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
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Frank WimberlySent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 11:27 AMTo: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions
From NASA:
-----------------------------------Frank WimberlyMy memoir:My scientific publications:Phone (505) 670-9918
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 11:24 AM Frank Wimberly <[hidden email]> 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 WimberlyMy memoir:My scientific publications:Phone (505) 670-9918
On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, 11:09 AM <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dave,I like these questions, and I think The Congregation should take them as achallenge.What can we-all, we who have long association, and a generalized (ifsomewhat guarded) respect, come to agree upon with respect to climate changeand human activity? By what process, with what attitudes, by what rules ofengagement, 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 beyondhuman reach.So, for starters, I find I am inclined to disagree with your facts asstated. They seem to assert that Things (whatever Things are) are not asbad as they were predicted to be. Yet, I find, I am inclined to believethat in fact Things are worse. The only specific data I feel I have beenexposed to recently is ocean surface rise and glacial melting. But eventhere, I would be hard pressed to match your specific references to any ofmy own. So, I guess the conclusion is, I disagree, but I don't know what Iam talking about. Ugh!I could (after some labor) cite data to support the following concern: whatwe 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 inCanada and maize in the US, and as the climate alters, the bands of climatesupporting these two crops will move north. But what happens if one yearthe climate demands one crop and the next the other? And the switch fromone to the other is entirely unpredictable. Anybody who plants a gardenknows that only two dates have a tremendous effect on the productivity ofyour garden: first frost and last frost. The average frost free period inmy garden in Ma 135 days or so, but only a few miles away, it is as short as90. And while we have never had a 90 day frost year, we have had last frostdates in June and first frost dates in early September. It would take avery small year-to-year increase in variability to turn my garden fromsomething that could support life for a year in New England into a 30 x 50wasteplot.I think I could show you that the period in which we live, the Holocene, isa period of remarkably low, year-to-year, variation in climate VARIABILITY.I think I could convince you that everything that has occurred in the lastten thousand years by way of civilization is entirely dependent on thatanomalous stability. The neanderthals were not too stupid to doagriculture; the climate of the Pleistocene would not permit it. The wholeidea of nation states depends on the idea that one can make more or less thesame kind of living by staying more or less in the same place and doing moreor less the same thing. A return to Pleistocene year-to-year variationwould obliterate that possibility.If then, I could convince you, that --quite apart from Global Warming-- weare seeing an increase in climate variability, then, by God, I think I couldscare 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 beharvested for the long run.Happy New Year!NickNicholas ThompsonEmeritus Professor of Ethology and PsychologyClark University-----Original Message-----From: Friam <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Prof David WestSent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 9:45 AMTo: [hidden email]Subject: [FRIAM] climate change questionsQuestions, that do NOT, in any manner or form deny the reality of climatechange.In 1990, citing the "best scientific models available" stated that becauseof carbon dioxide emissions, the Earth would warm by an average of 3 degreesFahrenheit and the U.S. as the largest producer, by an average of 6 degreesFahrenheit by 2020.The UN IPCC report of the same year predicted a range of temperatureincreases ranging from 1-5 degrees F, with the most likely expectationsbeing 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 ofdomestic 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 badlyincorrect predictions, grounded in the best available scientific models, andover-hyped "disaster scenarios" promulgated by those with political orsimply "circulation" motives.In light of this context of "error" and "hype," is it fair to tar everyoneexpressing 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 carbonscrubbers to ...) along with analyses of cost/benefit ratios, humansocio-economic impact, etc. and compare them?Is there more than one strategy for getting out of this mess; and if so, howdo we decide (and/or construct a blend) on one that will optimize ourchances?davew============================================================FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservMeets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribearchives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove============================================================FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservMeets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's Collegeto unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comarchives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove============================================================FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservMeets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's Collegeto unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comarchives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |