Belief and Knowledge and Humans and Nature:
Belief and Knowledge and Humans and Nature:
Revised: 20120703
I am starting this entry from a previous blog, Rhetoric Again - Cycles. I got some interesting comments as well as a couple of letters for that entry. To set the tone, here is a thought from the end of that blog.
There is little doubt that humans are the dominant life form on the planet today. We shape every ecosystem. We consume all forms of energy. Like the balances between plants and animals in the past we change the atmosphere and the ocean. Not only are we a dominant life form, we have this amazing ability to extract rocks and liquids and gas from the Earth and burn them. We have the ability to push around land, to make concrete, to remove mountains, and build islands. We are, therefore, not only biological, we are geological.
With this notion, I place humans as a force of nature – as part of nature. Because we have the ability to remember, reason, develop and accumulate knowledge, then unlike other parts of the natural world, we have the ability to make decisions that influence our future. Therefore, our role in nature, in the natural world is unique. To be clear, that uniqueness is not in our ability to change the environment, but in our ability to understand the consequences of those changes and the ability to anticipate and influence the future.
I bring up this idea of humans as a reasoned biological and geological force for several reasons. First, I believe that to set the world into two divisions, that which is natural and that which is human, is both a false and dangerous division. Focusing on climate change, it is a division that sits at the foundation of those who argue that the climate is full of natural cycles, and that the current warming is just part of that natural cycle, and hence there is no need for us to be concerned. Or alternatively, there is no need for us to modify our behavior because it is all a force of nature, and we don’t have any influence over nature. (see also).
This is a belief – mine, that humans are part of nature. But many others see humans as outside of nature. The outside perspectives are not simple. For example, there are those who see humans as a disturbance to nature, and there are those for whom humans have divine providence over nature. That is the second point I want to make, the very foundation of how we think about climate change, our environment, and our place in nature is belief based. It is a belief base associated with our personal identity.
I have been motivated to think about what we believe and how this impacts our behavior on climate change for many years. For the sake of this blog, that motivation rises from how do we communicate climate change? Some scientists spend a lot of time thinking about how to communicate their work; in fact, research sponsors often require plans for communication, outreach and broader impacts. Many scientists, trained in a discipline of evidence-based knowledge generation, fall naturally to presenting evidence-based arguments, with the idea that ultimately the evidence-based argument will be convincing beyond reasonable doubt. In many ways this invites an argument more suitable to our approach to legal problems. We the scientist will present the evidence base. This will stand in contrast to the arguments of the non-scientist. There will, ultimately, be judgment in favor of the evidence base, because, well, it becomes self evident. This form of argument does not recognize that we often look at evidence and make decisions that deny the existence of that evidence. We make decisions that align with, our desires, our beliefs and what we want to believe.
I have written about some of these communications issues, and they are compiled here in What to Do? What to Do?. What I want to state more explicitly than I have stated before is the importance of the recognition of the belief-based argument. First, I naturally contrast the belief-based argument with the knowledge-based argument, which is not really the right contrast. The belief-based argument is, in fact, informed by knowledge, but it does not give high weight to science-based knowledge. Hence, it is not especially useful to pose a belief-based versus a knowledge-based argument. I have already stated that both sides of the argument are belief based and that both sides on the argument are informed by knowledge. Hence, it is easy for these arguments to fall into an attack on identity – I the scientist work from the foundation of knowledge and the ability to generate knowledge. You do not. This is not useful.
Second, I have used belief-based argument with the idea that it might be viewed as a politically based argument or even a religion-based argument. I have often referred to the politically based argument in my blog entries, and I have stated that once in a political argument, where the foundation is not primarily science-based knowledge, there is really little purpose in arguing over facts and evidence-based knowledge of the Earth’s climate. There is even evidence that introduction of science facts increases the polarity of political arguments (here). In such an argument, people may be working from a different base of facts. This is especially evident in the arguments over biological evolution, divine creation and, say, the observation-based scientific description of progression of Earth’s life and climate.
Where am I planning to take this blog? The first place I want to take it is that the communication of climate change is complex and individual. If we mash together evangelical, conservative, and Republican as dismissive of climate change and view a concern for climate change as secular, liberal and Democratic, then we do disservice to all. It does not take much effort to reveal evangelical, conservative, Republican organizations that are concerned about and vested in ways to address climate change. That is why in the 2012 political environment, a focus on exposing those seeking solutions is a more useful way forward than perpetuating the political arguments and despair over the political response. There is no simple key that will be uncovered by a compelling presentation of knowledge; there is no single approach to communication that will be universally effective. Successful communication is purpose-based and recognizes the valid points of view brought to the table by all constituencies. It often requires overcoming barriers of prejudice.
The next place I want to take this blog is to return to the idea of natural cycles – climate variability. We have been faced with many environmental challenges. I am sitting in St. Cloud, Minnesota, in a region that was largely deforested many years ago, on the Mississippi River, which has too much nitrogen-based nutrients in the water. A few miles back I saw a bald eagle, a species that was endangered by DDT. We eliminated the use of DDT, and we have seen the return of the bald eagle and the ospreys. Why can we make that decision? Lot’s of reasons, and an important one is the easy identification of cause and effect and seeing the return of the eagle over one’s lifetime after DDT was banned. Climate change does not have that easy cause and effect.
Responding to climate change does not have the narrow focus of regulating an insecticide and saving a grand bird. It is not easy to see the benefit of regulating carbon dioxide emissions. Those benefits are many years in the future, and the near-term cost is high. It is like people not taking a medicine that has a 90% chance of curing them from a slowly progressing disease because they don’t understand how the drug they ingest might work; they don’t want to introduce alien chemicals into their body. They seem to be doing okay right now. And if we look at the consequences of climate change, they are frightening, threatening, and they are our fault. We don’t accept fault easily; we have a mandate to feel that we are right. We don’t like change forced upon us, either individually or collectively. We fall back to our beliefs, our identity.
After the blog Rhetoric Again – Cycles, I was asked whether or not I considered man part of nature? Yes, I am saying that man is part of nature. But I don’t think that nature proceeds as a completely unrestrained force. We are many, and we influence nature. In fact, we are at this time the most dominant force of nature. However, we are also able to investigate nature, develop knowledge, and anticipate scenarios for the future. Therefore, we can influence the course of nature. My belief is that we have the responsibility to act on this knowledge. And like people who get caught in cycles of behavior, perhaps trapped by psychological pitfalls, with recognition of our role in nature, we have the ability and the opportunity to take advantage of our knowledge.
To my students I try to teach that they separate what is known from what they believe and what they want to believe. Advocacy needs to be recognized by the advocate, and advocacy changes one's role in decision making. The advocate identifies with an issue and is trying to elevate one position relative to other positions. The convincing advocate for addressing climate change is anchored in a knowledge base that is drawn from scientific investigation. With a separation of what is known, from what is believed to be known, and what is desired based on belief, the climate-change advocate becomes more effective in the decision making process. It is then easier to incorporate climate knowledge into planning and policy and societal response becomes possible.
r
Reader Comments
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 — Blog Index
That is my impression as well. It seems that the science community is treating that organization as a bit "fringe".
Whether they're on to something or are overly concerned might take a bit of time to determine.
Are you able to find what you're looking for using NOAA's Carbon Tracker at the ESRL Global Monitoring Division? You can look at trends in Methane and Carbon Cycle Gases as far north as Nunavut, Canada. Although the chart comes up as CO2 first, you can select other gases.
I am not surprised that AMEG are catching some disfavor. It's no small thing (!), to openly agree with a message of planetary emergency. And I suppose that much of the community are now struggling for their own credibility, after the complete failure of even very recent consensus models to pace how fast things were going to happen in the Arctic.
We know for sure that there are immense amounts of methane hydrate on the Arctic shelves, storing both local biogenic methane and older methane leaking up from hydrocarbon-rich Eocene sediments below. (The very deposits that finally sank most of the carbon released at the Paleocene/Eocene boundary event - the last time we seem to have had a CO2-forced and CH4-amplified runaway).
Much of this hydrate will have formed just inside its stability field, and will decompose again if heated only a few degrees. Current Arctic warming pretty much guarantees a significant warming of bottom waters on the shelves and eventual decomposition of an awful lot of hydrate. The only question is when. There's also an Antarctic event waiting to happen sometime after, but by then it might not matter so much.
The reports from Semiletov et al. last fall of huge methane plumes on the East Siberian shelf are deeply worrying, and are most unfortunately consistent with recent data from ground- and satellite-based instruments showing high methane levels over the shelves. If warmer waters are starting to cause regional and large-scale hydrate decomposition, then the system is starting to go very nonlinear, and we'll know shortly if AMEG are correct. But if not just now, I don't see how they won't be correct in the next decade or so.
On the geological timescale, the methane stored in the Arctic basin is a bit like the CO2 stored in Lake Nyos, Cameroon. Every now and then it bubbles out and kills all the villagers.
Extraction of Gulfstream kinetic energy lowers fossil fuel GHG's while lowering Gulfstream SST's at the same time to restore Methane hydrates and locked up Co2 and restores Northern Arctic sea ice extent/ mass to whatever levels we want by regulation of those SST' in the Gulfstream to any temperature we want between 70 and 90 degrees F..
Plumbers flat out during cold snap
By Emma Sleath (Cross Media Reporter)
Burst water pipes all over town are keeping local plumbers busy as a new cold weather record is set in Alice Springs.
