tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post5274383389542176280..comments2024-03-28T15:48:48.514-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Climate: Have we reached the tipping point?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger96125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-72225021215972484062014-09-18T00:31:03.950-07:002014-09-18T00:31:03.950-07:00onwardonwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54506323786998983832014-09-18T00:25:19.539-07:002014-09-18T00:25:19.539-07:00"Most of the poor countries are not on atolls..."Most of the poor countries are not on atolls and flooding is not the primary problem there."<br /><br />Major misconception here,<br />Yes most are not on atolls<br />BUT most ARE in the flood plains of major rivers<br /><br />What happens to those rivers when the sea levels rise???<br /><br />They FLOOD - and cover the MOST fertile land with water <br /><br />Duncan Cairncrossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-39074678858750754982014-09-17T22:33:40.202-07:002014-09-17T22:33:40.202-07:00@Alex
Venice is a praise of the human spirit and ...@Alex<br /><br />Venice is a praise of the human spirit and achievements (the spirit of Dr. Brin's Uplift series). It were built in the mud more than 5 centuries ago. The buildings lie on wooden piles under the water. And the Venetians not look suffering - I was there in April. The same spirit can save Miami probably, but it vanishes. The end is always near, we reach overpopulation, starvation, The Great Horse-Manure Crisis, end of resources, peak of oil, global cooling, global warming, tipping points etc. over and over again from centuries and nothing of this actually happens. Scientists and engineers always change the game and the things not go on as they were. I am offering to help poor countries with education, technologies and economic growth, what will solve many other problems. Most of the poor countries are not on atolls and flooding is not the primary problem there.Unclenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35625521421197661062014-09-17T18:20:03.159-07:002014-09-17T18:20:03.159-07:00Paul Shen-Brown:
Sometimes I wonder if adults are...Paul Shen-Brown:<br /><i><br />Sometimes I wonder if adults are only a myth...<br /></i><br /><br />The problem with our media culture is that we intimately "know" more celebrities and politicians than we do actual human beings.<br /><br />My co-workers, neighbors, and close family members strike me as pretty well-adjusted adults. Those people on tv, OTOH, make me despair as you do, until I remember most of what we see there is an act.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2217733498944729612014-09-17T17:56:58.370-07:002014-09-17T17:56:58.370-07:00@Robert. The nicest argument one can make for the...@Robert. The nicest argument one can make for the decision is that Nasa is covering it bets. A safe selection in Boeing that has proven deliverables, plus a side bet on a more innovative company SpaceX to add some competition and a likely earlier delivery, but may also fail.<br /><br />Pity about dropping SN's Dream Chaser as this looked very interesting too. I hope that they can continue with development. Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-81542916105767867132014-09-17T17:52:50.268-07:002014-09-17T17:52:50.268-07:00@Tacitus2. I have read that the Chinese couldn...@Tacitus2. I have read that the Chinese couldn't actually sell the US treasuries they own. At best they can purchase other US assets (which they seem to be doing already, much as petrodollars were back in the 1970s and 80s.<br /><br />As you say, neither the US nor China will exit the WTO for obvious reasons.<br /><br />At some point the Chinese will have to allow the yuan/USD rate to rise, reducing their ability to export. Whether the US can regain the manufacturing it has lost is another matter. <br /><br />If the US invented anti-pollution devices that worked, I would happily give them away/offer free licensing/whatever, if that would effectively reduce global pollution.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-28810982525871712822014-09-17T17:45:05.098-07:002014-09-17T17:45:05.098-07:00@Uncle
Yes, but we can make things worse if have w...@Uncle<br /><i>Yes, but we can make things worse if have wrong assumptions. Do you think burning in UK a wood from USA and Canada make things better (see Drax power station). I'd rather invest in reforestation.</i><br /><br />Since I didn't in any shape or form suggest that the UK burn Canadian wood, this is a strawman argument.<br /><br />Replacing incandescent bulbs with LEDs is a start. Unfortunately, they are still rather expensive, and the cheaper ones, predominantly from China, appear to fail rather quickly. But keep researching and get those prices down. And could you make them not look like incandescent bulbs. In the meantime, I will continue to use fluorescent bulbs for most application. LEDs work for me when used as spotlights.