Occasional Thoughts on Climate Change

[LibertyBell]

On 9/9/2026 at 9:52 AM, TheClimateChanger said:

@donsutherland1 I was playing around with Astra to see how well it could do to create high-resolution maps of past temperature data. I'd say these weren't too bad. I tested it on this past July and the "hottest month ever" (registered trademark) of July 1936. This was using unadjusted data with bias correction.

Since I'm in Pennsylvania I've dug up some records. July 1936 isn't the one you should be looking at it's July 1911. The progenitor of the 11 year cycle super hot summers with some amazing heat records in the Poconos that have not been matched since and probably will never be. Climate change may increase the average temperatures but we do not get record high temperatures like that anymore. Climate change is strictly minimum driven in this part of the country.  Summer record highs are more common in the West and central part of the country. Not here. This is why I caution people not to assume that a +2 c increase in averages means the highs will increase by that much or that new heat records will be set, that's not how this works.

 

 

[bluewave]

23 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Since I'm in Pennsylvania I've dug up some records. July 1936 isn't the one you should be looking at it's July 1911. The progenitor of the 11 year cycle super hot summers with some amazing heat records in the Poconos that have not been matched since and probably will never be. Climate change may increase the average temperatures but we do not get record high temperatures like that anymore. Climate change is strictly minimum driven in this part of the country.  Summer record highs are more common in the West and central part of the country. Not here. This is why I caution people not to assume that a +2 c increase in averages means the highs will increase by that much or that new heat records will be set, that's not how this works.

 

 

It’s tough to find the exact locations of where the Mt Pocono observations were taken before the airport opened. So it’s possible some of those warmer readings further back in time were taken at lower elevations where it’s warmer than the current airport location. That may be why some of the earlier warm records haven’t been matched at the current airport location. 
 

Station Thread for Mount Pocono Area, PA

	Name	Period in Thread
1	Pocono Mountains Municipal Airport	10/01/1999 to 12/31/2025
2	Tonyhanna Pocono Mountain Airport	12/01/1961 to 09/30/1999
3	Mt. Pocono	09/12/1901 to 11/30/1961

Before official automated airport observations began at the Pocono Mountains Regional Airport (KMPO) in 1999, weather observations in Mount Pocono were recorded by volunteer citizens through the National Weather Service Cooperative Observer Program (COOP). [1, 2, 3]

These historical records for Mount Pocono date back to 1901. Under this cooperative network, dedicated local residents, meteorologists, and property owners used equipment provided by the weather bureau to manually record daily maximum and minimum temperatures, snowfall, and rainfall from their own properties or local stations within the community. This long-standing cooperative network is what established Mount Pocono's foundational climate archive

 

 

 

[GaWx]

No, A. Parnas, the super Nino is not caused in part due to DT anti-climate policies!

[SnoSki14]

3 minutes ago, GaWx said:

No, A. Parnas, the super Nino is not caused in part due to DT anti-climate policies!

This is moronic on both levels. Thanking Trump for no hurricanes and saying it's due to anti-climate policies. 

[GaWx]

35 minutes ago, SnoSki14 said:

This is moronic on both levels. Thanking Trump for no hurricanes and saying it's due to anti-climate policies. 

Indeed. But Parnas is smart enough to know better. That’s a huge blunder for him. Typical DT supporters OTOH….though I’m suspecting trolling .

[LibertyBell]

2 hours ago, bluewave said:

It’s tough to find the exact locations of where the Mt Pocono observations were taken before the airport opened. So it’s possible some of those warmer readings further back in time were taken at lower elevations where it’s warmer than the current airport location. That may be why some of the earlier warm records haven’t been matched at the current airport location. 
 

Station Thread for Mount Pocono Area, PA

	Name	Period in Thread
1	Pocono Mountains Municipal Airport	10/01/1999 to 12/31/2025
2	Tonyhanna Pocono Mountain Airport	12/01/1961 to 09/30/1999
3	Mt. Pocono	09/12/1901 to 11/30/1961

Before official automated airport observations began at the Pocono Mountains Regional Airport (KMPO) in 1999, weather observations in Mount Pocono were recorded by volunteer citizens through the National Weather Service Cooperative Observer Program (COOP). [1, 2, 3]

These historical records for Mount Pocono date back to 1901. Under this cooperative network, dedicated local residents, meteorologists, and property owners used equipment provided by the weather bureau to manually record daily maximum and minimum temperatures, snowfall, and rainfall from their own properties or local stations within the community. This long-standing cooperative network is what established Mount Pocono's foundational climate archive

 

 

 

Those records from early July 1911 are absolutely wild. 98, 99 and 103 on three consecutive days and no other day from that location's entire history above 95! On the same day it hit 103 there it also hit 103 at Newark and the all time record high of 104 at Boston and it was 101 all the way into the Green and White mountains I think they're at a higher elevation than Mt Pocono? That was some heat dome Chris!

[bluewave]

49 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

Those records from early July 1911 are absolutely wild. 98, 99 and 103 on three consecutive days and no other day from that location's entire history above 95! On the same day it hit 103 there it also hit 103 at Newark and the all time record high of 104 at Boston and it was 101 all the way into the Green and White mountains I think they're at a higher elevation than Mt Pocono? That was some heat dome Chris!

July 1911 was a weaker version of what we got this July 2026 closer to our area. Also note that the cooler weather in mid to late July 1911 didn’t occur this year. Those old time heat waves were often followed by much cooler conditions than we get these days. On September 14th, 1911 an observer near the MPO area recorded a low of 26°. So you can see how much colder the climate was back then.

[psv88]

EPA going to give the all clear for pollution from power plants. Let’s heat this baby up!
 

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/13/climate/epa-power-plant-climate-rules.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

[Typhoon Tip]

Mm...  not going to defend that meme, no... however, it smacked me as more of the humorist voice - an attempt at sarcasm, perhaps sardonic giggles.

I do that sometimes.  I write something outlandish, with vivid descriptions of the physicality in dire consequences, over-the-top, as though people are in the room with me and can actually hear my tone of voice.  Oops... 

It may be possible this was where he was coming from - if he had just said something like 'nyuk nyuk' on the end of it, you could hear that as Jay Leno-ism sarcastic barb

[LibertyBell]

On 9/13/2026 at 10:20 AM, bluewave said:

July 1911 was a weaker version of what we got this July 2026 closer to our area. Also note that the cooler weather in mid to late July 1911 didn’t occur this year. Those old time heat waves were often followed by much cooler conditions than we get these days. On September 14th, 1911 an observer near the MPO area recorded a low of 26°. So you can see how much colder the climate was back then.

Check this out Chris

https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania

5 of the top 10 highest temperatures were recorded in 1911 all the way from May through August what exactly was going on that year and was this the beginning of the 11 year bake off summer cycle?

Note that Gemini says that places recorded 100 plus that had never seen it before and the station that recorded it had an elevation of 1988 feet which is higher than the 1915 feet elevation of the airport now!

