3 ms·
I'm not sure how you can make that claim with only 29 years of data without making some pretty big assumptions about the underlying distribution.
by noosphr 3mo ago
I'm not sure how you can make that claim with only 29 years of data without making some pretty big assumptions about the underlying distribution.
- sph 3mo agoWe have ways to determine the past climate without having access to direct measurements.
- qsera 3mo agoBut there is no way to confirm that those methods are accurate...
- inigyou 3mo agoYes there are. Scientists compare the measurements from both methods in the time when there's data from both. For example ice cores formed last decade should match direct temperature measurements from last decade. It's the same way the oldest rings from living trees are matched against the newest rings from tree fossils, and radiocarbon dating is checked against all of that.
- qsera 3mo agoThat does not look very reliable to me, because that implies certain things are only affected by ambient temperature. Btw, Can you tell me how ancient temperature is measured from ice cores? My lookup only says we can detect atmospheric composition, and not temperatures from the ice cores.
- inigyou 3mo agoIt seems like you're on the trajectory to refuting all historical measurements altogether. In that case, I can't help you. Good luck. I suggest the philosophy of Last Tuesdayism, it may interest you.
- qsera 3mo agoNot really. I only reject using them for certain things that require vastly more reliable data. And I am not making the mistake of relying on unreliable data just because it is the best we can manage. Also why don't you answer my question about ice cores?
- inigyou 3mo agoI'm not an ice core scientist. I suggest you ask them for detailed specifications. But the way you have posed the question strongly suggests that you will not be satisfied with any possible answer. Anything short of your eyes laying upon a thermometer will always be "not reliable enough", and thermometers only record the current temperature.
- qsera 3mo agoIt is not really surprising that skeptics exist when the answers they get are of these sort...
- RetroTechie 3mo agoAir bubbles from ancient atmosphere caught in ice -> historic CO2 levels -> historic average global temps. This is fairly 1:1 linkage, and the Earth-heating effect of atmospheric CO2 was established in what, early 20th century or so?
- qsera 3mo ago>historic CO2 levels -> historic average global temps But this seems to imply that global temperatures are only dependent on CO2 levels. That is a pretty flawed assumption...
- RetroTechie 3mo agoNo this is 'calibrated' against other research like fossils (indicating which species were living where & when) & probably more. It's called science for a reason... (not back-of-a-napkin stuff)
- qsera 3mo agoBut those are unreliable as well... See, since it seems that you are convinced yourselves, can you tell me how accurately the past temperature can be assessed by using this method? I mean +/- how many degrees?
- TYPE_FASTER 3mo ago> Btw, Can you tell me how ancient temperature is measured from ice cores? https://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/ https://www.antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-c...
- qsera 3mo ago>Past precipitation can be used to reconstruct past palaeoclimatic temperatures. δD and δ18O is related to surface temperature at middle and high latitudes. The relationship is consistent and linear over Antarctica[9]... I think this is also flawed, because this computation requires the ratio of the isotopes in the atmosphere at the period of interest, which we don't have. And the people making this measurement just seem to assume it would certain value derived from the present, which is also unreliable... So yea, all things considered, pretty unreliable..
- TYPE_FASTER 3mo agohttps://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/paleoclimatology-the-oxygen-balance/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/paleoclimat...
- qsera 3mo agoSee, since it seems that you are convinced yourselves, can you tell me how accurately the past temperature can be assessed by using this method? I mean +/- how many degrees? Also share if this accuracy requires any implicit assumptions. For example, "If we assume that X today is true then it is true back then as well" where X is not a physical constant...
- noosphr 3mo agoThis isn't climate, it's weather. There are no proxies that record monthly water temperature. Only second order effects that are at best weakly correlated with water temperature.
- mrkeen 3mo ago> I'm not sure how you can make that claim with only 29 years of data without making some pretty big assumptions about the underlying distribution. Under what circumstances would 29 years be an insufficient mean to compare to the last few years? Precisely those circumstances in which the climate had changed. > This isn't climate, it's weather.
- noosphr 3mo agoUnder any sane statistical model. If we assume that this is a naturally occurring once in century El Nino under an equal probability model we'd expect not to see it before we have 70 years of records.