Weather station in Antarctica records high of 65, the continent's hottest temperature ever

...dude...

A) "Recorded record"
B) The only reason to care about the time period when Antarctica was located at the equator is because you want to study pangaea.

 

Oh well, 9 years and 4 months to go and the only thing left will be cockroaches.

 

A) The notion that you are even discussing coal fire power plants and CO2 emissions implicitly means that you recognize and accept the basic tenets of AGW.

B) The reason I say that they are both doing more is because they are both currently signatories to the Paris Climate Accords, they are both actively pursuing policies endorsed by their leaders to address and mitigate climate change, and because they are making massive investments into renewable energy sources and technologies.

The United States is led by a guy who thinks climate change means having "great numbers with clean water and clean air" and who is actively trying to increase subsidies to prop up old coal power plants.

 

No, it is in the range created by + or - minus two standard deviations from the average. Coincidentally, it is near the lowest mark that happened allllllll the way back in....2017.

Plus or minus 2 standard deviations means that 95% of all the recordings should fall in that range.

The fact that we are near the low end of even that massive spread and that the lowest have all taken place recently and that there is absolutely zero reason to believe the trend will suddenly reverse should be alarming, not comforting.

 

No, it is in a normal range for the chart.

 

Clearly the only way to fix the problem is to throw out Trump and replace him with enlightened politicians who will ensure free healthcare, free college, free daycare, and lots of other entitlements.

 

I would settle for someone who is not a ****ing moron that believes climate change is a hoax created by the Chinese.

So yes, get rid of trump first.

 

Neat. This is what that means.

No, it is in the range created by + or - minus two standard deviations from the average. Coincidentally, it is near the lowest mark that happened allllllll the way back in....2017.

Plus or minus 2 standard deviations means that 95% of all the recordings should fall in that range.

The fact that we are near the low end of even that massive spread and that the lowest have all taken place recently and that there is absolutely zero reason to believe the trend will suddenly reverse should be alarming, not comforting.

 

Seems like the all time high was hit in 1982

 

The fact is it is within the normal range. All else is your propaganda.

 

Our government shouldn't force us to do it. Plus major us companies have stated they will be carbon negative in relatively short lengths of time.

The US has the second largest solar and wind capacity. (Second to china)

This is cancelled out or worse by china having 1000 gigawatts from coal and 121 gigawatts planned for the future which is more than the rest of the world combined.

https://www.google.com/search?q=new...droid-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

With the price of fossil fuels being cheaper the cost of nuclear is more expensive so maybe we need to use more power so we can use more nuclear? Lol

What is the Paris climate agreement and why is pulling out such a big deal?

 

You are the one who defined what is normal.

 

Does it?

 

65 degrees in Antarctica?

Sounds like a great place for those progressive college students to go on spring break.

 

The prickly part of this thought is that that we qualify under 'animals'.

 

I will admit that it's real and we're the most significant cause. Okay, so what do we do? We literally aren't going to go back 300 years and go back to horses and carriages(though that would be pretty cool.)

 

Mankind has been keeping weather records, for a very brief time.

 

Meanwhile, not too long ago...

Antarctic temperatures recently plunged close to the theoretically coldest achievable on Earth!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11...he-theoretically-coldest-achievable-on-earth/

 

The benefit of having that moron in office is that progressives are forced to seek other ways to combat climate change while whining about a lack of entitlements. Once they have power again, they'll lose interest in climate change and bankrupt the Federal government and drain the economy granting themselves freebies while the world burns. For all their complaints about conservatives being selfish, they are just as selfish.

 

But instead of giving $10 to your local Democrat politician to cure it, you came here to... what?

 

Went right over your head.

 

Just a couple decades longer than the oldest living human being.

 

Did it? You mean that wasn't a reference to some vague and undefined notion that the planet will survive no matter how badly we **** things up?

 

Push my boulder up that infinite hill otherwise known as "trying to convince climate change deniers that human induced climate change is real and a threat."

 

There is no need to go back because we are not currently at a point where we face very dire circumstances, but the window to take significant action is shrinking quite rapidly.

The best and quickest method for taking those steps is to elect political leaders who recognize and are willing to act on that threat and will address the solutions in a manner that does not harm economic or ecological projections to any significant degree.