<br /><br />As regards solar and wind. Any suggestion that they are not net benefits regarding CO2 emissions is fatuous. This is reminiscent of the time when the right-wing talk show hosts tried to suggest that hybrids were more energy inefficient that gasoline trucks because they had batteries. This talking point was very quickly debunked. But the lie got halfway around the planet before the truth caught up. <br /><br />We'll see what happens to Miami in a century. But so far it is starting to flood. It wouldn't surprise me if Miami suffers the same fate as Venice and for the same reasons. By the way, are you offering to help poor countries that will suffer from flooding while you continue to burn carbon?<br /><br />So your proposal so far is replace light bulbs with LEDs (not going to be nearly enough) and some vague technology R&D will increase energy efficiency, which is happening anyway and is good (even though there is opposition to mandatory efficiency increases for US automobiles). Is that going to be nearly enough to stave of the impacts of warming? You know the answer, it is not.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3518523585168769092014-09-17T17:14:33.927-07:002014-09-17T17:14:33.927-07:00You can fairly argue that neither China nor Russia...You can fairly argue that neither China nor Russia are really Communist countries now. But it is in their "political DNA". Only a few decades back you would be sent to the gulag, or worse, for oversleeping and in a small way setting back the Five Year Plan for tractor production or some such. It will be a damn tough sell asking them to potentially curtain their economies for any reason.<br /><br />Lawyers might not be enough. Us or them leaving the World Trade Org is interesting but trade wars get ugly fast. You used to castigate Republicans for endangering the US economy. Imagine China calling the US debt they hold.<br /><br />Oh, and I doubt the Chinese will buy billions of dollars of antipollution gadgets. If they get to the point where Beijing air is more solid than gaseous state they are more likely to simply industrial espy the schematics from us and pirate the tech.<br /><br />Got anything else in the tool kit?<br /><br />Tacitus<br />believe it or not the antispam code word is Tacitus!Tacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53792764414597824402014-09-17T16:48:46.691-07:002014-09-17T16:48:46.691-07:00I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in NASA...I must admit I'm a bit disappointed in NASA's selection of Boeing as one of the two finalists for the "Commercial Crew" program. What's worse, it got the lion's share of the money, with SpaceX getting half as much.<br /><br />The end result? Two space capsules with the one with innovative technologies and designs (SpaceX) getting half the funding over the glorified Apollo capsule from Boeing.<br /><br />Left out? The small space-plane from Sierra Nevada Corp. <br /><br />It would have been far better for the Dream Chaser and Dragon 2 to have gotten equal amounts of NASA funding, and Boeing told "nice try, but give us something with more innovation and less waste."<br /><br />I also can't help but feel politics are involved in this decision. Boeing is a major U.S. aerospace company, and yet their entry (which is not as innovative as the competitors) won two thirds of the money.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41650590508722867962014-09-17T16:43:38.458-07:002014-09-17T16:43:38.458-07:00Dear Dr. Brin,
We are trained relentlessly to watc...Dear Dr. Brin,<br /><i>We are trained relentlessly to watch out for confirmation bias</i><br /><br />In this discussion I am stipulating you have the right of it on the scientific questions. I am talking about confirmation bias among your opponents. I'm sure they would mostly insist they are trying to be "fair and balanced." But they fail. This is how human brains work, especially when politics or religion is involved. <br /><br /><i>the denialist cult, which bobs and weaves and ducks and backpedals and allows NO ANSWERS to modify their enraged accusations.</i> <br /><br />So, what are the possibilities? A) they know just what they are doing, and are stone evil. B) They are really stupid. (The creativity of the bobbing and weaving seems evidence against this.) C) They are influenced by cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, us/them groupthink, etc. (Just for completeness and so as not to be accused of dogmatism, we could include option D) maybe they're sort of almost kind-of right, with an unmeasurably small expected probability. For instance, Earth could be hit by a massive asteroid next year, rendering the discussion moot. Low probability.)<br /><br />So, which hypothesis are we going to bet on, and what is the solution? How do you reform the demons, or educate the dullards, or snap your fingers for the hypnotized? Or just ignore them? That doesn't seem like an option.<br /><br /><i>lately become more polite</i><br />I'm trying.<br /><br /><i> he is a member of a cult.</i><br />So where does that leave us? You live among a bunch of evil ignorant cultists. How are you going to deprogram us? Maybe your next novel will become the "Uncle Tom's Cabin" of climate change? (The context makes it difficult, but I do not intend that as sarcasm.)<br /><br />Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17330240621500931648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47230393807192669522014-09-17T14:51:50.526-07:002014-09-17T14:51:50.526-07:00@locum. Given your background, a TWODA would be:
