Saul Griffith interview on energy flows and climate (mitigation/adaptation). Recommended by John Baez. I think "solve" is a little strong, I'd use "address". https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2019/12/28/how-to-solve-climate-change/
As to the issue of climate models being accurate over time... https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming There are a billion or so people who will be affected by melting glaciers in the Hindu Kush, so there will be a lot of folks on the move relatively shortly. Carl On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 3:09 PM Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > Nick, > > The last sentence simply stated that human activities contribute, almost > certainly critically, to the problem. And the only causal factors that we > might be able to change are those same human activities. > > What is being stipulated is that humans, individually and collectively, > must be the change agents. Other contributory causes like solar cycles, > natural climate cycles, etc. cannot change or be changed. > > Sorry if the terseness of the original expression led to ambiguity. > > As to trust - yes, I am arrogant enough to believe I can follow an > argument and understand the premises / assumptions / and conclusions of the > models and reports produced by the experts. No, I do not understand the > math or the specialized science. But, if the experts cannot express > themselves clearly enough to meet me half-way then they are no better than > witch doctors explaining how voudun works. > > The other dimension of trust mentioned involves avoiding being manipulated > (politicians, rent-seekers, ecological cultists - and they do exist) or > defrauded. > > Two examples, I am very leery of purchasing carbon offsets for the only > way I have to go home once in a while - jet travel. A couple of reasons: I > can't see exactly how my money actually does something other than line > someone's pockets; and it feels a whole lot like spitting on a forest > fire. There must be a better way to spend my funds. > > I don't see the point in supporting politicians like Ocasio-Cortez or even > Warren and trying to convince people to give up their cars or quit eating > meat in order to reduce the amount of carbon being put into the atmosphere, > simply because I have zero belief that it will happen. I do see a greater > likelihood that money contributed to research on carbon scrubbers will > result in something that will help and will be actually put into play. > > davew > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, at 8:44 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > > Please see larding below. > > > > My larder is still broken, but it should work well enough. > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 1, 2020 12:19 PM > *To:* friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions > > > > convict of what? > > premeditated Gaia murder? > > voluntary climate slaughter? > > involuntary climate slaughter? > > reckless endangerment? > > conspiracy to commit climate change? > > accessory after the fact? > > *[NST===>] All of the above. * > > > > Not trying to be either specious or difficult. I would be ready to vote in > favor of human activity contributing the "tipping point factor" but not the > cause. > > *[NST===>] As a philosophy camp-follower, I am curious about the > distinction, but right now we have a planet to save.* > > > > > > The following is stipulated: > > > > - Dr. Kwok, et. al. are correctly reporting phenomena and consequences. > > *[NST===>] Is the whole jury prepared to “convict” on these counts? I am > sorry, I should probably stop punning on “convict”, here. I guess the > real question is, are these proposition upon which we are all prepared to > act?* > > - The planet is getting warmer. > > - Human activities are a critical component of the cause, and the only > factors that might be altered to partially ameliorate the situation. > > *[NST===>] Sorry, but the last part of the above was unclear to me. Is > there a missing word?* > > > > But, > > How to I analyze the models (I am unwilling to just take 'The Experts" > word on the matter) and evaluate the importance of the various factors such > that I can start to plan a course, mostly personal, of action. > > > > What options are available to remediate the problem. What options might I > adopt as an individual? What options must I try to convince the masses to > adopt? > > > > > > How to I avoid being exploited - by politicians seeking power, by > opportunists seeking an income, from fraud like green washing? > > *[NST===>] Dave, it seems there are two threads here. One concerns > trust. An expert is just somebody whom we trust to evaluate the data for > us when we are incompetent to do so. I sense in what you write here an > assumption that you are going to be able to make your personal decisions > without having to avail yourself of trust. But surely that’s a dream, > right? So the question is, “How are we to deploy trust?* > > > > *The second thread is the relation of personal responsibility to group > action. Now I think that we can stipulate that group action is the only > way we are ever going to have a solution to the climate. It’s like what > your mom told you about those Poor Starving Armenians. If every mom served > to her kid only the amount of spinach that that kid would eat, and shipped > all the rest to Armenia, the Armenians would not have starved. But no > rational connection exists between my eating my spinach, and any Armenian > child being fed. So, in fact, if we actually cared about Poor Starving > Armenians, we would have paid to send a boat load of spinach over there, > and eaten whatever spinach was left over. In fact, perhaps we should have > Federalized the Guard, confiscated all the spinach, and sent it to Armenia. > Because even if every kid ate all the spinach on his plate, and every, mom > served her kid only what he would eat, still, and all, **THAT WOULD NOT > GET THE SPINACE TO ARMENIA. * > > > > *Yet the quakers had a point, and Gandhi had a point, and there is a point > to voting. If no individual takes action, then no action will be taken. * > > > > > > davew > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, at 7:55 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > > Friammers: > > > > Let’s constitute ourselves as the “climate change jury”. The jury can > have a conviction but only if we all agree. Otherwise we remain a hung > jury. > > > > So, does the Jury agree that with Dr. Kwok of JPL that “ … sea level rise, > disappearing sea ice, melting ice sheets and other changes are happening”? > > > > If, so, is the jury prepared to convict human activities for causing those > changes? > > > > I am polling the jury. