The Graph That Should Be Front-Page News

(lyrebirddreaming.com)

54 points | by rakel_rakel 4 hours ago

11 comments

  • voidUpdate 33 minutes ago
    If it should be front-page news, shouldn't it also be at the top of the article, rather than right at the bottom?
  • yellow_lead 21 minutes ago
    Lots of AI tells in this article. Ironic?

    > It's not a forecast. It's not a simulation of what might happen decades from now. These are...

  • retube 2 minutes ago
    You also need to ask what is the likelihood you get this move just by chance
  • KingOfCoders 23 minutes ago
    There are many thing people could do, eat less meat, smaller homes, electric cars, green energy, no flights etc. but the vast majority of people does exactly nothing.
    • Hoodedcrow 10 minutes ago
      "Eat less meat, smaller homes, no flights"? Sounds like an average person to me because of poverty, lol. Even my family, well above the threshold for poverty, has to do this.

      "Electric cars" is less likely tho because having a car at all is a money drain.

    • embedding-shape 19 minutes ago
      > eat less meat, smaller homes, electric cars, green energy, no flights etc.

      How much % of the world's population would have to do those things, for the graph to show a reversal of the trend? 10%? 50%? Everyone?

  • jones89176 43 minutes ago
    Shouldn't the y-axis better be called "Standard DeviationS"?

    According to one comment on the site, the 3.5 means "3.5 times the SD", which makes much more sense to me.

    I initially tried to make sense of "SD being 3.5 on that day of the year", which seems to be a wrong interpretation.

    • edwinjm 38 minutes ago
      No. The (standard) deviation is 3.5.
      • stymaar 7 minutes ago
        > No. The (standard) deviation is 3.5.

        3.5 what, according to you?

        You're reading this graph wrong: we're currently 3.63 standard deviation above the mean.

        It's clearer on the original article[1] that this AI-generated blog is taking the graph from, the average temperature on the period at this time of the year is around 27.5°, the ocean is almost at 29.5°, just short of 2°C above average, and the standard deviation is 0.55°C.

        [1]: https://climatecasino.substack.com/p/some-monsters-are-real

        Edit: note that the original article is 6 days old, and we've unfortunately crossed the 2°C threshold right after it was posted, so the situation of even direr than described: https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

  • stymaar 20 minutes ago
    This blog post is pure slop, stealing from this one: https://climatecasino.substack.com/p/some-monsters-are-real the submission should be updated to link to the original instead.
  • turtleyacht 4 hours ago
  • l1chorpe 4 hours ago
    Looking at the graph left me wondering just what it means exactly. I'm not well versed in statistics so "the standard deviation is 3.5°C" doesn't mean much. Also, what's up with that other line going down to -3.5°C? And what do the colors mean? In the sense that I'm not sure whether a darker blue means closer to or further from today.
    • blaze33 42 minutes ago
      You can go to the source website https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/?dm_id=nino3.4

      There's is an interactive chart that's easier to understand

      • 2b3a51 34 minutes ago
        Thanks for posting that link.

        The graph has a key on the right hand side that clearly labels each colour of line, and the horizontal axis is scaled in months of each year. Scrolling down gets you notes and links to data sources.

        In answer to another poster in this thread, the dataset only reaches back to 1983, I'm assuming because that is when they started monitoring these temperatures?

      • camillomiller 37 minutes ago
        Check out 2015, it had way hotter temperatures in November, with higher temperatures than the average in this period, but I would like a climatologist to explain this, draw correlations etc. The original post is a weird LLM-mediated mix of vague scaremongering with some easy piling on journalism "just because". So what am I supposed to with it? Nothing, because it's written by an LLM, I guess.
    • danhau 44 minutes ago
      I'm not an authority on this, but here's is my understanding - I'd appreciate if someone could correct my mistakes.

      The baseline of 0.0 represents the average of all years. Anything above / below the baseline is a (standard) deviation from the average. The blue lines are the individual years since 1991 [1] while the red line is the year 2026.

      If a line is above the baseline, then the sea-surface temperature was hotter on that day than average. If below, it was cooler than average.

      The year 2026 is an outlier, dwarfing all the others starting around June / July. The Nino 3.4 sea-surface temperature is significantly hotter than any previous year during that time. New record, I guess?

      [1]: I'm confused about the two date ranges given: 1982-2026 and 1991-2020. I'm assuming this graph is based on measurements from 1982-2026 to calculate the average, but the lines shown are only from 1991-2020, for some statistical reason I don't understand.

      • plough 27 minutes ago
        I think it is the other way around: SD is calculated from 1982-2020, while all measurement readings in the plot are 1982-2026. I believe this is meant to not introduce an unwanted shift but compare to sort of a 'stable process'. However, that should have been described and argued somewhere.
    • bitter_michael 28 minutes ago
      I had the same concerns and think the chart would benefit from color grading the individual years by age. If the other outlier in the opposite direction is equally likely then it should also be concerning (obviously it is not). My understanding is the deviation is from the 1991-2020 subset avg, so a warming trend would be indicated by relative drift towards positive in the std dev across years from 82-present
    • bestouff 53 minutes ago
      > Each blue line represents a different year since 1982. The red line is this year. It doesn't just set a new record. It has departed entirely from the range of previous observations.
    • ArnoVW 56 minutes ago
      my layman understanding, a real statistician will surely intervene.

      standard deviation is a measure that informs about the distribution. A high standard deviation means a "wide bell curve". A low standard deviation means that all values are closely clustered around the middle of the curve.

      So if your value is 2 x standard deviation (for example) that means it is a relatively rare outlier, since 2 x standard deviation covers 95% of the bell curve. In particle physics I believe they require 5 standard deviations to confirm an observation.

  • Arodex 18 minutes ago
    The Forest of Fontainebleau, just 50 km south of Paris, is burning, with Canada it's on the scene trying to contain it. Nearby highways and trains - some of the busiest of France - are cut. It is a temperate European forest, oak trees and beech.

    No AC is going to save European from that. In fact, it is American AC which is the main cause of it. They dumped all that energy and greenhouse gases and Europeans are the one impacted by these externalities.

  • camillomiller 39 minutes ago
    I believe this post was written with some heavy help of an LLM. I hope the irony is not lost on the author, nor the readers here.
  • anirudhak47 1 hour ago
    i have seen this couple of times here and there. with eu melting looks concerning. i guess build more data centers