I already told you. Air conditioning. — unenlightened

Air conditioning demand in Kuwait 2011-2021
Published by Statista Research Department, Mar 22, 2024

In 2021, the demand for air conditioning devices in Kuwait amounted to approximately 133 thousand units, the second lowest number of the past decade. Within the observed period, demand for air conditioning peaked in 2015 at approximately 225 thousand units, but has been on a downward trend since then. Especially the past three years saw a significant drop in demand for air conditioners, with 2020 marking the low-point of only 123 thousand units.

In Kuwait the demand for air conditioning devices is dropping significantly while the population is growing rapidly (doubled since 2000).

Your stated that:

Without air-conditioning, Kuwait is already more or less human uninhabitable in summer. — unenlightened

The statistics don't seem to support you claim.

Without air-conditioning, Kuwait is already more or less human uninhabitable in summer. — unenlightened

For a country that is supposedly "already more or less human uninhabitable in summer" the population growth is very high.

In the year 2000 the population of Kuwait was 1,991,674
In the year 2023 the population of Kuwait was 4,349,380

That is an increase of 2,357,706 people in 23 years. The population is now 218% of the population in the year 2000. The population has more than doubled since 2000.

Why is the population of Kuwait going up so fast when Kuwait is supposedly "already more or less human uninhabitable in summer" ?

Do you think that article suggests that most of the animal life on land that is larger than an insect wouldn't go extinct if the average temperature was above 86 F? — wonderer1

I like to work in degrees Celsius. Your temperature of 86 degrees Fahrenheit is the same as 30 degrees Celsius.

Here are the average summer temperatures for the hottest countries in the world. They are in degrees Celsius and are sorted from the hottest country to the coldest country.

- Kuwait 44.5
- Iraq 42.2
- United Arab Emirates 40.6
- Chad 40.5
- Qatar 40.4
- Sudan 39.9
- Niger 39.6
- Pakistan 39.3
- Mali 38.8
- Saudi Arabia 38.3

About 397 million people live in these countries. That is over 5% (over 1 in 20) of the total human population.

Remember that we have had about 1.0 degrees Celsius of global warming over the last 100 years. So these places were hot even before global warming started.

As far as I know the human species and most of the animal life on land have not gone extinct in these countries.

Don’t waste too much time with climate deniers. — Mikie

You seem to waste a lot of time Mikie. :grin:

Question: What do you call somebody who calls people "deniers" even though they don't deny climate change?

Answer: Mikie. :vomit:

It's crazy that anyone ever believed that the earth would cease to be habitable due to anthropogenic climate change. — frank

There are only 2 sane people in the world, you and me. And I am beginning to have my doubts about you. :grin:

There are many crazy people around. Probably more crazy people than sane ones. Unfortunately the crazy ones have convinced young people that there is no future for them.

Scientists have captured Earth’s climate over the last 485 million years

These are selected quotes from an article in The Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/09/19/earth-temperature-global-warming-planet

There is no doubt that Alarmists will interpret this information in a catastrophic way.

An ambitious effort to understand the Earth’s climate over the past 485 million years has revealed a history of wild shifts and far hotter temperatures than scientists previously realized — offering a reminder of how much change the planet has already endured and a warning about the unprecedented rate of warming caused by humans.

At its hottest, the study suggests, the Earth’s average temperature reached 96.8 degrees Fahrenheit (36 degrees Celsius) — far higher than the historic 58.96 F (14.98 C) the planet hit last year.

At the timeline’s start, some 485 million years ago, Earth was in what is known as a hothouse climate, with no polar ice caps and average temperatures above 86 F (30 C).

Temperatures began to slowly decline over the next 30 million years, as atmospheric carbon dioxide was pulled from the air, before plummeting into what scientists call a coldhouse state around 444 million years ago. Ice sheets spread across the poles and global temperatures dropped more than 18 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius).

Coldhouse climates — including our current one — prevailed just 13 percent of the time. [note - we are currently in a coldhouse climate]

This is one of the more sobering revelations of the research, Judd said. Life on Earth has endured climates far hotter than the one people are now creating through planet-warming emissions.