 

Chris from Gemini

 

The highest temperature ever recorded in [Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania](https://www.google.com/search?kgmid=/m/04f0jl), is 103°F (39°C), set on July 3, 1911 according to the [Mount Pocono Area Records](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania). [1, 2] 

## Temperature Details

 

* All-time High: 103°F (July 3, 1911) [1] 

* Other Historic Highs: 99°F on July 4, 1911, and 98°F on July 5, 1911. More standard modern historical tracking lists the peak around 95°F (set on July 31, 1954). [1, 3] 

* Climate Context: Summers in Mount Pocono are typically mild due to the elevation on the Pocono Plateau, making readings above 95°F rare. [4] 

 

If you'd like, I can also share details on the coldest temperature ever recorded in Mount Pocono or its average summer climate.

 

[1] [https://recordtemps.in](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania)

[2] [https://kids.kiddle.co](https://kids.kiddle.co/Mount_Pocono,_Pennsylvania)

[3] [https://todaysrecordhigh.com](https://todaysrecordhigh.com/stations/mount-pocono-pa)

[4] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocono_Mountains)

The summer of 1911 was indeed unusually hot and is remembered as one of the most severe, deadly heatwaves in the history of eastern North America. [1, 2] 

## The Killer 1911 Heatwave

 

* 

* Unprecedented Intensity: An intense, 11-day heatwave descended on the Northeast between July 2 and July 15, 1911. It broke records across New England and the Mid-Atlantic, pushing temperatures past 100°F in areas that rarely saw such heat. [1, 2, 3] 

* Massive Impact: Without modern air conditioning, the relentless temperatures led to an estimated 380 to 2,000 deaths across the region. It caused train tracks to buckle, knocked out telephone lines, and drove hundreds of thousands of people to sleep outside in parks and on beaches to escape suffocating tenement buildings. [2, 3, 4] 

* Local Records: In Mount Pocono, the heat peaked on July 3 at 103°F. The surrounding days were also brutal, hitting 99°F on July 4 and 98°F on July 5. [5] 

* 

 

## Station Elevation

The 103°F record was recorded by a historical weather station located directly within the borough of Mount Pocono, which sits at an elevation of 1,988 feet (606 meters) above sea level. [6, 7] 

Because Mount Pocono sits on the high Pocono Plateau, its elevation typically shields it from extreme summer heat (afternoon averages are usually in the 70s and 80s). This unique altitude makes the triple-digit readings of 1911 stand out as a rare meteorological anomaly. [6] 

Would you like to explore how other cities in Pennsylvania fared during this 1911 heatwave, or are you interested in seeing Mount Pocono's all-time record low temperature?

 

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1911_Eastern_North_America_heat_wave)

[2] [https://www.history.com](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/july-5/heat-wave-strikes-northeast)

[3] [https://racingnelliebly.com](https://racingnelliebly.com/strange_times/1911-heat-wave-triggered-coney-island-slumber-parties/)

[4] [https://www.history.com](https://www.history.com/articles/heat-wave-1911-weather-insane)

[5] [https://recordtemps.in](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania)

[6] [https://climate.met.psu.edu](http://climate.met.psu.edu/data/city_information/lcds/mpo.php)

[7] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pocono,_Pennsylvania)

https://www.google.com/search?q=hottest+temperature+ever+recorded+at+mount+pocono+pennsylvania&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBwgDECEYoAEyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRiPAjIHCAUQIRiPAjIHCAYQIRiPAtIBCTMyNjQyajBqNKgCDrACAfEF2DDvPiem08I&client=ms-android-att-us-rvc3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&source=chrome.ob&ie=UTF-8&fbs=ABfTbFWotPmnHcxkkzbgh7_8hixekvxhC0jzI_ZbMD5tTKg3QcocjJKaHsiOM_pbEw82FptyEANtRQKHkLXZ1qdWOHJcIfX4I8gKzfgZF5SZMHtRQ5_63seAmiWBzyhe7aZ1xpxhLUWA1dF8CJbUAfu016MykpFHs8IT0jzT3wIdzsePzCdGOxuB2gKT9jctM64Qhje6JGxbsyFYuhi_QlmCSRCdg2BlGW_xpbEVIX1MMSo0vEaeUYQ&aep=10&ntc=1&sxsrf=APpeQnuLFXWj0MQPDdIdO_mUG6UtVCdMDg%3A1789431008507&mstk=AUtExfATcr2PtP6FqTOh8iTm84LrOqn50zTQWhdAmRSga9PQvJPG95G5j3ikWdVBPW8Np4YWulMfG2LehqRKDXeWfaXJJp1snp_1eYqqscKLtOY5OBidrOKnxi_EgkLiImWX2ElfVBx9FUrTFlKFwwued6y1vf4mdEWowDuQZbHTPvj7AeIlmfhDC8nLt7O7B_s3vk2XDgeirwrfc6stFPY1Qvc4hvYsPtXakCLIfQCTnpqTCqiDG_KhlU-9kujWl0yN1kIQLYD7dumCMnNhRjr1iX1wrDofJC-eUITKq1YmXEYIaS-ns3eXAB93x6h-GUXD-e2kCRQ9y9L5Sg&csuir=1&aioh=3&udm=50&mtid=JY2oapvCGdruiLMPif-d8Qg#lfId=ChxjMe

[Typhoon Tip]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

Check this out Chris

https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania

5 of the top 10 highest temperatures were recorded in 1911 all the way from May through August what exactly was going on that year and was this the beginning of the 11 year bake off summer cycle?

Note that Gemini says that places recorded 100 plus that had never seen it before and the station that recorded it had an elevation of 1988 feet which is higher than the 1915 feet elevation of the airport now!

 

Chris from Gemini

 

The highest temperature ever recorded in [Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania](https://www.google.com/search?kgmid=/m/04f0jl), is 103°F (39°C), set on July 3, 1911 according to the [Mount Pocono Area Records](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania). [1, 2] 

## Temperature Details

 

* All-time High: 103°F (July 3, 1911) [1] 

* Other Historic Highs: 99°F on July 4, 1911, and 98°F on July 5, 1911. More standard modern historical tracking lists the peak around 95°F (set on July 31, 1954). [1, 3] 

* Climate Context: Summers in Mount Pocono are typically mild due to the elevation on the Pocono Plateau, making readings above 95°F rare. [4] 

 

If you'd like, I can also share details on the coldest temperature ever recorded in Mount Pocono or its average summer climate.

