How do you explain his comments regarding Mary Barra & GM on the EV summit? He doesn't seem to understand the need to electrify and move away from fossil fuels at all.
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
On a global level that obviously doesn't hold and they don't explain why it would for this basin.
Maybe I'm just stupid but I'd doubt a reviewer could make any sense of something like this. I don't think it would be possible to replicate it independently based on their explanation.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Given how important, according to the paper, the evapotranspiration is to the result I'd really wish they would explain what they are doing. It reads as if they assume water vapor and precipitation stay constant but temperature and evaporation increase?
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
This paper is Incredibly difficult to read. Do they really model solar radiation using temperature, and then just add +4 degrees to the temperature? The reference they use for this doesn't even mention it at all.
1 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
Scientific American hit peak denial when they started arguing against the so-called normal distribution, as if the term normal in statistics has anything to do with a value judgement.
0 replies
0 reposts
0 likes
He also has a nice tutorial for a "realistic earth" which might be an easy intro for GIS/RS folks.
1 replies
0 reposts
1 likes
I always use a dedicated jupyter and gdal installation for each conda environment. The conda-forge packages should then set everything (?) correctly when the activate/deactivates scripts run. That avoids any cross contamination from other installations.
0 replies
0 reposts
1 likes