1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Course code: Denial101x, April 2015

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by bwilson4web, Dec 30, 2014.

  1. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
  2. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Enrollment hockey stick
     
  3. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    NPR editorial

    Climate Denialists In Congress Acting As NASA's Kryptonite : 13.7: Cosmos And Culture : NPR

    I understand that most NASA Earth System Science (other than satellites) is modeling, or direct measurements (T, CO2, photosynthesis, etc). So are these things that people simply don't want to know about, or is it that somebody other than NASA should fund them?

    There is a thing called CRISPR in genetic research. It is quite important. While I understand that few of you are interested in CRISPR, does that mean NOBODY should know how it works?
     
  4. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    More things you are not supposed to know:

    Wyoming law against data collection: Protecting ranchers by ignoring the environment.

    Clearly Slate is not a 'centrist' news source, but you can all apply appropriate filters. With fluff removed, I am still not sure this is a good trend.

    You may be aware that there is a Large Asian Nation where it is illegal to set up your own personal weather station. Or put a stick in a river and measure flow rates over time. There are things you are not supposed to know, other than from official sources. This is not a direction that USA ought to follow.

    Freedom to know things.
     
  5. icarus

    icarus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    4,884
    976
    0
    Location:
    earth
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    ^that...is a stunning piece of legislation. I urge all to read it!

    Thanks,

    Icarus
     
  6. austingreen

    austingreen Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    13,527
    4,057
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX, USA
    Vehicle:
    2018 Tesla Model 3
    Model:
    N/A
    we have a lot of congress critters taking a lot of billionaire cash. Lots of these billionaires (ok there aren't that many) don't really want to know answers, they want to buy policy. So Steyer and buffet don't really want to know that moving oil by rail instead of by pipeline causes more accidents deaths, ghg, other environmental, and regulatory problems. They simply want to not build keystone. Buffet makes more money moving fuel on his railroads, Steyer gets to pretend he's a good guy. Science be damned. David and Charles Koch don't really want to know if ghg is damaging the environment, they really want to continue getting corporate welfare with no more regulation for their companies, and ghg knowledge might hurt that. The people these 4 men contribute to will fight hard to not know the science.

    But yes, NASA seems to lack some competence, and there is much duplication between NASA, EPA, NSF, and NOAA in funding projects. Perhaps it would be simpler to have people in NOAA and NSF run the projects if we want to know the science, and they can use NASA or spaceX or other companies to launch the satellites.

    I think outside a handful of billionaires and a lot of politicians, many americans want research to go forward. The problem is the media pays a lot more attention to those billionaires and politicians, and have fired most of their science reporters that might have made the research more understandable. I guess that puts me on the side of keeping some research in NASA because the media pays more attention to them than NOAA.
     
  7. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    Careful folks, we're starting to wander into Freds House of Politics stuff.

    Bob Wilson
     
    usnavystgc likes this.
  8. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    I suppose the risk of Politicization began when Cook named the course. I think in terms of ‘selective disregard for concordant evidence’, which is ungainly but covers the matter in an emotionally neutral way.


    Selective disregard is not inherently bad; our busy brains do it all the time, flooded with sensory inputs. But it can get you into trouble disregarding low-temperature behavior of o-rings, or in many other ways.


    We put up with it, and put up with the consequences. Fair enough I guess.


    However, wishing to not know things is far different from wishing that other people not know things. That’s what got my goat.
     
    bwilson4web likes this.
  9. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    AustinG, combining and streamlining research activities among govt. agencies does not sound like a bad idea. Too much research money gets 'administered away' inside the Beltway (maybe that is a purely personal beef).

    But if it means decisions about what gets funded, I should much prefer those decisions to be made with scientific competence. Closer to the original Vannevar Bush model. Further from overview by self-proclaimed non-scientists.
     
  10. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    Satellites are not cheap and they offer some of the best platforms for global inventories.

    Bob Wilson
     
    austingreen likes this.
  11. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
  12. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    A reasonable rule of thumb:
    • $100,000 ~= 1 person per year (inflation may have increased this some)
    • $300 m cut ~= 3,000 people cut
    • Large NASA center ~= 3,000 people,
    Larson B does not operate on a budget.

    Bob Wilson
     
  13. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    This week's lecture is on weather and climate change. Driving in this morning, I was reflecting on:
    • ~1400 deaths India heat wave
    • Texas flooding
    • California drought
    As unfair as it might be to blame 'bad weather' on man-made, CO{2} induced climate change, there is a certain poetic justice. People tend to forget the 'bad weather' over time so when it hits, it 'wakes them up.' They want to blame someone and there is this CO{2} included climate change . . .

