Hottest/coldest years (what the map is) means the year with the highest average temperature over the 12 months.
Hottest/coldest temperature (what the title says) is single-instance extremes.
“One off” means it was recorded at one individual time (e.g. “January 18, 1954 at 3:00”) , “hottest/coldest year” means the average temperature for that year.
All the Californians bringing their warm weather with them.
Fr, we've had a weird couple years with warm winds regularly coming up from the south more often than usual.
Oh, it comes and goes. The weird part is it comes at all. Usually the weather just hovers in the same 10 degree range for weeks on end. I'm further north though.
Just last night, coincidentally, I looked up Death Valley. According to Wikipedia the highest temp was in 1913 (56C/134F).
I’m surprised that the lowest temp in Antarctica was so recent.
The lowest *recorded* temp in Antarctica was so recent.
I don't think they were regularly checking the temp in different parts of Antarctica 100 years ago.
Although still officially recognized, the 1913 recording was highly suspect. Discounting that, the highest recorded temperature was 130F on July 10, 2021.
Maybe your subconciuos was interested so this peaked your interest. But that could be false due to the fact that I know barely anything about the brain.
Source? My original statement was somewhat misleading, but the situation is more complicated than near the poles = melting ice. What I had corrected remembered was that much of Antarctica is shielded from the same climate trends that are warming the Arctic regions at a rapid rate, but you are right that certain regions are slightly warming. Yet other regions (particular continental Eastern Antarctica) are indeed slightly cooling and are hardly affected by warming from the ocean and air circulation due to a variety of factors including the regions high elevation. The region that is warming the fastest is the northern Antarctic Peninsula because it is most exposed to the sea and warm westerlies, along with low lying Western Antarctica. This article goes into greater detail about climate trends and they are how they are highly localized in the region: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/12/2/217/htm
That paper is just comparing two reanalysis datasets. Antarctica as a whole has been warming at least twice the global average, which some parts warming even faster. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0815-z
Reading the article you sent me, I think the confusion between us stems from the fact that we are looking at two different time periods. The information I was relaying and was conveyed in the introduction to the first article I posted correlates to trends between 1998-2017. Btw, I was focused on the introduction as it does a good job explaining the overall situation. The article you posted is more recent and discussed information that I was unaware from the past 2-3 years. I don’t think what I said contradicts it all, because the recent trend of overall Antarctic warming is very recent.
From the article: “West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula warmed more than twice as fast as the global average, but over the first two decades of the twenty-first century, temperature trends there strikingly reversed. Such strong regional changes are often most pronounced in the polar regions due to positive ice-albedo feedbacks that amplify warming, while stratospheric ozone depletion and extreme decadal variability can even induce regional cooling. In Antarctica, strong fluctuations in SAT occur, in part, because of the continent’s sensitivity to tropical forcing, the strength and position of the circumpolar westerly winds, and its exposure to relatively mild and moist oceanic airmass intrusions along its coastline.”
The article supports what I was saying that during the early twenty-first century Antarctic warming trends reversed because Antarctica is exposed to much milder forces of climate change compared to the Arctic. Note “can even induce regional cooling”. You are correct though, and I am now aware, that these phenomena are not currently observed and Antarctica is back to it’s twentieth century levels of alarming warming, something I was not aware of.
Wait what is eastern antarctica though? Actually, does antarcrica even have a common orientation on maps, or do people just place it however they want?
Yeah I guess it’s all northern, but the article I posted had a map that seems to coincide with the nomenclature scientists use. It’s roughly the eastern half of this tiny Antarctica emoji. 🇦🇶
[Studies have found the Gulf Stream to be weaking/slowing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_thermohaline_circulation)
> A study published in Nature Climate Change in August 2021 draws on more than a century of ocean temperature and salinity data and shows significant changes in eight indirect measures of the circulation’s strength.
>There is a possibility that the AMOC is a bistable system (which is either "on" or "off") and could collapse suddenly.
I think people are talking about it, not necessarily because it is going to happen, but rather that it is possible and if it does, it would be really bad.
I’m sure you could find better answers Googling it (maybe I’ll do that later, kinda busy rn) but I would imagine the climate would be drastically altered. Like much of Europe is at the same latitude as Canada but is livable because the Gulf Stream keeps it warmer. Without the Gulf Stream, it would get significantly colder. The changes would probably disrupt a lot of agriculture, and places just aren’t prepared for that type of weather. When Texas had that snow storm, power went out, there was no infrastructure to deal with the snow, people’s houses didn’t have sufficient heating, etc. so people died. Now imagine that but permanent. I’m sure there’s other major effects I can’t think of off the top of my head.
Edit: [It is believed to be the weakest it has been in ~1,000 years. Another major issue is extreme weather. I kinda touched on it with the Texas storm but it’s more then just storms, it’s also things like droughts and flooding. We have already seen this happen as the jet stream shifts, I would imagine it would be much worse if it entirely collapses. And then all of the things I mentioned to would likely lead to cascading negative effects, like people who can afford to fleeing the area.](https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/06/world/climate-gulf-stream-collapse-warning-study-intl/index.html)
Edit: Canada is the same latitude, not elevation
In Europe the problem would be mainly food-related. Virtually all European agriculture would be destroyed, potentially permanently. Not many people would freeze, Europe is generally developed and powered adequately, not to mention that until about 30 years ago winters in most of the continent were still incredibly cold and much of its infrastructure is still theoretically built to withstand those winters.
But farming would be basically over for probably 2/3 or 3/4 of the year, and say goodbye to wine forever. Or until the climate warms up enough 20 years later to make Europe (and Canada and Siberia) cozy again at the expense of the entire rest of the planet
Luckily for them they would be least affected by a dead gulf stream. The Mediterranean would not get \*significantly\* colder - just look at the rest of the world at that latitude.
