Sci-Tech: Globalization will end because of technology, not politics!

This is a science and technology posting… but we’ll start by posing a political question and then answering another... then using technology to answer a big one, about the future of globalization.

1) Candidates, where do you stand on science?  56 scientific organizations representing 10 million scientists and engineers, led by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), have posed a list of twenty science-based questions, offered up to Clinton, Trump, Stein and Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson. They have until Sept. 6 to send in their answers.

"Most of the questions are entirely unsurprising (and sadly still controversial): AAAS asks how candidates plan to address climate change and growing global energy needs. Some questions are new this year. “There is a growing opioid problem in the United States, with tragic costs to lives, families and society. How would your administration enlist researchers, medical doctors and pharmaceutical companies in addressing this issue?” 

Other new issues included immigration, mental health and biodiversity." Intriguing stuff... And short of nuclear war, can you think of anything more important? Yet more politically neglected?

At this even longer have been the folks at sciencedebate.org - (led by Shawn Otto, author of The War on Science: Who's Waging It, Why It Matters, What We Can Do About It), who have been relentless in trying to get candidates to admit we live in an era of science and that facts matter at least 10% as much as polemics. 

I'd go farther. I'd demand that every member of Congress name his or her science adviser.  If they name a fool or a shill, that would hurt them.  If they name someone eminent from their district, then that eminent person might either sway the politician... or embarrass him.

2) Some of you ask why I pal with John Mauldin, a conservative economist, government-skeptic and dedicated (though less-so with Trump) Republican. What? Other than the fact John’s a terrific guy? Also, his insights and critiques are everything that a sane American conservatism could bring to our national conversation… pro-science & diversity & tolerance-friendly, pragmatic, pro-small-business… everything that today’s GOP is diametrically opposed-to. We need that conservatism back at the negotiating table! Though it will only emerge, phoenix-like, from the ashes of a monstrous Confederacy-madness that Rupert Murdoch raised with his 30 year satanic rites.

How does that relate to today's topic? Here’s a link to one of the best articles on globalization I ever read, by John’s partner Patrick Watson. It explains how globalization got its start with four major technologies… 

...and why four more will bring about its end, returning us to an era of local production, when fleets of ships and pipelines and trucks will no longer be the lifeblood of the world economy.

And yes, they point out that while some have lost, due to globalization, most of the people of this planet have benefited spectacularly. And those (of you) who oppose globalization strictly as a convenient excuse for simplistic protectionism are thus reflexively committing horrific racism.

Those eight technologies changed - or will change - the world. But what Patrick and John leave out is the topmost driver of 70 years of globalization. Pax Americana. Not only did the planetary order set up by George Marshall and Harry Truman protect the world from major war for an entire human lifespan, allowing 90% of nations to spend amounts on arms and armies that were minuscule compared to any past generation…

…but the trade networks they erected were diametrically different than the mercantilist regimes erected by Pax Romana, Pax Sinica, Pax Brittanica and every other empire. Pax Americana has been ANTI-mercantilist, allowing, even fostering, the development of local industries, all over the globe. This simple measure is the one innovation that uplifted first Europe and Japan, then Korea, Taiwan and so on… till now the American consumer is raising-up masses in both China and India at the same time. It is the chief reason that 3/4 of the world's children bring school books back to homes with electric lights, toilets, running water and a modestly well-stocked fridge.

It is the prodigious American accomplishment that historians of the future will most prominently note, far above measly moon landings. And we did it by buying several trillion dollars worth of crap we never needed. Oh, irony.

== End globalization right! ==

But yes, it's time to move on from carbon-spewing globalized trade! For example: 
      "General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt says that “wage arbitrage” is over. Robots do not care where you install them. They cost about the same and work at equal speed no matter where they are. Robotics will greatly reduce the incentive to make goods far from the end user simply to save on labor costs. The new incentive will be to produce in proximity to your customer. This will let you deliver faster and offer greater customization."

Local production, robotics, local food, these trends will build, bringing benefits and troubles of their own. But all the tech trends seem to point in this direction. And about time, because all those cargo planes and cargo ships are helping to cook us!

Given the nature of their newsletter audience, John and Patrick only glancingly nod at the top reason to reduce our use of fossil fuels. 
(Psst... it's pollution-driven climate change!) 
But I won’t begrudge them the gentleness of their ministry to the near-terminally delusional.  At least they are trying.

