I would like to see this broken down. And, why 1970?https://twitter.com/theeconomist/status/906739904788430848 …
-
1:22 -
Replying to @jaspergregory
Probably because it was a record year for fewest extreme weather events. 20s through 40s were much more violent, I think.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
I would not bet against you on this, but I would love to see the data
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jaspergregory
I'd love to see the Economist's data too! Some poking around turns this up, but it's not in chronological order. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories/s334b.htm …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @St_Rev @jaspergregory
I'd guess that by 'extreme weather events' they're counting high temperature records. But that just reflects a very mild warming trend.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @St_Rev
Humans are notoriously bad at distinguishing apocalyptically extreme weather from normal extreme weather
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jaspergregory
Humans are good at maliciously misstating data, when their livelihood depends on it.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
It shouldn't be hard at all to compile a fair record of this kind of information, but who's going to pay for and publish it?
-
-
Replying to @St_Rev
Our brains are not evolved to compare freakish and non freakish weather
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.