[freshfey]

I'm originally from Basel, where the Rhine river is flowing true and very central to the city's history and appearance. We usually go swimming (it's more letting yourself float) in the Rhine in summer by starting at one part of the city and then getting out at the other.

This year it was quite unusual as the current was extremely slow, the water was very warm and you could see that there is significantly less water flowing through. We always talk about climate change but feeling it in ways like these makes it very relatable and real.

[ekianjo]

> This year it was quite unusual as the current was extremely slow, the water was very warm and you could see that there is significantly less water flowing through. We always talk about climate change but feeling it in ways like these makes it very relatable and real.

One data point (i.e. a year) should not be taken as a sign of climate change. There are always outliers from time to time. When drawing such observations it is more relevant to track exactly the state of the river over extended periods of time (20, 30 years at least) so that you have a real sense of what is happening.

[unknownkadath]

C'mon guy, I'm sure parent poster is aware of how statistics work and the difference between weather and climate. As the weirdening of environment continues, everyone will have a personal story where the consequences of climate change hit home. This is theirs.

[ekianjo]

> I'm sure parent poster is aware of how statistics work

I can't talk about whom I replied to, but you would be surprised how few people actually get statistics and probabilities right.

[freethemullet]

If we knew how probabilities worked, we wouldn't be surprised.

[rdl]

Humans unquestionably respond to "stories", especially those with personal impact, more than just statistics. But statistics and fair/scientific data analysis are the correct form of analysis.

Maybe the right thing is some process to analyze the data fairly and then pick verifiably representative instances for deep-dive stories about the change.

(I'm pretty sold on climate change, and increasingly so on CO2/human activity as a major factor, and likely large impact, but I think the costs of brutal CO2 reduction are probably far higher than the costs of alternative remediations. Including costs on other environmental issues -- as diesel fuel in cities vs. gasoline has shown, with one having lower carbon emissions due to efficiency, but the other being cleaner in other emissions...)

[skh]

It’s not one data point. It’s an additional data point on top of millions of other data points.

[theothermkn]

This very much depends on the model space in question. If our model space includes “climate continues normally” and “climate gets weird/warm over time” models, then an event that occurs that is an outlier for “normal,” but routine for “warm/weird,” does tip the odds toward “we are in the weird/warm regime, now.” In other words, future weather days, modeled as tokens being drawn from one of two climate bags, are not independent. Each draw of warm/weird makes it more likely that we have switched from the normal bag to the weird one.

[agumonkey]

mathematically this is just the beginning.. we're about to experience exponential returns..

[singularity2001]

Yes, and the curve only really started to take off in the last 30 years:

Example: antarctic ice melt:

1979-1990 40 gigatons

1989-2000 50 gigatons

1999-2009 166 gigatons

2012-2017 219 gigatons

(source: Spiegel.de)

[antisthenes]

The last time period is somewhat misleading, because it is 6 years instead of 10, like the other 3.

Looking at a glance, one could mistakenly assume the ice loss slowed down (as I did initially)

[tarr11]

Also, what happened between 2009 and 2012?

[lazyjones]

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-o...

[DoctorOetker]

how closely did you read this article? I did, but I have the impression you didn't really or not closely

would you mind making a summary of the most important points (on what points the study agrees or contradicts other studies? how soon the lead author of your study expects the losses to be greater than the gains, compensated for the year of publication? does he have an explanation for the mismatch? or does he concede precisely measuring the height by satellite altimeter may be in error? when will a satellite with better height resolution be launched?)

[DoctorOetker]

different measurement methods are giving conflicting results.

increased snowfall may cause observable localized increases that add up over time, but that does not necessarily mean the ice sheet is thickening: water expands when forming ice, so pressure from increased weight of snow can melt the bottom layer of ice where pressure is highest.

I don't necessarily see a contradiction between the observations