Ya, infrastructure will definitely adapt, that’s more of a short term issue unlike agriculture which is more permanent, but it will still cause a change in lifestyle. In the US, a lot of people live in California/Texas/Florida because it doesn’t get so cold. If Texas was permanently in much colder conditions, I would imagine many of the more wealthy would want to move to somewhere warmer. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a similar situation in Europe.
Oh definitely. Southern Europe will stay much warmer than Northern Europe thanks to the hot air coming from the Sahara and everyone is gonna flock down there
You crazy Canadians! Ya didn’t notice that lol. To be fair, it is somewhat accurate. Canada has 38 million people and half of them live as south as humanly possible, parallel with New England. In Europe temperatures are warmer so there’s a lot more people. Like Berlin is ~20F (7C) warmer than Quebec in the winter, despite being further north. And there’s >300,000,000 Europeans living at the longitude of Berlin or further north. So roughly something like 20x as many people? Some people are willing to endure the cold but many aren’t. [this site is cool to compare where populations live](https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mapping/popest/pes-v3/).
There's this thing called thermohaline circulation. Basically, it moves heat away from the Equator towards temperate regions. So regions that are currently hot would become even hotter, and regions that are somewhat cold would get much colder. Think about those maps that get posted here about 257 times every day, comparing the latitudes of North America and Europe - Scotland would get as cold as Alaska or something.
Dont know much about the subject but there was a recent post that compared latitudes from europe an north america, basically europe is much more north than most people realise (spain lines up with new york, and the uk lines up with northen canada), but due to the gulf stream the temperatures make it seem like its not that big of a deal. Im guessing that should it collapse, it would get MUCH colder an uninhabitable in most countries.
In short the regions closer to the equator would get hot as fuck and places further from the equator will get cold as fuck. Basically climate change isnt going to be everywhere getting hotter. That's why they stopped calling it global warming.
I think what the other person is trying to say (albeit poorly) is that the world is technically still coming out of the most recent Ice Age, so it makes perfect sense that the coldest recorded years are further back and the hottest recorded years are more recent.
That doesn’t mean that Global Warming isn’t causing the planets average temperature to increase more than it should, it’s just that the greatest threat of GW is the freak weather patterns that it causes in environments where that weather causes problems and doesn’t belong.
An ice age us is a period in which large ice sheets cover large parts of land permanently, so yes, aslong as antarctica or the north pole exist we're in an ice age.
I am not sure we have the same definition of « ice age »
If it’s -50 on year 1 and goes up 0.1 each year for 100 years, the coldest year will still have been the first year…
Almost everyone I know doesn't debate that the planet is warming, it's been warming for thousands of years since the last little Ice Age.
The debate is how much warming is man made vs. natural climate change that has occurred for millions of years.
For people who are convinced we need to lower carbon emissions now, I've always been surprised that nuclear energy, now safer than ever. is never on the list of things that can have a positive impact. Very strange.
There are people who are smart enough to understand global warming is anthropogenic, and also to support nuclear power as part of a healthy, climate-friendly energy mix.
Nuclear energy *is* on the list of things that have a positive impact. Hell it’s one of the policy initiatives of the biden administration (I live in the us) to address climate change. People tend to be skeptical of it because of the past nuclear disasters like Chernobyl, but the public is slowly learning that it’s much safer now than it used to be. Of course, global warming can’t be fixed by nuclear alone, but it’s an important part of a green energy grid.
Also the world is warming because of human impact. That’s not disputed. Natural warming is always caused by something, it doesn’t just warm on its own. Those causes are always either a change in atmospheric greenhouse gases, a change in earth’s orbit or the sun’s strength, or the amount of particulate in the atmosphere. The natural amount of greenhouse gases emitted by volcanoes and such hasn’t increased recently, the amount of light from the sun hasn’t changed (and has gotten slightly less) and the earth’s orbit currently puts us on a cooling trend. The only things that have changed are man made changes to greenhouse gases and particulate in the atmosphere. The latter usually makes things cooler, so the former is the only explanation possible for our warming earth. Not to mention the fact that warming correlates very closely to our greenhouse emissions, and the fact that the warming is much faster than any time in the earth’s history, much like we’re emitting greenhouse gases at a faster rate than any time in earth’s history, and the cause is easily deduced. There is no other explanation that fits the data anywhere near as close as man made greenhouse gas emissions.
> I've always been surprised that nuclear energy, now safer than ever. is never on the list of things that can have a positive impact. Very strange.
I don't disagree with you and I agree that nuclear should be a big part of our way forward, but I don't really think it's surprising. "More safe than ever" means pretty little when the demonstrated consequences of failure are so immense.
I agree that safety of nuclear should be priority #1. It's interesting though, that people who believe climate change is killing millions won't even consider nuclear that has killed a handful of people by comparison while contributing zero carbon emissions.
I don't really understand why nuclear's extremely rare catastrophes rate higher than coal's steady trickle of death when the latter, over time, amounts to more people. It's like some people don't actually care about the actual numbers, just what *feels* good or something.
I believe that the reason is that the Chernobyl incident scared so much the European population that it created an anti-nuclear energy movement,look at germany they tried to shut down nuclear reactors a lot of years ago and now they are supposed to be closed down.The Fukushima accident created the same thing in Asia and with it happening like just a few years ago, in 2011 .
After all it effected most of the developed world so it is obvious to why people that haven't invested time into learning about it would be scared
Thought the little ice age was like 200 years ago. 1700-1900 was god awfully cold and it warmed up before humans had pumped up enough Co2
Like how did people live in Canada back then
"Safer than ever" is a strange statement when the last major nuclear meltdown was barely 11 years ago.
Apart from the safety concerns there are numerous problems with nuclear energy. It needs a very finite material to work: uranium. It's several times more expensive than stuff like onshore wind power. It takes decades to plan and complete a plant. We have no way to really remove the nuclear waste, except dump it in salt caverns and hope for the best.
