THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: Some 70% of people, depends how you ask, accept the global emergency. Climate system destabilisation is one aspect, declining biodiversity and increasing pollution is another. I ask: what would actually *break* if humanity responded decisively? 1/

To "The Sky Is Falling" Idiots

Read this thread 👇🏾

The proof is ALL OVER THE INTERWEB 🧐

GLOBAL WARMING (as described by the Left) IS A HOAX and Being Used Against You As A Money Making Machine 🧐

I Have Posted this Many Times Before, but here YOU ALL go again INVESTIGATE IT

Oh fuck. I am listening to Gormley's interview w/ Patrick Moore about climate change from Jan 21. Gorm is being fed a pile of horseshit and just happily swallowing every word. This is garbage. /1

Moore says you can't go out in the field & see what CO2 is doing. Which is just false. You can go in the field & measure atmospheric CO2 & its change directly. And he calls himself a sciencey guy? /2

Then he's saying, b/c some on the left believe GMOs are bad w/ no evidence, therefore everything they believe they believe w/ no evidence so therefore scientists who say the climate is changing are making up stories? This is ridiculous. /3

Often when I tune into climate deniers, there's stuff I hadn't heard before that I have to do a bunch of reading to find out what's real & what isn't. So far with Moore, I don't even have to make a list of stuff to check to know this is all nonsense. /4

I'm saying, he's going over old, long debunked talking points. This is tired & boring. /5

New paper: Review and Analysis of Strategies for Reducing Life Cycle GHG Emissions of Residential Buildings in Humid
Subtropical and Tropical Climates by Daniel Satola et al. 2021 - A Thread (1/9)

We reviewed more than 70 building LCA studies in climate regions common in the Global South, studying building cases from Asia, Oceania, South America and North America. We conduct detailed analyses ...
(2/9)

...based on a final sample of 36 building cases which were fit for harmonization of results. Therein, life cycle GHG emissions show a wide range of 491 to 4811 kgCO2eq/m2. To understand more: First, how structural material choice is influencing emissions...
(3/9)

...we study both embodied and life cycle GHG emission in relation to primary materials used in the building structure. This shows lowest embodied emissions with wood as structural material, and potentially low emissions from use of concrete (non-reinforced). Second,... (4/9)

...we investigate specific design strategies applied in the different cases to analyse their potential for reducing operational and/or embodied GHG emissions. Substantial embodied GHG emissions reduction can be achieved by use of local materials, ... (5/9)

It's #FigureFriday, so let's chat about my favorite subject: color palettes 🎨 for climate science visualization! (1/12)

First, why is it important? Put simply: a beautiful figure can communicate your results more effectively than text. It can make a figure more understandable to a public audience. So it is worth it to put care into your figure design. (2/12)

First, if you're plotting up climate model data, especially anomalies, I highly recommend Cynthia Brewer's palettes on ColorBrewer. BrBG is my go-to for precip anomalies, and RdBu is a natural for temperature. (3/12)

The sequential palettes are also great if you've got data going in one direction. Here's the Brewer "blues" at work for a figure showing LGM T change. (4/12)

But what about line graphs? If you are paleoclimatologist like me, you are probably plotting a bunch of squiggly lines. For this, I suggest designing a palette for your *entire paper* ahead on time, and then plot stuff in this palette in every figure. (5/12)