Even under the worst-case scenarios, human-caused warming will not push the Earth beyond the bounds of habitability.

The most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy is interesting because they are (or it is) the most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy. :chin:

Otherwise, no: intelligence had to wait until a brain evolved someplace. — Vera Mont

Intelligent Beings Without Brains Are Abundant In Nature–A Growing Scientific Consensus

Levin’s study published last week shows a slime mold, a brainless blob called Physarum, sensing cues in its environment and making a decision about where to grow. The findings suggest it’s “able to build a picture of the world around itself using a kind of sonar. It's a kind of biomechanics,” says Levin. “It's sitting on this gelatin and it's sensing the way that all the objects around it are putting strain on that gelatin. By watching those mechanical signals it figures out where the different bigger and smaller objects are, and then it makes decisions which way it's going to crawl.”

An important feature in the study’s design is that there was no food used in this experiment. Previous studies demonstrating Physarum learning and memory use food (smell and taste), also called chemical sensing. Levin’s study shows Physarum also uses another sense. It uses touch to detect objects at a distance.

It’s only good science to ask whether there could be any other explanation than thinking. Unlike a compass that may spin and then point north, Physarum are capable of processing memories of past experience with competing sensory inputs in real-time while doing computations that can and do change how it will respond.

“Here's what it's definitely doing,” Levin offers. “It's definitely doing decision-making. Because out of the different options in its environment, it always chooses to go towards the bigger distribution of mass.” In addition to decision-making, it’s also sensing and processing information. “For the first few hours, before it grows out in any direction, it's acquiring information and figuring out which way it's going to go.” — Andréa Morris (Forbes)

The new analysis predicts that the world population will likely peak in 2064 at around 9.7 billion, and then decline to about 8.8 billion by 2100--about 2 billion lower than some previous estimates.

The latest (2019) UN Population Division report estimates that world population is likely to reach 10.88 billion by 2100.

Population forecasts from UN Population Division use just past time trends as the determinant of future trajectories for fertility and mortality. So population forecasts from the UN Population Division are more linear than the new analysis.

In the new study researchers developed a statistical modelling strategy that use past and forecasted trends in drivers of fertility (education and met need for modern contraceptives), mortality (sociodemographic variables and more than 70 risk factors for disease) and migration (sociodemographic variables, deaths due to conflict and natural disasters, and the difference between birth and death rates). Also, their model incorporates uncertainty about migration and accounts for women delaying childbirth as they become more educated.

The problem with such predictions is a change in one thing leads to a change in rate which is connected to another change of rate which might not be about the linear relationship being described (and often isn't) — Moliere

The new analysis attempts to handle the situation where a change in one thing leads to a change in rate which is connected to another change of rate.

Population forecasts from UN Population Division don't attempt to handle these situations.

But the human population on Earth has exceeded the ability of the environment to sustain it: 'might' is not the term; human population will start to crash this century, as cartoon idiot like, we destroy the environment we depend on. — unenlightened

World population likely to shrink after mid-century

Improvements in access to modern contraception and the education of girls and women are generating widespread, sustained declines in fertility, and world population will likely peak in 2064 at around 9.7 billion, and then decline to about 8.8 billion by 2100--about 2 billion lower than some previous estimates, according to a new study published in The Lancet.

[ Also people with a higher standard of living tend to have less children. Or is it that having less children gives you a higher standard of living? ]

By 2100, projected fertility rates in 183 of 195 countries will not be high enough to maintain current populations without liberal immigration policies

By century's end 23 countries will see populations shrink by more than 50%, including Japan, Thailand, Italy, and Spain.

Continued global population growth through the century is no longer the most likely trajectory for the world's population.

Whether or not you’re a climate denier I don’t know, but every post of yours indicates a slant towards downplaying the risks. — John McMannis

I believe that climate-change/global-warming is happening. I don't deny that.

The reason that most of my posts downplay the risks is that I believe that most of the posts from many other people exaggerate the risks.