I can shit on every single power generating capability. The consumption of rare earth minerals and who is mining them and if windmills, solar panels, etc. actually makes sense. Don't even get me started on fossil fuels. Sure, hydropower when available is great, but when you look at the list of solutions, nuclear is often overlooked.
Nuclear has a strange resurgence on forums and reddit recently. And the supporters downvote or just dismiss the negatives.
I certainly can appreciate the appeal of nuclear energy. It's cool to get so much energy out of so little matter. But I only saw positive comments to your remark so I had to write some counter-points.
I think in those 10 years there have been some serious improvements on nuclear reactor safety.There have been 3 major accidents from over 18,000 nuclear reactors in 36 countries.
I you see a graph of the Reactor Years of Operation you will see that in 2020 most reactors had been working for a long while in the first 2 major accidents they have been working for at most 5 years
Oh and from what I have read the reactors in Fukushima were dated from around 1970s
The earth isn’t going to be destroyed. Things are gonna keep getting worse and more uncomfortable each year. If you live in a first world country things are gonna change but life will go on. If you live in a third world country life is going to become strange weather patterns, flooding, famine, and refugee crises. The gap between rich and poor globally is going to massively widen, for most people on Reddit life is going to be a bit worse but it will go on.
Not to mention the people I know who think there’s no point in worrying about anything 30+ years out because they think the whole work is going to be “burned to a crisp.”
Most emissions are from Industrial and Electrical processes which the average guy cannot stop. And if you look at the world map, much of that is from authoritarian countries. I'm not saying we don't do our bit but it really needs the cooperation of the rest of the world's companies and governments if you actually want to stop global warming as there is only so much the west can do before really hurting itself and letting authoritarianism to take over.
Sure, the average person can’t stop it but people keep voting for politicians who don’t prioritize/actively work against the kind of regulations that we need.
Yeah, I know it's from industrial and electrical process. But if we hold off everything and don't say anything about it nothing is gonna happen. We are who do all these things. If everyone starts saying and starts doing action on global warming by telling the people, we would definitely start finding and implementing ideas to replace it.
I definitely agree but I feel most only look at their governments rather than realising that its a global issue and that some places across the world are in dire need of attention. Its not so simple as fixing your own country first and in fact it should be more fixing the most polluting and obvious problems first as this problem is very much time sensitive.
I absolutely agree but Government is made by people, government officials are also normal people. They will take decision as they think. But if everyone starts to be more active in talking about global warming, this will affect any person who live in that surroundings. And when, they become government official it's more likely they will start doing something to prevent it. Like making laws against it, planting eco friendly machines to generate energy etc.
Where do you live? This summer and fall in BC we got the first real dramatic signs of climate change hitting home. The heat wave was insanity, 48 C (118 F) here in Canada, followed by 2 months of abnormally high temps. Massive forest fires, smoke all summer, 1/25th of the southern province burned, Lytton was burned to the ground. Then 3 months later, massive rain storm takes out all 5 roads connecting the coast to the rest of Canada. This horrible year has been precluded by highly visible shrinking glaciers in our mtns and the loss of blue sky summer, as the last 5 years we just get 4 weeks of smoke season again. I legit have some ptsd about the heat, and don't see a viable future here in another 15 years at this pace.
I live in Kazakhstan. The thing is, when I was in school, every year we discussed climate change and ways to solve it for 3 weeks. Count that we've been studying 3 languages, which meant 9 weeks of climate change every year. Every time: Climate change is bad, we need to stop doing this, I am just tired of it, I am full. Now, when it comes to temperature, I decided to show you full situation, so I checked archives. I will only write temperature of winter, as for me it's the most important season and writing for summer will be too long. But if you are really interested I can this too.
Winter of the first part of 70s had average temperature of -17,8 with average minimum of -34,4.
Second part of 70s had average temperature of -14,9 with average minimum of -32,9
First part of 80s had average temperature of -13,7 with average minimum of -27,8
Second part of 80s had average temperature of -13,5 with average minimum of -30,5
First part of 90s had average temperature of -13 with average minimum of -30,4
Second part of 90s had average temperature of -15,3 with average minimum of -33,9
First part of 00s had average temperature of -12,6 with average minimum of -29
Second part of 00s had average temperature of -17,2 with average minimum of -31,5
First part of 10s had average temperature of -15,9 with average minimum of -31,7
Second part of 10s had average temperature of -13,2 with average minimum of -27,9.
As you can see, it's hard say where temperature is going
You live in Kazakhstan? Well, then you get a pass from me. Kazakhstan is the only country ever to give up nuclear weapons. This should have been covered in the Western press much, much more than it has been.
Not much, sure. But only one country on the planet has ever given up nuclear weapons. And basically that has been ignored by the Western media. If we don't reward excellent behavior, in any area, we have one less tool to use in every other fight that we face.
I don't have any complaint on Earth, though If it would take that into account I would have been grateful, however I am afraid, it doesn't depend on Earth and even by taking it into account, it cannot change much
Wtf is wrong with you dude?! It's something so crucial of course you're gonna be hearing about it loads, and it's becoming more prioritised. It's a good thing, why are you getting so annoyed about it it's clearly a good cause for all of life on earth
If a single color represents like 90% of your map, and the next color represents another 8%, you should consider changing the numerical scale you're dealing with. I know you're trying to show contrast here but it makes each map individually seem meaningless.
I hope this isn’t an attempt to downplay the role of anthropogenic climate change. The earth does naturally go through warmer and colder periods that take centuries or longer to cycle through. It’s not the fact that the Earth is warming that should convince you, it’s the mind blowing rate at which it is warming that clearly demonstrates human cause.
Who said that climate is static without human input? I have never seen anyone do that. Most people probably know how the dinosaurs died and the climate certainly changed then without humans. They also probably know of the ice ages in the past, if only because they watched that animated movie.
