So besides that AGU has disputed some of today's LA Times story, I haven't heard much about what will actually occur. But I think it's a good thing that at least some climate scientists are planning to fight back.
I don't see this as activism. At all. These scientists aren't saying we should tear down oil wells or transition to electric cars or that Congress should enact cap-n-trade -- I don't think I've ever heard a single climate scientist say anything like that. They are simply communicating the science --that GHGs + land use changes are going to, in the long-term, change our climate. And for that, for their science alone, they are being attacked, and being accused of all manners of fraud and lies and misrepresentations. This is unprecedented and unacceptable, and they have a right to fight back about the science.
Personally I think some scientist ought to sue someone like Moran or Tom Nelson when they label them a "fraudster." That would get attention.
Monday, November 08, 2010
AGU disputes LA TImes story
In a press release just distributed, the AGU says that today's LA Times story (on climate scientists fighting back) represents its position:
WASHINGTON- An article appearing in the Los Angeles Times, and then picked up by media outlets far and wide, misrepresents the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and a climate science project the AGU is about to relaunch. The project, called Climate Q&A Service, aims simply to provide accurate scientific answers to questions from journalists about climate
science.
"In contrast to what has been reported in the LA Times and elsewhere, there is no campaign by AGU against climate skeptics or congressional conservatives," says Christine McEntee, Executive Director and CEO of the American Geophysical Union. "AGU will continue to provide accuratescientific information on Earth and space topics to inform the general public and to support sound public policy development."
..."AGU is a scientific society, not an advocacy organization," says climate scientist and AGU President Michael J. McPhaden. "The organization is committed to promoting scientific discovery and to disseminating to the scientific community, policy makers, the media, and the public, peer-reviewed scientific findings across a broad range of Earth and space sciences."
Friday, November 05, 2010
At Least Kitzhaber Still Cares about the Environment
Environmentalism may have lost big time on Tuesday, but at least it's still a strong value of the incoming Oregon governor, John Kitzhaber:
At a rally to celebrate his election victory, however, the Democratic former governor also made it clear that environmental protection -- often a wedge issue between Oregon's urban and rural communities -- would return as a hallmark of his new administration....This is especially quotable:
While Kitzhaber said his goal is to "create that political center" that can tackle the state's long list of recession-caused troubles, the jeans-and-boots-wearing white-water rafter asserted himself once again as the chief steward of the state's natural bounty.
In addition to tipping his hat to job-seekers and school children, he thanked "everyone who sees our state and recognizes its natural wonder, and knows it's worth fighting for, and that it's a legacy to be passed on to future generations. It's your victory, too.
"The challenges aren't blue, the challenges aren't red," Kitzhaber said. "Hell, they're green."It's almost embarrassing to say, but it's nice to have a governor who actually believes what scientists are saying (for decades now).
Just a Gesture
Steve Chapman, Hit and Run:
Some 300 candidates nationally have signed the Tea Party "Contract from America" calling for a balanced budget, radical simplification of the tax code, and strict limits on federal spending. The chance that any of those will come to pass in the next two years? Zero.
Our campaigns are generally a matter of theater, not to be taken literally. We like to be the kind of people who vote for drastic change, but we don't want to be the kind of people who actually experience it. The gesture is generally enough.
Feynman on Magnetism
Here's a great clip where Richard Feynman explains how magnets attract or repel on another. He answers it as only Feynman could.
via: wimp.com
via: wimp.com
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Some Good News
From California:
Voters rejected a controversial proposal to suspend California's landmark greenhouse gas reduction law Tuesday, showing their support for the state's efforts to lead the nation in confronting climate change.
The measure, Proposition 23, would have suspended the state's climate law until unemployment dropped below 5.5 percent for 12 months, which economic analysts said was not likely to happen for several years. Proponents called the measure a responsible response to the economic slowdown, while opponents painted it as a hostile and thinly veiled attempt by Texas oil companies to kill California's progress on the issue.
The measure, Proposition 23, would have suspended the state's climate law until unemployment dropped below 5.5 percent for 12 months, which economic analysts said was not likely to happen for several years. Proponents called the measure a responsible response to the economic slowdown, while opponents painted it as a hostile and thinly veiled attempt by Texas oil companies to kill California's progress on the issue.
Back and Forth
In a way, all this gets kind of tiring.
Now the Republicans win. Two years ago the Democrats won, and four years before that the Republicans held and four years before that Gore lost and six years before that the Republicans took over Congress yet again and blocked Clinton.
And yet what changes, really?
