|
|
|
|
|
|
by southern_cross
2536 days ago
|
|
|
No, I'm using them to discredit some of the thinking in the article. You did read the article, didn't you? It's pretty simple-minded stuff. But I do have to ask: If that 100F temperature had occurred recently instead of over 100 years ago, how many people would be absolutely freaking out about it? And it would be all over the news, wouldn't it, complete with satellite interviews and talking heads and repeated insistence that "We must do something about climate change right now!" As it is, though, it's just a historical footnote isn't it? And it seems that some folks are now trying to claim that it never really happened. (It appears to have been truncated out of the HadCRUT temperature data set, for example.) How inconvenient for them, then, there are other folks out there who have gone so far as to dig up the actual handwritten log for the weather station involved, which appears to be in good order. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D-E1nQ_W4AEpC7D.jpg Still other folks have noted that there are other logs out there for other stations which show equal if not higher temperatures, but Fort Yukon is called out as the official record high temperature for the state. I can only assume that investigation showed that those other stations weren't as reliable as Fort Yukon, but the possibility exists that they did in fact experience equally high or even higher temperatures. |
|
|