    If you'all haven't noticed, I tie winter, Arctic cold snaps back to reduced Arctic sea ice. This makes sense because the cold air that left the Arctic has to be replaced by other air that comes from warmer regions. So Alaska sees a lot of winter days where it goes over 0 C. It is funny how the predicted loss of polar ice from the models just happens to dove-tail with this weather event. Even good friendly 'Mojo' has noticed the winter cold-snaps . . .

    So I'm not above looking a 'gift horse in the mouth.' If severe weather counters to misinformation merchants, too bad. <GRINS>

    Bob Wilson
     
  14. usnavystgc

    usnavystgc Die Hard DIYer and Ebike enthusiast.

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    3,159
    988
    0
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    Four
    Here are my thoughts (and I know I will get slammed for them).

    1) GW can be neither proven nor disproven. While evidence to support climate change can be found, do we really have enough info to emphatically state that GW is occurring? On the other side, evidence to refute GW can be found I'm sure but, the pot of money to gather this evidence is much smaller than the pot to find evidence to support GW. I personally do not believe we do have enough definitive evidence and won't in my lifetime. As long as there is a window for denial, you will find deniers. Labeling them as lunatics isn't going to cause them to jump over to the other side. Just because one doesn't believe like you do doesn't make them a lunatic.
    2) Many (scientists, universities, politicians etc.) are profiting both politically and financially by instilling fear about GW and the more fear they perpetrate, the more power and wealth they attain. This causes many "deniers" to doubt the "science" behind it. BTW, there is no solution for this. lol
    3) No matter what the subject is whether politics, abortion, evolution or GW, humans are inherently biased and tend to see thing from their biases. Admitting that is very hard to do and seeing things from the other point of view is very difficult. Humility is in short supply in this world. I plead guilty to that.

    The main question I have is, if all is true and GW is indeed occurring, what can be done and will it be enough to stop this from happening? I do not believe the majority of the world's population can be convinced to do what it takes to change. Even if they can be convinced and the changes are made and GW stops, how will anyone be certain that those actions are what caused it to stop? There are not two earths to study and one cannot be allowed to continue as we are going today. This does not allow scientific experimentation to continue and "prove" anything.

    I respect all of your opinions and know that you are very smart. I like to believe I am as well. :) Will we ever truly know?? If so, how?
     
  15. icarus

    icarus Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    4,884
    976
    0
    Location:
    earth
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Parts of Alaska were warmer yesterday than parts of Texas!

    Icarus
     
    bwilson4web likes this.
  16. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus

    It has more to do with attitude. When folks want to discuss something versus throwing firebrands, there will be reasonable responses. Fortunately, Doug does the heavy lifting of 'calming me down' when I get in brick-bat mode. Regardless, the course is aimed at addressing a wide range of opinions and not 'one size fits all.'

    The course provides a 'short' answer, the taxonomy, to characterize the problem. But they also provide the relief, information to persuade someone to understanding. So let's start with the more persuasive information followed by the term:
    There is no single study or piece of evidence that says "This is man-made global warming or climate change." Rather it is the collection of multiple, independent sources that tell us Global Warming is happening and it is from fossil fuels:
    • Temperature records - Berkeley is one I'm fond of but it turns out we find it in all sources including the notorious UAH data. For example Google led me to this: [​IMG] The first half of their data is mostly below 0.0 and after the El Nino year, mostly above. There are more technical details but this is the short version.
    • Ground spectral studies - we actually see the CO{2} re-radiation emissions from the ground and one study found the intensity followed the increase in CO{2} level over time.
    • Satellite spectral studies - we see the spectral distribution of earth from space shows the CO{2} impact and effect on energy flow from the earth.
    • Quantify other forcing functions - solar radiance, dust, and orbital effects are measured and understood enough to explain the variations.
    If you sign-up for the 'free' course, the first week covers the collections of scientific evidence showing we have man-made, global warming. Each weekly lesson is 3-4 hours long so I'm giving just the bare-bones summary but we can go into more detail if you wish. But there is a term for "GW can be neither proven nor disproven" called "Impossible Expectations."

    In math, we have the concept of a 'proof' where we can take the axioms and like pieces of a jig-saw puzzle, rearrange them to make a final picture. But science works on the preponderance of data. So Newton was right when he described physical laws but as we became more aware, it was replaced by Einstein's General Relativity. Within the information Newton had in a pre-industrial world, Newton was brilliant. But Einstein's day advanced to the point where we could look for light being bent by gravity. Do not expect a single smoking gun or denial characters in a Perry Mason moment confessing 'CO{2} is causing global warming.' Get informed and look at all of the evidence.