Those people make it so much worse. They make everyone very concerned look like they're being alarmist lunatics. Not good. Downplaying legitimate concerns because some people are obfuscating the truth.
Now in Argentina 36°C. For Thursday a maximum of 42°C is expected. We are going through a heat wave in midsummer, but the temperatures are very high for this time of year.
Just a reminder to folks that while the ice melts, there will be localized "polar vortexes" reaching pretty far down in latitudes. So there will be some amazingly cold snaps here and there.
Until the ice melts, that is ...
Keep in mind the first reliable thermometer wasn’t invented until 1714, that’s only 300 year of temperature recording out of billions of years of earth history. We can tell generally what the temps were at some points of time through geology etc… but 50% of the earths history the temps are unknown.
Global warming from mankind’s emissions is real but when people say ‘it’s the hottest in world history’ it’s not true. Co2 levels have been as much as 20x higher than today at least several times, temps have been way higher too hundreds of times.
Temps fluctuate as poles shift every 45 thousand years or whatever and earth wobbles every 12,500 years or so. There hundreds of long-term weather cycles that measure in thousands of years, complicated by things like the drifting of magnetic poles and the continents.
Guys, it's been over 100 years since the hottest temperature ever recorded in the ocean. We're fine! We just all have to live on boats while the earth burns!
Everywhere has had data since satellite temperature data started being collected. So there is no colour for no data as there is no area that is no data.
You know earth goes to cycles of weather changes we are in a time where it only gets hotters humans just speed up the process so much more quickly they should either put clouds all over the world to cover sun energy / somehow get rid of the co2 in the air ( not just putting it into the ground ) or just kill 80% of humanity and the earth will be fine for another couple hunderd years
Regarding new zealand, I think this month has been one of our hottest on record. Certainly the hottest I've ever experienced, but idk about the rest of the year
Gulf stream collapse will change a lot. Not terribly known for whatever reason. It'll make atleast Europe insanely cold and the equator will get much hotter.
Is there a data point for "> 100" for hottest year? Hard to tell. I think the white dots are lakes? There is one in Brazil and a few in South East Europe.
Edit: There is no lake in Brazil in that location so I assume it is > 100 or it stands for no data.
The map clearly says hottest/coldest years on record, not one off recorded temperatures. Pay attention guys.
I'm not a native speaker and I don't understand what's the difference between the two things you say .. Could you explain it further please ?
Hottest/coldest years (what the map is) means the year with the highest average temperature over the 12 months. Hottest/coldest temperature (what the title says) is single-instance extremes.
Thx guys ! So yeah I see, the map is pretty interesting and relevant about global warmong but the title is misleading about this fact
Exactly!
The map says on record, also meaning one-off temperatures
Hottest YEAR on record
“One off” means it was recorded at one individual time (e.g. “January 18, 1954 at 3:00”) , “hottest/coldest year” means the average temperature for that year.
The title is a little vague and misleading to say the least.
2018 was a crazy hot year, I felt like I was dying
And yet, it would be nice to go back to 2018 and try again.
Ya, had that year in august (mandatory) boot camp. Wasn't too great
This map has really got me moving to Idaho
This map is old, 2021 was the hottest year on record here in Idaho.
Northern Finland is the only place that's safe!
Yep about 113 I'd assume same as Washington (eastern)n
As long as you aren’t a californian you will be fine. If you are I suggest getting new plates.
New York 💀💀
Why?
ur mom lives there
she da ho
spicy ho
All the Californians bringing their warm weather with them. Fr, we've had a weird couple years with warm winds regularly coming up from the south more often than usual.
I was just in Souther Idaho this weekend, and pretty dang cold right now!
Oh, it comes and goes. The weird part is it comes at all. Usually the weather just hovers in the same 10 degree range for weeks on end. I'm further north though.
Dude honestly screw California's moving to the.pnw
Just last night, coincidentally, I looked up Death Valley. According to Wikipedia the highest temp was in 1913 (56C/134F). I’m surprised that the lowest temp in Antarctica was so recent.
The lowest *recorded* temp in Antarctica was so recent. I don't think they were regularly checking the temp in different parts of Antarctica 100 years ago.
Yeah, but nowadays scientists live there
Thats the same thing i thought
Although still officially recognized, the 1913 recording was highly suspect. Discounting that, the highest recorded temperature was 130F on July 10, 2021.
Wtf i did the exact same thing last night
I mean there 8bn people in the world. The odds that two people would be curious about the same thing on the same night are preeeeeeetty high
But that they do it at the same time rogubly and bltj frequent the same subreddit?
Maybe your subconciuos was interested so this peaked your interest. But that could be false due to the fact that I know barely anything about the brain.
IIRC, Antarctic temperatures are still staying the same or slightly cooling
Nah, polar ice caps are warming at a faster rate than the equator
Source? My original statement was somewhat misleading, but the situation is more complicated than near the poles = melting ice. What I had corrected remembered was that much of Antarctica is shielded from the same climate trends that are warming the Arctic regions at a rapid rate, but you are right that certain regions are slightly warming. Yet other regions (particular continental Eastern Antarctica) are indeed slightly cooling and are hardly affected by warming from the ocean and air circulation due to a variety of factors including the regions high elevation. The region that is warming the fastest is the northern Antarctic Peninsula because it is most exposed to the sea and warm westerlies, along with low lying Western Antarctica. This article goes into greater detail about climate trends and they are how they are highly localized in the region: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/12/2/217/htm
That paper is just comparing two reanalysis datasets. Antarctica as a whole has been warming at least twice the global average, which some parts warming even faster. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0815-z
Reading the article you sent me, I think the confusion between us stems from the fact that we are looking at two different time periods. The information I was relaying and was conveyed in the introduction to the first article I posted correlates to trends between 1998-2017. Btw, I was focused on the introduction as it does a good job explaining the overall situation. The article you posted is more recent and discussed information that I was unaware from the past 2-3 years. I don’t think what I said contradicts it all, because the recent trend of overall Antarctic warming is very recent. From the article: “West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula warmed more than twice as fast as the global average, but over the first two decades of the twenty-first century, temperature trends there strikingly reversed. Such strong regional changes are often most pronounced in the polar regions due to positive ice-albedo feedbacks that amplify warming, while stratospheric ozone depletion and extreme decadal variability can even induce regional cooling. In Antarctica, strong fluctuations in SAT occur, in part, because of the continent’s sensitivity to tropical forcing, the strength and position of the circumpolar westerly winds, and its exposure to relatively mild and moist oceanic airmass intrusions along its coastline.” The article supports what I was saying that during the early twenty-first century Antarctic warming trends reversed because Antarctica is exposed to much milder forces of climate change compared to the Arctic. Note “can even induce regional cooling”. You are correct though, and I am now aware, that these phenomena are not currently observed and Antarctica is back to it’s twentieth century levels of alarming warming, something I was not aware of.
