SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Hindustan Times reports:
An unrelenting heat wave has killed more than 1,100 people across the country over a fortnight with southern neighbours Andhra Pradesh and Telangana bearing the brunt, as torrid temperatures melted roads in the national capital and have forced people indoors.
Authorities said on [May 26] most of the victims were construction workers, the elderly, or the homeless, as the weather office predicted the mercury will continue to soar this week with substantial relief expected only when the southwest monsoon hits the Indian mainland around May 31.
[...] The meteorological department issued "red box" warnings for Odisha, Jharkhand, and coastal Andhra Pradesh, signalling high chances of heatstroke, dehydration, and fatality with temperatures inching upwards of 45°C and conditions worsened by constant dry, sweltering winds.
[The state of] Odisha continued to reel, with [the town of] Titlagarh in Balangir district clocking the highest temperature of 47.6°C [117.7°F], while authorities said they received reports of 67 deaths in the past week.
[...] Experts warned [that] no let-up in the heat wave would lead to large-scale power outages in several parts of north India, bringing back memories of a horrific blackout in 2012 that affected nearly 600 million people.
In a separate story, Arne Winguth, Associate Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Texas-Arlington led a study on future environmental conditions in central Texas in the year 2100.
The professor was interviewed by KERA TV:
Winguth's study predicts more cracks and potholes, even buckling and melting of roadways in extreme 125-degree heat.
"The 125° Fahrenheit is a prediction for the future that is predicted for the year 2100. That would be the extreme temperature--that is based on most recent climate assimilation from the National Center for Atmospheric research."
[Editor's Comment: Original Submission]
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Thursday May 28 2015, @08:47PM
Yea, spelling error easy to miss.
The other error that got me was the sentence structure is wrong for the description. The "in the year 2100" is a modifier for "lead [sic] a study", so the sentence actually claims that the study was conducted in the year 2100. This could have been corrected without restructuring the sentence merely by using the word for instead of in, indicating that the study was about environmental conditions for the year 2100.
So I see your nitpicking, and I raise.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by Marand on Friday May 29 2015, @05:18AM
I noticed that too, though it seemed more like ambiguity than outright error, so I didn't even consider mentioning it. Everyone occasionally writes something and later notices that it could have been written more clearly, so it's usually not worth worrying about unless it's a common problem or particularly egregious example.
Still, that's some professional grade nitpicking. My inner grammar Nazi approves. :)