About the heat wave in Canada and the rapid climate model attribution. We are desert adapted animals. It's in our DNA, and what we need to change for heat waves is behaviour. Even elderly and babies have the biology to live in hot deserts so long as it's dry.
What we need for heat waves is to adapt our behaviour.

This is not instinctive. Desert people will learn from their community.
- drink lots of water!
- ventilation
- blinds or window reflectors
- stay in shade
- go somewhere cool
- air conditioning
redcross.org/get-help/how-t…
Although Lytton had record heat, it was also very dry, 15% humidity. Also though it was record heat in Lytton, temperatures above 40 C are not unusual. In dry summer conditions with Canadian long summer days and short nights, heat builds up in a heat trap far from the sea.
This is about local temperature not global temperature. When it was 20 C hotter than normal for that day in Lytton it was 15 C colder than normal in parts of central US. Can't find map for the actual day only day after sorry.
Although rare, places in southern California and nearby have been warmer than this in the past. The long summers in Canada make heat waves there more likely than you expect.
At 2 C warming the climate of Seattle will be similar to that of San Francisco today (sorry doesn't have Vancouver on this map)
(cites to all these graphics in blog post debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Heat-waves-in-… )
Humans need to be able to keep our body at 37 C for optimal health. To do this we need to cool our skin to 35 C as we need 2 C difference to avoid over heating. Minimum temperature our skin can achieve by sweating is the "wet bulb" temperature and depends on temp. and humidity.
Most places have maximum wet bulb temperature well below 35 C. That includes most deserts as they are very dry. But a few small hot spots already go above 35 C regularly.
This is one of them. Each dot is a day. It's been occasionally "too hot" for humans for a couple of hours at a time back to 1987.
However this is not literally too hot for most humans. If you don't have a fever already, then a wet bulb of 36.6 would mean you can't cool down to below 38.6 equivalent to a high fever. You won't die of a couple of hours wet bulb even well above 35 C but will feel unwell.
The highest body temperature anyone has had and survived according to the Guiness World Records is a remarkable 115.7° F or or 46.5°C! Discharged at "prior baseline status" after 24 days in hospital.
At 4.9 C then parts of the hottest paddy fields in China get "too hot for humans" in this sense. Workers would experience a fever for a few hours during the occasional hottest heat waves.
At 3 C then the world doesn't get to these 35 C wet bulb temperatures (apart from the rare hot spots mentioned). At 4.9 C (now unrealistic) potentially over a million person days could be over 35 C. Out of our 7.8 billion people.
Researchers found the heat waves were a 1 in 1000 year event according to their models even at current warming levels.

1933 record of 45 C is not surprising for Canada but the 49.6 C record is far higher than you'd expect without global warming, only once every 150,000 years.
Two possibilities.

1. a 1 in 1000 year event, more common as we warm up..

2. not modelling details of climate properly.

It is not so easy to model such details in the climate models.
1 in 1000 may seem impressive but statistically not very significant. There may be hundreds, or thousands of records of different climate variables that we measure every year. It wouldn't be surprising to have a "1 in 1000 year event" somewhere, of some variable, every year.
Strongest hurricane. Strongest tornado. Coldest cold snap in winter. Temperature record in Siberia. Temperature record in Australia, etc etc.
It's certainly reason to look closely at their models, but it is not at the level really of "evidence" that they are missing something.
In any case for human habitability it's not the temperature record we look at. It's the wet bulb temperature. Canada is an unlikely place to set a record there. Highest wet bulb temperatures so far < 27 C.
Hot but dry heat. Humans can easily cope - with adaptations of behaviour.
Climate action tracker make our pledges 2. C with optimistic targets, and "well below 2 C" is well within reach now with future commitments in COP26 and then in 2025 and 2030 as our technology and experience improves and pressure to act continues to mount. debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/With-statement…
Technology is helping. Solar panel prices dropped 10-fold in 10 years and continue to fall fast. They are now cost competitive with the lowest cost fossil fuels.
Gas fired electricity expected to cost twice as much as onshore wind or solar by 2025. Perovskite solar panels could halve the cost of solar before then. debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Perovskite-cou…
Debra Roberts for IPCC talking about 2018 report said each of us as individuals can help shape the future by our choices, such as energy, diets, transport we use, and choices as consumes directing where industry goes and goods are manufactured. debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/What-the-IPCC-…
There are many simple things you can do yourself to help with climate change. I go into some of them here debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/12-Simple-life…
My blog post about the Canada heat waves is here for sources and more details: debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Heat-waves-in-…
I forgot to cover the fires, will add more tweets soon. The forest fires are normal in the Arctic region. Trees adapted to them. Most Canadian trees have a huge range e.g. Douglas Fir south to Mexico and Sugar Maple south to Missouri. It won't get too hot for them.
Mussel beds often have die offs in heat waves and will recover within a few years. I'll expand on all this soon.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Robert Walker BSc, fact checker for scared people

Robert Walker BSc, fact checker for scared people Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DoomsdayDebunks

Oct 24
SHORT DEBUNK Trump if elected CAN'T use the military as soldiers on US soil
- only as extra National Guards, or relief workers (as for hurricanes)

doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Trump_if_…
SHORT DEBUNK: Why NATO would hardly change if Trump is elected president and ignores all the US commitment to NATO
- and Europe is already well on its way to taking over funding to Ukraine