The economy goes up for awhile, then it goes down. A little lower this time, a little higher at other times. Some people get jobs, and some people lose them. People lose health insurance at the rate of about 1%/yr, and nothing seems to change that. Clinton or Obama try to make changes, and the Republicans try to cancel them out.
Meanwhile corporate interests make steady increases in influence year after year, since... when, at least since the '60s now?
Government gets bigger no matter who is in charge. Government gets more intrusive no matter who is in charge. People work even harder no matter who is in charge, and fear for their jobs no matter who is in charge.
Aren't we supposed to be progressing towards a kinder, more beneficent future, where people work less and have more time for their families and their leisure and opportunities to read great literature and see theatre and dance and movies? Isn't that what all this is supposed to bring us?
It seems like all we're supposed to do is work harder to beat (now) the Indians and the Chinese, instead of (then) the Russians and the Japanese.
Is this really progress?
Am I really supposed to think that that Republicans are now going to save our union, when four years ago they seemed to be doing all they could to screw it up? And that the best Democrats can do, with the White House and both houses of Congress, is to cap unemployment at 10%?
What exactly am I waiting for? Can you tell me?
Now the Republicans win. Two years ago the Democrats won, and four years before that the Republicans held and four years before that Gore lost and six years before that the Republicans took over Congress yet again and blocked Clinton.
And yet what changes, really?
The economy goes up for awhile, then it goes down. A little lower this time, a little higher at other times. Some people get jobs, and some people lose them. People lose health insurance at the rate of about 1%/yr, and nothing seems to change that. Clinton or Obama try to make changes, and the Republicans try to cancel them out.
Meanwhile corporate interests make steady increases in influence year after year, since... when, at least since the '60s now?
Government gets bigger no matter who is in charge. Government gets more intrusive no matter who is in charge. People work even harder no matter who is in charge, and fear for their jobs no matter who is in charge.
Aren't we supposed to be progressing towards a kinder, more beneficent future, where people work less and have more time for their families and their leisure and opportunities to read great literature and see theatre and dance and movies? Isn't that what all this is supposed to bring us?
It seems like all we're supposed to do is work harder to beat (now) the Indians and the Chinese, instead of (then) the Russians and the Japanese.
Is this really progress?
Am I really supposed to think that that Republicans are now going to save our union, when four years ago they seemed to be doing all they could to screw it up? And that the best Democrats can do, with the White House and both houses of Congress, is to cap unemployment at 10%?
What exactly am I waiting for? Can you tell me?
Where are the Aliens?
Robert Park, What's New, Oct 29, 2010
Of course, some people aren't content to just stay home, sipping Chardonnay in comfort.... But some people are.
The great physicist Enrico Fermi asked, "Where are they." This is referred to today as the Fermi paradox, but there is no paradox. They are peering through their telescopes, calculating the incredible difficulty of traveling to another star, and deciding to let others, somewhere else, make the effort. That's what I would do.
Of course, some people aren't content to just stay home, sipping Chardonnay in comfort.... But some people are.
Big Review Article on Solar Influences
There is a big review article on solar influences on climate that, if you want to preach on the topic, you definitely need to read first:
Read it. Then, read it. Once again, read it before you tell us how solar variability is responsible for recent decadal increases in worldwide temperatures.
REVIEWS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 48, RG4001, 53 PP., 2010
SOLAR INFLUENCES ON CLIMATE
L. J. Gray, et al.
Read it. Then, read it. Once again, read it before you tell us how solar variability is responsible for recent decadal increases in worldwide temperatures.
Tuesday, November 02, 2010
At Least Oregon Seems (Mostly) Good
Ron Wyden (Dem) {maybe the best Senator I've ever seen} wins.
David Wu (D) beats Ron Cornilles (in my district).
Peter DeFazio is leading the nasty climate skeptic Art Robinson (who was behind the infamous Oregon Petition). This is a defeat for climate skeptics, and should be the end of Robinson, who is now 68 years old.
Still unknown: John Kitzhaber (Dem) vs a basketball player.
David Wu (D) beats Ron Cornilles (in my district).
Peter DeFazio is leading the nasty climate skeptic Art Robinson (who was behind the infamous Oregon Petition). This is a defeat for climate skeptics, and should be the end of Robinson, who is now 68 years old.
Still unknown: John Kitzhaber (Dem) vs a basketball player.
America's Turning Point?
NY Times:
Really, is there any reason not to give up on America right now? I'm very, very serious about this -- is there any longer a reason for a rational, thinking person to stay here, to expect that the future is going to be better than the past?
Do any of you really believe that life in America is going to get better in the near future and not worse? -- that it's not going to continue on the path it's taken for 3 decades now -- middle-class wages absolutely stagnant, and about a 1%/yr decline in the population with health insurance?
