Looks like a great book, interesting that it was written in the 1950’s. And by a St. Johns’s prof nonetheless. Thanks.
Comment on Conflicts of interest in climate science. Part II by nickels
↧
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Joseph
I am still waiting for a robust explanation for the substantial global warming from 1905-1945, why the globe has been warming overall for the past 400 years,
Has it been established that it has warmed for the past 400 years? And wouldn’t you characterize recent warming as being substantially different from warming in that may have started 4 centuries ago?
And where does that leave the Little Ice Age, if you accept that this is a period of gradual warming? I got this is from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age
It has been conventionally defined as a period extending from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries,[3][4][5] or alternatively, from about 1300[6] to about 1850,[7][8][9] although climatologists and historians working with local records no longer expect to agree on either the start or end dates of this period, which varied according to local conditions. The NASA Earth Observatory notes three particularly cold intervals: one beginning about 1650, another about 1770, and the last in 1850, each separated by intervals of slight warming.[5].
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by davideisenstadt
Mark Twain loved kittens, but was less fond of cats, so his staff made sure that his house was stocked with kittens, which they disposed of when older, and then replaced the displaced cats with new kittens.
just saying.
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by rovingbroker
Oh, look outside the window
There’s a woman being grabbed
They’ve dragged her to the bushes
And now she’s being stabbed
Maybe we should call the cops
And try to stop the pain
But Monopoly is so much fun
I’d hate to blow the game
And I’m sure
It wouldn’t interest anybody
Outside of a small circle of friends
Phil Ochs
↧
Comment on Week in review – science edition by michael hart (@michael97087462)
Your point is good, AK.
Many people will also tell pollsters they believe in a god of some sort. Their day-to-day actions suggest that the influence of the more strident priests is limited, to say the least.
↧
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Rob Starkey (@Robbuffy)
Can anyone please link to the information that leads them to believe that additional human released CO2 will result in a worse climate overall for humanity. Yes, it is more likely to warm slightly, but that does not equate to a climate worse for humanity.
If science cannot reliably conclude that additional CO2 will make the climate better or worse for a particular nation or the world overall, how can rational people defend spending significant amounts of limited financial resources to reduce CO2 emissions?
Isn’t it more sensible to use our limited resources on things more likely to have a benefit?
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by JCH
Michael Mann gathered a group of scientists in a joint effort to constrain the MWP.
And he was an author on this: <a href="http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/medclimopt.pdf" rel="nofollow">Indeed, when Lamb (1965) coined the term Medieval Warm Epoch, it was based on evidence largely from Europe and parts of North America. Regional temperature pat- terns elsewhere over the globe show equivocal evidence of anomalous warmth (see Wigley et al., 1981; Hughes and Diaz, 1994) and, as Lamb (1965) noted, episodes of both cooler as well as warmer conditions are likely to have punc- tuated this period.</a>
Of course, what was happening with the global average is unimportant. Locally it was colder in many places.
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by JCH
Because we can make you.
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Stanton Brown
“As an engineer I am amazed that there are folks who consider “climate change” to be mankind’s largest challenge, equivalent to a war, and are prepared to march into battle against an entity not yet proven to be an enemy, a hypothetical black swan, using weapons which are socially expensive and largely ineffective. ”
Follow the money
↧
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Jim D
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Rob Starkey (@Robbuffy)
LOL–not much seems to have been enacted.
JCH–as is typical, people like you fail to honest supply the information to support your belief
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by brentns1
Co-opting Chaos: The Role of Complexity Discourse in the War on Terror
What is new however, is the acceptance that chaos may not be so easily crushed and may in fact be creative.
Almost 7 years before the invasion Saperstein stated quite bluntly: “One of the prime reasons for our failure to deal successfully with Iraq – a sovereign element in the Newtonian system – is that we fear to deal with its possible break-up” (Saperstein 1997). Even more bluntly Stephen Mann argued:
“that we need to be open to ways to accelerate and exploit criticality if it serves our national interest, for example, by destroying the Iraqi militaryand the Saddam state” (Mann 1997).
