[Peace-discuss] persistence of data

Tue Jul 26 01:38:38 CDT 2011

In fact I think it's fairly well established that global warming is occurring, 
although there does seem to be a question about the extent to which it is 
anthropogenic. It seems clear that it  is producing real problems that need to 
be dealt with by democratic action - not by corporate interests.

In a keynote speech in China a year ago ("Contours of the world: continuities 
and changes," August 13, 2010) , Chomsky observed - correctly it seems to me - 
that there are two major threats to humankind: "One is the environmental 
catastrophe, the other is the threat of nuclear power."

Chomsky enlarged upon the point in answer to a question about whether he was in 
favor of nuclear power:

"No. I don't think anybody's in favor of nuclear power, even business, because 
it's too expensive. But what I am in favor of is being rational on the topic. 
That means recognizing that the question of nuclear power isn't a moral one -- 
it's a technical one. You have to ask what the consequences of nuclear power 
are, versus the alternatives.

"There's a range of other alternatives, including conservation, solar and so on. 
Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. But imagine that the only 
alternatives were hydrocarbons and nuclear power. If you had to have one or the 
other, you'd have to ask yourself which is more dangerous to the environment, to 
human life, to human society. It's not an entirely simple question.

"For example, suppose that fusion were a feasible alternative. It could turn out 
to be nonpolluting. But there are also negative factors. Any form of nuclear 
power involves quite serious problems of radioactive waste disposal, and can 
also contribute to nuclear weapons proliferation."

