Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

This July, temperatures in London and Hamburg in northern Germany teetered over an edge that seemed unthinkable in previous centuries: 104 degrees (40 Celsius).

In large areas of the western and central United States, where temperatures routinely exceed 105 (40.5 Celsius), that may not seem particularly hot. But London and Hamburg are northern, maritime climates, where average July high temperatures are in the mid-70s (23 to 25 Celsius), and they don’t have close counterparts in the Lower 48 states.

To translate these records to cities in America, The Washington Post and the nonprofit Climate Central calculated how much warmer the record was relative to extreme high temperatures in London for the month of July.


[Dozens of cities to select in the linked original report.]

London and Hamburg are located near the equivalent latitudes of Calgary and Edmonton in North America and are within 50 miles of the chilly North Sea. They are nothing like relatively arid, landlocked southern cities such as Phoenix, Las Vegas, Dallas and Oklahoma City, where temperatures reached 110 this week. Even Seattle, Green Bay, Wis., and Portland, Maine, have warmer July average highs — around 80 degrees.

In smashing their all-time records, temperatures in London and Hamburg soared about 32 degrees (18 Celsius) above average. Simon Lee, an atmospheric scientist at Columbia University, said it was “surreal” watching temperature records fall in Western Europe and Britain. The heat wave “didn’t just break them by little margin like we’ve seen in the past,” he said. “It bulldozed them.”

London was one of at least 34 locations in Britain to surpass the U.K.’s previous all-time highest temperature — 101.7 degrees or 38.7 Celsius. The country sweltered under the heat, as the British people and infrastructure are not accustomed to such extremes. Steel rails in London expanded and buckled, while roads in Cambridge softened and bended. People flocked to cool off in public swimming pools or air-conditioned public spaces, as fewer than 5 percent of homes have air conditioning according to government estimates.

The heat is a preview of extreme temperatures to come in the warming climate. The U.K. Met Office found that the country is now 10 times more likely to experience 40 Celsius than in a world untouched by human-caused climate change, emphasizing the need for better climate adaptation in the country.



The heat wave swept over the Iberian Peninsula last week, and Madrid matched its highest temperature on record: 105 degrees (40.7 Celsius). The mercury rose even higher in northwestern Spain, surpassing 109 degrees (43 Celsius) to set all-time records in Ourense and Ribadavia.

The government advised people to stay indoors and reduce physical activity. In a country where only one-third of homes have air conditioning, some flocked to their air-conditioned workplaces and public spaces.

Temperatures remained warm through the night, and Madrid also experienced its hottest night on record at 79.1 degrees (26.2 Celsius). Elevated nighttime temperatures prevent people from cooling down and can increase heat stress, which can lead to heat exhaustion, strokes and death. In the last week, nearly 900 people in Spain have died of heat-related illnesses.

Combined with dry conditions, the extreme heat has also sparked wildfires that have consumed tens of thousands of hectares.



Dublin set a new July record at 91.4 degrees (33 Celsius), the country’s highest temperature in the 21st century. Huge crowds cooled down at beaches, and at least one wildfire appeared about 15 miles south of the Irish capital. The heat wave was intense but short-lived, with showers returning to the region this week.

That's like not 128 degrees in Las Vegas, because 104 degrees is not 128 degrees.

That's like not 128 degrees in Las Vegas, because 104 degrees is not 128 degrees.

Biden is causing inflation.

No more blame game.

Quote:

That's like not 128 degrees in Las Vegas, because 104 degrees is not 128 degrees.

Unsurprisingly, you missed the point. How often does it get to 128º in Vegas? Never has yet, right? In London, average July temperatures are in the 70s – 30º higher is unprecedented. That's as if it were 128º in Las Vegas. "The Washington Post and the nonprofit Climate Central calculated how much warmer the record was relative to extreme high temperatures in London for the month of July."

Quote:

Biden is causing inflation.

It's a global phenomenon caused by Covid, hitches in the international supply chain on which our economies depend, U.S. interest rates kept too low for too long, massive tax cuts in the U.S. during a period of strong economic growth, disruption to the world food supply caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and climate-driven heat and drought, similar disruption of energy supplies due to the invasion of Ukraine, the effects of Covid shutdowns and layoffs in the petroleum industry and all the industries which supply it, and huge demands on power supply due to climate-driven spikes in heatwaves.