The question raised by chaos theorists such as Saperstein and Mann is that, in a global environment where the permanence of nation states can no longer be taken for granted, and where sub-and trans-state social forces are bubbling out of control, is the stability and integrity of nation states always an achievable, or even desirable objective?
snip
In order to understand US foreign policy in the 21st Century we should become familiar with the strategic use of chaos, and with the political role of cultural narratives of American “exceptionalism”. However, we also need to increase our scepticism towards outdated assumptions that the defence of American interests – via adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq and possibly Iran –is even intended to be compatible with the security and stability of the rest of the world. For, as Mann (1997) suggests, America’s role in a chaotic world is to defend the “national interest, not international stability”.
https://fortyninthparalleljournal.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/7-okane-coopting-chaos.pdf
In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend — but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
The aide said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/faith-certainty-and-the-presidency-of-george-w-bush.html
Tomgram: LeVine on Playing the Chaos Card in the Middle East
The problem with this narrative is that the neoconservatives, who were primarily responsible for launching the war on terror as well as the invasion and occupation of Iraq, have by and large not viewed chaos in this manner. For them, chaos has been not just an inevitable consequence of globalization, but a phenomenon that might be well used to further their long-term agenda of remaking the Middle East in America’s image. Indeed, as they saw it, it was only natural for the world’s first true hyperpower to adopt a historically well-tested policy of “creative destruction.” Their goal, as explained in the now famous comment of an anonymous administration official, was to “create our own reality” wherever we tread. (“We’re history’s actors,” he continued, “and all of you will be left to just study what we do.”)
Such a comment might seem the height of Bush administration hubris alone, if it hadn’t also reflected the avant-garde of American business thinking of the previous decade or more. In his 1988 book Thriving on Chaos, for instance, business guru Tom Peters argued that Americans must “take the chaos as given and learn to thrive on it. The winners of tomorrow will deal proactively with chaos Chaos and uncertainty are market opportunities for the wise.”
The advice of Peters and of the Pentagon was taken to heart by scholars and policymakers like Paul Wolfowitz, Samuel Huntington, and Robert Kaplan, who in the mid-1990s began writing of a “new cold war” or “clash of civilizations” between Islamism and neoliberalism across an “arc of instability” stretching from sub-Saharan Africa to Central Asia. Specifically, post-Cold War experiences in Bosnia, Haiti, Rwanda, and elsewhere in Africa called for an organized effort to figure out how the United States could best “manage the chaos” that the coming global “anarchy” was certain to bring.
Similarly, the World Bank argued in a 1995 report that modernizing the Middle East might well necessitate a “shake-down period” before the region could even begin adapting to the new global economic order. Some neocon intellectuals believed that the best way to manage such a moment was to bring it on, to provoke a level of chaos that would be but the prologue to a new, American-style world order. (In keeping with that spirit, “Shock and Awe” made its debut in Iraq in March 2003, a level of force whose very intention was to create chaos, however short-lived it may have been expected to be.)
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/30881/
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Jim D
Yes, this 1910-1940 period is often brought up. They fail to mention that in 1910 the sun was in a lull similar to today’s, and that period was cooler than even the previous few decades when the sun was more active. It is a cherry-picked starting point in the middle of a temporary dip. Also 1940-1950 was an active period for the sun, so that is a range that you would choose to best illustrate solar effects which may account for at least half that warming, as much as 0.2 C with the other half being the expected CO2 effect.
↧
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Rob Starkey (@Robbuffy)
Jim D.
Thanks for the link. Is the linked data what you really believe shows that a world with more CO2 will have a worse overall climate for humanity?
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Jim D
It gathers the data in one place for you. It is a good starting point, because once you decide which parts you don’t believe you can probably find references for it.
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by matthewrmarler
Jim D: https://www.coursera.org/course/warmerworld
2C by 2040, 4C by 2100? I was wrong about you making that up on your own. Sorry. About the changes since 1880 or thereabouts: what damages? How would an 1880-style climate be an improvement over what we have now?
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Jim D
Also, I would take issue with this statement “policies, that will be lucky to reduce warming by 0.2C”. Policies can make a difference of 2-4 W/m2 in forcing by 2100 (see the RCPs). Not even the most skeptical sensitivity estimates would say that the impact of that is as small as 0.2 C. There is something numerically wrong with that calculation.
↧
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Curious George
Many years ago the Communist world was running on five-year plans. It took two years to prepare the next plan, so doctors were asked what disease they would be fighting seven years from now. Planning is not always easy.
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Rob Starkey (@Robbuffy)
Jim D
Your link states–
“This course also offers projections for the 21st century for droughts, heat waves and sea-level rise in different parts of the world, with implications for food and water security, as well as possible impacts on agriculture, water availability, ecosystems and human health.”
If it was shown that the links “projections” were not based on remotely reliable models would it impact how much you believed these projections?
↧
Comment on Pink flamingos versus black swans by Curious George
And courts.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
