Copernicus has September as hottest on record. It holds the record by 0.05 C, the same as May.
Compare to this range question, where the community gives an 87% chance that any of the top 25 will file by Mar 2024.
Note that fires 6, 7, and 8 were very similarly destructive and this is most likely due to chance, not some magic of that number of buildings being destroyed. Hence a new fire is quite unlikely to stop at places 7 or 8. Quantitatively, fire 7 was only 1.8% more destructive than fire 8, while fire 5 was 18% more destructive than fire 6.
The same goes for fires 3 and 4.
Fit a logistic with Jun 13 as midpoint.
Looks like I can't collect tachyons (yes, I'm below 50).
Taking @RyanBeck 's sheet and filling in the last 2 months of data, I get a mean of 4411 and sd of 77.
35% is far, far too high - try 1%
I just input the cdf for the 20 historical maxima, adjusted for inflation.
In 2017 solar was about 9% of all renewable power, according to wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy
However, solar grows by about 40% per year - much faster than the 2.5-3% growth of renewable on a whole. That means we can expect 17% of renewable to be solar in 2019 and 28% in 2021. I expect this to push renewable growth way over 3%.
— edited by PepeS
@AlyssaStevens Since the link in the resolution criteria lists the stocks every week, will this be averaged for all 4-5 weeks of September?
If you think there's a 17% chance of Trump winning and you think 538 is calibrated, then by Markov's inequality they can only give more than 96 at any time in 17+4 = 21% of outcomes. Realistically, they will probably only give 96 in 17+epsilon% of outcomes. So why is the community cdf at 66% for an outcome of 96 on this question?
Ok I see that a lot of this was wrong. Actually this calculation happens for each state, and then a few extra seats are allocated at the national level to balance things. You can see from the 2017 election that in most states the CDU wins most regions with under 50% of the vote so extra seats are allocated.
This makes the calculation difficult, but I think outcomes over 900 are super unlikely.