Oh… before we shift topics... here’s just a couple of science-y news items showing how we will de-globalize.

Vertical farming stacks crops on top of one another in a climate controlled, indoor facility, using aeroponic technology, which involves misting the roots of the plants, using an astonishing 95% less water. The plants are grown organically, in a reusable cloth made from recycled plastic, so no soil is needed. What’s cool is that the technology is mature… it actually works on pragmatic and commercial scales, at least for table greens. Doubtless there are some crops that won’t apply.  But this — plus tissue-culture meat — could loosen humanity’s death grip on the planet’s arable land, just in the nick of time, and make our cities much more sustainable. 

And a Tesla car drives owner to hospital after he suffers pulmonary embolism.

A day after Elon says the "era is coming faster than we think."

== Science in trouble? ==

This lengthy and illuminating article -- The 7 biggest problems facing science, according to 270 scientists – began when the authors sent scientists a survey asking this simple question: If you could change one thing about how science works today, what would it be and why?  

According to one researcher the selection pressures in science have favored less-than-ideal research: "As long as things like publication quantity, and publishing flashy results in fancy journals are incentivized, and people who can do that are rewarded … they’ll be successful, and pass on their successful methods to others." 

The article offers in-depth reflection on a number of problems ranging from peer review to publish-or-perish to funding misallocation and lack of incentives for replicating or disproving earlier works.  Note also a recurring theme that I have promoted for decades, that of transparency – a concept and a methodology that, if not invented by science, certainly has been promoted in this civilization foremost by science.

Alas, the article also has its own problem – a complete lack of big picture perspective.

Dig it, every single one of the listed problems was with us in the past! In most cases far worse than today, with fewer corrective measures in place.  Indeed, the gripes – and proposed solutions – presented in this article are manifestations of a very strong, ongoing, self-critical, self-improvement campaign within science. In large part, we are not witnessing a deterioration of scientific behavior but rather a steady rising of awareness and standards. 

In other words, Criticism is the vitally important Only Antidote to Error.  But not all mea culpas come from realization of turpitude. Reflective criticism can also be a declaration: “let’s get even better!”

It is no surprise that fallible human beings have trouble measuring up to the most honesty-driven pursuit in the history of our inherently delusional species. What stands out is that millions want to try. The very standards by which scientists find their own field lacking are standards brought into our civilization by science.

Of course the background for all of this is a drumbeat War on Science, being waged by bits and corners of one end of the political spectrum… and every corner of the other end. Science and scientists have earned the respect they have from most, sane citizens. Beyond any reasonable doubt, fanatics are hurling much of their calumny out of jealousy.

Indeed, that is why critical self-examinations like this one merit both our serious attention and heed to historical perspective. Clearly, scientists are faulty humans and have a long way to go, like the rest of us.  They are merely (on average) the best and smartest and most knowing and most honest of all professions.

== A science roundup of wowzer amazements ==

The latest – cool-looking – attempt at a flying car. 

A new kind of luminescent cement will be able to absorb enough solar energy to then remain illuminated for up to 12 hours at night, even when the day is cloudy. Brilliant. 

This 250 ton monster digger scours the ocean depths, looking for mineral wealth - gold, copper, nickel, zinc and cobalt. 

A fascinating story of how Oregon scientists discovered the first new blue pigment in 200 years, both brilliant and extremely durable.  

Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal has developed an automotive steel sheet that is 30% lighter and 25% stronger than the toughest high-tensile steel now on the market, hoping to help carmakers build more fuel-efficient, safer vehicles.

Using neuro-imaging data, Carnegie Mellon University researchers have identified four distinct stages of math problem solving -- encoding, planning, solving, and responding. Although the study focused specifically on mathematical problem solving, the method holds promise for broader application.

Led by Richard Carson, a Yale-led team of researchers has developed a way to measure the density of synapses in the brain using a PET (positron emission tomography) scan. They invented a radioligand (a radioactive tracer that, when injected into the body, binds to a type of protein and “lights up” during a PET scan) that is uniquely present in all 100 trillion or so synapses in the brain.  With this noninvasive method, researchers may now be able to follow the progression of many brain disorders by measuring changes in synaptic density over time or assess how well pharmaceuticals slow the loss of neurons.