Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Climate Etc.
Viewing all 148700 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Book publishing in the 21st century by stevepostrel

$
0
0

For me, the only downside of Amazon’s growth has been the demise of the browsing function at physical bookstores as these disappear. There is no recommendation system or electronic sampling system I’ve seen that approaches the discovery potential of being able to physically browse volumes.

In principle, a sufficiently nimble (and unencumbered by publishers’ copyright paranoia) interface could allow a virtual shelf that approximates the ability to pick up, peruse, and see the neighbors of a book on a physical bookshelf. In practice, on those rare occasions when I do visit a physical store I end up finding and buying (or occasionally showrooming) way more books than I ever do online. Just try the exercise of looking online at the index of a book to see how it treats some item you know about or are curious about, skimming those passages, looking at another item, seeing who blurbed it, reading the author’s credentials, etc. It is so clunky (and often blocked by missing pages not made available for sampling) compared to the meat-space alternative that it is easy to give up.


Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by RiHo08

$
0
0

“So having to deny the emotional need to talk about what’s on your mind all the time … those are some of the burdens that climate aware scientists and activists have to endure.”

When one talks about an emotional state, including depression, on any subject, the next question is: how much does this issue, and the stress from this issue interfere with your daily activities? Does the stress come from talking climate change with your brother-in-law whom you consider a jerk and wonder why your sister married him in the first place? Or is the climate change issue so stressful that your husband has to take the kids to school as you always have a meltdown when you see the science teacher who is filling your children’s heads with lies and denial and you are considering withdrawing your children from school and home schooling only if you had time?

For the obligatory Thanksgiving Dinner do you say: “Look John, you and I don’t see eye-to-eye on climate change. Why don’t we just agree to disagree? Or, do you take the unscabbard turkey carving knife and plunge it into the stuffed bird saying: “this is what I think of you and your denialism!”

Interference with daily activities provides a launch point to ask further questions about daily activity disruption; is this a behavioral issue on your part? needing some tips to steer you through the usual family social mine fields? Or, is this a time when you should run, not walk to the nearest mental health facility and consider a Selective Serotonin ReUptake Inhibitor.

Usually the weight of the world is not on our shoulders. Maybe, at times, it feels like it; but, in reality, it isn’t. The sensation of being overwhelmed and depressed usually reflects other issues within yourself that you struggle with more or less on an ongoing basis. Climate change is not necessarily a topic infused with more or less moral or ethical certainty or value, it’s just what floats one’s boat.

I hope Carmille Parmesan has more than a good cry, and repurposes herself with the aids available to her.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by A fan of *MORE* discourse

$
0
0

Joshua wonders “Judith, just wondering if you could manage to be more condescending?

The millions of families that have veterans back from the wars, or care for foster-kids, or have lost family farm sto drought, or to predatory agribusiness, or to strip-mining …

… are none of them making light of the trauma-related concerns that are the focus of this Climate Etc essay.

Conclusion  Joshua, your personal criticism is off-base and unwarranted … Judith, your treatment of these trauma-related concerns is inexplicably insubstantial.

Good on `yah, Barbara Kingsolver and Wendell Berry (and hundreds more) for tackling these topics responsibly, rationally, and respectfully.

\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by k scott denison

$
0
0

Beat me to it Latimer. What a child.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by Rob Ellison

$
0
0

The Borg collective cult of AGW groupthink space cadets is the point. Arguing science with the insane we have tried. It doesn’t work. Much better use of time to laugh at the psychopathology – talk past true believers and move on.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by mosomoso

$
0
0

We’ve had lots of climate change depression in Oz starting in 1791, though the aborigines were pretty sure there’d been much worse drought not long before. Of course, those monsoon failures of the 1790s were far more dire for India. Depressing even.

Oxley tried to explore inland in 1818 and got depressed by endless wet country. Some years later Sturt and Mitchell got depressed by endless dry country – which happened to be the same country as Oxley saw. Mitchell, who shared Michael Mann’s dismal ignorance of drought species (though Mitchell had an excuse), thought inland NSW must be on the verge of becoming treeless, open downs. He thought no plant could withstand the conditions he was witnessing.