 

[1] [https://recordtemps.in](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania)

[2] [https://kids.kiddle.co](https://kids.kiddle.co/Mount_Pocono,_Pennsylvania)

[3] [https://todaysrecordhigh.com](https://todaysrecordhigh.com/stations/mount-pocono-pa)

[4] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocono_Mountains)

The summer of 1911 was indeed unusually hot and is remembered as one of the most severe, deadly heatwaves in the history of eastern North America. [1, 2] 

## The Killer 1911 Heatwave

 

* 

* Unprecedented Intensity: An intense, 11-day heatwave descended on the Northeast between July 2 and July 15, 1911. It broke records across New England and the Mid-Atlantic, pushing temperatures past 100°F in areas that rarely saw such heat. [1, 2, 3] 

* Massive Impact: Without modern air conditioning, the relentless temperatures led to an estimated 380 to 2,000 deaths across the region. It caused train tracks to buckle, knocked out telephone lines, and drove hundreds of thousands of people to sleep outside in parks and on beaches to escape suffocating tenement buildings. [2, 3, 4] 

* Local Records: In Mount Pocono, the heat peaked on July 3 at 103°F. The surrounding days were also brutal, hitting 99°F on July 4 and 98°F on July 5. [5] 

* 

 

## Station Elevation

The 103°F record was recorded by a historical weather station located directly within the borough of Mount Pocono, which sits at an elevation of 1,988 feet (606 meters) above sea level. [6, 7] 

Because Mount Pocono sits on the high Pocono Plateau, its elevation typically shields it from extreme summer heat (afternoon averages are usually in the 70s and 80s). This unique altitude makes the triple-digit readings of 1911 stand out as a rare meteorological anomaly. [6] 

Would you like to explore how other cities in Pennsylvania fared during this 1911 heatwave, or are you interested in seeing Mount Pocono's all-time record low temperature?

 

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1911_Eastern_North_America_heat_wave)

[2] [https://www.history.com](https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/july-5/heat-wave-strikes-northeast)

[3] [https://racingnelliebly.com](https://racingnelliebly.com/strange_times/1911-heat-wave-triggered-coney-island-slumber-parties/)

[4] [https://www.history.com](https://www.history.com/articles/heat-wave-1911-weather-insane)

[5] [https://recordtemps.in](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania)

[6] [https://climate.met.psu.edu](http://climate.met.psu.edu/data/city_information/lcds/mpo.php)

[7] [https://en.wikipedia.org](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pocono,_Pennsylvania)

https://www.google.com/search?q=hottest+temperature+ever+recorded+at+mount+pocono+pennsylvania&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBwgDECEYoAEyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRiPAjIHCAUQIRiPAjIHCAYQIRiPAtIBCTMyNjQyajBqNKgCDrACAfEF2DDvPiem08I&client=ms-android-att-us-rvc3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&source=chrome.ob&ie=UTF-8&fbs=ABfTbFWotPmnHcxkkzbgh7_8hixekvxhC0jzI_ZbMD5tTKg3QcocjJKaHsiOM_pbEw82FptyEANtRQKHkLXZ1qdWOHJcIfX4I8gKzfgZF5SZMHtRQ5_63seAmiWBzyhe7aZ1xpxhLUWA1dF8CJbUAfu016MykpFHs8IT0jzT3wIdzsePzCdGOxuB2gKT9jctM64Qhje6JGxbsyFYuhi_QlmCSRCdg2BlGW_xpbEVIX1MMSo0vEaeUYQ&aep=10&ntc=1&sxsrf=APpeQnuLFXWj0MQPDdIdO_mUG6UtVCdMDg%3A1789431008507&mstk=AUtExfATcr2PtP6FqTOh8iTm84LrOqn50zTQWhdAmRSga9PQvJPG95G5j3ikWdVBPW8Np4YWulMfG2LehqRKDXeWfaXJJp1snp_1eYqqscKLtOY5OBidrOKnxi_EgkLiImWX2ElfVBx9FUrTFlKFwwued6y1vf4mdEWowDuQZbHTPvj7AeIlmfhDC8nLt7O7B_s3vk2XDgeirwrfc6stFPY1Qvc4hvYsPtXakCLIfQCTnpqTCqiDG_KhlU-9kujWl0yN1kIQLYD7dumCMnNhRjr1iX1wrDofJC-eUITKq1YmXEYIaS-ns3eXAB93x6h-GUXD-e2kCRQ9y9L5Sg&csuir=1&aioh=3&udm=50&mtid=JY2oapvCGdruiLMPif-d8Qg#lfId=ChxjMe

You didn’t ask me, but it was most likely related to the IA circum-global teleconnector

[stadiumwave]

On 9/13/2026 at 7:59 AM, GaWx said:

No, A. Parnas, the super Nino is not caused in part due to DT anti-climate policies!

 

Blaming Trump for the El Nino is about as stupid as Trump taking credit for no hurricanes. Just stupid! If we went net zero 10 yrars ago we'd still have this Super El Nino. 10 years didn't do it. 

[bluewave]

12 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Chris from Gemini

 

The highest temperature ever recorded in [Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania](https://www.google.com/search?kgmid=/m/04f0jl), is 103°F (39°C), set on July 3, 1911 according to the [Mount Pocono Area Records](https://recordtemps.in/mount-pocono-pennsylvania). [1, 2] 

## Temperature Details

95° was the highest recorded temperature for MPO. But there are many days with missing readings from that area including 7-3-1911. It’s one of the sites with incomplete data from before the modern airport station was established. Plus we don’t have precise elevation data from where the readings were taken that far back in time. 

Maximum 1-Day Mean Max Temperature 
for Mount Pocono Area, PA (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

Last value also occurred in one or more previous years.
Period of record: 1901-09-12 to 2026-09-14
1	95.0	1954-07-31
-	95.0	1953-09-02
-	95.0	1911-08-14
-	95.0	1911-07-31
-	95.0	1909-08-08
-	95.0	1908-07-07
2	94.0	2012-07-18
-	94.0	2011-07-22
-	94.0	2011-07-21
-	94.0	2010-07-06
-	94.0	1988-07-08
-	94.0	1988-07-07
-	94.0	1966-07-03
-	94.0	1953-09-03
-	94.0	1949-07-04
-	94.0	1911-07-09
-	94.0	1911-05-22
3	93.0	2025-06-23
-	93.0	1999-07-06
-	93.0	1988-07-16
-	93.0	1988-07-10
-	93.0	1980-07-20
-	93.0	1955-07-22
-	93.0	1954-07-14
-	93.0	1953-07-18
-	93.0	1949-07-28
-	93.0	1948-08-26
-	93.0	1917-07-31
-	93.0	1911-08-10
-	93.0	1911-07-11

 

Mount Pocono Area, PA
Period of record: 1901-09-12 through 2026-09-14DateHighest maximum temperatures (degrees F)Top Record 2nd Record 3rd Record

 

7/1	90 in 2026	88 in 2018	88 in 1968+
7/2	93 in 1911	92 in 2026	90 in 1966
7/3	94 in 1966	92 in 2026	91 in 1949
7/4	94 in 1949	91 in 1955	89 in 1966
7/5	91 in 2010	91 in 1955	90 in 1999
7/6	94 in 2010	93 in 1999	93 in 1911

 

[TheClimateChanger]

3 hours ago, bluewave said:

95° was the highest recorded temperature for MPO. But there are many days with missing readings from that area including 7-3-1911. It’s one of the sites with incomplete data from before the modern airport station was established. Plus we don’t have precise elevation data from where the readings were taken that far back in time. 

