The incredible NW heat dome has led to some interesting contradictory claims
From within the story:
Expert 1= “These extremes are something we knew were coming,”
Expert 2= “It’s well beyond what climate models suggest”
🤷♂️ washingtonpost.com/climate-enviro…
From within the story:
Expert 1= “These extremes are something we knew were coming,”
Expert 2= “It’s well beyond what climate models suggest”
🤷♂️ washingtonpost.com/climate-enviro…
Obviously, if models can’t produce the heat dome then event attribution is not possible
Of course, event attribution studies have a high bar to clear: forbes.com/sites/rogerpie…
Of course, event attribution studies have a high bar to clear: forbes.com/sites/rogerpie…
I came across this (by Sarah Miller HT @dwallacewells) which I think well summarizes challenges to discussing extremes
“I realize I could cite some data to support this but I’m not going to look anything up because I don’t want to know the truth. I’m comfortable with “It’s bad””
“I realize I could cite some data to support this but I’m not going to look anything up because I don’t want to know the truth. I’m comfortable with “It’s bad””
Here’s the link to that piece: niemanlab.org/2021/06/all-th…
I am empathetic to that view
But some of us actually focus professionally on data related to extreme events and their impacts
And while I wish it were really really simple, it’s not
Data, evidence & science matter
I am empathetic to that view
But some of us actually focus professionally on data related to extreme events and their impacts
And while I wish it were really really simple, it’s not
Data, evidence & science matter
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