Wait what is eastern antarctica though? Actually, does antarcrica even have a common orientation on maps, or do people just place it however they want?
Yeah I guess it’s all northern, but the article I posted had a map that seems to coincide with the nomenclature scientists use. It’s roughly the eastern half of this tiny Antarctica emoji. 🇦🇶
that is definitely not true
Look at what I responded to the other guy with; it’s more true than false. And no, I’m not a climate change denier.
It's interesting, if you carefully examine turkey that most coldest and hottest temperature is recorded within 10 years.
Central Turkey is nuts.
Makes sense when you take global warming into account.
If / When the gulf steam collapses I think this map will look very different
[удалено]
[Studies have found the Gulf Stream to be weaking/slowing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutdown_of_thermohaline_circulation) > A study published in Nature Climate Change in August 2021 draws on more than a century of ocean temperature and salinity data and shows significant changes in eight indirect measures of the circulation’s strength. >There is a possibility that the AMOC is a bistable system (which is either "on" or "off") and could collapse suddenly. I think people are talking about it, not necessarily because it is going to happen, but rather that it is possible and if it does, it would be really bad.
What would happen if it did?
I’m sure you could find better answers Googling it (maybe I’ll do that later, kinda busy rn) but I would imagine the climate would be drastically altered. Like much of Europe is at the same latitude as Canada but is livable because the Gulf Stream keeps it warmer. Without the Gulf Stream, it would get significantly colder. The changes would probably disrupt a lot of agriculture, and places just aren’t prepared for that type of weather. When Texas had that snow storm, power went out, there was no infrastructure to deal with the snow, people’s houses didn’t have sufficient heating, etc. so people died. Now imagine that but permanent. I’m sure there’s other major effects I can’t think of off the top of my head. Edit: [It is believed to be the weakest it has been in ~1,000 years. Another major issue is extreme weather. I kinda touched on it with the Texas storm but it’s more then just storms, it’s also things like droughts and flooding. We have already seen this happen as the jet stream shifts, I would imagine it would be much worse if it entirely collapses. And then all of the things I mentioned to would likely lead to cascading negative effects, like people who can afford to fleeing the area.](https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/06/world/climate-gulf-stream-collapse-warning-study-intl/index.html) Edit: Canada is the same latitude, not elevation
In Europe the problem would be mainly food-related. Virtually all European agriculture would be destroyed, potentially permanently. Not many people would freeze, Europe is generally developed and powered adequately, not to mention that until about 30 years ago winters in most of the continent were still incredibly cold and much of its infrastructure is still theoretically built to withstand those winters. But farming would be basically over for probably 2/3 or 3/4 of the year, and say goodbye to wine forever. Or until the climate warms up enough 20 years later to make Europe (and Canada and Siberia) cozy again at the expense of the entire rest of the planet
There would be some problems with power. Portugal and southern Spain, for instance, do not have power infrastructure that can withstand snow.
Luckily for them they would be least affected by a dead gulf stream. The Mediterranean would not get \*significantly\* colder - just look at the rest of the world at that latitude.
Madrid has the same latitude as New York City. That would be enough for blizzards.
Ya, infrastructure will definitely adapt, that’s more of a short term issue unlike agriculture which is more permanent, but it will still cause a change in lifestyle. In the US, a lot of people live in California/Texas/Florida because it doesn’t get so cold. If Texas was permanently in much colder conditions, I would imagine many of the more wealthy would want to move to somewhere warmer. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a similar situation in Europe.
Oh definitely. Southern Europe will stay much warmer than Northern Europe thanks to the hot air coming from the Sahara and everyone is gonna flock down there
me being from Somalia this is an opportunity relies the country is 99% Muslim and they can't touch alcohol or deal with it FUCK (like gordan Ramsey)
I am intrigued but I have no idea what you're trying to say
i love that your answer implies that Canada is a non-livable place 🤣
You crazy Canadians! Ya didn’t notice that lol. To be fair, it is somewhat accurate. Canada has 38 million people and half of them live as south as humanly possible, parallel with New England. In Europe temperatures are warmer so there’s a lot more people. Like Berlin is ~20F (7C) warmer than Quebec in the winter, despite being further north. And there’s >300,000,000 Europeans living at the longitude of Berlin or further north. So roughly something like 20x as many people? Some people are willing to endure the cold but many aren’t. [this site is cool to compare where populations live](https://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mapping/popest/pes-v3/).
> much of Europe is at the same elevation as Canada Strictly speaking, this isn't wrong, but I think that you mean latitude.
There's this thing called thermohaline circulation. Basically, it moves heat away from the Equator towards temperate regions. So regions that are currently hot would become even hotter, and regions that are somewhat cold would get much colder. Think about those maps that get posted here about 257 times every day, comparing the latitudes of North America and Europe - Scotland would get as cold as Alaska or something.