On 7/25/11 11:58 PM, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
> The perversity of these supposedly clever arguments can hardly be overestimated.
>
> The money behind the (anthropogenic) global warming "deniers" comes mainly 
> from fossil energy corporations and right wing elements such as Tea Partyers 
> (funded by Koch like types) and their representatives in Congress.
>
> Abysmal ignorance on the environmental problems facing the globe, or whatever 
> else is hidden behind this (facade of?) ignorance, on the part of those who 
> may be "anti-war" ought not to be excused. Carl ought to query his idol 
> Chomsky on what he thinks about AGW, and while at it he might query him about 
> the catastrophic dangers of nuclear power about which Chomsky has been 
> strangely silent.
>
> --mkb
>
> On Jul 25, 2011, at 4:21 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>
>> These are the Obama Years: the Second Law of Thermodynamics will be 
>> RIGOROUSLY ENFORCED until a desirable result is obtained. (But the media are 
>> not to investigate or report on the process, until a successful outcome is 
>> reached; cf. Overseas Contingency Operations from Libya to Pakistan//.)
>>
>> The important question about AGW is of course, How do you make money from it? 
>> As my old friend Cooey Bono (no relation to singers of that name), use to say 
>> "Who's ox [or was it 'ogs?] is being al-Gored?"
>>
>> We need in fact an Al-Gore rhythm to beat upon our fellow citizens' heads and 
>> calculate how they'll react to the temperature's being slowly raised on their 
>> immersed anuras...
>>
>>
>> On 7/25/11 4:04 PM, "E. Wayne Johnson 朱稳森" wrote:
>>> Ultimately it seems that the general good will be greater threatened
>>> by coldness than by being excessively warmed.
>>>
>>> Carbon dioxide is great stuff if you are a plant, and plants seem to have 
>>> exceptional utility.
>>>
>>> There is a tendency toward aggregation, and aggregation seems to result in 
>>> concentration of wastes although
>>> there is some economy in non-duplication of some shared solutions to needs.
>>>
>>> It's not just big business but big cities also are a problem as well as a 
>>> solution.
>>>
>>> [It's the Second Law of Thermodynamics that's the problem.
>>> Perhaps if we can cut the funding for its enforcement, it
>>> will just sort of recede into the dustbin of obsolescence?]
>>>
>>> The problem is not so much Government itself (yes it hurts to say so) but
>>> rather it's the Perversion of Government and the Perversion of the Law
>>> such that the Many are bent to serve the desires of the Few.
>>>
>>> I perceive that the Few embrace the AGW/climate change concept as another 
>>> opportunity for
>>> further concentration of wealth and concentration of authority.  Authority
>>> concentrated is the power to gain more and more wealth.
>>>
>>> It is a pretty cool trick to harness the energies of those who champion for 
>>> the Many
>>> and pervert their activities into the service of the goals of the Few.  
>>> Predators
>>> have lotsa cool trix for snaring kids.  Silly rabbi.
>>>
>>> Championing for a better environment is a lofty goal and a desirable end.  
>>> Thy keepers and owners hath
>>> not such ideals.  They see every popular cause as a ripe plumpness to be 
>>> expertly massaged and milked
>>> for their benefit.  Those with milk await the relief of their burdens.
>>>
>>> Those in power care not for history, data, or ideals.  They dont give a 
>>> frank fuck (a "wan, eitolated [sic] damn",
>>> as "Fred Reed" noted) about you.  But they are certainly willing to 
>>> (reluctantly) take on more and more authority so
>>> that they can improve their own lives while creating the illusion of 
>>> improving yours.
>>> They really do care,more than you think, about what you think.
>>>
>>> Hence war, hence too big to fail, hence bailouts (not for us), hence a 
>>> number of other
>>> evils too numinous to count.
>>>
>>> On 07/25/11 8:20, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>>>> I don't think there's any doubt that there are long-term climate changes, 
>>>> including warming and cooling trends. And the historical record seems clear 
>>>> that these trends have social effects.
>>>>
>>>> In Europe, the Medieval Warm Period (aka the "Medieval Climate Optimum") - 
>>>> e.g, England was a major wine-producer in in the 12th & 13th centuries - 
>>>> was perhaps the most important factor in the great cultural efflorescence 
>>>> of the High Middle Ages. It was reversed by the climate changes of the 14th 
>>>> century (bad harvests, a Malthusian crisis, and the conditions conducive to 
>>>> the spread of bubonic plague), which brought the medieval mode of 
>>>> production to an end and led to the rise of capitalism.
>>>>
>>>> It's also agreed that the Little Ice Age was a period of cooling that 
>>>> occurred after the Medieval Warm Period. The term LIA was introduced by 
>>>> François E. Matthes in 1939. It is conventionally defined as a period 
>>>> extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries. NASA considers the term to 
>>>> refer to a cold period between 1550 CE and 1850 CE and notes three 
>>>> particularly cold intervals: one beginning about 1650, another about 1770, 
>>>> and the last in 1850, each separated by intervals of slight warming.
>>>>
>>>> It also seems that we're in the midst of another warming trend.  The 
>>>> question is whether it's anthropogenic. Has industrialization added to what 
>>>> may be a normal fluctuation? It would seem reasonable, but it some sense it 
>>>> doesn't matter too much: we need to control industrial pollution, the 
>>>> externalities of industrial production, and that can be done only by 
>>>> concerted government action.  Driving a Prius doesn't make much difference, 
>>>> but neither does condemning the heretics who have turned away from the 
>>>> great god AGW.
>>>>
>>>> Climatologists have only interpreted the world; the task is to change it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/24/11 6:15 PM, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
>>>>> I dont think it's a conspiracy, I think that it is Fraud.
>>>>>
>>>>> But thanks for the links.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/25/2011 7:02 AM, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
>>>>>> Read the IPCC report, or its summary. Another will be coming out soon. 
>>>>>> Here are other sources, with data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many others, but deniers like you refuse to accept the 
>>>>>> scientific data and their arguments. There is overwhelming consensus on 
