2.5M views · Jan 27, 2024 · 21:37 · 1 HN recommender · 6 mentions · discussed 2024
Sabine Hossenfelder explains climate sensitivity and why recent observations suggest climate models may have underestimated warming. She says this changed her view on how worried to be.
Why Hacker News points people here: HN commenters link it as the direct source on climate sensitivity and on the claim that past models ran too cold.
“See this great video from Sabine Hossenfelder here”HN comment, 2024
“See this great video from Sabine Hossenfelder here”
Great video on warming trajectory
See this great video from Sabine Hossenfelder here: this video We have surpassed the 1.5°C goal and are on track towards 3.5°C to 5°C. This accelerates the climate change timeline so that we'll see effects postulated for the end of the century in about ~20 years.
“I think this is the actual video”
Points to the actual video the story meant
Lmfao I think this is the actual video - this video Somehow OP must've linked to the RDCWorld video by mistake and somehow this still got to the top of HN? I guess HN just upvotes without clicking the link?
“Direct link to the content”
Direct link to content with proper transcripts
That blog post is a thin wrapper around another video btw. Direct link to the content: this video (For those who prefer to read: it has subtitles/transcript available for various languages — proper ones, not auto-generated!)
“On the topic of possible inaccurate climate models used in IPCC reports”
Cited on possibly inaccurate climate models
We have good reasons to be concerned when looking at the sudden rise in ocean temperatures seen since early 2023 that closely track the worst-case scenarios. Given the stakes, I prefer to be overly cautious (aka. alarmist). On the topic of possible inaccurate climate models used in IPCC reports this video
“I watched Sabina Hossenfelder talk about historical predictive models being wrong and too cold”
Discusses climate models being too cold due to clouds
I watched Sabina Hossenfelder talk about historical predictive models being wrong and too cold on their predictions due to the way they looked at the clouds and the scattering of the light (quantifying the amount of water vapor in the clouds). this video Climate scientists are disagreeing over the hot climate models. This is not a debate on the human effects, simply the way to interpret the data.
“The article is purely a link to this YouTube video”
The article merely wraps this video
Maybe the link should be changed directly to the video it discusses? The article is purely a link to this YouTube video: this video The article itself as I read it doesn't really contribute or expand the concepts in the video and instead is a call to action (not defined) as it assumes you've watched the video, basically I'm just not confident the article contributes anything to the subject its presenting.