...@locum. Given your background, a TWODA would be:<br /><br />"We ought to give John broad spectrum antibiotics, because otherwise he may die of an infection we haven't been able to identify." <br /><br />This is not a moral argument, but one based on evidence.<br /><br />The equivalent climate TWODA is that we have evidence that:<br /><br />1. Our climate is within narrow ranges is required for our present civilization without huge changes.<br />2. The globe is warming.<br />3. Human CO2 emissions are the best explanation of the proximal cause.<br /><br />Therefore reducing CO2 concentrations in the biosphere looks like the best approach to take. You can pile on moral, economic and other arguments, but unless you have believe that potentially allowing millions of people to die is an acceptable risk for not doing anything, then you need to advance other approaches.<br /><br />What I would find morally repugnant is to willfully let people die for selfish reasons, particularly when solutions are available that don't require us to shiver in the dark wearing hair shirts.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-15480880218326420922014-09-17T14:38:14.789-07:002014-09-17T14:38:14.789-07:00While scientists are indeed a competitive lot, the...While scientists are indeed a competitive lot, the increasing demands for peer review reform should be raising some flags about how much that competitiveness does to ensure that incorrect research doesn't get published. Perhaps we need paid reviewers of more open peer review. There is also the question of who gets hired in academia. It is well known that in the social sciences, hiring is very dependent on which ideas are held. There have been claims that this has happened in the hard sciences, most notably in physics departments that adhere to String Theory. And of course there is the old saw that obsolete theories die when their adherents are dead too. All of which is to say that science isn't perfect, but, as you have stated in the past, is SELF-CORRECTING in the long run.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25620039290694294252014-09-17T14:28:25.981-07:002014-09-17T14:28:25.981-07:00TWODA (things we OUGHT to doing anyway) is not a s...TWODA (things we OUGHT to doing anyway) is not a scientific position; instead, it is a moral position based on a scientific principle.<br /><br />The statement that 'John may die if current circumstances continue' is a scientific argument because it can be supported by empiric observation.<br /><br />The statement that 'We OUGHT to help John or he may die' is a moral argument that assumes that we should want (or are somehow obligated) to prevent the death of John because of culturally specific social or religious precepts that are not necessarily based on science and/or empiric observation.<br /><br />Likewise, the argument to prevent climate change is also moral rather than 'scientific', even if you can prove that ongoing climate change will result in adverse consequence for all, meaning that TWODA advocates are no more 'scientific' than any other culturally-specific jihadist.<br /><br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25250910431181325652014-09-17T14:20:05.123-07:002014-09-17T14:20:05.123-07:00Tacitus, the US can bring suits against China in t...Tacitus, the US can bring suits against China in the WTO that if successful would cost them many billions and force changes or get them kicked out. We also have the option of leaving WTO and slapping tariffs. There are many potential tradeoffs and one would be for them to reduce our trade deficit by buying a lot of pollution abatement stuff.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-83920586836394176522014-09-17T14:18:00.418-07:002014-09-17T14:18:00.418-07:00Arm-waving terms like "confirmation bias"...Arm-waving terms like "confirmation bias" does not let Mr. Bruns escape my challenge. You, sir, clearly know no scientists.<br /><br />We are trained relentlessly to watch out for confirmation bias and other traps and to use dozens of methods to chaco that we might be wrong. But, knowing that we are human, we know also that the only ones who can find our biggest mistakes will be our competitors.<br /><br />Which is why science is by far the most competitive (ruthlessly so) of all human endeavors. And if you do not know this, in your bones, then you know no scientists and have never engaged in science.<br /><br />Given this trait, one is behooved to ask why some media push the opposite image, of nerdy meek wusses following each other around, like lemmings? <br /><br />Can group think or confirmation bias take hold, even despite science being fiercely competitive? Sure. The central scientific paradigm in ANY field is simultaneously 98% right... and contingently about-to-change as constant poking reveals new flaws and improvements. Moreover, every now and then a central paradigm is proved to be WRONG!