• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

July ends as one of coolest ever for Michigan

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
i wish i had those temps here. here, it been hot as hell this month. AC's been churning all summer long an isn't going to stop any time soon.
 
One of the worst droughts in recent memory here, multiple days of 100+.

Edit: apparently this is the worst drought in the last 50 years.
 
I love this summer weather, so cool and comfortable. I wish it were this temperature all year round.
 
Bullshit, I was in Michigan this summer and it was HOT. 80F in the morning to 95F in the afternoon. The temperature above the asphalt at rider height was well over 100F.
 
Originally posted by: Safeway
Bullshit, I was in Michigan this summer and it was HOT. 80F in the morning to 95F in the afternoon. The temperature above the asphalt at rider height was well over 100F.
I was real close to a blast furnace this summer in Michigan. The temperature was 125F in the morning and 138F later in the afternoon.

My post is about as relevant to the temperature in Michigan as yours.
 
Yeah it's been fairly cool here, at least in the UP of MI. We had a couple weeks of pretty hot temps in like June but that was about it. It's also been really dry; my mom said their garden is doing very well and they've still been watering it.
 
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Please Bing the terms 'outlier' and 'trend' before calling people who believe in science "freaks", asshole.

"Science, damn you."

It sounds more like you believe in the IPCC.

There is a substantial number of scientists in opposition to the man-made GW model, but a very large majority agree with the MMGW hypothesis. I have absolutely no education in the area of climatology so I choose to side with the large majority of qualified individuals. There is still room for discussion, no doubt, but calling those on the side of the majority of experts "freaks" is pathetic and demonstrates a certain insecurity in ones self.

Yeah, but I'm more-or-less commenting on the fact that it is still "faith" in the majority of scientists, considering that we aren't all climatologists ourselves.

"Praise Science."

South Park nailed that "religious science" analogy. 😉

Um, South Park is a cartoon...
 
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: Safeway
Bullshit, I was in Michigan this summer and it was HOT. 80F in the morning to 95F in the afternoon. The temperature above the asphalt at rider height was well over 100F.
I was real close to a blast furnace this summer in Michigan. The temperature was 125F in the morning and 138F later in the afternoon.

My post is about as relevant to the temperature in Michigan as yours.

Uh, no. Thank you for calling me a liar, though, when I know what the fucking temperatures were while I was riding. I rode my bicycle across Michigan, and experienced 105F ambient temperatures above the asphalt. A bank sign listed 102F one day.

The weather reports claimed 95F.
 
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: CZroe
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Please Bing the terms 'outlier' and 'trend' before calling people who believe in science "freaks", asshole.

"Science, damn you."

It sounds more like you believe in the IPCC.

There is a substantial number of scientists in opposition to the man-made GW model, but a very large majority agree with the MMGW hypothesis. I have absolutely no education in the area of climatology so I choose to side with the large majority of qualified individuals. There is still room for discussion, no doubt, but calling those on the side of the majority of experts "freaks" is pathetic and demonstrates a certain insecurity in ones self.

Yeah, but I'm more-or-less commenting on the fact that it is still "faith" in the majority of scientists, considering that we aren't all climatologists ourselves.

"Praise Science."

South Park nailed that "religious science" analogy. 😉


Retard alert.

edit= Ok that was a bit harsh. Faith isn't the best word to use there; faith is more associated with religious beliefs.
 
thread subtitle = fail.

global warming causes uncharacteristic weather temperatures, including cooling. it's not just warming. it shifts airflows around so cool places could end up warm and warm places could end up cool.
 
The unfortunate thing about this whole mess is that there isn't any perfectly good way of seeing the overall trend of this planet's climate. Sure we've got stuff like ice cores, but they only give a very small, well, "slice" of the planet's history, and only from a very small region.

Example: Text
Say that's a chart of Earth's average temperature over a span of a million or billion years, or even a chart of the Sun's output. The highlighted red zone is the portion that we've been able to measure with a fair level of accuracy.
That red zone encompasses a portion where the temperatures are consistently rising, and from that, we will thus predict a continued trend like that.

The problem is, you can't really predict a trend from what may very well simply be noise. To get a good trend, you need a much larger sampling, which is something we can't get.

However, we can try to make predictions. There's the whole carbon dioxide issue. Carbon dioxide is opaque to infrared frequencies. This can be measured and observed.
The question there is, is our contribution enough to cause problems? Sure, nature puts out its own CO2 on a regular basis, and nature has had a long time to make changes to accommodate that. We're putting CO2, which had effectively been locked away millions of years ago, back into the atmosphere, and we're doing so at an increasing rate.
Is it enough? The best way to know would be to have a second planet, otherwise identical to Earth, and do experiments, using this second planet as the "control group." That of course presents some minor logistics problems. So, we do the best we can with the tools and information that we do have.

 
I think I heard that here in WI we had our 4th coolest July ever. And of course we got a pool this year and have used it like 5 times.
 
Originally posted by: Kelemvor
I think I heard that here in WI we had our 4th coolest July ever. And of course we got a pool this year and have used it like 5 times.

did it shrink?
 
Originally posted by: eits
thread subtitle = fail.

global warming causes uncharacteristic weather temperatures, including cooling. it's not just warming. it shifts airflows around so cool places could end up warm and warm places could end up cool.

That's just it, global warming is a religion, you can't prove it, and you can't argue against it. Everything is global warming. If I told you my pet guinea pig got a bladder infection, you could argue that its because of global warming...

That's not a stretch. Here are two 'facts' that have passed as truth by the religion of global warming:

1. Greater CO2 causes more poison ivy to grow, increasing health care costs.

2. Global warming will increase the incidence of kidney stones.

Don't believe it? Google it as NEWS and find out for yourself.

:roll:
 
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: CZroe
Yeah, but I'm more-or-less commenting on the fact that it is still "faith" in the majority of scientists, considering that we aren't all climatologists ourselves.

"Praise Science."

South Park nailed that "religious science" analogy. 😉

Picking a side isn't the same thing as having faith. We can assess the evidence ourselves and make an educated guess, and as long as we're willing to admit we're wrong when presented with contrary evidence then it's certainly not faith. Or we can do what I did and side with the majority of experts - in this case I'm making a decision by diverting to people who know more than I do, and I'm more than willing to revise my views if the scientific community presents contrary views.

A faithful view on the science would be arbitrarily picking a side and insisting, despite any evidence, that you're right because you really really really believe it.

Edit - and I'm not saying there aren't GW believers (and skeptics) whose views border on religious fanaticisms - there are. I'm not one of them.

You know, I didn't like you much as a poster until I came across this gem.. Thanks
 
Are you also a Birther, Analog?

Even mainstream Republicans have given up on climate change denial, they've shifted to arguing there's nothing to be done without spending too much money.
 
Did you know the new health card bill will pay doctors to kill old folks? It's true!

"Keep your government interference out of my medicare!" - UHC foe
 
Originally posted by: Analog
Originally posted by: eits
thread subtitle = fail.

global warming causes uncharacteristic weather temperatures, including cooling. it's not just warming. it shifts airflows around so cool places could end up warm and warm places could end up cool.

That's just it, global warming is a religion, you can't prove it, and you can't argue against it. Everything is global warming. If I told you my pet guinea pig got a bladder infection, you could argue that its because of global warming...

That's not a stretch. Here are two 'facts' that have passed as truth by the religion of global warming:

1. Greater CO2 causes more poison ivy to grow, increasing health care costs.

2. Global warming will increase the incidence of kidney stones.

Don't believe it? Google it as NEWS and find out for yourself.

:roll:

Fail.
 
Back
Top