I am a very skeptical person and I tend to take the opposite side to other people. However, I don't do this without what I consider valid reasons. My comments are meant to promote discussion and make people think. Something that Mikie doesn't like.

Here is an example. People are concerned about an increase in the global average temperature of 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius. But most places on Earth have a difference in temperature between winter and summer of 20 to 30 degrees Celsius. Which do you prefer, winter or summer?

A lot of that difference in viewpoint comes down to the use of temperature anomalies, rather than actual temperatures.

Very few things in life are totally good or totally bad. But you will never hear anything good said about climate-change/global-warming. Why? What about having a longer growing season in many places? Lower winter heating bills? Moscow has an average temperature of 4 degrees Celsius. Wouldn't Muscovites welcome some global warming? Etc, etc, ...

On this thread I can name one: “Agree to Disagree.” Just a climate-denying troll. Maybe he’s been booted off by now, I don’t know. — Mikie

I am still here. Since Mikie has me on his ignore list I can say anything that I like about him. :grin:

Mikie has no idea what he is talking about, and doesn't realize how foolish he is.

- I do not deny the climate
- I do not deny climate change
- people like Mikie exaggerate the effects of climate change
- people like Mikie blame the wrong people
- people like Mikie promote solutions which won't work
- people like Mikie misrepresent other people's views. He calls everybody who doesn't accept his views a "denier", even when they are not denying climate change
- people like Mikie think that abusing people will make them do what Mikie wants
- people like Mikie don't understand human nature
- people like Mikie won't have a discussion (because Mikie thinks that he knows everything)
- people like Mikie underestimate the number of people who don't care about climate change
- people like Mikie enjoy being a troll, while accusing other people of being trolls

Denmark will tax livestock farmers for methane emissions

In 2030, Denmark is set to become the first country to start taxing farmers for gassy pigs, sheep, and cattle — the methane that livestock animals give out is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming.

The goal is to reduce methane gas emissions by 70% from 1990 levels, said Denmark’s tax minister, but the new law does not specify how it will change the economic livelihood of farmers.

Question - will Denmark's methane tax help to reduce global-warming/climate-change?

Here are my thoughts:

- farming of pigs, sheep, and cattle will reduce in Denmark, but will increase in other countries to meet the demand for these things. So no reduction in global methane emissions.

- if the other counties are less efficient than Denmark in farming these animals then global methane levels could actually go up because of the methane tax in Denmark

- there will be additional greenhouse gases produced due to the transport of farm products to Denmark. So global methane levels and CO2 levels could actually go up because of the methane tax in Denmark

Why is Denmark going to introduce a methane tax when it will have no effect, or possibly even make global-warming/climate-change worse than before the tax?

Do you think psychiatric medication belongs to the common person's future? — merloz

In the Year 2525

Song by Zager and Evans

In the year 2525, if man is still alive
If woman can survive, they may find
In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say
Is in the pill you took today

‘Inconvenient truths’ for greens

There is a danger environmentalists “get into a bubble of clear-sighted, righteous agreement that if only other people had sufficient political will and shared our views, we’d be well on our way to the promised land”

Environmentalism is much harder than a few slogans and he listed what he called five “inconvenient truths” that need addressing

The first inconvenient truth is that closing polluting industries will in most cases result in imported replacement goods unless there is an equal focus on curbing consumption. Telling consumers they can’t have stuff is an altogether more difficult conversation to have.

The second inconvenient truth is that society must entertain some environmentally damaging activities like mining or the provision of infrastructure. “The question is how much damage? If we are not prepared to examine trade-offs critically, we will be dismissed as the dog that barks at every passing car.” Environmentalists oppose extractive industries but in the transition to zero emissions energy, demand will increase for metals needed for batteries, wind turbines and solar panels.

The third inconvenient truth is the call for green growth, which he said isn’t the easy economic and environmental win some people imagine. Tourism is not environmentally benign and renewable electricity is usually far more efficient and therefore less damaging than fossil fuels but will result in ecosystem damage. “The green growth vision of the future will continually trade one environmental issue for the next. We can’t escape that.”

