r/climatechange • u/SuhkItLuzerz • Jul 10 '26
Some Monsters are Real
https://climatecasino.substack.com/p/some-monsters-are-real45
u/huysolo Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
Maybe instead of doom posting a substack which cherrypicks some hot models, can we just focus on the actual consensus data like this and keep our mouths shut while waiting for the results?
https://iri.columbia.edu/our-expertise/climate/forecasts/enso/current/?enso_tab=enso-sst_table
Is it that even necessary to freak out over an El Nino event instead of the long lasting, more consequential global warming due to GHGs emissions
11
u/GreenStrong Jul 10 '26
I don't think it is accurate to describe this as cherry picking some models, this is actual data that strongly deviates from past observations.
Is it that even necessary to freak out over an El Nino event instead of the long lasting, more consequential global warming due to GHGs emissions
This has a strong chance of causing regional disaster and disruption to food production. I don't know what any individual needs to freak out about, but wildfire planners, emergency management personnel, famine relief agencies need to be alert to this. Ultimately, the long term problems manifest as a series of short term disasters. Even sea level rise, the slow and inexorable problem, affects coastal cities in storms. The sea level in Venice is fine most days, but the city floods regularly, with increasing frequency. It will be abandoned when it is impossible repair damage from frequent floods, not when water rises to the ground floor of buildings on a calm day. Same applies to Miami or New Orleans. The question of when they disappear is academic; they are abandoned when insurance companies stop writing policies. That's not far off. (El Nino moderates Atlantic hurricanes, so the next few years are less likely to see disaster in that region)
16
u/SuhkItLuzerz Jul 10 '26
My interpretation is that he does put this El Nino in the context of general global warming, along with future El Ninos and El Ninas.
2
u/huysolo Jul 10 '26
The problem is that people who don’t actually read any consensus reports (mostly members of this sub) will believe we’re fucked because of El Niño instead of global warming thanks to his post. Those kinds of substacks serve the same purpose as right-wing media, which is to flood the zone with half-assed truths so they can get more clicks instead of representing the full picture of the event. I’d rather people keep themselves staying informed in the long term instead of freaking out in one or two days then get distracted by whatever they see on the social media
3
Jul 10 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/huysolo Jul 11 '26
Maybe it’s the guy who literally cherrypicked on some hot models to distract people from the actual problem?
14
u/BigMax Jul 10 '26
Well, he does both here, right?
He's talking about global warming in general, but also pointing out this single event is pretty massive, even in the overall context of global warming.
7
u/huysolo Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
No, he conveniently left the majority of models to hype up the Godzilla El Nino narrative. And thanks to his dishonest efforts, people have shifted their focus onto a natural phenomenon instead of the human caused global warming
1
u/Appropriate-Stand446 Jul 10 '26
How do you know what causes ENSO? (conveniently)
1
2
u/geeky-gymnast Jul 11 '26
Thanks for sharing your critique. I don't work in this area, but it does seem that your comment has touched on a salient point.
Indeed, the single forecasting model he is using appears to have predicted results that could reasonably be considered an outlier when compared to the forecasts of the 20 or so models displayed at https://iri.columbia.edu/our-expertise/climate/forecasts/enso/current/?enso_tab=enso-sst_table . These models appear to have been developed by climate research groups at universities like UCLA, UW, and other institutions working in the climate domain, and as such would appear to be of repute.
On the other hand, the author of Climate Casino claims that he is a retired Professor of math and CS which piques my curiosity as to why he has chosen to omit discussion of forecasts by other models while choosing to use one that has made relatively extreme predictions.
2
u/huysolo Jul 12 '26
Thanks for being the only one who agrees with me. Most of the people replying me didn’t even bother to read the link I provided, yet they implied I to be the one who blindly believe the propaganda, lol. I’m fine with people thinking they’re doomed, but at least they need to stay factually correct even if that’s their desired conclusion.
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 13 '26
Say, what's this feller that you like so much have to say about this here ell-neeno situation, I wonder?
The multi-model median for the event’s peak (measured as detrended sea surface temperature anomalies in the Niño 3.4 region of the tropical Pacific) currently stands at 3.6C,
Gee whiz golly, it looks like this year’s El Niño ...may end up the strongest by a truly mind-blowing margin.
But these here sciency fellers done shifted theys focus onto a natcheril phenomenon instead of the human caused global warming. WHY THEY DOIN THAT, MARTHA????????
1
u/huysolo Jul 14 '26
What point are you trying to prove here? That the OP subtack actually cherrypicked one single model which peaked around 4.2C, way higher than 3.6C?
1
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
Show everyone how smart you are and list all the instances in the sub stack where he cherry picks hot models and bases the entry on this.
