• DrNeurohax@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m 110% on board with global warming, but this graph is misleading.

    The author needs to at least correct for population changes (heat deaths per X residents). Even better would be to account for changing demographics, like age and county. From this random stats website, it looks like there has been a dramatic increase in proportion of older residents since 1970. Old people are more likely to die, so more elders = more deaths.

    If I wasn’t about to head to bed, I might try to fix it, but… sleep.

    Oh, and I’m pretty sure there has been an increase in small plane crashes in AZ. The hot air is much thinner than most pilots are used to, so they tend to forget accounting for changes in thrust and climb rates. I’m pretty sure a couple happened in just the last few weeks.

    • rob64@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And whenever you have a chart of historical data like this, you have to at least consider that an increase could be reflective of either improved diagnostic or record-keeping abilities.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Climate change is just getting started and people should start suing cities and design firms for failing to include shade requirements in their standards and for making roads too wide to properly shade

    Where natural shade can’t be sustained artificial shade needs to be provided.

    The single family house on a grass lawn is such a stupid idea in many places

    • LearysFlyingSaucer@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish, but I just know the segregationist city planners in my town will just lay down more asphalt and gated suburbs. We don’t even have sidewalks or crosswalks even though there’s people walking/biking everywhere. They intentionally make our towns unlivable.

  • AngryBear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ironically the oil companies back in the 60’s, did an extensive research into what exactly would happen to the climate and ecology etc, if they kept drilling for and using fossil fuel etc. It’s so accurate that even todays models aren’t that good (I find that fact odd), but bottomline, they knew… they knew, but kept on doing it anyway.

  • Old_Fat_White_Guy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    NGL… First glance at the chart I thought the left hand scale was temperature with a sudden spike to 250°… no wonder people are dying when your iced tea boils in your glass as you try to drink it!

  • LetMeEatCake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Every time I see crazy heat data for Arizona and other places like it in the US, it makes me wonder. When the fuck will we see a reversion of population trends of people moving south? Arizona, Texas, etc. are only going to get worse. Everywhere is going to get worse, but there’s a lot of rapidly growing areas that are on track to be non-viable for 1/3+ of the year within 10-20 years.

    People should not be moving to Arizona, not with climate change as it is.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know that the northern U.S. will be that great either in the summer. I’m in Indiana and it’s been in the 90s for weeks. When I was a kid, it was a day here or there in the 90s.

    • Misconduct@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I mean… They did do stuff like fix the ozone layer. Unlike us, they have the excuse of information being considerably harder to come by because they didn’t really have the internet. So far, for the most part, all we’re doing collectively is being mad about it online. Oh, yeah I guess we banned straws.

      Millennials have been adults for a while now and… Welp. I don’t think it’ll be long before the newer gens start heavy criticizing us and frankly we’ll deserve it. If we were any less apathetic than previous gens things would have already changed or be changing faster imo.

      • FoxAndKitten@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        On one hand yeah, I’d look at us pretty dimly from the outside

        On the other, we’ve been kinda fucked. Our mental health is in the gutter, we’re unable to make connections the way every other generation could, we’re missing all these milestones like buying a house and having kids and older generations keep telling us it’s our fault.

        Even as far as voting, we’ve been fucked. Previous generations had a choice - we get an ultimatum

        They just keep gaslighting us.

        We don’t have the money, we don’t have the power, but we do have the numbers and as a group we’re not ok… Frankly, there’s no way this ends well. It’s hard to comprehend how the powers that be haven’t realized that and thrown us a bone now and again

    • milkjug@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Kids nowadays are so fragile with your participation trophies and dying from touching the ground. In my day, we pull up our bootstraps and head for the coal mines, then lie down on asphalt to nap like Real Men™ do.

      /s if it isn’t blatantly obvious.

  • dgilluly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can always count on the right winged politicians and voters to prepare for disasters instead of trying to prevent them.

        • Goodie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fortunately no. (Maybe fortunately).

          The last IPCC climate change report predicted that shits gonna get real fucking bad for a while, but at the rate we’re going it should at least turn around sometime between 80 to 100 years.

          • there1snospoon@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is there feasibly anything we can do to shorten that time? Even if it’s on a catastrophic/behemoth level of change/effort? Or is this just how it is?

            • Goodie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The obvious answer is yes.

              We could shut of all fossil fuel usage tomorrow except for where it’s needed (eg a single generator to kick start a countries power grid if things actually go down) and make a painful hard switch to renewables. We could begin using renewable energy sources to start extracting CO2 from the atmosphere.

              I don’t know and can’t speak to how effective that would be, from memory the earth would continue to warm for some time to come even on their optimistic predictions.

  • Ni@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We desperately need regulation for people and workers in extreme temperatures. We’ll be dealing with more and more of it as times goes on so the protections need to be in place.

    • Skunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And regulations for less pavement, concrete etc and more green and trees to provide shade and cooler temperatures.

      You can live in extreme temperatures, provided the infrastructures are built for that (ie. Ouarzazate in Morocco).

      But with the US urban planning and all for cars policy it won’t happen before it’s too late.

      • ButtonMcLemming@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        In my opinion, the only solution, although radical, would be to make motorists’ lives a living hell (charging for road or parking lot use, lowering speed limits to increasingly slow levels, removing on-street parking lots, prioritizing bicyles and buses, reducing bus fare prices, and converting excess parking lots to new neighborhoods) that public transport (i.e. metro and local commuter trains) and bicycle paths can be considered to reduce road traffic with the budget allocated to making new roads or maintaining currently existing ones allocated to improving the public transport system and even providing a bicycle route network that can allow us to follow in the Netherlands’ footsteps.