The fourth inconvenient truth is that change is costly and not the win-win it is pitched as. “Environmentalists have to be conscious of the social impacts of these sorts of transitions.”

The fifth inconvenient truth is that arguing for degrowth is not an easy sell. “As a student of human nature, my hunch is that if we tell people that they can’t have the stuff they’ve grown to expect, they will turn to thinking about how they can take it from others.”

Sure they do, but you have to look up from your book occasionally and look around and smile at anyone who's looking at you. — unenlightened

Sure they do, but you have to look up from your book phone occasionally and look around and smile at anyone who's looking at you.

Is this a joke, or are they serious? Would banning advertising for fossil fuels save us from climate change? Fossil fuels don't need to be advertised. Most people know about fossil fuels and want to use them. The main effect of advertising is probably to influence which oil company you buy from.

‘Godfathers of climate chaos’: UN chief urges global fossil-fuel advertising ban

Fossil-fuel companies are the “godfathers of climate chaos” and should be banned in every country from advertising akin to restrictions on big tobacco, the secretary general of the United Nations has said while delivering dire new scientific warnings of global heating.

In a major speech in New York on Wednesday, António Guterres called on news and tech media to stop enabling “planetary destruction” by taking fossil-fuel advertising money while warning the world faces “climate crunch time” in its faltering attempts to stem the crisis.

“Many governments restrict or prohibit advertising for products that harm human health, like tobacco,” he said. “I urge every country to ban advertising from fossil-fuel companies. And I urge news media and tech companies to stop taking fossil-fuel advertising.” — The Guardian

Turning the planet into Venus seems to be the goal. — Mikie

This is the sort of stupid comment that destroys the credibility of the people who make it.

The problem with the free market in this case is it doesn't price in the externalities associated with burning fossil fuels (global warming, increased asthma deaths, increased smog). — RogueAI

What happens if some people are affected by the externalities, but other people are not. How do you price an externality that affects different people in different ways?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/01/opinion/clean-energy-solar-wind.html — Mikie

Mikie, the article that you linked to is an opinion guest essay by Andrew Dessler. He is a climate scientist and not an expert on renewable energy. Many people would see him as biased and that he has a conflict of interest.

If you want to get the facts from the New York Times then I suggest that you read this article:
https://nypost.com/2023/11/02/opinion/collapse-of-projects-shows-again-that-wind-power-is-not-affordable

Here are some highlights:

Collapse of projects shows again that wind power is not affordable

The renewable-power fantasy is being blown apart by furious financial headwinds.

Already this year projects have tumbled in Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts, and now Danish wind-power giant Ørsted has canceled two wind farms in New Jersey.

Over and over, the litany of causes is the same: inflation, higher interest rates that drive up capital costs and severe kinks in the supply chain.

Indeed — and yet this broken industry is what New York’s climate activists have pinned their clean-energy hopes on.

If offshore wind had to compete on the free market, we wouldn’t even be talking about it.

Frozen iguanas are falling from trees in Florida
News article dated 24 January 2024

In Florida, colder than normal temperatures are having a major impact on certain animal species. This weekend, several weather forecasters issued unofficial warnings – not about snow or ice, but about the possibility of falling iguanas.

While falling iguanas are more often stunned rather than dead, they can be inconvenient or even dangerous. In some cases, they’ve damaged cars or injured people. So, when walking in Florida during colder temperatures, looking up is advisable. — Sarah Bregel, BBC

How long until climate change makes humans extinct?
============================================

A supercomputer simulation just predicted when humans will go extinct

And according to a new simulation, humanity's end could come in as little as 250 million years if climate change continues the way it has. — Joshua Hawkins

First-ever supercomputer simulation predicts when humans will become extinct on Earth

But you need not fear as this doomsday scenario isn't forecast to happen for another 250 million years. — Dylan Murray

Supercomputer shares terrifying prediction of date human life will become extinct

The projected timeline for these events extends over the course of 250 million years. This vast timeframe offers humanity ample opportunity to prepare and adapt. — James Kay

This Supercomputer Just Made A Prediction About The Human Species, And It’s Quite Terrifying

Recent simulations run by a supercomputer have painted a chilling picture of our planet’s future. If climate change continues at its current pace, humanity could vanish within the next 250 million years, leaving behind an uninhabitable world. — Sarah Jensen

It's... still not flipped vertically. — Lionino

The head of the image is below the feet. How is that not flipped vertically?

