Slashdot Mirror
54C Recorded In Kuwait Likely Hottest On Record In Asia (foxnews.com)
An anonymous reader writes from an Associated Press report: The UN weather agency said it suspects that the 54C temperature recorded in Kuwait has set a record for the eastern hemisphere. The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) said Tuesday it is setting up a committee to look into whether the temperature recorded last Thursday in Mitrabah, Kuwait, was a new high for the eastern hemisphere and in Asia. WMO's Omar Baddour said it is "likely" to be an eastern hemisphere record. Last week, swathes of the Middle East and North Africa and were hit by heatwaves that have become more frequent over the last half-century, and Earth is fresh off the hottest six months on record. WMO says the world record high of 56.7C was recorded at Furnace Creek in Death Valley, California, in 1913. In the UAE, highs of 49C are expected inland on Wednesday. Last year, the mercury rose above 50C in Sweiham, near Al Ain.An article on Citylab, citing NOAA's latest analysis notes that it was the warmest June in the modern history and also the 14th consecutive month of unprecedented hotness.
That's 129.2F if you're interested.
The land surrounding the Persian Gulf will be uninhabitable by mid-century. The daily heat will be too hot for everyone's grandmother and camel.
You please shut up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
Causes aside, what would you call an increasing trend in temperatures if not global warming? Or did you think global warming suddenly meant all cold weather would disappear overnight?
If all it takes for you to disregard the massive body of evidence behind AGW is someone saying something you don't like, you are terrible at this. I bet your post sounded awesome in your head, but on the screen it is laughably naive.
No, we don't wonder. We just shrug and say, "another FOX news listener".
What kind of lush savanna reaches 54 degrees? Not to mention that conflating local extrema with global climate is inadvisable.
Ezekiel 23:20
Record cold can be evidence for global warming. The key is to understand what "warming" actually is: adding energy to the system. Consider a glass of water. What happens when you add energy to it by shaking it? The answer is, it sloshes around -- the maximum height of the water surface gets higher, and the minimum height gets lower. Or consider the refrigeration thermodynamic cycle: one part of the system gets colder even though the total energy of the system is increasing.
That's not to say that record cold is always evidence of global warming, or indeed that it could never be evidence of an oncoming ice age. I'm just pointing out that the issue is more complicated than "record cold = cooling" or "record heat = heating" considered in isolation. We only know that record heat actually is evidence for heating because it's been observed as part of a larger pattern and was predicted by climate models and such (i.e., all the actual science that climatologists do that a Fox News sound bite is inadequate to explain).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I don't think anyone serious is pointing to this as proof of climate change though. At most they might claim it is a symptom of it. It's an important distinction, because one side is saying "this is likely to be the result of climate change" and the other is saying "this one event proves that climate change isn't happening".
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
And people wonder why we don't believe Global Warming.
I don't wonder. I see it as one of the human brain's greatest weaknesses. More and more research shows that once people pick a side, they are highly likely to dig in and contrary evidence actually reinforces their incorrect position. Perhaps this served some evolutionary purpose (you only need to learn fire is hot once) but in today's world where humans have the capability to drastically alter the environment we need to listen to the fucking facts.
Lead is bad for the brain even if the lead industry spends 50 years and $millions trying to prove otherwise. Smoking causes cancer even if the cigarette industry spends 50 years and $millions trying to prove otherwise. The average global temperature is rising due to human emissions of a known greenhouse gas into the atmosphere at a rate that does indeed match most models even if the fossil fuel industry spends 50 years and $millions trying to prove otherwise. Not exactly sure what industry is against vaccinations (maybe religion) but apparently you might not even need a shadowy group to cause trouble (see recent measles outbreaks).
For an especially hilarious example, see the John Oliver clip where newt ginrich repeatedly basically says "my feelings are more important than your facts for making policy". If humanity as a whole can evolve past that bullshit maybe we have a shot at colonizing space...or at least finding out if the physics of the universe allow it. If not, then I guess we don't deserve to and we'll get wiped out and the earth will try again in a few hundred million years.
Anyway, hopefully the deniers are right cause if not, we're fucked.
...in this case "weather" IS climate?
I'm never sure when it is, or when it isn't.
Because I don't recall it getting a lot of play when:
14 June 2016 -- In Vostok, temperature of -80.3 degrees was recorded.Coldest since observations began.
(http://iceagenow.info/record-cold-antarctica/)
Curious, isn't it?
-Styopa
I don't wonder. I see it as one of the human brain's greatest weaknesses. More and more research shows that once people pick a side, they are highly likely to dig in and contrary evidence actually reinforces their incorrect position. Perhaps this served some evolutionary purpose (you only need to learn fire is hot once)
Probably more local diversity so we don't get wiped out by spurious reasoning, mono-culture or get stuck on some local maximum. Instead of risking the whole tribe jumping on what they think is a good thing we'll divide into camps with the old ways and the new ways like a primitive scientific experiment. Today we don't have that strong evolutionary pressure but back when people would starve and freeze and die from all sorts of injuries and diseases I imagine this could be rather important in a shifting environment with droughts and floods and heat waves and cold waves and packs of animals coming and going could change the optimal choice quite often. Perhaps we had an evolutionary need to have people stick with what's worked in the past even if it doesn't seem to be working right now.
The other part might be that we're used to people having an agenda. The more persistent people are to convince you something is true, the more skeptical we get. There might be a value to having made up your own opinion rather than to take someone else's, even if it's wrong. That one seems even more relevant today, since more and more of what we do is make ourselves familiar with second hand knowledge, things others have found out and put to paper. There's so many tons of it you just have to accept you barely have time to get a tiny glimpse of our collective knowledge. And let's face it, a lot of that has been fantasy and fiction. You can't see AGW, but people say it exists like they used to say dragons exist. It's hard to know what is actually facts.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Record cold can be evidence for global warming. The key is to understand what "warming" actually is: adding energy to the system. Consider a glass of water. What happens when you add energy to it by shaking it? The answer is, it sloshes around -- the maximum height of the water surface gets higher, and the minimum height gets lower. Or consider the refrigeration thermodynamic cycle: one part of the system gets colder even though the total energy of the system is increasing.
That's not to say that record cold is always evidence of global warming, or indeed that it could never be evidence of an oncoming ice age. I'm just pointing out that the issue is more complicated than "record cold = cooling" or "record heat = heating" considered in isolation. We only know that record heat actually is evidence for heating because it's been observed as part of a larger pattern and was predicted by climate models and such (i.e., all the actual science that climatologists do that a Fox News sound bite is inadequate to explain).
indeed. for an analogy; high summer temperatures in my house are correlated with very low temperatures; directly in front of my air conditioner.
in a vaguely analogous way, the shut down of the Gulf Stream observed with increased oceanic warming is going to lead to colder winters for Europe, most of which is north of NYC.
and, weirdly enough, to increased rate of sea level rise on the US east coast, since the old Gulf Stream was powerful enough to actually lower the water level there.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.