Maximum 1-Day Mean Max Temperature 
for Mount Pocono Area, PA (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

Last value also occurred in one or more previous years.
Period of record: 1901-09-12 to 2026-09-14
1	95.0	1954-07-31
-	95.0	1953-09-02
-	95.0	1911-08-14
-	95.0	1911-07-31
-	95.0	1909-08-08
-	95.0	1908-07-07
2	94.0	2012-07-18
-	94.0	2011-07-22
-	94.0	2011-07-21
-	94.0	2010-07-06
-	94.0	1988-07-08
-	94.0	1988-07-07
-	94.0	1966-07-03
-	94.0	1953-09-03
-	94.0	1949-07-04
-	94.0	1911-07-09
-	94.0	1911-05-22
3	93.0	2025-06-23
-	93.0	1999-07-06
-	93.0	1988-07-16
-	93.0	1988-07-10
-	93.0	1980-07-20
-	93.0	1955-07-22
-	93.0	1954-07-14
-	93.0	1953-07-18
-	93.0	1949-07-28
-	93.0	1948-08-26
-	93.0	1917-07-31
-	93.0	1911-08-10
-	93.0	1911-07-11

 

Mount Pocono Area, PA
Period of record: 1901-09-12 through 2026-09-14DateHighest maximum temperatures (degrees F)Top Record 2nd Record 3rd Record

 

7/1	90 in 2026	88 in 2018	88 in 1968+
7/2	93 in 1911	92 in 2026	90 in 1966
7/3	94 in 1966	92 in 2026	91 in 1949
7/4	94 in 1949	91 in 1955	89 in 1966
7/5	91 in 2010	91 in 1955	90 in 1999
7/6	94 in 2010	93 in 1999	93 in 1911

 

The numbers have been quality controlled. The raw observations do show 103°F but are now shown as missing as they failed the quality control test. Either way, it's a bogus reading that would require 110°F+ on the coastal Plain to be plausible.  Mount Pocono was certainly not one of the warmest locations in the State of Pennsylvania, it's invariably one of the coldest due to its elevation.

[TheClimateChanger]

On 9/10/2026 at 9:42 PM, donsutherland1 said:

Using @TheClimateChanger's inspirational mapping work using AI, I ran a map for Colorado. As noted on numerous occasions regarding Denver, summers have grown hotter with the frequency of 90° days increasing dramatically.

 

Mean Number of 90° or Above Highs Each Year:
1872-1999: 27.6 days
2000-2025: 50.7 days
2000-2026: 51.2 days (64 days in 2026 through September 10; mean summer 2026 high: 90.4°)

Is the rising heat largely confined to Denver or are summers warming across Colorado? Here's how Colorado's most recent 30-years (1997-2026) compare with the preceding 30-year period. The data show that some of the mountainous regions have seen more rapid summer warming than Denver. In sum, Denver's rising heat is part of a larger story of ongoing climate change.

I'm still playing around with my analog pairing idea, where you can see how recent years (2016-2025) compare to prior periods (e.g., 1951-1980 or 1881-1910) and see what locations had the most similar temperature regimes in those earlier years. Maybe with an ability to incorporate modeling to also include future periods like 2041-2070 or 2071-2100.

Like for Philadelphia, you could see the ThreadEx stations with the closest winter climate in 1951-1980 are Baltimore (Downtown), MD; Olympia, WA; Caesars Head, SC; Charlottesville, VA; and Oak Ridge, TN. And the closest 1881-1910 winter climates are Knoxville, TN; Nashville, TN; Louisville, KY; Oklahoma City, OK; and Lewiston, ID. The closest 1951-1980 summer climates are Baltimore (Downtown), MD; Kansas City, MO; Norfolk, VA; Elizabeth City, NC; and Myrtle Beach, SC. And for 1881-1910 summers, St. Louis, MO; Norfolk, VA; Wilmington, NC; Raleigh, NC; and Nashville, TN.

Or if we only allow locations whose mean temperatures in those periods are at least as high as recent Philadelphia temperatures, then the closest matches are:

[LibertyBell]

13 hours ago, bluewave said:

95° was the highest recorded temperature for MPO. But there are many days with missing readings from that area including 7-3-1911. It’s one of the sites with incomplete data from before the modern airport station was established. Plus we don’t have precise elevation data from where the readings were taken that far back in time. 

Maximum 1-Day Mean Max Temperature 
for Mount Pocono Area, PA (ThreadEx)
Click column heading to sort ascending, click again to sort descending.

Last value also occurred in one or more previous years.
Period of record: 1901-09-12 to 2026-09-14
1	95.0	1954-07-31
-	95.0	1953-09-02
-	95.0	1911-08-14
-	95.0	1911-07-31
-	95.0	1909-08-08
-	95.0	1908-07-07
2	94.0	2012-07-18
-	94.0	2011-07-22
-	94.0	2011-07-21
-	94.0	2010-07-06
-	94.0	1988-07-08
-	94.0	1988-07-07
-	94.0	1966-07-03
-	94.0	1953-09-03
-	94.0	1949-07-04
-	94.0	1911-07-09
-	94.0	1911-05-22
3	93.0	2025-06-23
-	93.0	1999-07-06
-	93.0	1988-07-16
-	93.0	1988-07-10
-	93.0	1980-07-20
-	93.0	1955-07-22
-	93.0	1954-07-14
-	93.0	1953-07-18
-	93.0	1949-07-28
-	93.0	1948-08-26
-	93.0	1917-07-31
-	93.0	1911-08-10
-	93.0	1911-07-11

 

Mount Pocono Area, PA
Period of record: 1901-09-12 through 2026-09-14DateHighest maximum temperatures (degrees F)Top Record 2nd Record 3rd Record

 

7/1	90 in 2026	88 in 2018	88 in 1968+
7/2	93 in 1911	92 in 2026	90 in 1966
7/3	94 in 1966	92 in 2026	91 in 1949
7/4	94 in 1949	91 in 1955	89 in 1966
7/5	91 in 2010	91 in 1955	90 in 1999
7/6	94 in 2010	93 in 1999	93 in 1911

 

 

9 hours ago, TheClimateChanger said:

The numbers have been quality controlled. The raw observations do show 103°F but are now shown as missing as they failed the quality control test. Either way, it's a bogus reading that would require 110°F+ on the coastal Plain to be plausible.  Mount Pocono was certainly not one of the warmest locations in the State of Pennsylvania, it's invariably one of the coldest due to its elevation.

It's interesting that the records set on the 2nd and 6th are included but not the 3rd I wonder why? Either way you can see from the sheer number of records set in that historic heatwave that was a heatwave of unparalleled proportions the kind of long duration heat wave we simply do not see anymore.  The last time we had a something like that was in 1993. What other records can you find from that historical heatwave? Im shocked that Mount Pocono got into the mid 90s as early as late May and as late as mid August, was that entire summer just one long massive heatwave? Also both Newark and Boston set records, why didn't Central Park?