The answer to this question is surprisingly simple.

Yes, a single plane mirror can flip things vertically.

Place the mirror flat on the floor like a rug. Step onto the mirror being careful not to break it.

You can now look down and you will see an image of yourself flipped vertically.

"Would you let animals like dogs die in order to create a vaccine that will save all of humanity?" — Arnie

What about using animals to test cosmetics?

Although they are not required by law, several invasive tests are performed on rabbits, mice, guinea pigs and rats. These can include skin and eye irritation tests where chemicals are rubbed onto the shaved skin or dripped into the eyes of restrained rabbits, without any pain relief.

Is this testing done for the greater good?

Hydropower may be renewable and clean, but it destroys the surrounding ecosystem. A small price to pay perhaps, but there is that. — Lionino

This song was written by John Hanlon and was adopted by the opponents of the Lake Manapouri dam.

It is called "Damn The Dam".

Leaf falls to kiss the image of a mountain
The early morning mist has ceased to play
Birds dancing lightly on the branches by a fountain
Of a waterfall which dazzles with its spray

Tall and strong and aged, contented and serene
The kauri tree surveys this grand domain
For miles and miles around him, a sea of rolling green
Tomorrow all this beauty won't remain

Damn the dam cried the fantail
As he flew into as he flew into the sky
To give power to the people
All this beauty has to die

Rain falls from above and splashes on the ground
Goes running down the mountain to the sea
And leaping over pebbles makes such a joyful sound
Such as Mother Nature's meant to be

I have grave reflection, reflection of a grave
Trees that once lived green now dead and brown
The homes of tiny animals and little birds as well
For the sake of man's progression have been drowned

Damn the dam cried the fantail
As he flew into as he flew into the sky
To give power to the people
All this beauty has to die

South Korean court hears children's climate change case against government

SEOUL, April 23 (Reuters) - South Korea's Constitutional Court began hearing on Tuesday a case that accuses the government of having failed to protect 200 people, including dozens of young environmental activists and children, by not tackling climate change.

The proceeding is Asia's first such climate-related litigation, the plaintiffs said, which includes four petitions by children and infants among others dating from 2020, as well as one from a foetus at the time, nicknamed Woodpecker. — Reuters

How did Woodpecker (a foetus) sign the petition? :chin:

Net zero has become unhelpful slogan, says outgoing head of UK climate watchdog

The concept of “net zero” has become a political slogan used to start a “dangerous” culture war over the climate, and may be better dropped, the outgoing head of the UK’s climate watchdog has warned.

But it was not just those who were against climate action who were causing the problem, according to Stark. Climate activists were also alarming people, he warned, and creating “quite a serious barrier to large parts of the political spectrum to support climate action” by forceful protests, and presenting environmental policies as radical.

“It would be more helpful if they were less divisive,” he said. “I don’t think it is radical. It’s really important that we stop using words like that, as it is understandably frightening.” — The Guardian

Best not to pay them any attention. — Mikie

You seem to constantly repeat this advice Mikie. Doesn't that prove that they are getting attention?

And Mikie, you seem to be giving them a lot of attention. Otherwise why would you need to give this advice constantly?

Are there things in the physical universe that we can never find out? — Vera Mont

Our knowledge allows us to build a model of the universe.

Over time our knowledge can increase and our model of the universe becomes better.

But our better model of the universe is still incomplete, unless our knowledge is infinite.

I don't believe that our knowledge can be infinite.

Therefore there are things in the physical universe that we can never find out.

Are there things in the physical universe that we can never find out? — Vera Mont

Whether unicorns exist.

