Jump to content

It's getting hot in here!


101

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, dorlomin said:

The impact on transport, work,  schools etc certainly justifies a high warning level. Its the point of introducing these coloured warnings so that people whos role it is to plan for disruption such as managers, head teachers, civil administrators can be alerted to a high risk event. We get this when high warnings for floods, wind or something comes in. IIRC we had a red for wind in February? 

Red Warnings are meant to indicate the very real danger to life, not to highlight to head teachers that they need to stick some fans on and open the windows.

If grown adults do not know how to adjust to hot weather then they should be nowhere near a position of authority.

They only introduced the warning for extreme heat last year - using them today when they were not really required smacks of the same energy as a kid who is looking for an excuse to play with a new toy.

Edited by Todd_is_God
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

Not true.  I can predict who will win the World Cup by looking at the horoscopes of the players.  Highly unlikely to be in any way accurate.

A forecast is where they run several models of weather patterns and identify the common ground in all of them.  Far more likely to be correct.

You’re a risky claiming that prediction and forecast are not synonymous. Such fragility! 😆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, dorlomin said:

There is a small chance that somewhere will top that at 17:00 but still it means that we are close to the highest ever temperature recorded in the UK (38.7C) with tomorrow likely to be the warmer day. More worrying tonight may have lows of 24C. This will mean people will struggle to cool over night. UK houses are really not made for this so many will have rooms with much higher temperatures. This is not a huge deal as this is a short burst of heat. But when you get these high lows over extended periods it leads to. a big jump in deaths in the elderly. 

Which therefore renders the point of a red heat warning for an event that'll be over by Wednesday questionable. As you say, most health issues involving heat are caused by long duration events, but this isn't one.

Infrastructure has also not become more fragile since 2003 either. Our attitudes to extreme events have changed alongside their increased frequency. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

That is not a smoking gun.

The difficulty is proving beyond reasonable doubt that any of this is either man-made, natural or a combination of both because the core molecule at the heart of it - CO2 - is the same in both cases.

It's not good enough to say "we have no other answers". That is simply not proof OR a smoking gun and by definition is an open research question. (as I explained to coprolite above.

BTW, the bigger problem isn't just CO2. It's the countless tons of methane gas trapped in the Siberian permafrost. If the permafrost continues to melt and that gas is escapes into the atmosphere it will be curtains for all of us.

Like I said, none of this is "simple Physics". It's been baffling and will continue to baffle the brightest minds our planet has to offer for decades.

This is almost exclusively utter bollocks as the carbon emissions into the atmosphere are clearly measurable. 

The science that AGW is a thing is undeniable. Both the local/regional effects of this global  change though - as well as choosing the better response between focusing shutting down carbon emissions or mitigating climate impacts through technology are up in the air. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Beans on Toast said:

They sure are friend. They are also quite high today, or so I am led to believe from these so called "experts" at the Met office.

Of course they are "high". It's summer.

This isn't the slamdunk you think it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I see the heat has unfortunately attracted all the screeching forum chimps out of the gallery to which they were confined and they are now metaphorically flinging their faeces all over the place, ruining yet another half decent thread. Well done guys!

And with that, I'm out of this discussion.

Enjoy yourselves folks.

Don't go !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

I see the heat has unfortunately attracted all the screeching forum chimps out of the gallery to which they were confined and they are now metaphorically flinging their faeces all over the place.

And with that, I'm out of this discussion.

Enjoy yourselves folks.

Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out chump.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

If I wanted evidence I am quite capable of finding it myself thanks.

I asked you for proof to justify you using phrases like "absolutely bollocks".

You can't do proof because it's still an open research question amongst climate scientists.

You're not in a position to talk about anyone else talking bollocks.

Ok, bollocks within a 99.9% confidence interval. 

Happy? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

You’re a risky claiming that prediction and forecast are not synonymous. Such fragility! 😆

Not really.

Who is going to win the Premiership this year?  Some people would say it could be one of two teams, based on how much money those teams have.  That would be a forecast - even if some other team wins.

Who is going to win the Scottish Cup?  Possibly one of those two teams but it is more of a lottery so ultimately you can only make a prediction.

Edited by Fullerene
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dorlomin said:

4b1fe5dd-ed9d-4244-9dfd-cca65a831c04.png

 

 

bell-graph_0.gif

 

We get a warm mass of air coming up off the Sahara as in this week, or back in 2019 when we had a sustained high pressure over the UK for a couple of weeks, the maximum temperatures are made (on average) higher than when such weather phenomena happened before. 

The physics is simple, more CO2 means more IR coming back to the surface. This then in turn means more water vapor can be held in the atmosphere which also increases the greenhouse effect acting as a feedback. There is a lot more to the science, but on the whole what had been predicted back in the 70s and 80s is broadly happening. 

This is a bit repeating the basics. But it seems the basics are back under discussion again. 

 

trenbert-fasullo-kiehl-2009.png

Edited on the left is the incoming short wave radiation, that hits the ground warming it up. That the emits infrared (long wave radiation). That then gets trapped in the atmosphere and some returned to the ground, that extra bit is in very basic terms the greenhouse effect. 

The more greenhouse gasses the more infrared comes back and warms the surface. 

 

Precisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...