<br /><br />So? These are fixed with fiercely competitive specific questions that can be specifically answered... exactly OPPOSITE to the approach used by the denialist cult, which bobs and weaves and ducks and backpedals and allows NO ANSWERS to modify their enraged accusations.<br /><br />The rare CATUAL SKEPTIC like Berkeley's Muller, was an irritant to the climate community, but his questions were specific, and pointed, and he forced some areas of doubt to be re-examined.<br /><br />Moreover, Muller set criteria (which Mr. Bruns refuses to do) by which his doubts might be satisfied. They were fierce ones. But last year he stepped up and declared "I am now satisfied."<br /><br />... something Mr. Bruns will never do, because there are no results or proofs or incremental increases in evidentiary support that will make him negotiate TWODA. Because (although he has lately become more polite) he is a member of a cult.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-48081374029791377132014-09-17T14:12:41.128-07:002014-09-17T14:12:41.128-07:00David
I am confused. Are you saying that the Uni...David<br /><br />I am confused. Are you saying that the United States has the power to kick China out of the World Trade Organizaton? Or that our depriving them of the latest iPhone will bring them groveling to the negotiating table?<br /><br />I am still waiting for something of substance. Something that will make pretty much the only nation on earth still building coal plants (I have seen a stat claiming they open a new one every ten days)..to "go green"?<br /><br />iPhone restrictions might work on your teenager. This is a more serious issue.<br /><br />Come on, bring the A game. How are you going to persuade the world?<br /><br />TacitusTacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-48880779733614167592014-09-17T13:29:31.206-07:002014-09-17T13:29:31.206-07:00@Paul Shen-Brown give them some cognitive dissonan...@Paul Shen-Brown <i>give them some cognitive dissonance!</i> Not helpful. Cognitive dissonance means that when evidence arrives that contradicts a deeply held/felt idea, the evidence is forgotten, dismissed, minimized, misremembered, sabotaged in some way. The question is how to defuse this, separate the facts from the wishful thinking.<br /><br /><i>People who hold extreme positions simply can't see anything else except their own camp and their perceived opposite, into which they shove everyone on Earth. Arguing with them is pointless</i> <br />Actually, not just extremists, though extremists are more likely to have a subconscious emotional commitment to ideas. Arguing is pointless, so how do we persuade?<br /><br /><br /><i>Science knows no politics.</i><br />This does not prevent partisans from trying to spin science and use it to flog their tired nostrums. One hundred years ago, supporters of eugenics claimed the mantle of science. Even if all scientific claims about climate change are true, the subsequent wrestling match about what to do about it seems likely to involve a rehash of some old, tired partisan struggles.<br /><br /><i>[Politics] takes advantage of our nature as social animals, which leads us to the demon twins of confirmation bias and belief perseverance, substituting for logic. Fortunately, our social nature does not turn everyone into sheep</i><br />Not all the time. But no one is impervious to this influence. To become aware of it is the first step toward defeating it, but not the last.<br /><br /><i>[F]or most, it's a propaganda war</i><br />How do we show that it is not? When so much is at stake, when no one gets to opt out and watch from the sidelines, it is not enough to be correct. Persuasive? Empathetic?Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17330240621500931648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-525678603588981932014-09-17T13:25:35.538-07:002014-09-17T13:25:35.538-07:00Why is there no negotiation on TWODA for environme...Why is there no negotiation on TWODA for environmental policies?<br /><br />The same exact reason there is no negotiation on even the most reasonable and logical of gun control legislation.<br /><br />There is an inherent (and not entirely inaccurate) fear of "if we give an inch they will take a mile and destroy everything."<br /><br />So conservatives refuse to even negotiate on things that make sense because it's the Other that is suggesting it. And the Other is the Enemy and cannot be negotiated with because they're terrorists and anti-American. Even when they are American.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80167824495909072252014-09-17T13:09:41.036-07:002014-09-17T13:09:41.036-07:00China needs us vastly more than we need China. It...China needs us vastly more than we need China. It is time to ask them to choose whether they wish to remain members of the World Trade Organization. e.g. --<br /><br />Apple, unannounced, is suddenly unable to ship its new iPhone 6 family into Communist China. <br /><br />The proximal cause of this sudden halt appears to be the unwillingness of the Chinese government to issue the appropriate permit. But this isn't a reason, it's a tool.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82047898069842699502014-09-17T12:59:31.688-07:002014-09-17T12:59:31.688-07:00Oh my, trade negotiations.