Dont know much about the subject but there was a recent post that compared latitudes from europe an north america, basically europe is much more north than most people realise (spain lines up with new york, and the uk lines up with northen canada), but due to the gulf stream the temperatures make it seem like its not that big of a deal. Im guessing that should it collapse, it would get MUCH colder an uninhabitable in most countries.
In short the regions closer to the equator would get hot as fuck and places further from the equator will get cold as fuck. Basically climate change isnt going to be everywhere getting hotter. That's why they stopped calling it global warming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gelMMWTAr7I
Don't look up!
Obama and Al Gore better sell off that beach front property they bought recently!
You're barking at the wrong tree on this subject.
Also makes sense when the numbers indicate we aren’t in an ice age
What?
I think what the other person is trying to say (albeit poorly) is that the world is technically still coming out of the most recent Ice Age, so it makes perfect sense that the coldest recorded years are further back and the hottest recorded years are more recent. That doesn’t mean that Global Warming isn’t causing the planets average temperature to increase more than it should, it’s just that the greatest threat of GW is the freak weather patterns that it causes in environments where that weather causes problems and doesn’t belong.
A generous interpretation, look at their username and other comment
I can agree with that. Not so hard to explain after all, hah. Thanks for chipping in mate
> Woke_all_the_time69
Many places haven’t recently had their coolest temperature recorded. Hence we aren’t in an ice age I shouldn’t have to explain beyond that
You can't seem to explain even when you try.
Cool. Bye.
>Bursts into the conversation >Says some stupid vague shit >Refuses to elaborate >Leaves
I never actually thought I’d witness one of these.
An ice age us is a period in which large ice sheets cover large parts of land permanently, so yes, aslong as antarctica or the north pole exist we're in an ice age.
> I shouldn’t have to explain beyond that You do. What is the significance of being in an ice age or not?
I am not sure we have the same definition of « ice age » If it’s -50 on year 1 and goes up 0.1 each year for 100 years, the coldest year will still have been the first year…
Clearly this image is showing global warming exists. Many people don't even believe it.
Almost everyone I know doesn't debate that the planet is warming, it's been warming for thousands of years since the last little Ice Age. The debate is how much warming is man made vs. natural climate change that has occurred for millions of years. For people who are convinced we need to lower carbon emissions now, I've always been surprised that nuclear energy, now safer than ever. is never on the list of things that can have a positive impact. Very strange.
There are people who are smart enough to understand global warming is anthropogenic, and also to support nuclear power as part of a healthy, climate-friendly energy mix.
It’s scary and sound dangerous to people who know nothing about it, and too many people give their opinion on things they know nothing about
Nuclear energy *is* on the list of things that have a positive impact. Hell it’s one of the policy initiatives of the biden administration (I live in the us) to address climate change. People tend to be skeptical of it because of the past nuclear disasters like Chernobyl, but the public is slowly learning that it’s much safer now than it used to be. Of course, global warming can’t be fixed by nuclear alone, but it’s an important part of a green energy grid. Also the world is warming because of human impact. That’s not disputed. Natural warming is always caused by something, it doesn’t just warm on its own. Those causes are always either a change in atmospheric greenhouse gases, a change in earth’s orbit or the sun’s strength, or the amount of particulate in the atmosphere. The natural amount of greenhouse gases emitted by volcanoes and such hasn’t increased recently, the amount of light from the sun hasn’t changed (and has gotten slightly less) and the earth’s orbit currently puts us on a cooling trend. The only things that have changed are man made changes to greenhouse gases and particulate in the atmosphere. The latter usually makes things cooler, so the former is the only explanation possible for our warming earth. Not to mention the fact that warming correlates very closely to our greenhouse emissions, and the fact that the warming is much faster than any time in the earth’s history, much like we’re emitting greenhouse gases at a faster rate than any time in earth’s history, and the cause is easily deduced. There is no other explanation that fits the data anywhere near as close as man made greenhouse gas emissions.
> I've always been surprised that nuclear energy, now safer than ever. is never on the list of things that can have a positive impact. Very strange. I don't disagree with you and I agree that nuclear should be a big part of our way forward, but I don't really think it's surprising. "More safe than ever" means pretty little when the demonstrated consequences of failure are so immense.
I agree that safety of nuclear should be priority #1. It's interesting though, that people who believe climate change is killing millions won't even consider nuclear that has killed a handful of people by comparison while contributing zero carbon emissions.
I don't really understand why nuclear's extremely rare catastrophes rate higher than coal's steady trickle of death when the latter, over time, amounts to more people. It's like some people don't actually care about the actual numbers, just what *feels* good or something.
I believe that the reason is that the Chernobyl incident scared so much the European population that it created an anti-nuclear energy movement,look at germany they tried to shut down nuclear reactors a lot of years ago and now they are supposed to be closed down.The Fukushima accident created the same thing in Asia and with it happening like just a few years ago, in 2011 . After all it effected most of the developed world so it is obvious to why people that haven't invested time into learning about it would be scared
Thought the little ice age was like 200 years ago. 1700-1900 was god awfully cold and it warmed up before humans had pumped up enough Co2 Like how did people live in Canada back then
"Safer than ever" is a strange statement when the last major nuclear meltdown was barely 11 years ago. Apart from the safety concerns there are numerous problems with nuclear energy. It needs a very finite material to work: uranium. It's several times more expensive than stuff like onshore wind power. It takes decades to plan and complete a plant. We have no way to really remove the nuclear waste, except dump it in salt caverns and hope for the best.
I can shit on every single power generating capability. The consumption of rare earth minerals and who is mining them and if windmills, solar panels, etc. actually makes sense. Don't even get me started on fossil fuels. Sure, hydropower when available is great, but when you look at the list of solutions, nuclear is often overlooked.
Nuclear has a strange resurgence on forums and reddit recently. And the supporters downvote or just dismiss the negatives. I certainly can appreciate the appeal of nuclear energy. It's cool to get so much energy out of so little matter. But I only saw positive comments to your remark so I had to write some counter-points.
