Global Warming 30 Years Later

If you do the math, this would mean that greater than 99.98% of the current world’s population would be extinct. Essentially, you’re friend is betting $10,000 that he and the entire human population as he knows it will die off. Wouldn’t it be more fun to pick an NFL team he likes, and bet on them to win the superbowl? I mean, at least you could cheer for yourself to win the bet.

If we are even using the dollar in 2040.

1 Like

I will bet you $10,000 we are using dollars in 2040. :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

We’ve been recording temperature for ~80 years. With 365 days/year and thousands of cities across the world, there is bound to be a record (high or low) every day.

See above.

One day is too much. Sadly, their countries’ leaders (third world countries) do not have the same priorities that we (US) have. (this is another thread though)

So for how long do we need to record this data in order for it to matter?

I’m not saying that 80 years isn’t enough time. I am saying that making broad statements about breaking temperature records isn’t statistically significant from a global level. If records continue to be broken in one region, then it tells us something significant. Merely stating we are breaking records every week is an emotionally provoking statement without qualifying it. Again, ~80 years of records, 365 days, ~185 countries. That means we have only recorded today’s temperature 80 times in Yolo, California.

People get more worried about climate change when it’s hotter.

It’s wise to remind them of the current weather - that’s why pro-warming journalists remind you of how hot it is and anti-warming will remind you of how hot it isn’t.

It’s also why in response to such reminders - the opposing side will point to the long term view or local vs global systems.

From my understanding, it’s been recorded since the mid 1800’s. By 1880, the measurements were standardized across the world.

Daily recordings would indicate weather rather than climate.

Ha ha. You might think so. Pundits have suggested Australia as one of the safest sites. However no mother fucker in Australia really wants it, and its not going to become a dumping site for the excesses of the rest of the world(no country is going to do that). If you use the energy its your responsibility to deal with the waste.

Nuclear waste makes really nice depleted uranium bullets for the apocalypse. Birth defects for the survivors.

I’m the bestliest at it!

1 Like