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > > > *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly > > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 1, 2020 11:27 AM > > *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > friam@redfish.com> > > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions > > > > From NASA: > > https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/16/is-it-too-late-to-prevent-climate-change/ > > > > ----------------------------------- > > Frank Wimberly > > > > My memoir: > > https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly > > > > My scientific publications: > > https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 > > > > Phone (505) 670-9918 > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 11:24 AM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What scares me is recent assertions that we have passed the tipping point > and there is nothing we can do about it. I have no references. > > > > Frank > > ----------------------------------- > > Frank Wimberly > > > > My memoir: > > https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly > > > > My scientific publications: > > https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2 > > > > Phone (505) 670-9918 > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 11:09 AM <thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dave, > > > > I like these questions, and I think The Congregation should take them as a > > challenge. > > > > What can we-all, we who have long association, and a generalized (if > > somewhat guarded) respect, come to agree upon with respect to climate > change > > and human activity? By what process, with what attitudes, by what rules of > > engagement, are we likely to arrive at ANY truth of that matter. Because, > > if we, here, cannot agree on some matters, agreement would seem to be > beyond > > human reach. > > > > So, for starters, I find I am inclined to disagree with your facts as > > stated. They seem to assert that Things (whatever Things are) are not as > > bad as they were predicted to be. Yet, I find, I am inclined to believe > > that in fact Things are worse. The only specific data I feel I have been > > exposed to recently is ocean surface rise and glacial melting. But even > > there, I would be hard pressed to match your specific references to any of > > my own. So, I guess the conclusion is, I disagree, but I don't know what I > > am talking about. Ugh! > > > > I could (after some labor) cite data to support the following concern: > what > > we should be watching out for, perhaps more than long term climate warming, > > is increases in year-to-year climate variability. You can grow rape seed > in > > Canada and maize in the US, and as the climate alters, the bands of climate > > supporting these two crops will move north. But what happens if one year > > the climate demands one crop and the next the other? And the switch from > > one to the other is entirely unpredictable. Anybody who plants a garden > > knows that only two dates have a tremendous effect on the productivity of > > your garden: first frost and last frost. The average frost free period in > > my garden in Ma 135 days or so, but only a few miles away, it is as short > as > > 90. And while we have never had a 90 day frost year, we have had last > frost > > dates in June and first frost dates in early September. It would take a > > very small year-to-year increase in variability to turn my garden from > > something that could support life for a year in New England into a 30 x 50 > > wasteplot. > > > > I think I could show you that the period in which we live, the Holocene, is > > a period of remarkably low, year-to-year, variation in climate VARIABILITY. > > I think I could convince you that everything that has occurred in the last > > ten thousand years by way of civilization is entirely dependent on that > > anomalous stability. The neanderthals were not too stupid to do > > agriculture; the climate of the Pleistocene would not permit it. The whole > > idea of nation states depends on the idea that one can make more or less > the > > same kind of living by staying more or less in the same place and doing > more > > or less the same thing. A return to Pleistocene year-to-year variation > > would obliterate that possibility. > > > > If then, I could convince you, that --quite apart from Global Warming-- we > > are seeing an increase in climate variability, then, by God, I think I > could > > scare the Living Crap out of you. > > > > The only question is whether we have the energy and sitzfleisch to do it, > > and some way to keep our correspondence is order so that it's value could > be > > harvested for the long run. > > > > Happy New Year! > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology > > Clark University > > thompnicks...@gmail.com > > https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West > > Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 9:45 AM > > To: friam@redfish.com > > Subject: [FRIAM] climate change questions > > > > Questions, that do NOT, in any manner or form deny the reality of climate > > change. > > > > In 1990, citing the "best scientific models available" stated that because > > of carbon dioxide emissions, the Earth would warm by an average of 3 > degrees > > Fahrenheit and the U.S. as the largest producer, by an average of 6 degrees > > Fahrenheit by 2020. > > > > The UN IPCC report of the same year predicted a range of temperature > > increases ranging from 1-5 degrees F, with the most likely expectations > > being 3-5 by the year 2020. > > > > The current report predicts a rise of 2-5 degrees by 2100. > > > > The New York Times, CNN, and the President of Exxon USA predicted the end > of > > domestic oil and gas reserves by 2020. > > > > The undisputed rise in Earth (and US) temperature as of 2020 is 1 degree. > > > > Exactly how does one go about constructing a reasoned, and accurate, > > argument for the need to address climate change in the context of badly > > incorrect predictions, grounded in the best available scientific models, > and > > over-hyped "disaster scenarios" promulgated by those with political or > > simply "circulation" motives. > > > > In light of this context of "error" and "hype," is it fair to tar everyone > > expressing questions or doubts with the same "deny-er" brush? > > > > Is it possible to constructively criticize either the models or the > proposed > > "solutions" without being dismissed as a troglodyte "deny-er?" > > > > Is there a way to evaluate a spectrum of means (eliminating coal to carbon > > scrubbers to ...) along with analyses of cost/benefit ratios, human > > socio-economic impact, etc. and compare them? > > > > Is there more than one strategy for getting out of this mess; and if so, > how > > do we decide (and/or construct a blend) on one that will optimize our > > chances? > > > > davew > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe > > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