    This one we call "Conspiracy Theories" because it presumes someone is making a lot of money:
    So who has more money, "Hockey Stick" Mann or Charles Koch? Conspiracies cut both ways and sad to say, there is empirical data showing an association of former 'tobacco advocates' and today's 'climate deniers.' But Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn once said:

    If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?

    Yes there are evil people in the world who do dastardly acts. But descending into this black-hole means blinding oneself from reality . . . the facts and data. Still, some people prefer to live in such a fearful world of their own paranoid imaginations. I have/had blood kin who lived in their self-made, hell.

    We covered this in one of the other lessons, the relationship between one's 'world view' and:
    It turns out that those who most hate regulations and government are most inclined to be a GW or climate change denier. They realize that if GW is a real threat, one they can no longer ignore, it may lead to mobilization of local, state, federal, and UN rules and regulations to mitigate what might be an extinction event.

    This is an area of research still going on. The evidence is clear the fossil fuel CO{2} is a major driver of current GW. So try to find ways to stop digging the hole deeper. It turns out the study of GW has also suggested some approaches such as increasing carbon capture by 'fertilizing' ocean plankton and injecting particulates to reduce solar energy inflow. It really is cutting edge stuff.

    It isn't an all or nothing problem:
    The first step is to do a little reading and research. Understand I knew about CO{2} global warming after the first Venus probes showed why our sister planet is so hot it melts lead back in the 1960s. But there are a lot of subtle aspects I am just learning about . . . not because I want to but the anti-Prius b*stards call us 'green.' They are lying about my Prius purchase motivation which often means they are lying about everything else and especially to themselves. They actually believe their fantasies.

    So when a 65 year old man takes a course called Denial 101x, I'm not planning a career change into climate science. It means I am getting ready to answer FUD with facts and data. There is no guarantee it will work but at least I won't be someone else's patsy.

    Bob Wilson
     
    usnavystgc likes this.
  17. usnavystgc

    usnavystgc Die Hard DIYer and Ebike enthusiast.

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    3,159
    988
    0
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    Four
    That may be true but, how do you know that didn't happen in 2000 BC?
     
  18. tochatihu

    tochatihu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    8,973
    3,501
    0
    Location:
    Kunming Yunnan China
    Vehicle:
    2001 Prius
    Right now, the 'attribution' studies (did climate change cause event X?) are rather weak. Best probably in J Amer Met Soc. For usnavystgc (and many others) to get on board will probably require something more dramatic than we have seen.

    Large step change in temp, sea level, or Antarctic ice to. Whatever it may be, it will be dramatic enough change opinions. Even if it is not attributable at 95 % confidence or whatever.

    Till then, we have people swayed by concordant evidence, and others who feel it is still too subtle or possibly contradictory. Both extremes are decorated by extreme views.
     
  19. bwilson4web

    bwilson4web BMW i3 and Model 3

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    27,068
    15,372
    0
    Location:
    Huntsville AL
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Plus
    We know it is accurate because we have the modern era a temperature records. Asking about "2000 BC" is a "Red Herring" because we know GW saw the first upswing in ~1850 but didn't really take off until the 20th century. But this turns out to be an easy problem to research:
    https://tools.ceit.uq.edu.au/temperature/index.html
    • Select a region of central Texas, ~30 stations - calculate the temperature making a graph
      • keep the line red
      • rename it Texas
    • Select a region of Alaska, ~30 stations - calculate the temperature
      • change the line to blue
      • rename it Alaska
    • Display both lines and add a trend line for 1900 to 2015
      • Texas temperatures have trended constant
      • Alaska temperatures have trended warmer
    [​IMG]
    • Adjust the trend interval 1900-1979 and they intersect
    • 1979-2015 and they cross in the middle
    • 1900-1957 about the last time they were parallel
      • The tool lets you fiddle with start and end dates but the longest parallel period I've found is 1903 to 1972. Around 1972, Hansen found CO{2} induced GW was overpowering all other temperature drivers.
    Bob Wilson

    ps. The tool is not as easy as I would like but it can be mastered in a few minutes. The data can be downloaded to load into excel for better charts and trending lines.
     
    #39 bwilson4web, May 28, 2015
    Last edited: May 28, 2015
  20. usnavystgc

    usnavystgc Die Hard DIYer and Ebike enthusiast.

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    3,159
    988
    0
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    Four
    It's not a matter of who has more money, I simply stated that they are profiting. And how does that dastardly devil Charles Koch get lumped into this??? Oh yeah, he's the rich evil man the left loves to hate.