>>>>>> this from the climate/scientific community. It is not a conspiracy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I have no idea what you are talking about ("same cats") in your last 
>>>>>> paragraph. It's nonsense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --mkb
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2011, at 4:41 PM, E. Wayne Johnson 朱稳森 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Urbana is a completely unprotected location on vast flat terrain
>>>>>>> with no buffering body of water nearby.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is good mixing of air with winds coming from all directions.
>>>>>>> Urbana appears to be a reasonable sample.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Indeed it is only one point on the big grid, but it has lots of data,
>>>>>>> and one should see /something/ if there is a major shift going on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After all, every cloudburst cyclone heatwave dryspell and blizzard
>>>>>>> is the result of "climate change" if one believes the media.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Denier seems to suggest that belief in AGW (like that in GWB) is a 
>>>>>>> matter of faith.
>>>>>>> I would rather say I am not a denier but rather am unconvinced by the 
>>>>>>> lack of
>>>>>>> a thread of evidence.  All the warping and woofing is not convincing me 
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> it's not all made up of whole cloth.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The fray is relevant here because those same cats who gave us the 
>>>>>>> endless war,
>>>>>>> the end of democracy, and economic-financial terrorism want to bring us
>>>>>>> embroidered eco-authoritarianism under the cloak of some general good.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They have a motive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where's the data?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 07/25/11 2:02, Morton K. Brussel wrote:
>>>>>>>> It doesn't seem like anything dramatic is happening in these two plots, although they are somewhat hard for the interpretation of any trends, if any existed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But the far more important point is that Urbana is but one point on the global map. No conclusions can be made from any one location. The global data on temperature and related events are conclusive that warming has been occurring, and, moreover, scientist studying the climate know there are physical reasons why.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm surprised you are (still?) a denier.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --Mort
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Jul 24, 2011, at 1:13 AM, E. Wayne Johnson 朱稳森 wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    
>>>>>>>>> Urbana is pretty much the center of the meterologic universe as judged by the meteorism that
>>>>>>>>> typifies its city government.  Thus it's temperature data can be used for global inferences about
>>>>>>>>> climatic trends.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Urbana is the furthest northern point at which I ever domiciled, and I always felt as if there was nothing
>>>>>>>>> between Urbana and the north pole except an ill-maintained barb-wire fence.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If there really were such a thing as global warming, it would have to be for the
>>>>>>>>> benefit of Urbana's frozen few.  The Urbana Water Survey has the daily temperature data
>>>>>>>>> to tell for the asking all the way back to the Gay90's.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The plot below shows the daily minimum temperatures (T min)for
>>>>>>>>> days below 10F (very cold days under my assumption of what is "cold").
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <moz-screenshot-9.png>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My great-grandmother told me about the terrible winters of her childhood in the
>>>>>>>>> late 19th century.  1977 and 1978 were truly awful for sure, but not the coldest it seems.
>>>>>>>>> There might be some rough suggestion of periodicity, but one needs a few
>>>>>>>>> hundred years more data to work it out clearly.  The relatively mild winters
>>>>>>>>> of the 1940 to 1970 were still pretty cold.  One doesnt find any trend
>>>>>>>>> suggesting a permanent reprieve from the ravages of those nasty Urbana winters.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The international media are suggesting that AGW is verified by the heat waves
>>>>>>>>> that plague the United States.  Below I present the incidence and intensity
>>>>>>>>> of hot (>92F) days in Urbana.  Keillor says that on really hot days the cats go to the basement
>>>>>>>>> and put their feet in the air.  Such data is not readily available and there could be many variables,
>>>>>>>>> particularly since most cats dislike water, and do generate CO2 and other volatilities.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One has to make do with the available data.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> <幻灯片1.JPG>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was in-utero for most of 1954 but I don't recall my mother complaining about the heat,
>>>>>>>>> although she did take me to the doctor because of my profuse perspiration which has
>>>>>>>>> been a lifetime condition so far.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have heard stories about 1936.  A certain Mr. J.N. Irvin of Hamilton County
>>>>>>>>> told me that it was so hot in 1936 that he and his brother used to dig
>>>>>>>>> holes in the yard and sleep in the dust just to stay cool.  The data supports his remembrance
>>>>>>>>> and perhaps the behaviour as well.  They didn't have electricity in Twigg Twp in '36
>>>>>>>>> let alone AC or even Tang Dynasty fans for Anthropogenic Local Cooling.
>>>>>>>>> They say that in Iowa it was so hot the children used to wet the bed to stay cool.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The inconvenient truth seems to be that there is no trend toward any sort of
>>>>>>>>> warming as judged from Urbana other than the typical cycling progression of the seasons previously
>>>>>>>>> observed by Enoch.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is also a persistent lack of persistence of memory and maybe some soft clocks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>    
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This body part will be downloaded on demand.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110726/a5696280/attachment-0001.html>