Also depressing was the drought which dried up the Murrumbidgee River (150ft. wide, 60ft. deep) in the late 1830s; and the world’s greatest known inferno in Victoria 1851 (not long before the monumental Murrumbidgee flood of 1852). Depressing.

Seemed to peak with the horrors of 1902, this widespread climate change depression, but it hasn’t gone away. Heat alone – there were also the mega-fires – gave us our most lethal natural disasters in 1896, 1939 and 2009. Depressing.

So we know what the poor climate scientists must be going through – on our very superficial level.

There’s a bit of climate change depression here now. I’d like to fly to Europe to get away from it all…but the whole valley might burn down. I do hope Professor Parmesan got help with her airfare and got to go business class where she was far more likely to encounter a NYT or Guardian reader. In tourist class you “don’t just start talking about unbelievably fast sea-level rise”. No, you just have to “deny the emotional need” to talk about that Early Holocene.

Ah, guys…what about my adults? Found any yet?

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by jim2

$
0
0

There is also the phenomenon of “existential depression.” I could well be that the scientist in question is simply depressed for no apparent reason. But a reason like that isn’t very satisfying, so the victim begins to cast about for a cause. Hey, I work with “climate change” every day – yeah, that’s it! I’m depressed because of “climate change.”

From the article:
Existential depression is not a condition of chemical imbalance in our brains. Existential depression is not caused by any specific situation in our lives. Rather, we just discover that we are depressed in the depths of our beings. And the use of anti-depressant drugs only masks this condition. (Of course this might be a very useful effect,
if we are inclined toward irrational suicide whenever we notice our existential depression.

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~parkx032/CY-DEP-K.html

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by Joseph

$
0
0
<blockquote> Hang out at Climate Etc. Listen seriously to a serious skeptic.</blockquote> After ridiculing her here, I don't think Climate Etc. is going to be her first stop, <blockquote>but I don’t know that much psychology myself</blockquote> That seems to be abundantly clear,

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by rabbit

$
0
0
<I>“You don’t just start talking about unbelievably fast sea-level rise at a cocktail party at a friend’s house,” Tidwell says </i> Whaaaaaat? Sea levels have been rising at a fairly constant rate of 2.5 mm per year for the last fifty years. Where does this "unbelievably fast sea-level rise" idea come from? It's pure baloney. I presume this is Mike Tidwell the climate activist. That's reassuring, as there's no way a climate <i>scientist</i> should be saying such things.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by jim2

$
0
0

I think asteroid strikes are a much bigger worry.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by jim2

$
0
0

It’s slapstick, but it’s still funny.

Comment on Book publishing in the 21st century by Rud Istvan

$
0
0

Hi Johanna. Yes, copyright is an elephant in the room. But I see different issues than you cite, and also different issues from my daughter’s ( who is a licensed attorney specializing in international intellectual property, especially copyrights).
70 years is way too long for ebooks, but maybe not for Darwin’s Origins.
But there are much larger issues. Many blogs (see WUWT) claim everything they post is copyrighted. Comments? Guest contributions from others? Other’s Charts promoted from comment to post? A complete mess. (and that term is used advisedly by this non-practicing but licensed attorney)

Because my books use copious illustrations, I have had to be very careful (epublisher insists). Self created images, no problem. Government doc images usually (not always) do not claim copyright. Scientific paper images usually do, and you have to rely on the US fair use doctrine, which does not have equivalent precedent in Europe. My post here and book essay Shell Games provides numerous examples. That doctrine is also how I ‘repurposed’ some ‘copyrighted’ Greenpeace and WWF images from their fund solicitations. Should advertising/ solicitations even be copyrighted –perhaps except as an entirety or as a trademarked (different than copyright) slogan?
My second book was held up almost 6 months just getting residual republication image permissions in writing for the remaining images. In the end, I avoided one roadblock by spending two days to recreate in Excel a graphic from US public information that was ‘copyrighted’ as published by an advocacy organization. The changes? colors of the various categories, and their stacking order, since all the data was public in the first place. I sent the ‘reproduction’ to the ‘copyright holder’ who was nonresponsive for several months, and got a green light in two days. I used my version, not theirs, anyway. Really useful copyright law!?!