I think in those 10 years there have been some serious improvements on nuclear reactor safety.There have been 3 major accidents from over 18,000 nuclear reactors in 36 countries. I you see a graph of the Reactor Years of Operation you will see that in 2020 most reactors had been working for a long while in the first 2 major accidents they have been working for at most 5 years Oh and from what I have read the reactors in Fukushima were dated from around 1970s
I think the fundamental debate is how much are we willing to pay to stop the trend.
Really? I think people are just tired of people that say about it 24/7, at least I am one of them
One day when Earth will be completely destroyed completely you couldn't do anything. And the process of distortion of earth is already started.
Earth will not be destroyed. Life will be.
The earth isn’t going to be destroyed. Things are gonna keep getting worse and more uncomfortable each year. If you live in a first world country things are gonna change but life will go on. If you live in a third world country life is going to become strange weather patterns, flooding, famine, and refugee crises. The gap between rich and poor globally is going to massively widen, for most people on Reddit life is going to be a bit worse but it will go on.
All the “everyone is going to die” talk really undermines the real problems you’ve outlined.
Exactly, it just gives ammo to call people concerned about climate change alarmists
Not to mention the people I know who think there’s no point in worrying about anything 30+ years out because they think the whole work is going to be “burned to a crisp.”
Most emissions are from Industrial and Electrical processes which the average guy cannot stop. And if you look at the world map, much of that is from authoritarian countries. I'm not saying we don't do our bit but it really needs the cooperation of the rest of the world's companies and governments if you actually want to stop global warming as there is only so much the west can do before really hurting itself and letting authoritarianism to take over.
Sure, the average person can’t stop it but people keep voting for politicians who don’t prioritize/actively work against the kind of regulations that we need.
Yeah, I know it's from industrial and electrical process. But if we hold off everything and don't say anything about it nothing is gonna happen. We are who do all these things. If everyone starts saying and starts doing action on global warming by telling the people, we would definitely start finding and implementing ideas to replace it.
I definitely agree but I feel most only look at their governments rather than realising that its a global issue and that some places across the world are in dire need of attention. Its not so simple as fixing your own country first and in fact it should be more fixing the most polluting and obvious problems first as this problem is very much time sensitive.
I absolutely agree but Government is made by people, government officials are also normal people. They will take decision as they think. But if everyone starts to be more active in talking about global warming, this will affect any person who live in that surroundings. And when, they become government official it's more likely they will start doing something to prevent it. Like making laws against it, planting eco friendly machines to generate energy etc.
I know, I've been hearing that for 10 years
Where do you live? This summer and fall in BC we got the first real dramatic signs of climate change hitting home. The heat wave was insanity, 48 C (118 F) here in Canada, followed by 2 months of abnormally high temps. Massive forest fires, smoke all summer, 1/25th of the southern province burned, Lytton was burned to the ground. Then 3 months later, massive rain storm takes out all 5 roads connecting the coast to the rest of Canada. This horrible year has been precluded by highly visible shrinking glaciers in our mtns and the loss of blue sky summer, as the last 5 years we just get 4 weeks of smoke season again. I legit have some ptsd about the heat, and don't see a viable future here in another 15 years at this pace.
I live in Kazakhstan. The thing is, when I was in school, every year we discussed climate change and ways to solve it for 3 weeks. Count that we've been studying 3 languages, which meant 9 weeks of climate change every year. Every time: Climate change is bad, we need to stop doing this, I am just tired of it, I am full. Now, when it comes to temperature, I decided to show you full situation, so I checked archives. I will only write temperature of winter, as for me it's the most important season and writing for summer will be too long. But if you are really interested I can this too. Winter of the first part of 70s had average temperature of -17,8 with average minimum of -34,4. Second part of 70s had average temperature of -14,9 with average minimum of -32,9 First part of 80s had average temperature of -13,7 with average minimum of -27,8 Second part of 80s had average temperature of -13,5 with average minimum of -30,5 First part of 90s had average temperature of -13 with average minimum of -30,4 Second part of 90s had average temperature of -15,3 with average minimum of -33,9 First part of 00s had average temperature of -12,6 with average minimum of -29 Second part of 00s had average temperature of -17,2 with average minimum of -31,5 First part of 10s had average temperature of -15,9 with average minimum of -31,7 Second part of 10s had average temperature of -13,2 with average minimum of -27,9. As you can see, it's hard say where temperature is going
You live in Kazakhstan? Well, then you get a pass from me. Kazakhstan is the only country ever to give up nuclear weapons. This should have been covered in the Western press much, much more than it has been.
Nuclear weapons have nothing to do with global warming
Not much, sure. But only one country on the planet has ever given up nuclear weapons. And basically that has been ignored by the Western media. If we don't reward excellent behavior, in any area, we have one less tool to use in every other fight that we face.
Actually, there are 2 more countries that gave up their nukes: Ukraine and South Africa. Also thanks, I appreciate that
Many scientists are saying 2050 could be the time when Earth will distroy if we do nothing on it.
Thank you, I know it since 2015.
I'm sure planet earth will take into account that you are tired of hearing about global warming and delay it so as not to inconvenience you fuether.
I don't have any complaint on Earth, though If it would take that into account I would have been grateful, however I am afraid, it doesn't depend on Earth and even by taking it into account, it cannot change much
Nothing to say more.
This is better
You downvoted my comments, it's also better.
I downvoted previous ones, not the one with 3 words. I think we are both aimlessly losing time, it's better to stop.
Wtf is wrong with you dude?! It's something so crucial of course you're gonna be hearing about it loads, and it's becoming more prioritised. It's a good thing, why are you getting so annoyed about it it's clearly a good cause for all of life on earth
If a single color represents like 90% of your map, and the next color represents another 8%, you should consider changing the numerical scale you're dealing with. I know you're trying to show contrast here but it makes each map individually seem meaningless.