I know not everyone can just pick up and leave. But some of us can....
In a CNN interview, Rand Paul, the newly elected Senator for Kentucky, defends extending the Bush tax cuts by saying that "we all work for rich people or sell stuff to rich people."
Really, is there any reason not to give up on America right now? I'm very, very serious about this -- is there any longer a reason for a rational, thinking person to stay here, to expect that the future is going to be better than the past?
Do any of you really believe that life in America is going to get better in the near future and not worse? -- that it's not going to continue on the path it's taken for 3 decades now -- middle-class wages absolutely stagnant, and about a 1%/yr decline in the population with health insurance?
I know not everyone can just pick up and leave. But some of us can....
O'Donnell loses
At least Christine O'Donnell has lost. Perhaps America still has an infinitesimal chance of survival.
Open Water
For reasons that still elude me, the vast majority of people who come here via Google searches come looking for "shark attacks."
Anyway, if that's you you should definitely watch the 2004 film Open Water. Not just for the sharks. In fact, not even primarily for the sharks. But just to have the complete crap scared out of you.
Like the Blair Witch Project, it's a very visceral movie that cuts right into what you know most. No birds pecking at your head, no shower scenes -- just situations you can easily imagine. Which makes it all the worse.
Anyway, if that's you you should definitely watch the 2004 film Open Water. Not just for the sharks. In fact, not even primarily for the sharks. But just to have the complete crap scared out of you.
Like the Blair Witch Project, it's a very visceral movie that cuts right into what you know most. No birds pecking at your head, no shower scenes -- just situations you can easily imagine. Which makes it all the worse.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
The Worst Kind of Climate News
This sounds like not just bad news, but even dangerous news:
Several key Republican Congressmen — most notably Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista), who could take over the chairmanship of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — have said they plan to investigate climate scientists they contend manipulated data to prove the case that human activity is contributing to global warming. (LA Times)It doesn't seem to matter an iota that three (isn't it now?) investigations have cleared climate scientists of any wrongdoing with regard to the Climategate emails -- Republicans and other climate bullies seem determined to pound on this until blood appears. Yes, actual blood. What worries me is that someone might get seriously hurt, just like the Tides Foundation barely escaped violence due to Glenn Beck's inaccurate and relentless accusations.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Manfred Max-Neef; But....
Here's a very interesting interview with Manfred Max-Neef, a leading economist from Chile.
He makes a lot of very good points about his time with the poor, and the failure of conventional economics to incorporate external costs (mostly environmental) costs -- until 40:24, where he says that there are a lot of catastrophes due to "storms, earthquakes, and volcanoes...." (emphasis mine). Amy Goodman, unfortunately, doesn't call him on it at all (yet another example of how the lack of scientific education undermines their efforts). That completely burst the bubble, for me -- it's difficult to respect anyone who thinks man is causing an increase in earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, no matter what else he says.
Ultimately, disappointing.
He makes a lot of very good points about his time with the poor, and the failure of conventional economics to incorporate external costs (mostly environmental) costs -- until 40:24, where he says that there are a lot of catastrophes due to "storms, earthquakes, and volcanoes...." (emphasis mine). Amy Goodman, unfortunately, doesn't call him on it at all (yet another example of how the lack of scientific education undermines their efforts). That completely burst the bubble, for me -- it's difficult to respect anyone who thinks man is causing an increase in earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, no matter what else he says.
Ultimately, disappointing.
Haas
"Nostalgia locates desire in the past, where it suffers no active conflict and can be yearned toward pleasantly."
-- Robert Haas, "Lowell's Graveyard"
-- Robert Haas, "Lowell's Graveyard"
Greenberg again
John Fleck has pointed me towards the document in question:
WASHINGTON ROUNDTABLE ON SCIENCE & PUBLIC POLICY
Science Advice to Congress
by Michael Gough, Daniel S. Greenberg, and Richard E. Rowber
This is a transcript, and I can't fault Greenberg at all for appearing at a Marshall Institute event to offer his viewpoint. I'd easily have done the same.
It seems that Mann et al definitely misfired on this one.
Greenberg Update
John Fleck comments:
Re: "Greenberg, Pielke Jr, Mann, Ehrlich and Rahmstorf":That's certainly very different than if Greenberg had accepted a writing assignment from the Marshall Institute, and so I was wrong to attribute any nefarious purposes to him, and I hereby apologize. As should Mann, Ehrlich, and Rahmstorf.
The answer is that Greenberg seems not to have written something for Marshall. They transcribed and published his comments from the round table discussion in which he participated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