What are you prepared ...Oh my, trade negotiations.<br /><br />What are you prepared to offer/threaten to induce China to keep carbon output at current levels or lower.<br /><br />I did ask for specifics.<br /><br />Handwavium don't count.<br /><br />TacitusTacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29781633691275797852014-09-17T12:41:47.383-07:002014-09-17T12:41:47.383-07:00Alas, this leaves us with folks like poor Mr. Wils...Alas, this leaves us with folks like poor Mr. Wilson, jibbering and capering about and actually convinced that the spittle he flings is a reasonable substitute for reason and science.<br /><br />Take his screeches about George Soros… who is (yes) a democratic billionaire… who has 1/10th the money, influence as Rupert Murdoch and 1/50th the media reach. The reason Fox rails about Soros is that they know that middle class Americans will sooner or later realize that oligarchy is their deepest enemy. And the Koch-Murdoch-Saudis want to set up scarecrows to keep their dittoheads from drawing conclusions: “Hey, everything on Fox is commanded by Koch-Murdoch-Saudi… oligarchs!”<br /><br />But Mr. Wilson will never budge… even though I deal with Soros decisively here:<br />https://www.facebook.com/thedavidbrin/posts/625402840566<br /><br />If he had any guts or curiosity, he would read that.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-42680590074844455072014-09-17T12:40:35.409-07:002014-09-17T12:40:35.409-07:00Tacitus2 we KNOW you don’t watch fox! Did you thi...Tacitus2 we KNOW you don’t watch fox! Did you think that we had so low an opinion of you? If YOU were a republican candidate, for any office at all, we would sit at your debates with sober and earnest respect. But your kind of Republican is on the ropes.<br /><br />Yes! TWODA things are happening! They are happening because the GOP has lost significant elections! As for China, I favor very aggressive trade renegotiations, on many many topics.<br /><br />I truly wonder if folks might be surprised at the reaction, if some daring Republican in a Purple district ran on a “take conservatism back from the crazies and oligarchs” platform?David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61310425528864028452014-09-17T12:40:06.251-07:002014-09-17T12:40:06.251-07:00David Bruns asks: “How to break the hypnotic spell...David Bruns asks: “How to break the hypnotic spell of Fox News?”<br /><br />Good question. Fox - backed by AEI and Heritage and Cato and very deep pockets - has become very good at what it does. It is very hard to break through a Nuremberg Rally that is so culturally self-reinforcing… the “victims” deeply WANT the mantras to succeed.<br /><br />That is why I have concentrated on what I do best, finding jiu jitsu moves around the loggerheads. I do not try to go toe-to-toe over evidence pro-or-con on climate change. That is sumo, grunting and pushing and AEI and fix equip denialists with all the anecdotal arm-waving assertions they need.<br /><br />Instead, I aim for the deeper underpinnings. Like why no negotiation? If you think that some lefties want us to “shiver in the dark” are there NO intermediate or practical measures you’d allow, just in case the smart folks turn out to be smart, after all? TWODA is a powerful concept and it lays bare which side is the one being spectacularly unreasonable.<br /><br />Likewise, the notion that scientists are the most competitive of all humans… this shatters the narrative that they are herd beasts…<br /><br />But in fact, there are stupid people in all directions and I despair that liberals have been too stupid to look for jiu-jitsu methods, instead allowing the fox-ites to keep choosing the narrative (sumo) battlefield. David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76474462626993889142014-09-17T11:09:19.976-07:002014-09-17T11:09:19.976-07:00Even if the Mew Climate Economy report is incorrec...Even if the <a href="http://newclimateeconomy.net/" rel="nofollow">Mew Climate Economy report</a> is incorrect, there is a very interesting potential parallel with Ray Bradbury's "The Toynbee Convector".Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-63144005741124303472014-09-17T10:52:32.790-07:002014-09-17T10:52:32.790-07:00@Tacitus2
I gather Bakken oil is 2x as expensive ...@Tacitus2<br /><br />I gather Bakken oil is 2x as expensive to produce as conventional oil wells in the US and on a par with Canadian oil sand extraction costs. So this sugegsts that production is highly dependent on prices being high. Could end up a boom and bust. <br /><br />IIRC, traditional mining operations have typically left such states with the tab for environmental cleanup. Fracking is probably not nearly so bad, but it wouldm't surprise me if a bust left a lot of untended seeping wells contaminating te groundwater for farms.Alex Tolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01556422553154817988noreply@blogger.com