I can put aside mental shorthand and tune into my visual field. I see color, light, dark, and lines. I can do that so thoroughly that I forget what it is my looking at — frank

Most people have 2 "local" visual fields, one from the left eye and one from the right eye. These 2 local visual fields overlap, but there are parts of each eye's local visual field which can't be seen by the other eye.

The brain combines the 2 local visual fields to create a "global" visual field.

There is a "blind spot" in each local visual field where the optic nerve enters the eye. When creating the global visual field the brain combines the 2 local visual fields in such a way that the blind spots are hidden. People are normally unaware of the blind spots, but they can be experienced under certain circumstances.

Your brain "tricks" you in a number of ways. Most people say that they can experience color over the whole global visual field. But the periphery of each local visual field only contains "rod" cells, which can only detect black and white. The "cone" cells which detect color are not found in the periphery.

The blood vessels in the eye lie near the retina, but between the retina and the lens. This means that shadows of the blood vessels fall on the retina. But your brain "tricks" you and you are normally not aware of them. They can be seen under certain circumstances.

Every time you blame cows for climate change, an oil executive laughs

Of all the climate solutions out there, maybe we should concentrate on the 97% of industrial emissions that come from fossil fuels, and leave the cows out of it, Eurof Uppington writes.

Given the press, you’d be forgiven for thinking that reducing cattle numbers and moving to a plant-based diet is a climate solution up there with electric vehicles and offshore wind.

Billions of dollars and euros and celebrity endorsements have been invested in plant-based and alternative protein startups. “Cows create global warming” is a truism of our time, shared by almost all right-thinking people.

The emerging truth appears different. Not only is the climate impact of cattle confused and overblown — properly managed, grazing cows and sheep can be a climate and biodiversity solution. — Eurof Uppington (euronews)

Do you mind if science is being controlled overall or just by the bureaucracy? It seems you want to set science and scientists free. — javi2541997

Science needs to be controlled in some way. So some degree of bureaucracy is required. But it should not be strongly biased towards one view.

To paraphrase Judith Curry:
Bureaucracy influences research funding priorities, the scientific questions that are asked, how the findings are interpreted, what is cited, and what gets canonized. Factual statements are filtered in assessment reports and by the media with an eye to downstream political use.

Here is a good description of academic life from Sabine Hossenfelder, who has many videos on YouTube:
It made me realize that this institute wasn’t about knowledge discovery.
It was about money making.
And the more I saw of academia, the more I realized it wasn’t just this particular
institute and this particular professor.
It was generally the case.

The moment you put people into big institutions the goal shifts from knowledge discovery to
money making.

You have to work on topics that are mainstream enough but not too mainstream.
You want them to be a little bit edgy.
But not too edgy.
it needs to be something that fits into the existing machinery.

Mikie, thank you for making this post. It is a good example of the sort of climate stupidity that is making the public distrust climate science and climate scientists.

Instead, it may be the far more numerous unremarkably hot days that cause the bulk of societal destruction, including through their complex and often unnoticed effects on human health and productivity. In the United States, even moderately elevated temperatures — days in the 80s or 90s Fahrenheit — are responsible for just as many excess deaths as the record triple-digit heat waves, if not more, according to my calculations based on a recent analysis of Medicare records — We Don’t See What Climate Change Is Doing to Us

.
Consider the different states in America. Some of the states are hotter than others (e.g. Texas, Florida, Louisiana) and some of the states are colder than others (e.g. North Dakota, Minnesota, Montana).

This article implies that the hotter states should have more societal destruction, and more effects on human health and productivity, than the colder states. Is that true?

The article also implies that the hotter states should have a greater number of excess deaths caused by moderately elevated temperatures than the colder states. Is that true?

A growing body of literature links temperature to cognitive performance and decision making. Research shows that hotter days lead to more mistakes, including among professional athletes; more local crime; and more violence in prisons, according to working papers. They also correspond with more use of profanity on social media, suggesting that even an incrementally hotter world is likely to be a nontrivially more irritable, error-prone and conflictual one. — We Don’t See What Climate Change Is Doing to Us

Do people from hotter states have worse cognitive performance and decision making than people from the colder states? Do people from hotter states make more mistakes and have more local crime than people from the colder states? Do people from hotter states use more profanity on social media than people from the colder states. Mikie, do you live in a hotter state or a colder state?