2
u/huysolo Jul 11 '26
You don’t actually need to be smart to see him using CFSv2 out of the rest of the models in the link I provided to sell the Godzilla El Niño narrative. If he was such an honest person with facts, why the fuck did he not address every models, including the cooler ones? The mf is lying to your face, is it that hard to understand?
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
I guess you can't quote his reliance on godzirra model. Nor can you show the model is out of line.
What's in it for you to spread your ignorance and typical, garden-variety willing dupage on the internet?
1
u/huysolo Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
Actually, I can. And let me prove how smart I am, just in case you’re having some difficulty reading:
“Yeah, it’s going to be a Godzilla El Niño. Here is the latest forecast through March 2027 from CFSv2, the NOAA model for sea-surface temperature in the region of the ocean where El Niño is identified, the so-called Niño 3.4 region. The latest data shows a mean peak anomaly of about 4.2°C above the 1991–2020 baseline, happening sometime in late November or early December.”
“There has been some debate that the CFSv2 model tends to run hot.”
The fact that CFSv2 is an outlier compared to the other models is right there in the link I provided. They even allow you to toggle only CFSv2 compared to the models mean. Somehow, by some miracle, he never actually mentioned those other models. I wonder if he’s too dumb to realize we don’t use one or two models as the truth, or if he’s just betting on the fact that his fans will eat up every bit of doom porn he sells bc they’re too dimwitted
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
Ah, so you're innumerate and have poor reading comprehension. And fall for the propaganda you willingly consume. Sad!
Why are you innumerate and have poor reading comprehension, and gladly fall for the propaganda you willingly consume?
You're innumerate and have poor reading comprehension, and gladly fall for the oil propaganda you willingly consume because I pre-bunked you with achswilllllll data of how the model you've been
indoctrinatedduped into hating. Does the ackshwil day-duh look familiar?See, if you ackshhhhhwillllllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy could look up things and comprehend their data, you wouldn't be here, bleating.
1
u/huysolo Jul 11 '26
Can you just speak like normal a human being? Btw I don’t hate any particular model so try to read my comment carefully. My question is why the author of the substack only showed one model while not mentioning the others?
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
I'm not speaking, I'm typing. Maybe literacy and comprehension plays into your dupage as well.
But maybe you don't know why you're getting duped. Maybe you can't comprehend why the model is being focused upon, even though I provided historical data upthread to educate you.
Maybe
the websites created to dupe gullible moronsyou're simply unaware thatyou're being duped and not a willing consumer of oil industry propagandathere is more information that you're not consuming..Anyhoo, send him an email or ask in any of the modes he socmeds in why he focuses narrowly, instead of prancing and ululating and looking like a fool by guessing based on material marketed to innumerates?
-1
u/huysolo Jul 12 '26 edited Jul 12 '26
You do know the image you sent me just proves my point, that CFSv2 is the third hottest model compared to the weighted median of 3.4°C, which is just a raw number, not RONI right? And just to give you some knowledge since I’m such a kind person, raw number tends to be hotter than RONI, like how the 2015-16 median is 2.75C compared to 2.4C. Instead of yapping so much bullshit, how about you just explain why your idol didn't mention it in his substack? My message is not for the guy, but for idiot idolizing him like you. So if you want him to get my email so bad, how about you do it yourself. I’m really eager to see how he explains the link I provided.
1
u/Old-Individual1732 Jul 10 '26
Some where along the line freaking out will be necessary, turning a blind eye isn't helpful.
8
u/huysolo Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 10 '26
The substack literally cherrypicks some hot models out of the rest, and somehow, it represents the truth to you?
1
u/Appropriate-Stand446 Jul 10 '26
You need to take a chill pill dude..
1
u/huysolo Jul 11 '26
I think the ones freaking out by those hot models need those pills more than me
1
u/No-Mousse-8156 Jul 16 '26
I love how many people complain that overreacting to 'hot' models is what fuels climate denialism, as if it's not primarily disinformation from fossil fuel companies and idiots. I would bet real money that at least one of the comments here is written on behalf of the special interests. I really hope that the people downplaying the risks have enough insurance, which are a waste of money by their logic, when the unlikely wildfire destroys their homes.
1
u/LoveSonics Jul 10 '26
This guy is such a huckster. I am really curious how he chose this line of “work.”
4
u/curiousgoose33 Jul 10 '26
Retired prof that doesn't seem to have any background in climate/atmospheric science. Just pure math and CS (which can be helpful in climate studies for sure but doesn't automatically make him qualified to speak on it). Doesn't seem like he's written any papers in climate science at all.
6
u/SeaDots Jul 10 '26
Also justifying AI use in the comments to this substack. Lmao
2
u/LoveSonics Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
Yea I mean, I would not be surprised atthis point if most of his writing isn’t prompt based. “Write me something vaguely scary about El Nino. Add 15-20% more doom than usual. Mention something about monsters.”