I completely agree with you that the tide is turning in favor of intellectual freedom, no different than after Guttenberg printed the Bible and put monk scribes out of business. It is moving fast right now, and precedent based law is of course lagging. Another reason for using an epublisher to spot any major unintentional copyright infractions.

Hope you will get and enjoy Blowing Smoke. Savor each stand alone essay.
Regards from the front lines.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by jim2

$
0
0

Joshua – shouldn’t you be making better use of your time? Oreskes probably could use some cheering up.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by PA

$
0
0

I was responding to the:
“In the U.S., [climate change] isn’t well-supported by the funding system.”

http://capitalresearch.org/2013/07/sue-and-settle-secret-backroom-deals-by-bureaucrats-and-environmentalists-hurt-the-american-economy/

I can’t get a good number for the amount of profit activist groups get by suing the government and the amount of twisted regulation that results from it.

The actual amount of budgeted for climate change was 0 in 1988.

Since then about $221 billion has been spent, $99 billion pre-obama, the rest during the current administration.

This doesn’t include regulatory cost.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/fcce-report-to-congress.pdf

There is almost a billion in “International Assistance” alone in fiscal 2014.

This kind of money creates a feeding frenzy. What we have is a environmental-government complex where lobbying and politicial donations buy government funded studies, handouts, and regulations. The studies fuel the climate concerns. The grant machinery has been hijacked (reading the climate RPFs is entertaining) so that few “skeptical” studies will be funded.

That was my point – sorry for any confusion.

The $22.4 in the 2014 includes if memory

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by Kneel

$
0
0

Look, squirels!

Can’t you understand that sea level is rising at 1.8 x 10^8 nM per century? That’s some BIG numbers! We’ll all die, I tells ya!


Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by A fan of @MORE@ discourse

$
0
0

Dick Hertz complains “That [2014 Hugo Award-winning cartoon is unbearable, awful.

That’s not what Randall Munroe’s creative peers think, eh Climate Etc readers?

Your special brand of intimate pain is shared, nowadays, by very many denialists, Richard.

Why oh why, do the world’s artists, scientists, engineers, mathematicians, business leaders, military leaders, and religious leaders … and nowadays, young people especially … overwhelmingly reject denialism?

The world wonders!

\scriptstyle\rule[2.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}\,\boldsymbol{\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}\,\heartsuit\,{\displaystyle\text{\bfseries!!!}}\,\heartsuit\,\overset{\scriptstyle\circ\wedge\circ}{\smile}}\ \rule[-0.25ex]{0.01pt}{0.01pt}

Comment on Book publishing in the 21st century by John Robertson

$
0
0
FOMD - did you actually READ Hanson's 1988 paper? Always go to the source! If so you would have read "We define three trace gas scenarios to provide an indication of how the predicted climate trend depends upon trace gas growth rates. Scenario A assumes that growth rates of trace gas emissions typical of the 1970s and 1980s will continue indefinitely: the assumed annual growth averages about 1.5% of current emissions, so the net greenhouse forcing increases exponentially. Scenario B has decreasing trace gas growth rates, such that the annual increase of the greenhouse climate forcing remains approximately constant at the present level. <b>Scenario C drastically reduces trace gas growth between 1990 and 2000 such that the greenhouse climate forcing ceases to increase after 2000.</b>". (pg 3 of 24 pages in this doc, it was part of a larger one so it shows as page 9343...) In other words for business (growth of trace gases) as usual the result would be scenario A, freezing production at 1980s levels would produce scenario B, and only by cutting CO2 and other trace gases drastically would produce scenario C. Didn't happen, did it? Read the paper <a href="http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha02700w.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. It took me ten seconds to find with a Google search for "Hanson 1988 paper".

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by jim2

$
0
0

I thought Obola’s “Hope and Change” would cheer up even the most forlorn scientist.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by Matthew R Marler

$
0
0

Jim D: However, the angriest ones seem to be the skeptics, and understandably given their interesting self-invented conspiracy theories.

Scorn. And derision. Directed toward self-pity.

I don’t know where you find the anger and conspiracy theories.

Comment on Pre-traumatic stress syndrome: Climate trauma survival tips by k scott denison

$
0
0

Joshua –

Just wondering if you could be a bigger putz. Oh, yeah, nearly every time you post, I forgot. Never mind.

Viewing all 148700 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images