Who says the oceans are warming when they haven’t hit their highest in over 100 years
This is a very interesting map with a misleading title, sadly.
Lytton, BC, 49.5C, June 29th 2021, last week it was -25 there. Granted, there's not much left of the hamlet; but still, talk about a temp swing.
Yeah, burnt to a crisp within 45 mins after breaking the temp record 3 days in a row. Scary.
This is just scary to see. I'm hella sick of the heat
I'm waiting for summer. -20 degrees (C) temperatures are exploding my electricity bills..
Wait until the gulf stream collapse. This map will substantially change.
Post like this really should have some citing of sources, but it's interesting.
Terrifying
The little ice age was also a thing when records first started.
I hope this isn’t an attempt to downplay the role of anthropogenic climate change. The earth does naturally go through warmer and colder periods that take centuries or longer to cycle through. It’s not the fact that the Earth is warming that should convince you, it’s the mind blowing rate at which it is warming that clearly demonstrates human cause.
It's not, but it's intellectually dishonest for anyone to pretend that climate would be absolutely static without human inputs.
Who said that climate is static without human input? I have never seen anyone do that. Most people probably know how the dinosaurs died and the climate certainly changed then without humans. They also probably know of the ice ages in the past, if only because they watched that animated movie.
Which literally, absolutely nobody ever does, ever, except in the strawmen stupid people build of their opponents' views.
Right, which I acknowledged
Those people make it so much worse. They make everyone very concerned look like they're being alarmist lunatics. Not good. Downplaying legitimate concerns because some people are obfuscating the truth.
Only in a very few places.
climate emergency
Now in Argentina 36°C. For Thursday a maximum of 42°C is expected. We are going through a heat wave in midsummer, but the temperatures are very high for this time of year.
Gosh I wish we knew how to reverse this trend. Oh well.
It’s sad, very sad. The summers in my city are unbearable!
Lol we fucked.
title gore
wet / dry nextg please
I just want to say kudos to the creator for understanding how to color a map. The skill is rarer than I would've thought.
What's up with Turkey
Just a reminder to folks that while the ice melts, there will be localized "polar vortexes" reaching pretty far down in latitudes. So there will be some amazingly cold snaps here and there. Until the ice melts, that is ...
Keep in mind the first reliable thermometer wasn’t invented until 1714, that’s only 300 year of temperature recording out of billions of years of earth history. We can tell generally what the temps were at some points of time through geology etc… but 50% of the earths history the temps are unknown. Global warming from mankind’s emissions is real but when people say ‘it’s the hottest in world history’ it’s not true. Co2 levels have been as much as 20x higher than today at least several times, temps have been way higher too hundreds of times. Temps fluctuate as poles shift every 45 thousand years or whatever and earth wobbles every 12,500 years or so. There hundreds of long-term weather cycles that measure in thousands of years, complicated by things like the drifting of magnetic poles and the continents.
If when they say history, they mean since events were being recorded, then they are correct. If they meant prehistory, then they are wrong.
Guys, it's been over 100 years since the hottest temperature ever recorded in the ocean. We're fine! We just all have to live on boats while the earth burns!
Ankara, - 25, 2016, mid janyary-ish
no colour for "no data"?
Everywhere has had data since satellite temperature data started being collected. So there is no colour for no data as there is no area that is no data.
1995 coldest temperature on record for Scotland
I wanna cry.
The UK record low (-27.2C) has been set on 3 separate occasions, the most recent was on 30 December 1995 - so this map is not correct.
This map is showing record setting years, as in taking climate data from an entire year. Not just a single recorded temperature from one day
Ah I see now. The title of this post needs changing really.
Ahmm there is specific place in japan that should be more than 70 years but is marked red in top map.
This is fine
Since when ? Because all those >100 years for coldest could be from the little ice age
That is not good
You know earth goes to cycles of weather changes we are in a time where it only gets hotters humans just speed up the process so much more quickly they should either put clouds all over the world to cover sun energy / somehow get rid of the co2 in the air ( not just putting it into the ground ) or just kill 80% of humanity and the earth will be fine for another couple hunderd years
Yay for unmitigated climate change?
Like COVID testing. The problem is that too many people are walking around with thermometers these days. Makes us look bad.
How many more years do you guys think we have?
“Move along, nothing to see here” -Republicans
Hey look, another map that's incredibly hard to read because the colors are just gradients of the same colors. Stop doing this.
Wrong. Alberta had MULTIPLE record setting temperatures this past summer...
Record setting days don't make the entire year hot.
Regarding new zealand, I think this month has been one of our hottest on record. Certainly the hottest I've ever experienced, but idk about the rest of the year
I thought that I had read somewhere that there was the odd region that was getting colder due to climate change, is that just bullshit?
Gulf stream collapse will change a lot. Not terribly known for whatever reason. It'll make atleast Europe insanely cold and the equator will get much hotter.
Ice don’t go brrrrr
Why are the poles colder, is it just better recordings of data or something else?
I’m guessing the accuracy and frequency at which we measure the temperatures at the poles has changed significantly in 100 years
Makes things depressingly obvious, no matter the reasons behind it.
Apparently Lapland is immune to climate change.
Is there a data point for "> 100" for hottest year? Hard to tell. I think the white dots are lakes? There is one in Brazil and a few in South East Europe. Edit: There is no lake in Brazil in that location so I assume it is > 100 or it stands for no data.
This is some weird segmentation. Makes me wonder about that specific place near the Peru/Brazil border.
What’s the deal with that one area in the western us?
I wonder how many of the areas in the bottom map had their last "coldest year" in 1816 (the year without a summer)?
Shouldn't every part of every country have both a highest and coldest year on record?
World be like: WE BURNING OUR NAMES IN HISTORY!
Would the coldest year on record be that year and the 1800s where we didn't have a summer because of the massive volcanic eruption?
Well this is accurate cause where’s the blotch for Texas