4 ms·
> Expect extreme temperature and storm records. I would like to see that substantiated by some historic data. If you look at the other gray lines, they're a co
by baxtr 3y ago
> Expect extreme temperature and storm records.
I would like to see that substantiated by some historic data. If you look at the other gray lines, they're a couple that would stand out like the 2023 one in their respective year.
What happened in those years? Did we see extreme temperature and storm records?
PS: Unfortunately there is no way to say which gray line is which year.
- Mistletoe 3y ago2022 is also high and also that’s what five sigma means.
- pil0u 3y agoYes, most probably. What was unprecedented then is not unprecedented now. Unfortunately, we tend to think about such events as a rolling average of only a few years. We did witness what was considered more storms, hurricanes and extreme temperatures during those times, they are now considered as business as usual. The point of the tweet being: expect unprecedented events in 2023.
- TheOtherHobbes 3y agoSo far this year we've seen: record breaking fires in Canada, ice disappearing from the north pole area, a huge positive temperature anomaly over the south pole with associated melting, and recording breaking floods across Europe and Asia. I would suggest that an involuntary geoforming experiment on one's own home planet - which so far is slowly but steadily making it less habitable - may not be the smartest thing a species should be doing.
- Tade0 3y agoAt least we pushed the next glaciation forward - provided we survive what's happening now.
- gonzo41 3y agoI'm expecting a few big earthquakes in the next 0-20 years. Melting all that ice on the top of globe will ease up some pressure and the earth will deform and things will shift. There's a few subduction zone's that are overdue for a slip.
- ajsnigrutin 3y agoDidn't antarctica (south pole) gain a lot of ice? Unexpectedly? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36221552 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36221552
- anoonmoose 3y agoNot to re-start a five-day old flamewar but the discussion you linked to seems pretty divided and my personal opinion is that the answer to your question seems to be "no".
- HWR_14 3y agoNo, and even the first few comments make it clear Antarctica did not gain ice. A subarea of Antarctica, where they expected ice to decrease, gained ice. Antarctica as a whole lost ice. One reason could be that this subarea is an area where ice is lost from, but also an area where ice from Antarctica moves to. So as ice in general melts, some of it also gets relocated to this area.
- csomar 3y agoThe climate change is not equally distributed. Antractica is getting colder. However, the earth, on average, is getting hotter. This means that places that are getting hotter, are getting hotter more than the average. (since some places are not changing or getting colder).
- hospitalJail 3y agoThe melting thing is the thing that flipped me(like 10 years ago). Russia shipping stuff from previously frozen areas during the winter was something I couldn't deny. Like, you can ignore all sorts of science under the guise that it was bad science. Anything biology and beyond has some sort of issue with methodology. However, a physical ship, bringing products/oil, in a previously frozen area, was undeniable. Who would have thought it was a logistics person that flipped me rather than a scientist.
- wizofaus 3y agoFlipped you how though - I would have thought that was a great example of how warming can be beneficial, hence something we needn't worry about avoiding, and there are still people out there that will argue that with a straight face.
- hospitalJail 3y agoToday's candy is tomorrow's stomach ache. Maybe I have a deep seeded conservative bent(my parents are...), but a different environment in my lifetime sounds scary AF.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bobbylarrybobby 3y agoThankfully the graph [here](https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/ https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/) is interactive and lets you hover to see the year.
- baxtr 3y agoThat's awesome! Thanks for sharing. The one line which is also very high in the beginning of the year is from 2016. This is what I found about that year: "In 2016, 342 disasters triggered by natural hazards were registered, below the 2006-2015 annual average." 2015 was a "peak" disaster year with a relatively "normal" line.
- scythe 3y agoThe data appear to be a screenshot of this website: https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/ https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/ Raspberries to the Tweeters for not properly citing sources. The two grey lines you're talking about are 2016 and 2020. One of those years had the worst California fire season ever recorded. 2016 was not quite record-smashing but did have the worst blizzard in the northeast US since 1978.
- csomar 3y agoThink about it this way: A higher temperature means there is more "energy" in the atmosphere. If this energy can't escape from the atmosphere, it can manifest itself as heat, wind, difference of pressure, rain, etc... Interestingly, it can turn into complexity too (ie: greener environment -> more animals) but certain circumstances and balance are required for this. This is good for the earth and organic matter but maybe not good for humans.
- oceanplexian 3y agoIt doesn’t exist. There are no records of surface sea temperature going back 100 years because there were no satellites to measure it. They could have been substantially higher in the 1930s (A decade when many, still standing temperature records were set), but we wouldn’t know
- callmeal 3y ago>PS: Unfortunately there is no way to say which gray line is which year. There is. If you want to see reality, click on the "hide all" button, then pick a few years. 1984, 1990, 2022 and 2023 are good. Then try to get the people whose job depends on pretending everything is fine to explain how this is normal.