Too many people do not understand the difference between weather and climate.
For being so smart, we are so dumb
Well, to be fair, we’re hobbled by the fact that we evolved to think in terms of short-term solutions on a very limited time-scale such that what makes intuitive sense to us is often at odds with what science tells us to be true.
Said short-term thinking has served us very well as we’ve become the dominant species on the planet, but now that we’re here, it’s a drawback in the sense that it’s difficult for many of us to think outside of the parameters that evolution has equipped us with.
What science shows us is that most of reality, from geological time to the vast scale of space and the infinitesimally small is far far out of the relatively tiny range of reality that we’ve evolved to make intuitive sense of.
This, together with a much broader coordination problem that arises from our evolved tribalistic tendencies, means that in spite of our intelligence, we are not well equipped to address long-term problems that require collective action on a global scale.
That said, I don’t have any answers. We’re in a tight spot and I don’t think we’re going to get out of it without a lot of pain.
The solution to global warming, then, is clearly to just set up a massive ring of fans all pointed in the same direction in a ring around the North Pole, to keep the jet stream going
That is the worst geoengeniering idea. https://whatif.xkcd.com/162/
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/0SYpUSjSgFg?si=xhbRkxE6nA6JoOlw
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/0SYpUSjSgFg?si=xhbRkxE6nA6JoOlw
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/understanding-arctic-polar-vortex
As of 2021 the science was not settled on the ice loss as a cause or an affect. This article goes into both theories.
That’s a bit like the investigation into whether lethal bear attacks are because of their teeth or their claws - probably really interesting, but not critical to the question of avoiding the bear.
Interesting. I would love to work on that kind of data model, as there is an interesting thing to point out with the movement of the polar vortex:
It dips further south to follow along land mass.
I wonder if the wind currents have an easier time maintaining speed along flat surfaces or if the water being warmer causes pockets of higher pressure further north than usual pushing the vortex to be more unstable looking.
It feels like it makes sense that the current would be much more stable along a surface that is more consistent and thus loss of ice smoothing the surface would cause it to wobble but inertia still remains the same meaning it needs to push down elsewhere where there is less resistance.
So I would lean towards ice loss as a cause of changing polar vortex stability but I kinda gave up that ability to do anything about this or study such things a while ago.
You can’t use logic with these people, they’ll try to burn you for being a witch.
I thought that was called sealioning?
I’m afraid I don’t have a wall of links to support my argument.
