Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by RutZap 4020 days ago
I sure hope so because I am very very curious. Surely there are a lot of researchers that will love to jump into this data and manipulate it somehow. It's a good time to be studying climate change now... your dissertation is right here :D
2 comments
zamalek 4020 days ago
> I sure hope so because I am very very curious.

Indeed. The image at the top of the page (presumably the worst case scenario) has no legend. I'm guessing that the red is desert, but what counts as temperate? The South America blue or the South Africa yellow? Or are the colors a delta from the current temperatures?

It's amazing how easy it is to turn a 12TB deluge of pristine scientific data into something completely meaningless.

link
RutZap 4020 days ago
My guess is that it shows the average temperature rather than actual climate. So red would be high temperature, and blue cold. I don't think that it refers to precipitation or anything like that. Or it could be a stock photo...
link
mrfusion 4020 days ago
You'd think some spots on the globe would get colder or rainer, no? Also this map makes it appear Antarctica will get colder? Or maybe that map is a stock image?
link
briandear 4020 days ago
Assuming the data is accurate and hasn't been 'adjusted' or 'corrected.' The whole climate business is a corrupt mess. Raw data over the years has been 'fixed' and policy is being made from 'models.' Yet what non partisan organization checks the models? The IPCC certainly doesn't. It's all a scam. We had global cooling fears in the 1970s. Then warming. Now "climate change." Yet industrial carbon output has risen exponentially and consistently since the industrial revolution yet temperatures haven't, thus calling into question that increased carbon dioxide raises temperatures. Such a disgusting mess.
link
tstactplsignore 4020 days ago
This is an interesting post, because so much of what you say is contradicted by basic fact. I'm wondering how you can possibly defend yourself?.

>We had global cooling fears in the 1970s.

No, we didn't. Climate scientists in the 1970s were predicting warming trends (the media just wasn't paying attention).

[0] http://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm

>Then warming. Now "climate change."

Nope, the two terms have been used in the scientific community for decades. Climate change has always been the more popular term in numerical analysis of the scientific literature.

[1] http://skepticalscience.com/climate-change-global-warming.ht...

>Yet industrial carbon output has risen exponentially and consistently since the industrial revolution yet temperatures haven't

This is factually inaccurate according to several datasets published by independent scientific organizations around the world. How many do you want? Let's start with NASA, Japan, and satellite data:

[2] http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

[3] http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/gwp/temp/ann_wld.h...

[4] http://nsstc.uah.edu/climate/

How many more do you want? There's also ocean heat content:

[5] http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

link