3 ms·
We‘ve also seen several widespread „global cooling“ conjecture phases. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_coo
by lazyjones 8y ago
We‘ve also seen several widespread „global cooling“ conjecture phases. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
Not saying it‘s all wrong, but the risk of incomplete data and wrong conclusions is always present.
- BugsJustFindMe 8y agoPlease. From your link > The global cooling hypothesis nonetheless gained temporary popularity due to... press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the debate in the scientific literature.[1]
- lazyjones 8y agoWkipedia style rhetoric. The „full scope“ is also neglected these days since a small minority firmly denies the severity of the issue and the „consensous“ is just the majority vote (which is not really appropriate in science). In other words, if the loonies are right, Wikipedia might write the exact same thing about the global warming craze one day.
- bjourne 8y agoAccording to xkcd, the world has already warmed 0.8 degrees compared to the 1961-1990 average. Something that has already happened cannot reasonably be said to be "all wrong."
- lazyjones 8y agoThat‘s undisputed. But the used reference timespan isn‘t the „norm“ and it‘s not certain that we haven‘t had similar short peaks in the past 22000 years - which is what the xkcd illustration at least strongly suggests.
- bjourne 8y agoThat objection is addressed at the 16000 BCE mark. We have had short peaks before such as the Krakatoa eruption that reduced world average temperatures by 1.2 degrees for five years. What we're now experiencing is a continuous increase that has already raised temperatures by one degree over 100 years. I think it is very unlikely that anything similar has happened before.