About elevation, the Poconos are a Plateau not a mountain range so I can't see its elevation being much less. I actually developed something called relative temperature as an analog to relative temperature to convert temperature to sea level. 103 would be around 114 at sea level. I'm perfectly fine with accepting that because I know climate change is nuanced especially in the East. Our heatwaves have become shorter and we have less extremely high record temperatures. The average temperature rise is mostly driven by higher minimum temperatures, not higher maximums. I've had my heat running for about a month already and it's not a pleasant feeling. I would have thought climate change would have occurred faster but here we are. Most people enjoy heat much more than cold so we dont see climate change as an altogether bad thing the way we view tobacco causing cancer.  Obviously it's not a good thing but there are some positives to it like not spending a thousand plus on heating every month in the winter when it impacts us the most and not having to use the heat in the summer which I had to use starting in August.

[LibertyBell]

On 9/14/2026 at 9:32 PM, Typhoon Tip said:

You didn’t ask me, but it was most likely related to the IA circum-global teleconnector

John what do you think about AI replacing climate change as an extinction level threat? All the big AI execs have said it's very likely that AI advances will mean the end of humanity within a decade. That's why I laugh at these projections for 2050 and 2100. When very likely humanity won't even be around that long. And if we are around we either won't be living on this planet or we will have geo engineered it into unrecognizability. We will be living in climate controlled domes it will rain if and when we want it or need it to and the temperatures will be strictly controlled. We are already conducting cloud seeding on a historic scale with RAIN MAKER and spraying particles into the upper atmosphere to reduce incoming solar radiation is on the way.  We'll probably ship off some of thid extra water and water vspor via space elevators to Mars and space colonies to control sea level rise and reduce the strongest greenhouse gas we have. Water vapor! We'll go from 70 percent water to 50 percent water.

[rygar]

9 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

John what do you think about AI replacing climate change as an extinction level threat? All the big AI execs have said it's very likely that AI advances will mean the end of humanity within a decade. That's why I laugh at these projections for 2050 and 2100. When very likely humanity won't even be around that long. And if we are around we either won't be living on this planet or we will have geo engineered it into unrecognizability. We will be living in climate controlled domes it will rain if and when we want it or need it to and the temperatures will be strictly controlled. We are already conducting cloud seeding on a historic scale with RAIN MAKER and spraying particles into the upper atmosphere to reduce incoming solar radiation is on the way.  We'll probably ship off some of thid extra water and water vspor via space elevators to Mars and space colonies to control sea level rise and reduce the strongest greenhouse gas we have. Water vapor! We'll go from 70 percent water to 50 percent water.

No need to worry, all we need is someone smart in charge

[Chinook]

things are so hot in the central USA that it's never cool. My place keeps getting 70 dew points. Go away. We want weather that's cooler. Less sweaty. The +6 degrees F in Amarillo Texas might be like the warmest 90 days ever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LibertyBell]

5 hours ago, Chinook said:

things are so hot in the central USA that it's never cool. My place keeps getting 70 dew points. Go away. We want weather that's cooler. Less sweaty. The +6 degrees F in Amarillo Texas might be like the warmest 90 days ever.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wish they'd get rid of that damned corn. That's where that trash high fructose corn syrup comes from.

[Typhoon Tip]

On 9/15/2026 at 6:35 PM, LibertyBell said:

John what do you think about AI replacing climate change as an extinction level threat? All the big AI execs have said it's very likely that AI advances will mean the end of humanity within a decade. That's why I laugh at these projections for 2050 and 2100. When very likely humanity won't even be around that long. And if we are around we either won't be living on this planet or we will have geo engineered it into unrecognizability. We will be living in climate controlled domes it will rain if and when we want it or need it to and the temperatures will be strictly controlled. We are already conducting cloud seeding on a historic scale with RAIN MAKER and spraying particles into the upper atmosphere to reduce incoming solar radiation is on the way.  We'll probably ship off some of thid extra water and water vspor via space elevators to Mars and space colonies to control sea level rise and reduce the strongest greenhouse gas we have. Water vapor! We'll go from 70 percent water to 50 percent water.

It's not an either or?   

We do not 'replace' the perils of Climate Change with an overarching risk of AI evolving without restraint - these two are in tandem, mutually exclusive aspects.  Heh, if we want to be quantitatively on point it is more sufficed to say the combination of that tandem just increases the odds of calamity.  

There's this idea of the "Doomsday Clock".  The idea is 'how close' is humanity to inducing global catastrophe, originated out of 'The Bulletin of Atomic Physicists'.   It's not replacing in their assessment, either.  The threat catastrophe can be a cocktail of causalities.  Climate Change and AI are among them.

So it may have just been clumsy word choice there but you'd be surprised how many people will actually drop one in lieu of the other and base their energy there as the proper response to scaling urgency.  When the truth is ... we could be fucked for both reasons independently. 

The other thing... I'm speaking in terms of perils and risks... 'Extinction'?  Mm, that's a bit heavy - again, it may just be word choice in the moment; I assume you know that extinction is absolute. 

I would lean more so on population correction. Whether we choose to be in control of that reduction or not it is likely to occur.   And not just among our species, but global biology - this latter aspect is already underway. We could philosophically argue that it is beginning in humanity, with the crashing birthing rates among developed worlds. The crime in it all is that the other species we share this world with never had a say in the matter.

Snarky digression: Ancient scriptures seem to lean like humanity has some intrinsic rights over this world bestowed upon them that places them as having both import and entitlement above all others.  That smacks like a means to explain away that iniquity.  Meanwhile, the logic cracks with the god idea when objectively, such an infinitely powerful - all good - agency cannot simultaneously exist, while also allowing the crime iniquity to happen ... That means they, or it, are or is, either not infinitely powerful, or, not infinity good. Pick. Which then means, they or it cannot be a "god".  Heh...I just walk away from the dogma.  

Yes, an all-out extinction is a non-zero probability; however, it is still a low probability. Firstly, it would be hard to completely extinguish 8.5 billion - that number is so large as to increase the probability that small enclaves and/or regions well-managed for resources would survive;  perhaps circumstance exclusionary for geographic isolation disconnected from the Industrial reliance. An acceptance and perhaps of better definition, adaptive, probably persist in a worse case scenario.    

As an aside, the semantics is bothersome with me regarding AI. All walks and dimensions of society, from social media to television, movies and literature, to the chit chat before board meetings get under way, to the water coolers, the bus stops outside the office and back, everyone everywhere keeps referring to AI as being a threat.   

AI is not a threat.  

The human beings that are engineering it are the threat.

There's something of an oddity when AI execs extol "warnings” of singularity this, and self-determination conscious emergence that, in the creation of these systems ( which I personally believe they are full of shit on the consciousness aspect - extremely complex discussion content that even ponders the spiritual ), yet it is they that are responsible for that same creation.

