Hurricane and other assorted tangents from political meme thread

This is totally normal for the latter half of October.



And for all y’all who’s minds got destroyed by the maps we grew up with Seattle is further north of Toronto than Toronto is north of NYC.

This is not normal.

You know all those memes about how it is always raining in Seattle?

Yeah, it should be grey, cool-almost-cold, wet and miserable here in Portland now. Which is 150 miles south of Seattle.

It's nice and comfortable outside.

This is not normal and it only gets worse.

It isn’t just that we should have rain stamping down the wildfires and blocking the sun and stuff but we should have started the ‘rebuild the glaciers’ phase a while ago.

Our rivers and streams are already dying due to not enough glacial runoff thanks to the hot summer starting earlier and being more severe so we have harder spring floodings and then this time of year not enough water left…

Which is why we have millions of BC salmon dying as their rivers and streams dry up…



But yeah… this is just places being (record breaking) hot in summer…

That’s all it is…

Puget Sound surrounding areas are hotter than LA, San Diego and Phoenix right now.
heat.gov

https://twitter.com/bedirthan/status/1581750707669336065?s=46&t=Tgja9H4S5D8ha5LUFZiWqQ

This is fine…

The previous High Temp record in Seattle for October 16 was set in 1961.

It was 76 degrees Fahrenheit.

High today was 88.

This is fine…

Dontcha know that in the past the surface of the earth had molten rock and was uninhabitable by humans? This is just part of the natural scheme of things, and in the future we are going to be part of the sun. So humans are not doing anything because those things happened once, and will happen. How are you going to deal with superheated dense star plasma when that comes around?

You just do not know how to use random unrelated bits of science knowledge to completely ignore the dangers of the moment because you want people in charge who want to abuse brown people for the sake of white nationalism, and harm GLBT people for the sake of religious superiority, and fuck with women's body's for the sake of their toxic masculinity and sexism. If you would just listen to @Bill Carson and @Uncle Albert you would be much more miserable, self loathing, and a weak whine pissbaby.

This is fine…

Between my next door neighbors ripping my face off because Fox told them I eat babies, or oxygen turning into fire right in my lungs, I don't know which ending to root for.
It's like a "Choose Your Own Adventure" where everything blows.

Questions:
1. Fucking forest fires
2. Why is Kolkata higher than Delhi or Mumbai?
3. Wtf's going on Europe to put them higher than Delhi or Mumbai?

I was going to make a joke because I live in the part of the state where this is normal. And it sucks. I drove west to visit family and I feel bad for them and you guys and everyone who hasn't dealt with this before. : (
I hope the rains come soon.

Friday.

Hopefully.

No increased hurricane activity due to climate change.

Plenty more at the link.
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/99/7/bams-d-17-0184.1.xml?tab_body=fulltext-display

Why do conservatives keep citing shit 4 years out of date?
Is this something the whole hive does, or is it just our idiots?

There's more to come, but did you notice we had a landfall hurricane drought for about a decade?

Did I stutter? What are you confused about?

It's a funny typo.

JFC. Lighten up.

Data that's not four years old. A thread,

https://twitter.com/BjornLomborg/status/1329040774844059648

A debunked PragerU and Fox News licker.
Wonder how FF stumbled on to him without being a Fox or Prager fan.
Isn't it funny how this keeps happening?
It must be mischief pixies out to make FF look stupid!

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bjorn_Lomborg

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Bjørn_Lomborg

Why are you always using data and facts to debunk @Bill Carson 's shady dishonest sources? It is just not fair that you bring up everyone he ever cites as being a completely dishonest con man, or a dimwitted buffoon. It is not his fault that the only people who support his lies are themselves liars and morons. You know full well that no reliable source would ever back up his delusions and falsehoods. It is just not fair and you are going to make him have another meltdown because you demand truth and facts.

There you go federal the boy, I saved you the time of making your same old response to the facts completely destroying your citation.

Because that's when the drought ended, dumbass.

Can you dispute the fucking data or can you not?

Here's another updated chart showing that hurricanes have not increased in frequency, the media is lying to you.

Now do hurricane strength, Captain Comma Splice.

