82, that’s a hot tub!
2 Likes
That’s really my minimum to get in the water.
Canada is still making New Yorkers cough a lot. Thanks Canada!!!
Good reminder of how easy-peasy it would be to geoengineer the whole sky.
I’m sorry.
Sadly the main fire in Quebec is so large it will probably burn all summer and fall.
Any time there is a northerly wind the northern US will get smoke. You should hope the wind switches to southerlies so the smoke gets blown to the Arctic.
1 Like
Interestingly that much smoke all year will act as a cooling mechanism for the global climate.
1 Like
That would be a no. You have clearly not thought this through.
Let me guess, you got that “information” from conservative US media?
Depends on how high the smoke is. Pinatubo height (stratosphere)? Sure. Where we (or polar bears) can breathe it (troposphere)? No.
1 Like
I think it will cause the North East to be somewhat cooler for the next few months. However? the science is rough because it’s a mix of stuff – black carbon, so4, co2, and well, literal fire – and it mixes with other stuff so it’s hard to model.
After the smoke clears so to speak, it will just be more co2, which will cause global warming for 50 years.
My heart goes out to those of you affected by the Quebec forest fires because I know how miserable breathing that smoke is. Totally spoils a summer day.
Vancouver has been great so far this year but inevitably we will get bad smoke days. The smoke comes up from Washington/Oregon/California with the southerlies and from other parts of BC from the northerlies or easterlies. Fortunately our prevailing winds are the westerlies and the Pacific Ocean is that direction.
Hopefully things aren’t so dire that we have to worry about wildfires on the Pacific Ocean…yet.
No doubt the Pacific Ocean fires are perfectly natural, probably caused by the sun or something, and have occurred many times throughout history.
Undoubtably things get hot when the sun sets in the Pacific…
1 Like
Yes, the Pacific hasn’t got to the condition of the Cuyahoga River, yet. I know you must be aware of those latter fires but the youngsters here may need to Google it.
When the kelp forests burn I don’t think people will deny climate change.
I’d bet, if the four or five lest, at least one would.
OK, so it is some average. Will this be, as my local news noted this, the fact, without checking how they got there?
How many data points for each date? Where are they? Are the data collection spots on the globe the same since 1979? Are they only in the Northern Hemisphere?
Not that I’m a skeptic. It probably is the hottest day ever. But, without knowing how they (whoever “they” are) collected the data and maybe adjusted in a perfectly legitimate way, why will most people, including “the news” simply accept their conclusion? “Too much time to explain that. They’re scientists they know what they’re doing.” Yeah, maybe.
It’s a good question.
Source here:
https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/t2_daily/
I assume it’s the same as it is for actuaries. Where the only people who can really judge your reserves are other actuaries, using a whole bunch of flawed assumptions, flawed data, and flawed adjustments.
That of course is just the GAAP temperature. The STAT temperature is 4 degrees lower, and the IRS temperature is 5 degrees higher.
5 Likes