Children are not immune. In other research, my colleagues Joshua Goodman, Michael Hurwitz and Jonathan Smith and I found that across the country, hotter school years led to slower gains on standardized exams like the Preliminary SAT exams. It may not seem a huge effect, on average: roughly 1 percent of learning lost per one-degree-hotter school year temperatures. Probably hardly noticeable in any given year. But because these learning effects are cumulative, they may have significant consequences. — We Don’t See What Climate Change Is Doing to Us

Did hotter states have slower gains on standardized exams like the Preliminary SAT exams than colder states?

If 1 percent of learning is lost per one-degree-hotter school year temperatures, and the effects are cumulative, then the children from the hotter states must be slowly but surely becoming stupider than the children from the colder states. Mikie, do you live in a hotter state or a colder state?

Mikie, you really need to improve your "cut and paste" skills. Some of the text in your post has mysteriously changed from the original text in the article.

Original article text:
the devastation wreaked by climate change comes not just from headline-grabbing catastrophes but also from the...

Mikie's text:
the devastation wreaked by climate change is often just as much about headline-grabbing catastrophes as it is about the...

Why did the text change Mikie?
Did you make the change?

Where would you rather live, location A or location B ?

The graphs below show a compact characterization of the entire year of hourly average temperatures. The horizontal axis is the day of the year, the vertical axis is the hour of the day, and the color is the average temperature for that hour and day.

Based only on these average temperature graphs, where would you rather live, location A or location B ?

Note that location A and location B are real locations on the earth. I will reveal where the locations are after people have answered the question. Location A and location B are very close to being on the same line of longitude, and the straight line distance from location A to location B is about 490 kilometers.


© WeatherSpark.com


© WeatherSpark.com

The only problem with this type of exercise is that the dog does a lot of sniffing and we don't move very fast
— Agree-to-Disagree

Be tolerant and thankful for a furry companion. :cool: — jgill

I am extremely grateful for my furry companion. She is an apartment dog so I try to give her as much variety as possible. I want her to enjoy all of the things that dogs enjoy. Not moving very fast is not really a problem. It gives me time to enjoy my surroundings. :cool:

You say you are more able to talk with other people because you walk with your dog. Maybe you are referring to other dog owners... — javi2541997

Talking to other dog owners is easy because you have a common interest. But I am talking about other people as well. The dog that I walk is a smallish black spoodle called Molly. She is probably about 30 cm at the shoulder. She looks very cute and she loves people.

There are a lot of cafes around the beach where we often walk. She checks under the tables and chairs to try and find food. If there are people sitting at a table then Molly will go straight up to them and they will pet her. You can see the joy on the faces of these people. It makes me feel good to see Molly making people happy.

I try to avoid groups of people because it gives me anxiety, and walking with my dog makes me feel I am protected by a bubble. — javi2541997

I suffer from social anxiety but walking with Molly (the dog) reduces that anxiety a lot.

I wish I could walk more than just an hour with my dog. She is a small-dog breed, and she tends to get tired early... — javi2541997

Molly is about 9 years old and I am in my mid 60's. I get tired before she does. We walk at her speed with plenty of sniffing and we rest whenever she wants to. Molly is an apartment dog so I try to give her as much variety as possible.

I walk a dog for about 2.5 hours daily. It is not my dog. The dog's owner is an elderly lady who walks with a walking frame. So I walk her dog for her.

I have suffered from depression in the past and if I don't have a required reason to go out then I usually stay at home. The dog gives me a reason to get up and get going. The walking gets me outside and gives me exercise, fresh air, sunshine, etc, We often walk on the beach.

Walking with a dog also gives you an excuse to talk to people. If I didn't have the dog with me then I wouldn't talk to anybody. The dog gives me unconditional love.

The only problem with this type of exercise is that the dog does a lot of sniffing and we don't move very fast.