Environmental Collapse: when and how bad?

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
It's OK everyone, we can chill now. Climate change has been solved for good, thanks to a bra that intentionally shows off your nips.


“Some days are hard, but these nipples are harder. And unlike the icebergs, these aren't going anywhere.”
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
What a stupid fucking question to ask people:


Are they going out of their promote the idea that environmentalists are misanthropic psychopaths or something?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
What a stupid fucking question to ask people:


Are they going out of their promote the idea that environmentalists are misanthropic psychopaths or something?
The last thing we need is to turn up to A&E and find that a shrub is being treated in front of you.
 

version

Well-known member
@mixed_biscuits will love this.

The slashing of pollution from shipping in 2020 led to a big “termination shock” that is estimated have pushed the rate of global heating to double the long-term average, according to research.

Until 2020, global shipping used dirty, high-sulphur fuels that produced air pollution. The pollution particles blocked sunlight and helped form more clouds, thereby curbing global heating. But new regulations at the start of 2020 slashed the sulphur content of fuels by more than 80%.

The new analysis calculates that the subsequent drop in pollution particles has significantly increased the amount of heat being trapped at the Earth’s surface that drives the climate crisis. The researchers said the sharp ending of decades of shipping pollution was an inadvertent geoengineering experiment, revealing new information about its effectiveness and risks.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
@mixed_biscuits will love this.

The slashing of pollution from shipping in 2020 led to a big “termination shock” that is estimated have pushed the rate of global heating to double the long-term average, according to research.

Until 2020, global shipping used dirty, high-sulphur fuels that produced air pollution. The pollution particles blocked sunlight and helped form more clouds, thereby curbing global heating. But new regulations at the start of 2020 slashed the sulphur content of fuels by more than 80%.

The new analysis calculates that the subsequent drop in pollution particles has significantly increased the amount of heat being trapped at the Earth’s surface that drives the climate crisis. The researchers said the sharp ending of decades of shipping pollution was an inadvertent geoengineering experiment, revealing new information about its effectiveness and risks.
You'd think it wouldn't be too hard to tune the relative amounts of warming pollution and cooling pollution being emitted so that the effects cancel out, right? I mean that's the obvious solution here.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
I think we'd get about 80% cloud cover from the creation of 70 trillion pterodactyls. So why not just do that?

Each person would receive a pack of 10,000 pterodactyl eggs, along with 100 tonnes of baby mix and some safety goggles.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Cost-cutting proposal: replace the Met Office with this statement: 'The [latest time period] has been the hottest on record.'

The Met Office, to universal disbelief and condemnation, has just announced that May was the warmest on record despite it having been cloudy and wet most of the time with only a handful of hottish days. They claim it's true because they include nighttime temperatures, during which excessive cloud cover has kept the heat in (not that the nights felt warm at all). That this body is so keen to spin whatever weather it gets so as to maximise climate fears suggests that the data processing itself may be similarly biased because of the incentives this institutional stance creates.
 

Murphy

cat malogen
Do you get ‘hot’ at night, Biscetti? Do your nocturnal emissions peak after dark? Lights off to cut unnecessary pollutants? Is every sperm sacred?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
Do you get ‘hot’ at night, Biscetti? Do your nocturnal emissions peak after dark? Lights off to cut unnecessary pollutants? Is every sperm sacred?
The Met Office's climate changeiest weather station is at Heathrow, 100m away from extremely hot things making the air around them extremely hot. That is the kind of professionalism we are dealing with.
 

hmg

Victory lap
There's that, and the fact that many weather stations were located in areas that have since seen a lot of building development and are now subject to the Urban Heat Island Effect, and many stations simply no longer exist and are zombies that are assigned estimates, like EDF do when I forget to send in my meter readings. Strangely, EDF never seem to underestimate usage.
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
There's that, and the fact that many weather stations were located in areas that have since seen a lot of building development and are now subject to the Urban Heat Island Effect, and many stations simply no longer exist and are zombies that are assigned estimates, like EDF do when I forget to send in my meter readings. Strangely, EDF never seem to underestimate usage.
Yikes. I guess for local forecasts they may need to do that, but to feed it into overall averages is wrong. I noticed that if many weather stations' locations are looked at on Google Maps, they indeed have recent urbanisation. The UK stations are disproportionately in the south, which I guess has also been disproportionately built up over time. The idea of 'average' temperatures over a large land mass is fundamentally flawed for the same reason that a zebra is not grey, but also the attempt to create some summary picture is hindered by the unsystematic distribution of the weather stations and all the fudging required to undo all the biases (if they even try to do that).

I guess the stations are where they are because their original primary purpose was to measure and predict local weather but the system is not fit for measuring macroclimatic change. The comparisons made over decades are completely worthless because the apparatus and its context change so much. But the Met Office, when comparing over time, formulates its announcements in such a way that one would expect that this isn't a problem, that there is such a thing as 'a July national temperature' and that this has been measured objectively at every point in time - it's ridiculous.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
The Met Office's climate changeiest weather station is at Heathrow, 100m away from extremely hot things making the air around them extremely hot. That is the kind of professionalism we are dealing with.
Yes, it's definitely that that caused China to experience a catastrophic heatwave two years ago, and the floods that inundated a large fraction of Pakistan the same year, and the increasingly extreme wildfires that affect California and Australia every year, and the vanishing glaciers, and... 🤪
 

hmg

Victory lap
posted this in the wrong thread earlier :

Even worse, the zombie stations are assigned estimates based on stations that could be hunrdeds of miles further south, like that cluster of zombies in Oklahoma, which get estimates based on notoriously chilly Texas
 
Top