SEE: doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Why_NATO_…
SHORT DEBUNK: Why Supreme Court was unanimous in decision that Trump's name had to stay on the ballot - also did not say he is immune for everything
- Judge Chutkan's preliminary ruling shortly after election day expected to say an 06 trial can go ahead
doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Why_the_S…
Read 11 tweets
Sep 26
BLOG: Dare to Hope
- Climate Restoration
- Three ways to get CO2 levels back to pre-industrial 300 ppm by 2050
- potentially pay for themselves
- many more ways to remove CO2 in IPCC AR6 chapters 7 and 12
See: robertinventor.substack.com/p/dare-to-hope…    Many ways to do carbon dioxide removal      - might need these in 2nd half of century      to stay at zero emissions once we get there      Cross-Chapter Box 8, Figure 1: Carbon Dioxide Removal taxonomy  . Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change  AR6 / WG3.
I wrote this blog post on Quora originally. Updated it and shared on my substack because so many seem completely unaware of AR6 / WG3 / Chapter 7 and Chapter 12 - even sometimes write articles on the topic of carbon sequestration that show they never so much as saw this figure.
The first part of the blog post is about several ways to get back to 300 ppm if we wanted to that even pay for themselves. The second part is a short summary of the IPCC sections on ways to remain at net zero through the second half of this century summarized in that graphic.
Read 5 tweets
Jul 8
If worried about project 2025:

BLOG: Far right Republican Project 2025 is mostly an illegal fantasy - most of it can’t be done at all - “Schedule F” would face legal challenges and likely be struck down
CLICK HERE TO READ:

Screenshot of first page. doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Far_right…
Image
2/ This is impossible. I 'll do a new post when I get time. Most things require new laws and they can't get a far right majority in either house. Schedule F is the main executive decision option. If he tries again it is likely shot down as illegal. Meanwhile short thread.
3/ for LGBT things remember that the vast majority in both houses supported the respect for marriage act. So it is not possible for Congress to pass laws that remove the right for marriage for gay people never mind harsher restrictions.

doomsdaydebunked.miraheze.org/wiki/Far_right…


Image
Image
Image
Read 14 tweets
Jun 15
1/n Yes we ARE headed for 1.7°C if countries keep to announced pledges
- most make realistic pledges and achieve or overachieve
- 77% of IPCC authors CAN be wrong if it is the remaining 23% who study how countries translate pledges into action

See BLOG: robertinventor.substack.com/p/yes-we-are-h…
    TEXT ON GRAPHIC      As technology improves we expect it to be EASIER to achieve these pledges and improve on them.      APS [Announced Pledges Scenario]      Most of these pledges are      - economically feasible      - from countries that historically equal or exceed pledges.      The 1.7°C scenario assumes countries achieve their announced pledges.      Why do so many say 1.7°C is impossible?      It can't be, by definition.      Highlighted text: "In the Announced Pledges Scenario (APS), the temperature rise in 2100 is 1.7 °C"      This graphic is from the latest IEA repor...
2/ About why climate scientists often are so pessimistic about action on climate change.
- hardly any study the economic models
- IPCC / AR6 had a cut off date just before the COP26 net zero pledges
- so couldn't evaluate the feasibility of India / China's net zero plans.     Text on graphic: IPCC / AR6 cut-off date was before the net zero pledges of India and China.      More important figure : 23% of climate scientists expect a rise of 2 C or less      Less than 10% of IPCC scientists study the economics of climate change and Integrated Assessment Models use older simpler economic methods
3/ The big IPBES report in 2019 was the only recent major study with a large element of social scientists and it was the most optimistic, saying we can achieve this transformative change, not just scientifically - that it is economically and socially feasible.     Transformative change maximizes good quality of life with GROWTH, material, non material and economic - IPCC and IPBES Increasingly we are following this path makes sense [Scroll down page to see second copy of this graphic for the rest of the text] Graphic from page 33 of the appendix to chapter 4 of the IPBES report in 2019 https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2021-01/GA_chapter_4_supplementary_materials.pdf
Read 25 tweets
Oct 3, 2022
@GerogeBush6 @mikestabile 1/ This is an inaccurate summary. It is about exceptions to the law not overturning it. There are many exceptions already itif.org/publications/2…
This case is specifically about how YouTube recommends videos to users (continues)
@GerogeBush6 @mikestabile 2/n The case is about whether Google is liable if its algorithm recommends illegal content to users. It is NOT liable for hosting user generated illegal content - that's established. Video summary.
c-span.org/video/?c503199…
@GerogeBush6 @mikestabile This is the basic argument for the defendant

news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/hi… Image
Read 11 tweets
Oct 3, 2022
1/4 Many people are misreading what Putin said in his annexation speech. He did NOT say Hiroshima and Nagasaki create a precedent for the world to use nukes today

- that would be a very radical
- that would reverse all Russian nuclear policy for decades.
2/4 It is very clear in context that Putin said
- the Allied carpet bombing in WW2 in Dresden, Hamburg and Cologne
- set a precedent for the use of the nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

They clip the video just before the second paragraph which makes that clear.
3/4 I go into it in my blog post using the official English translation of Putins' speech as published by the Kremlin.

I look at two other ways to intepret those two sentences, neither makes sense in the context of the paragraph that follows.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(