Hacker News Reader

I believe in climate change because I trust the experts who have done analyses of global temperature (and to a lesser extent, climate models).

Individual events like this could be cherry picked, so I don't know if they are good evidence or not. If I wasn't convinced by the science I described above, I don't think I would be convinced by this, unless it was accompanied by a similarly rigorous statistical analysis.

View on HN

Right, but certain individual events are signifiers for larger systemic changes. If one needs reliable summer access through the arctic for this to work, relying on a fluke isn't going to work.

The problem with climate change is that there is plenty of rigorous statistical analysis... and yet ppl deny the analyses, deny the evidence collection, deny that there is any evidence. I'd like to think this is a different game now that business are making decisions predicated on it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com