Those warning about climate change are partially to blame. I was saying decades ago that touting the "hottest summer on record" as proof of global warming isn't actually proof and would come back to disrupt the conversation.
And here we are, equally "valid" proof that global warming is not real.
I'm not absolving the people intentionally distorting the facts, but the people who centered the conversation on local maxima bear some blame for the shakiness of the conversation.
>I was saying decades ago that touting the "hottest summer on record" as proof of global warming isn't actually proof and would come back to disrupt the conversation.
I'm not sure what you mean. If temperature records are broken consecutively do you really think it's just up to chance?
"The warmest years globally have all occurred since 1998, with the top ten being 2016, 2019, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2014, 2010, 2013 and 2005 (tied), and 1998, respectively."
Can you think of a reason why this should not count as evidence? I want you to disrupt the conversation.
Thunderfoot made a video about betting whether the next year will be the hottest year or not and if you bet against climate change then you would lose the bet all the time.
I forgot to mention how Trump said it's a hoax and a "money making industry". Isn't that ironic? Central banks are begging for money making industries. There is this money making industry that they could have spent the printed money on instead of letting it lie in some bank account and push up the value of every stock and cryptocurrency. It's money that could have employed low skilled workers in a fresh and growing industry and also save the planet. It's never going to happen. People are so against the idea of technological progress the only way it's going to happen is when it's forced down their throat.
Most discussions of temperature extremes I’ve seen focus on their change in frequency. That’s not a distortion at all, that’s a changing average (and corresponding increase in volatility).
When? As I pointed out, the stage was set for decades ago with statements like, "see how hot it is?!"
I said then that it would cause problems and today you have people equally saying, "see how cold it is!"
Neither is proof and now we have a muddle discussion with the media happy to run whatever stirs things up.
The proper move some time ago was to center the discussion around some proxy for global temperature (avg ocean temp perhaps) instead of the variable.
Even now, we shouldn't be speaking about unusual events in terms of climate change. There are more people in more places with more cameras and ability to report unusual weather.
Most news articles these days will follow it with language like: "__ marked the hottest July on record. In fact, __ of the top ___ Julys have occurred in the last 10 years."
Reputable news outlets are also good about including boilerplate like:
"While we can't attribute any single event to climate change, scientists predict an increasing frequency of events like ___."
Extreme event frequency is one of the most unambiguous signals of climate change that people can see and relate to. I feel like you're either consuming sub-par media or attacking a straw-man.
And here we are, equally "valid" proof that global warming is not real.
I'm not absolving the people intentionally distorting the facts, but the people who centered the conversation on local maxima bear some blame for the shakiness of the conversation.