3 ms·
I think you might be arguing in bad faith. Looking at your first link, and reading your comment above this one, you’ve drawn an opposite conclusion from the pap
by CraigJPerry 5y ago
I think you might be arguing in bad faith. Looking at your first link, and reading your comment above this one, you’ve drawn an opposite conclusion from the paper.
The paper starts with “ United States has increased by 1.2°F (0.7°C) for the period 1986–2016 relative to 1901–1960 and by 1.8°F (1.0°C) based on a linear regression for the period 1895–2016 (very high confidence)”
But reading the text around your chosen chart is even more enlightening.
“ are mainly tied to the unprecedented summer heat of the 1930s Dust Bowl era, which was exacerbated by land-surface feedbacks driven by springtime precipitation deficits and land mismanagement. However, anthropogenic aerosol forcing may also have reduced summer temperatures in the Northeast and Southeast from the early 1950s to the mid-1970s, and agricultural intensification may have suppressed the hottest extremes in the Midwest.”
If you’re going to cherry pick at least do it from a paper that doesn’t counter your argument.
- swader999 5y agoI don't think your quote really changes the facts that we aren't seeing more extreme heat events. Read chapter 6 in Steve Koonin's new book "Unsettled". He does a great job of going through all the real data on heat over the last century.