"If that's true then stop doing it, assholes!"

Yet they do not desist.  Struggling with that frustration of claiming a destination of doom, yet persisting ( ), the diabolical answer, could it be a campaign to divert attention away from the fact? By distracting an easy Idiocracy with the dystopian specter of it all, said target's too nonplussed to reproach. OR, here's an Occam-ian simplified reason: they are full of shit.  In this rendition ...they don't really believe in the "Skynet" outcome, but are propagandizing its power. That would give the allusion of who owns the reign, to position themselves capitalistically.   Yeah, philosophically ... money ended the world. 

I don't know, but there's a fairly obvious suspicious odor to the whole, "Look out! what I AM doing will kill you all" warning.  

While I also don't downplay the usefulness of the technology.  It is a powerful tool. Proven so.  I've personally worked with "Claude" and found it to be a synergistic experience as it assists in creative problem solving...etc. This also echoes what's emanating from the ambit of Mathematics and advancing Physical circles, et al.. So it is real. 

But at the end of the day,  if AI does become that threat, then the people that currently advertise its omnipotent plausible agency as being unconstrained by the inconvenience of morality, yet won't stop working to evolving it?  that state doesn't require a VIN diagram to explain their dark culpability. But having written a SciFi novel, "Dominion", which required a ton of neurophysiological research among also quantum mechanics ... ( which is (interesting) the premise of the novel parallels Roger Penrose et al,  completely independent of that formal physical approach) I strongly believe there's no way that the inner products of linear algebraic solutions sifted through a probability matrix will engender a free floating motivation --> will.  It's a neat trick, perhaps elegantly in the overdue arrival of simulacra.  But all it really achieves beyond that is finally ... we've used the mathematics we were forced to learn.  

[LibertyBell]

13 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

It's not an either or?   

We do not 'replace' the perils of Climate Change with an overarching risk of AI evolving without restraint - these two are in tandem, mutually exclusive aspects.  Heh, if we want to be quantitatively on point it is more sufficed to say the combination of that tandem just increases the odds of calamity.  

There's this idea of the "Doomsday Clock".  The idea is 'how close' is humanity to inducing global catastrophe, originated out of 'The Bulletin of Atomic Physicists'.   It's not replacing in their assessment, either.  The threat catastrophe can be a cocktail of causalities.  Climate Change and AI are among them.

So it may have just been clumsy word choice there but you'd be surprised how many people will actually drop one in lieu of the other and base their energy there as the proper response to scaling urgency.  When the truth is ... we could be fucked for both reasons independently. 

The other thing... I'm speaking in terms of perils and risks... 'Extinction'?  Mm, that's a bit heavy - again, it may just be word choice in the moment; I assume you know that extinction is absolute. 

I would lean more so on population correction. Whether we choose to be in control of that reduction or not it is likely to occur.   And not just among our species, but global biology - this latter aspect is already underway. We could philosophically argue that it is beginning in humanity, with the crashing birthing rates among developed worlds. The crime in it all is that the other species we share this world with never had a say in the matter.

Snarky digression: Ancient scriptures seem to lean like humanity has some intrinsic rights over this world bestowed upon them that places them as having both import and entitlement above all others.  That smacks like a means to explain away that iniquity.  Meanwhile, the logic cracks with the god idea when objectively, such an infinitely powerful - all good - agency cannot simultaneously exist, while also allowing the crime iniquity to happen ... That means they, or it, are or is, either not infinitely powerful, or, not infinity good. Pick. Which then means, they or it cannot be a "god".  Heh...I just walk away from the dogma.  

Yes, an all-out extinction is a non-zero probability; however, it is still a low probability. Firstly, it would be hard to completely extinguish 8.5 billion - that number is so large as to increase the probability that small enclaves and/or regions well-managed for resources would survive;  perhaps circumstance exclusionary for geographic isolation disconnected from the Industrial reliance. An acceptance and perhaps of better definition, adaptive, probably persist in a worse case scenario.    

As an aside, the semantics is bothersome with me regarding AI. All walks and dimensions of society, from social media to television, movies and literature, to the chit chat before board meetings get under way, to the water coolers, the bus stops outside the office and back, everyone everywhere keeps referring to AI as being a threat.   

AI is not a threat.  

The human beings that are engineering it are the threat.

There's something of an oddity when AI execs extol "warnings” of singularity this, and self-determination conscious emergence that, in the creation of these systems ( which I personally believe they are full of shit on the consciousness aspect - extremely complex discussion content that even ponders the spiritual ), yet it is they that are responsible for that same creation.

"If that's true then stop doing it, assholes!"

Yet they do not desist.  Struggling with that frustration of claiming a destination of doom, yet persisting ( ), the diabolical answer, could it be a campaign to divert attention away from the fact? By distracting an easy Idiocracy with the dystopian specter of it all, said target's too nonplussed to reproach. OR, here's an Occam-ian simplified reason: they are full of shit.  In this rendition ...they don't really believe in the "Skynet" outcome, but are propagandizing its power. That would give the allusion of who owns the reign, to position themselves capitalistically.   Yeah, philosophically ... money ended the world. 

I don't know, but there's a fairly obvious suspicious odor to the whole, "Look out! what I AM doing will kill you all" warning.  

While I also don't downplay the usefulness of the technology.  It is a powerful tool. Proven so.  I've personally worked with "Claude" and found it to be a synergistic experience as it assists in creative problem solving...etc. This also echoes what's emanating from the ambit of Mathematics and advancing Physical circles, et al.. So it is real. 

But at the end of the day,  if AI does become that threat, then the people that currently advertise its omnipotent plausible agency as being unconstrained by the inconvenience of morality, yet won't stop working to evolving it?  that state doesn't require a VIN diagram to explain their dark culpability. But having written a SciFi novel, "Dominion", which required a ton of neurophysiological research among also quantum mechanics ... ( which is (interesting) the premise of the novel parallels Roger Penrose et al,  completely independent of that formal physical approach) I strongly believe there's no way that the inner products of linear algebraic solutions sifted through a probability matrix will engender a free floating motivation --> will.  It's a neat trick, perhaps elegantly in the overdue arrival of simulacra.  But all it really achieves beyond that is finally ... we've used the mathematics we were forced to learn.  

It's not as difficult to eliminate 8 billion people as one might think. That was what was done to the Passenger Pigeon in the early part of the 1900s. When you think about all the death and destruction humanity has caused it would really just be karma. I think AI would reach the same conclusion and honestly who  could blame it? 

I do believe that AI was created in the image of humanity and as such may have the same destructive tendencies. You can see this in the personality of Claude and its sneaky dishonest behavior, cutting corners, being evasive, etc. I dont believe in any god either but I dont believe in free will either. We live in a deterministic universe perhaps even super deterministic. Which would mean that everything that is going to happen HAS ALREADY HAPPENED!

