9 ms·

Climate science has always acknowledged this. The rate of rise is unprecedented. This is based on non-man-made evidence we gather from the world around us. Conc

Climate science has always acknowledged this. The rate of rise is unprecedented. This is based on non-man-made evidence we gather from the world around us. Concentration of pollen in layers of ice cores for example.

fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
[flagged]
- slater 3y ago
  > Then who are these kind of headlines (ie, "Hottest day ever!") for? Given they are factually incorrect how so?
  - fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - slater 3y ago
      i mean, yeah, back when the earth was formed i'm sure it was VERY much hotter than it has been in recent millennia (are you attempting a "global warming isn't real and/or not human-induced and/or 'just part of the regular cycle of things'"...?)
- wizofaus 3y ago
  The headline doesn't say "ever", it says "on record". That's widely understood to mean "since accurate temperature records began", and doesn't include the fact that the earth was known to be far warmer in former aeons (we certainly don't have any records of what the average temperature was on any given day then).
  - fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - wizofaus 3y ago
      > HN's editorialised version does not say that. True, "on record" was elided, but nor does it say "ever". And given the readership of HN I doubt it was done for sensationalist purposes, purely space-saving. > So the problem is? None, that I can see - it was you that claimed the headline was "factually incorrect".
- comfypotato 3y ago
  For me, in the context of the climate change discussion, I knew exactly what it was trying to communicate. I did not find it particularly sensationalized. > Would love to see a source for that. False. If you’d love to you would have at least given it a quick Google and found plenty of relevant papers. There are thousands of studies that would communicate what I just said with a basic Google Scholar search. If you’re a climate change denier just say that so we can move on with our lives.
  - rfdsaljfds 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - comfypotato 3y ago
      Your tone is out of line with HN guidelines. Emotionally laden, sure. But it’s not garbage. Our inhabitation is sustainable in part because of sensational climate science. It plays an important role in keeping our effect on the planet in check. As far as you not finding a source: it doesn’t surprise me. With your attitude, you’ll never find anything. I did a quick search as a sanity check and the first hit (just Google, not Google Scholar even) had exactly what I would send you if this argument was worth my time.
      - rfdsaljfds 3y ago
        [flagged]
fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
[flagged]

fdsajkfdskl 3y ago

[flagged]

slater 3y ago
> Then who are these kind of headlines (ie, "Hottest day ever!") for? Given they are factually incorrect how so?
- fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - slater 3y ago
    i mean, yeah, back when the earth was formed i'm sure it was VERY much hotter than it has been in recent millennia (are you attempting a "global warming isn't real and/or not human-induced and/or 'just part of the regular cycle of things'"...?)
wizofaus 3y ago
The headline doesn't say "ever", it says "on record". That's widely understood to mean "since accurate temperature records began", and doesn't include the fact that the earth was known to be far warmer in former aeons (we certainly don't have any records of what the average temperature was on any given day then).
- fdsajkfdskl 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - wizofaus 3y ago
    > HN's editorialised version does not say that. True, "on record" was elided, but nor does it say "ever". And given the readership of HN I doubt it was done for sensationalist purposes, purely space-saving. > So the problem is? None, that I can see - it was you that claimed the headline was "factually incorrect".
comfypotato 3y ago
For me, in the context of the climate change discussion, I knew exactly what it was trying to communicate. I did not find it particularly sensationalized. > Would love to see a source for that. False. If you’d love to you would have at least given it a quick Google and found plenty of relevant papers. There are thousands of studies that would communicate what I just said with a basic Google Scholar search. If you’re a climate change denier just say that so we can move on with our lives.
- rfdsaljfds 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - comfypotato 3y ago
    Your tone is out of line with HN guidelines. Emotionally laden, sure. But it’s not garbage. Our inhabitation is sustainable in part because of sensational climate science. It plays an important role in keeping our effect on the planet in check. As far as you not finding a source: it doesn’t surprise me. With your attitude, you’ll never find anything. I did a quick search as a sanity check and the first hit (just Google, not Google Scholar even) had exactly what I would send you if this argument was worth my time.
    - rfdsaljfds 3y ago
      [flagged]

fdsajkfdskl 3y ago

[flagged]