Quote:

No more blame game.

You say this right after you blame Biden for "causing" inflation! Complex world events have many underlying causes and develop over long periods of time. Governments have only limited tools to combat inflation and are often bound by institutional inertia and political cowardice. The business cycle is a feature of capitalism, always has been. Preventing inflation would be politically unpopular. Bitching about inflation and playing the blame game, on the other hand, are extremely useful for populist demagogues.

Quote:

No more blame game.

You say this right after you blame Biden for "causing" inflation! Complex world events have many underlying causes and develop over long periods of time. Governments have only limited tools to combat inflation and are often bound by institutional inertia and political cowardice. The business cycle is a feature of capitalism, always has been. Preventing inflation would be politically unpopular. Bitching about inflation and playing the blame game, on the other hand, are extremely useful for populist demagogues.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:

No more blame game.

You say this right after you blame Biden for "causing" inflation! Complex world events have many underlying causes and develop over long periods of time. Governments have only limited tools to combat inflation and are often bound by institutional inertia and political cowardice. The business cycle is a feature of capitalism, always has been. Preventing inflation would be politically unpopular. Bitching about inflation and playing the blame game, on the other hand, are extremely useful for populist demagogues.

By the blame game, I mean:
1. "Trump caused this..."
Nuhhh, Trump is out of office, he didn't do a damned thing. So either Biden's bad policies caused this (unless you believe the above about the heating effect of 5G, probably not), or he had nothing to do with it either. But he had plenty to do with real problems.

2. "You dirty polluters..."
Yeah, no. This isn't Captain Planet.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwJaELXadKo[/youtube]
3. All of this blamed rather than get with it. There are real problems in our state. We are once again ignoring those problems to be like "Look it's a hot day." Dude, I am ADD, and I spent most of my life struggling against distraction. Sorry, but I won't put up with more of that nonsense. You think the temperature is hellish? Get back to me when it's at least 9000 degrees.
https://www.livescience.com/33393-how-hot-hell.html

Quote:

On Friday, Axios began to publish a deeply researched and important series by Jonathan Swan, explaining that if former president Trump retakes power, he and allies like his former chief of staff Mark Meadows, Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH), and head of Trump’s social media network Devin Nunes are determined to purge our nonpartisan civil service and replace it with loyalists. In a normal administration, a new president gets to replace around 4000 political appointees, but most government employees are in positions designed to be nonpartisan. Trump’s team wants to gut this system and put in place people loyal to him and his agenda.

When he campaigned for the presidency, Trump promised to “drain the swamp” of officeholders who, he suggested, were just sucking tax dollars. Once in office, though, Trump grew increasingly angry at the civil servants who continued to investigate his campaign’s ties to Russia, insisting that figures like former FBI director Robert Mueller and former deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller as special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election, were Democrats who wanted to hound him from office. (They were, in fact, Republicans.)

Trump’s first impeachment trial inflamed his fury at those he considered disloyal. The day after Republican senators acquitted him on February 6, 2020, he fired two key impeachment witnesses: U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, the top expert on Ukraine at the National Security Council. Ironically, Vindman had testified in the impeachment hearings that he had reassured his father, who had lived in the Soviet Union and was worried about Vindman’s testifying against the president, not to worry because in America, “right matters.” Trump fired Vindman’s twin brother, Yevgeny, at the same time, although he had nothing to do with the impeachment.

A Trump advisor told CNN the firings were intended to demonstrate that disloyalty to the president would not be tolerated.

Within days, Trump had put fierce loyalist John McEntee in charge of the White House office of personnel, urging him to ferret out anyone insufficiently loyal and to make sure the White House hired only true believers. McEntee had been Trump’s personal aide until he failed a security clearance background check and it turned out he was under investigation for financial crimes; then–White House chief of staff John Kelly fired him, and Trump promptly transferred McEntee to his reelection campaign. On February 13, 2020, though, Trump suddenly put McEntee, who had no experience in personnel or significant government work, in charge of the hiring of the 4000 political appointees and gave him extraordinary power.