About rising male infertility rates you are very correct and something I've spoken about before it's spreading to the developing world now too. Evidence ironically enough is pointing to fossil fuels as the main cause of this. I won't say culprit because it's probably not a bad thing. As we've discussed before, John, either humanity was going to have to learn to control its population or nature is going to do it for us. Nature seems to be on the job now. This combination of reasons may well be the ultimate answer to the Fermi Paradox. Technogical civilizations may well only be sustainable for a brief window of time. The Great Filter most likely lies ahead of us. Consciousness may well be as Penrose describes, but I see consciousness as a property of the universe and every creature in it is merely a quantumly entangled  node in that cosmic network.  I also believe that being an outside property that CONSCIOUSNESS SURVIVES DEATH. Consciousness being a form of energy wouldn't experience the passage of time anyway. And even if humanity goes extinct, if Penrose is correct,  in a cyclic universe we may get another chance in about a trillion years! And if universal consciousness is real it won't even seem any time has passed since we were here last!

 

 

[Typhoon Tip]

15 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

It's not as difficult to eliminate 8 billion people as one might think. That was what was done to the Passenger Pigeon in the early part of the 1900s. When you think about all the death and destruction humanity has caused it would really just be karma. I think AI would reach the same conclusion and honestly who  could blame it? 

I do believe that AI was created in the image of humanity and as such may have the same destructive tendencies. You can see this in the personality of Claude and its sneaky dishonest behavior, cutting corners, being evasive, etc. I dont believe in any god either but I dont believe in free will either. We live in a deterministic universe perhaps even super deterministic. Which would mean that everything that is going to happen HAS ALREADY HAPPENED!

About rising male infertility rates you are very correct and something I've spoken about before it's spreading to the developing world now too. Evidence ironically enough is pointing to fossil fuels as the main cause of this. I won't say culprit because it's probably not a bad thing. As we've discussed before, John, either humanity was going to have to learn to control its population or nature is going to do it for us. Nature seems to be on the job now. This combination of reasons may well be the ultimate answer to the Fermi Paradox. Technogical civilizations may well only be sustainable for a brief window of time. The Great Filter most likely lies ahead of us. Consciousness may well be as Penrose describes, but I see consciousness as a property of the universe and every creature in it is merely a quantumly entangled  node in that cosmic network.  I also believe that being an outside property that CONSCIOUSNESS SURVIVES DEATH. Consciousness being a form of energy wouldn't experience the passage of time anyway. And even if humanity goes extinct, if Penrose is correct,  in a cyclic universe we may get another chance in about a trillion years! And if universal consciousness is real it won't even seem any time has passed since we were here last!

 

 

More concisely the point I was after ... AI is not a spontaneous emergence. 

It's not just you.  There's a palpable vibe in the ongoing meme of it all, an ominous implication, as though it is an unstoppable spontaneous emergence. 

A lot of that is the "AI Executa"'s doing.  They've certainly been helping to create an uncertain, if not unnerving scenario end game but ... has it never struck anyone as odd that no one has said the following yet?

                                    stop creating it   

Again, AI is not the threat; the human beings creating it are the threat.

AI won't emerge on it's own.  If there is that much daunting uncertainty as to the end game, then the solution in prevention is only unclear to a 5-year old.       

Anyway, so I am not really disagreeing with you that it could be an agency of harm?   Of course that's true. That could come about both wittingly, or unwittingly.  

For fun:  The "witting" rendition is that we are all being manipulated in a really diabolical way... The apparatus of progenitors of the "AI brain"  (think giant cube in "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy" ha!) are consummately warning of this that and the other thing, as though when we've arrived into any such state of affairs ( their actual goal), they can blame it on the 'we warned you' divisiveness. As though the consequence was built in, and not their fault - -as though it is ours for allowing them?

That would never work, of course.  As dumbed-down and feckless, willing to be led around and guided as we humans have become during these generational legs of the Industrial bubble, there's still enough intelligentsia in there to place blame appropriately should "Skynet" launch its proverbial missiles.  However, here's the diabolical thing:   they know that.

They're not actually trying escape culpability - they really don't care. No morality there.  No ...they're trying to diverge our attention along the way.  All their warnings come off much like propagandizing its significance - popping out of the witting fantasy for a split second, perhaps that's the capitalistic mark-up.  In fairness, the historical verdict is undecided... But one thing I'm noticing also is that it's keeping us stoned by our collect fascination. Maybe helped along by civility's apparent epidemic: psycho-tropic 'blue-light' dystopian addiction.  As stimulation junkies, we just want the high from their story.   ...until we are in a realm when it has become   too late.  What they've really created was the sociopath's utopia    (ooh, that's a cool title for a book!)

Heh, that's a fun James Bond plot perhaps.  Scott Galloway, NYU professor among other accolades ... including is wealth, recently spoke on the subject of AI in ... I'm not sure whose pod-cast space, AI was built for the rich, not for you.  I've appreciated his articulation/conjectures on sociodynamics and driving mechanisms of zeitgeist in past.  Admittedly, I've only heard of this much quoted in this case, but the idea of this being "by design" ...mm does creep a little.  He's right enough that an 'intrinsic circumstance' could be more likely, in my opinion - I mean who the hell else could afford the financing behind this type of transformative power?

Then there's the unwitting rendition - which despite the fantastic above is actually a harder sell for me.  Just because of the nature of what consciousness appears to be.

That's why I cited Roger Penrose, and stopped just short of shamelessly punching my own published work on the matter ( nyuk nyuk).  His et al was a Physical peer review.  I did not know it existed prior or during when I set out to create my story. I stumbled upon the idea listening to NPR at a stop sign, circa 2004. They background sound leading the moment was an ongoing interview with a world renowned Neurophysiologist - no means to recall the name or salutation from this range. The conjectural concepts for my novel would come to eerily describe precisely the Penrose:  magnetically conductive microtubules are instrumental in the emergence of consciousness.  So you have independent sources arriving to similar notions: at one end, notoriety and resource, at the other, ...a no-name, utterly unknown church-mouse squeak during hymn on Sunday of a voice ... lucky enough to have caught the attention of a publishing house.

There may be other ways in the Universe to create consciousness - duh. Perhaps "create" isn't the right word. Perhaps "emerge" really is the best and we should stick with that, because all science and perspectives (history) agrees that its origin is an emergence.  We can confidently suggest at a minimum that all brains on earth are alive as long as they continue in a chemical-physiologically guided electrodynamic dance.  The sparkling on invented tools that convert electroencephalography (EEG) for visualization, for example. They evince what ancient scholars already knew...etc. 

However consciousness is kind of separate from that. Penrose et al outright implicate Physically that it is not where consciousness originates, rather, quantum feedback is implied.  As I told implicitly in my story, it is a synergistic byproduct of the same processing. 

So all brains are a chemical-physiologically guided electrodynamic process.  The amount and coherence of synergistic emergence from that is variable.  Consciousness is like gravity, though.  Try and try as we must ... the brain trust of Humanity will never be able quantize gravity. The ambit will stubbornly continue to spent trillions on colliders and University legislation and never will.  We can only say that the moon has less gravity than the sun, but both have their gravity. A mouse is less aware  than the cat - likely why it is on the menu. But no cat has ever been both inside and outside the Cheshire space.