Without context, that chart is absolutely meaningless. First of all, there's no source of information used by said chart. There is, however, what appears to be a Twitter handle at the top. That account hasn't tweeted that chart out recently (and the chart was dated yesterday). The account seems to be owned by a guy who spends a lot of his time complaining about his heat pump being inadequate for the job when "extreme" cold weather hits his city of Atlanta. (I put extreme in quotes because the level of cold, while severe for Atlanta, isn't worse than other places where people routinely use heat pumps with no problem. It is unclear from what I've read of his tweets if he thinks that heat pumps are a shitty technology, or if he's just amused by its lack of performance in colder than normal temps.)

When I quoted your tweet, I noticed a link to the chart, so I went to the URL. There we have the chart and this

Now, whenever someone makes a graph they have an agenda that they're trying to push. Maybe they're honest with what they're pushing, maybe they're not. But one should always ask questions about graphs, because even though the information presented in them might be accurate, the way its presented gives one a false impression.

A non-controversial example of this will be the graphs you sometimes see in ads for pickups. They'll say something like "After 10 years, 9X% of <insert model name here> are still on the road" and have a graph that compares the other makes of pickups, and you'll see that, sure enough, the graph showing that pickup has higher numbers of vehicles on the road than other makes. The line showing this is giant. However, if you look at the scale information on the graph, you realize that they've fiddled with the fact that differences between automakers can be boiled down to statistical noise, since they're all within a couple of units of one another. So, while 96% models of this particular pickup are still one the road, models made by other companies are at like 95% and 94%, and if you shift the years in question, the make of the highest surviving number of vehicles changes. Said graph is accurate, but it gives the wrong impression in that there's a life difference in the life cycle of pickups.

Now, I don't know if he's being misleading with the way he designed the graph or not. Part of this is because I'm unfamiliar with his source: Maue GRL. It took some serious googling to find it. All the search engines out there kept spitting out results for "Maui Girl" no matter how many times I told them to exclude "Maui" from the search. Eventually, however, I was able to turn up the details on it. Sorta. He has a PDF on his site that claims to be the paper that he submitted to Geophysical Research Letters in 2011.

There is a huge problem in academia with fake scientific journals popping up all over the place. How bad is the problem? Even legitimate scientists have been fooled into thinking that some of the fake journals are real. The folks making the fake journal sites use the same tricks as the guys who create fake websites use. You know, having a name that is identical to the famous thing, only spelled slightly different, or an official government-sounding name, despite the fact that the journal has no connection to the government whatsoever, and the like. I'm not terribly familiar with most of the journals out there, though that one did sound real enough that if I found that it was a fake journal, I wouldn't automatically hold it against the guy for getting it wrong. The journal is real and legitimate, and his paper is there to read.

On page two of the paper, you'll see an earlier version of that chart. It looks similar to the one you posted, with a couple of differences. One of which is, obviously, the time period of the chart. The one in the paper stops at some point in 2011, while yours goes all the way out to the end of the year. The other is the scale used on the graphs. They're different. On yours, the left is measured in tens ending at 70, while in the paper, it's measured in thousands, ending at 2200. A bit odd that. No clue as to what his reasoning for this is. His website (and yeah, he's the guy who owns the site that you got that graph from) has another version of the graph that you linked to, also with the scale in thousands.



Interesting that while the earlier version the scale on the left goes up to 2200, on the newer version it goes up to 2400. No reason given for the difference. Also kind of odd, given that in neither version to they appear to even reach 2200, let alone 2400 hundred. So why change the scale?

I could go on, but I've got shit to do, so let me cut to the chase here, about this particular guy you're quoting. He's a Trump appointee (done very late in 2020, I might add) to NOAA. You know, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He's got decent academic credentials, unlike many other Trump appointees. He's also a former CATO Institute employee, who left when the Libertarian think tank decided that they found his beliefs in global warming to be "too extreme." (That's saying something, since he's all in favor of burning fossil fuels.)

I should also like to point out that he gets a lot of money from Koch. All of which raises a lot of questions for me. Like, why is he not citing stuff produced by the government agency he's in a leadership position? If you're pro-fossil fuels, why does someone like the CATO Institute think that you're too extreme?

Warsaw has set a new January high record.

BY FOURTY ONE DEGREES Fahrenheit. For the smooth brains among us this means that it is currently 41 degrees hotter in Warsaw than it has been in any January in their prior EIGHT CENTURIES OF EXISTENCE.

https://twitter.com/extremetemps/status/1609522180643078146