3 ms·
We should certainly listen to sceptics, but I'm a bit sceptical myself about this guy (ignoring @ZeroGravitas' link) I don't know what the top 2 graphs are act
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
We should certainly listen to sceptics, but I'm a bit sceptical myself about this guy (ignoring @ZeroGravitas' link)
I don't know what the top 2 graphs are actually measuring and I don't have time to look, but the top one says "It shows the frequency..." but if you follow the link he gives it seems that the period is only up till 2016, not 2020 as the graph kind of implies.
The bottom one says "The bottom figure is actually based on a paper that I co-authored in 1999..."And following the link indeed confirms that, so why are the numbers going up close to 2020 here?If it's from an updated paper or later work, where is the link to that? And how is intensity defined here anyway?
"Even though U.S. heat waves have increased since the 1960s, societal vulnerability has decreased over that time. The figure below presents mortality risk in “extreme heat events” across the U.S. since the 1970s, showing an overall decline." - The United States is 4 or 5% of the world's population, and some of the top wealthiest, and in no way represents the rest of the world.
Edit: 1999 paper is here https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-75-1999.11.pdf https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/r... , graph is on P. 1092. Intensity apparently defined as "F IG . 11. Number of days with a maximum temperature above the threshold for a 1.5% daily exceedance probability (dark line) and the number of heat waves of 4-day duration with an average temperature exceeding the threshold for a 1 in 10 year recurrence
(dashed line)..."