Trump also wanted to purge the 50,000 nonpartisan civil servants who are hired for their skills, rather than politics. But since 1883, those jobs have been protected from exactly the sort of political purge Trump and McEntee wanted to execute.

A policy researcher who came to Trump’s Domestic Policy Council from the Heritage Foundation, James Sherk, found that employees who work in “a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating” job can be exempted from civil service protections.

On October 21, 2020, Trump signed an executive order creating a new category of public servant who could be hired by agency heads without having to go through the merit-based system in place since 1883, and could be fired at will. This new “Schedule F” would once again allow presidents to appoint cronies to office, while firing those insufficiently loyal. One Trump loyalist at the Office of Management and Budget identified 88% of his agency as moveable to Schedule F.

Biden rescinded Trump’s executive order on January 22, 2021, just two days after taking office.

According to Swan, Trump has not forgotten the plan. Since the January 6 insurrection, he has called those former colleagues who did not support his coup “ungrateful” and “treasonous.” In a new administration, he would insist on people who had “courage,” and would reinstate the Schedule F plan in order to purge the career civil service of all employees he believes insufficiently loyal to him.

The idea of reducing our professional civil service to those who offer loyalty to a single leader is yet another fundamental attack on democracy.

Democracy depends on a nonpartisan group of functionaries who are loyal not to a single strongman but to the state itself. Loyalty to the country, rather than to a single leader, means those bureaucrats follow the law and have an interest in protecting the government. It is the weight of that loyalty that managed to stop Trump from becoming a dictator. He was thwarted by what he called the “Deep State,” people who were loyal not to him personally but to America and our laws. That loyalty was bipartisan.

Authoritarian figures expect loyalty to themselves alone, rather than to a nonpartisan government. To get that loyalty, they turn to staffers who are loyal because they are not qualified or talented enough to rise to power in a nonpartisan system. They are loyal to their boss because they could not make it in a true meritocracy, and at some level they know that (even if they insist they are disliked for their politics).

Between 1829 and 1881, all but the very highest positions throughout the government were filled by the president on the recommendations of officials in his party, so every change of administration meant weeks of office seekers hounding the president. After the Civil War, the numbers of federal jobs climbed, until by 1884 there were 131,000 people on the federal payroll. Assignment of these jobs was based not on the applicants’ skills, but on their promise to bring in votes or money for their party. Once a man scored a government job, he was expected to return part of his salary to the party’s war chest for the next election.

And then, on July 2, 1881, a man who had expected a government job and didn’t get it retaliated for his disappointment by shooting the president, President James A. Garfield, in the back as he walked up the stairs of a train station in Washington, D.C. The assassin expected that Garfield’s successor, Chester A. Arthur, would reward him with a job.

Horrified, Americans recognized that a government that was for sale by the political party in charge created men who saw government only as a way to make money and were willing to tear the entire system down to get their cut. Even though they hoped no one else would go so far as Garfield’s assassin did, they could see that such a system attracted those who could not get a decent job on their actual merits.

So in 1883, Congress passed and President Arthur signed An Act To Regulate and Improve the Civil Service of the United States, more popularly known as the Pendleton Civil Service Act. It guaranteed the government would have skilled workers by requiring applicants for positions to pass entrance exams, and then protected them from being fired by an incoming president of the opposite party. At first, only a few jobs were covered, but presidents expanded the system quickly. Our government employees became highly qualified, and loyal to the country rather than to a president.

That seems likely to change if Trump gets back into office.

hcr

You're just as bad as hightor, saying such things!

You're denying your own words?

Oh wait, I see the problem.
Somehow I was you quoting hightor in response to me.

What the hell is up with that, btw?

I didn't see the hightor post and hit quote instead of respond, so it was a long string of quotes that I was trying to condense.

Anyway, you obviously said it, shame on you! You're just as bad as hightor, saying such things!

That's called bandwagoning.

As in, "Hey, I don't actually have an original idea in my head, so rather than just a quick link with why the argument works, I'll let someone speak for me! This person, that person, and the third person say this so let's jump on the bandwagon!"

A thousand people can share an idea. But if none of them have any proof or logic, a thousand people are wrong.

So, you need to prove that I am full of ****.