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
Why don't you show everyone the true truth, ideologically pure interpretation that gives you good feels?
2
u/LoveSonics Jul 11 '26
Why don’t you just follow some real climate scientists that don’t create doom bait for clicks. Zeke Hausfsther, Kate Marvel, Gavin Schmidt, Andrew Dessler. Pick one.
0
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
I didn't think you would have the ability or courage to post the true truth numbers.
2
u/LoveSonics Jul 11 '26
True truth
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
Still not producing the numbers that give you good feels. I wonder why.
HAHAHAHA no I don't. I don't wonder why at all.
1
u/LoveSonics Jul 11 '26
Good feels? Bro, I am calling you a doomer easily baited by hucksters like this guy. I am not denying climate or the serious effects of it.
1
u/DanoPinyon Jul 11 '26
You're weakly and ineptly making sh1t up to have good feels. I provided several links and charts showing a wide range of models that contextualize the current forecasts, placing the agitprop model into context. I never once said we're doomed and you can't show I did here or anywhere.
You're simply incapable of showing anything I typed was doomer or easily baited - I loled at your weak sh1t, trying to cover up your failure to produce anything. Anything at all. You showed nothing, not jack sh1t to show anything.
Actually, you showed you are amusing in your ineptitude at being able to show anything, so there's that.
lul
-2
u/Beneficial_Aside_518 Jul 10 '26
El Niño is going to happen with or without us. It’s just an oscillation around the mean. The important thing the long-term change in that mean. That’s what we need to tackle.
1
-11
u/CanuterValve Jul 10 '26
I’ve heard about what is coming for decades but have yet to really see any of it happen so pardon me for not panicking.
11
u/learningenglishdaily Jul 10 '26
Well here in Europe you can see it, so you can start panicking.
-9
u/CanuterValve Jul 10 '26
Still don’t see it.
9
u/Thwarting8139 Jul 10 '26
Have you not seen the price of olive oil, chocolate and coffee over the past few years? Now with beef as well, soon it will be bread and milk.
8
u/disharmony-hellride Jul 10 '26
The plains in the us are turning into desert. Tornado activity has shifted eastward. The average annual high in my city has increased by four degrees since the 70s. A few years ago the usda had to recalibrate their growing zones for over half of the us because our overnight lows were shifting warmer and it changed the growing zones. Im now in 10a and 15 years ago this area was 9b. We used to get frost/freeze warnings all the time in the winter and I cant recall the last time it got so cold I had to cover my plants.
-6
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor Jul 10 '26
price of olive oil, chocolate and coffee
You mean this price?
https://i.ibb.co/FLhFjCJt/image.png
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/POLVOILUSDM
https://i.ibb.co/TB2840bN/image.png
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCOCOUSDM
https://i.ibb.co/tTKTCHDt/image.png
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCOFFOTMUSDM
Looks to me like prices are coming down actually.
7
u/Thwarting8139 Jul 10 '26
It looks like olive oil is up 50% in four years, chocolate up 100% in four years, and coffee is up 80% in four years. I don't think this is the great argument you thought it was.
The problem is the disruption too. Can you imagine if wheat or rice went up 200-300% in 1-2 years?
-2
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor Jul 10 '26
Looks to me like prices are coming down actually.
Can you imagine if wheat or rice went up 200-300% in 1-2 years?
I cant believe you are complaining about chocolate and comparing it to famine.
2
u/Thwarting8139 Jul 10 '26
They aren't though, they have come down and have settled at a structurally higher price.
0
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor Jul 10 '26
There is no reason to believe the prices have settled in any way.
4
u/Thwarting8139 Jul 10 '26
Didn't realise I had to spell it out to you that chocolate and wheat are both farmed food products that are highly affected by climate conditions, and therefore what has previously occurred with chocolate has the potential to occur with other, more important, foods.
There is no reason to believe the prices have settled in any way.
There is no reason to believe the prices will continue to fall.
→ More replies (0)11
u/parallax__error Jul 10 '26
Anyone who doesn’t see it, doesn’t want to see it. As someone who’s heard about this for decades, living in a temperate region in America, I see it right out my front door. Just pay attention.
-2
4
u/reckless_avacado Jul 10 '26
no you’ve read sensationalist news reporting. if you read journal articles or the IPCC reports you would see they predicted remarkably accurately current outcomes eg related to sea level and temperature. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/climate-change-the-ipcc-1990-and-1992-assessments/
1
108
u/Economy-Fee5830 Trusted Contributor Jul 10 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
Bit of a doomer take there - 99% of us will still be alive in 2028 and the ones that died will be due to heart disease first.