Penrose et al would like to quantize consciousness. We cannot quantize consciousness.  Consciousness, I strongly personally believe, is a field ...just like gravity.  Just like magnetism.  There ultimately - though needing some sort of exotic math and matching breakthroughs of philosophy thereof - exist so long as other actions persist - probably occurring at the same speed as quantum entanglement.

Though all of that... what we can infer with high confidence is, AI is not that.   Haha.

So again ...if there's another way to achieve higher order consciousness in the cosmos than so be it.  Fine.  We have to be open to that possibility.  But where AI/research is, its not creating a bubble that is inflated by emergence.

As far as the 8 billion elimination argument... It's easier to eliminate 8 million than it is to eliminate 8 billion.  A planet colliding with Earth would do the trick on the latter. Excluding the possibility that a Star Warsian planet killer ray is pointing its gun are way ...  the like would be exceptionally rare to put it humorously.   ... It follows that whatever catastrophe befalls is more likely going to be less than such extreme, sarcasm aside ... Which leaves at least a vestige.

 

[rclab]

2 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said:

More concisely the point I was after ... AI is not a spontaneous emergence. 

It's not just you.  There's a palpable vibe in the ongoing meme of it all, an ominous implication, as though it is an unstoppable spontaneous emergence. 

A lot of that is the "AI Executa"'s doing.  They've certainly been helping to create a uncertain, if not unnerving scenario end game but ... has it never stuck anyone as odd that no one has said the following yet?

                                    stop creating it   

Again, AI is not the threat; the humans being creating it are the threat.

AI won't emerge on it's own.  If there is that much daunting uncertainty as to the end game, then the solution in prevention is only unclear to a 5-year old.       

Anyway, so I am not really disagreeing with you that it could be an agency of harm?   Of course that's true. That could come about both wittingly, or unwittingly.  

For fun:  The "witting" rendition is that we are all being manipulated in a really diabolical way... The apparatus of progenitors of the "AI brain"  (think giant cube in "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy" ha!) are consummately warning of this that and the other thing, as though when we've arrived into any such state of affairs ( their actual goal), they can blame it on the 'we warned you' divisiveness. As though the consequence was built in, and not their fault - -as though it is ours for allowing them?

That would never work, of course.  As dumbed-down and feckless, willing to be led around and guided as we humans have become during these generational legs of the Industrial bubble, there's still enough intelligentsia in there to place blame appropriately should "Skynet" launch its proverbial missiles.  However, here's the diabolical thing:   they know that.

They're not actually trying escape culpability - they really don't care. No morality there.  No ...they're trying to diverge our attention along the way.  All their warnings come off much like propagandizing its significance - popping out of the witting fantasy for a split second, perhaps that's the capitalistic mark-up.  In fairness, the historical verdict is undecided... But one thing I'm noticing also is that it's keeping us stoned by our collect fascination. Maybe helped along by civility's apparent epidemic: psycho-tropic 'blue-light' dystopian addiction.  As stimulation junkies, we just want the high from their story.   ...until we are in a realm when it has become   too late.  What they've really created was the sociopath's utopia    (ooh, that's a cool title for a book!)

Heh, that's a fun James Bond plot perhaps.  Scott Galloway, NYU professor among other accolades ... including is wealth, recently spoke on the subject of AI in ... I'm not sure whose pod-cast space, AI was built for the rich, not for you.  I've appreciated his articulation/conjectures on sociodynamics and driving mechanisms of zeitgeist in past.  Admittedly, I've only heard of this much quoted in this case, but the idea of this being "by design" ...mm does creep a little.  He's right enough that an 'intrinsic circumstance' could be more likely, in my opinion - I mean who the hell else could afford the financing behind this type of transformative power?

Then there's the unwitting rendition - which despite the fantastic above is actually a harder sell for me.  Just because of the nature of what consciousness appears to be.

That's why I cited Roger Penrose, and stopped just short of shamelessly punching my own published work on the matter ( nyuk nyuk).  His et al was a Physical peer review.  I did not know it existed prior or during when I set out to create my story. I stumbled upon the idea listening to NPR at a stop sign, circa 2004. They background sound leading the moment was an ongoing interview with a world renowned Neurophysiologist - no means to recall the name or salutation from this range. The conjectural concepts for my novel would come to eerily describe precisely the Penrose:  magnetically conductive microtubules are instrumental in the emergence of consciousness.  So you have independent sources arriving to similar notions: at one end, notoriety and resource, at the other, ...a no-name, utterly unknown church-mouse squeak during hymn on Sunday of a voice ... lucky enough to have caught the attention of a publishing house.

There may be other ways in the Universe to create consciousness - duh. Perhaps "create" isn't the right word. Perhaps "emerge" really is the best and we should stick with that, because all science and perspectives (history) agrees that its origin is an emergence.  We can confidently suggest at a minimum that all brains on earth are alive as long as they continue in a chemical-physiologically guided electrodynamic dance.  The sparkling on invented tools that convert electroencephalography (EEG) for visualization, for example. They evince what ancient scholars already knew...etc. 

However consciousness is kind of separate from that. Penrose et al outright implicate Physically that it is not where consciousness originates, rather, quantum feedback is implied.  As I told implicitly in my story, it is a synergistic byproduct of the same processing. 

So all brains are a chemical-physiologically guided electrodynamic process.  The amount and coherence of synergistic emergence from that is variable.  Consciousness is like gravity, though.  Try and try as we must ... the brain trust of Humanity will never be able quantize gravity. The ambit will stubbornly continue to spent trillions on colliders and University legislation and never will.  We can only say that the moon has less gravity than the sun, but both have their gravity. A mouse is less aware  than the cat - likely why it is on the menu. But no cat has ever been both inside and outside the Cheshire space.

Penrose et al would like to quantize consciousness. We cannot quantize consciousness.  Consciousness, I strongly personally believe, is a field ...just like gravity.  Just like magnetism.  There ultimately - though needing some sort of exotic math and matching breakthroughs of philosophy thereof - exist so long as other actions persist - probably occurring at the same speed as quantum entanglement.

Though all of that... what we can infer with high confidence is, AI is not that.   Haha.

So again ...if there's another way to achieve higher order consciousness in the cosmos than so be it.  Fine.  We have to be open to that possibility.  But where AI/research is, its not creating a bubble that is inflated by emergence.

As far as the 8 billion elimination argument... It's easier to eliminate 8 million than it is to eliminate 8 billion.  A planet colliding with Earth would do the trick on the latter. Excluding the possibility that a Star Warsian planet killer ray is pointing its gun are way ...  the like would be exceptionally rare to put it humorously.   ... It follows that whatever catastrophe befalls is more likely going to be less than such extreme, sarcasm aside ... Which leaves at least a vestige.

 

Cockroaches in the dust? As always ……