•
•
•
• 4
Local plumbers are currently in high demand as the cold weather wreaks havoc on water pipes all over town.
By Saturday (when we hit a chilly -5.2 degrees), Alice Springs had endured five nights in a row of minimum temperatures below -4, a new record in the region.
Warren Thompson, who owns a plumbing company in town, says he's been run off his feet.
"I was getting calls from about 8am [on Saturday morning] with people ringing up saying that they had no water coming out of their taps...then by about 9.30am everything started to thaw out and then all of the burst pipes appeared," says Warren.
"In the end I had to keep telling people to ring around, to try everyone, because we just weren't able to cope with the amount of calls that I was getting."
Warren says the majority of calls have been water pipes bursting in people's rooves, causing water to leak through into the houses.
"Waterpipes to air conditioners and hot water systems were freezing and splitting...and then basically leaking through the ceiling inside the houses," he says.
"When the water freezes it expands...so it takes up more space and with the copper, because there's no flexibility, it can't handle the expansion, so it splits."
"What we've been doing is putting extra insulation on pipework...but also insulation batts which you can buy at the hardware store, they appear to be helping as well, just by laying them on the effected area."
Stand pipes on outdoor garden taps have also been effected, with some using home-made remedies to keep out the chill.
Rural resident Yvonne Rowan, who works with Warren at his plumbing company, says she hasn't seen it this bad in twenty years.
"I think it's been a good 20 years since it's been this cold...since the pipes have been effected this much," she says.
"We've got all our outdoor pipes covered in carpet...we're also using cardboard boxes and old rubbish bins to cover them...unfortunately my plants haven't been so lucky!"
Monday, 2 July 2012 - Monthly Climate Summary for Northern Territory - Product code IDCKGC22R0
Northern Territory in June 2012: Cool nights from north to south
Minimum temperatures across the NT were noticeably cool this month with the area averaged minimum temperature ranking as the second lowest on record. The sub-tropical ridge was the dominant climate influence on the NT this month. A series of strong high pressure systems moving across southern and central Australia consistently pushed fresh, cool air north and blocked any rain-bearing systems from reaching the Alice Springs District.
Link
A tree in Siberia? Iceland? No, Neil Ross snapped these pictures on his rural block in Alice Springs, helping nature a bit by keeping his sprinkler on over night on Friday.
The current cold snap started on July 1 with zero degrees, followed by -1.7, -4.9, -4.3, -4, -4.4 and yesterday, -5.2 at 6.41am.
This morning it was -0.7 – we’re on the way back up!
The coldest day ever in Alice Springs – so far as records show – was July 17, 1976 when the thermometer dropped to minus 7.5 degrees.
If you want to be technical, the “terrestrial temperature” yesterday, measured at ground level, was minus 7 degrees. FULL STORY »
Posted: July 8, 2012 – 9:31 am | Comments (2)
All excellent examples of cold weather events we should expect to see less of in the coming years. Thank you for sharing.
The bridge (and some other infrastructure) at Kangerlussaq has been wiped out by a flooded river which originates in the ice.
Flow measurements are now about 3,500,000 liters per second. The former record was around 2,000,000 liter/second.
Don't know if this a generalized or only a localized event, but best to start paying attention. If generalized then sea level rise estimates might need an update and upsizing.
The Greenland Ice sheet is deteriorating rapidly this year. I was just browsing Neven's Ice Blog today and came across some startling facts, observations and conjectures:
1. Today, 7-13-2012, the temperature at the Summit (Elev. 3200m) has reached 36 degrees (F). I verified same on the Wunderground Extremes page.
2. The glacial discharge in the Watson river at Kangerlussuag is currently flowing at the rate of 3,500,000 liters/sec. The old record was 2,000,000 liters/sec. There is an astonishing video of the river wiping out the bridge which connected both sides of the town:
Watson River Video, Greenland, 7/12/2012
3. One of the posters on the blog is conjecturing that the Greenland Ice Sheet might lose 1,000 Gigatonnes of ice this year alone.
I believe that the best estimates of total ice loss world-wide (Greenland, Antarctica & Mountain Glaciers), in 2006, was less than 900 GT annually.
If melt rates continue like this, the sea-level rise projections are going to have to be revised upward.
If you're looking for good news, temperatures in Northern Siberia are predicted to reach the 90s in the next few weeks, so be sure to bring your shorts and swim gear!!
You beat me with the Breaking News about the bridge at Kangerlussuag.
Great minds work alike, however, yours seems to be working faster!
Thanks for posting this.
I'm sure this video will get prime billing on WUWT!!
Gosh, I guess that wraps it up for AGW. I mean, Alice Springs covers what, 93% or so of the Earth's surface, right? So if it's cold there then it's clear that the Earth has cooled.
On a more interesting note, I ran into a paper that had escaped my attention from 1979: Charney report to the NAS
I just wrote less.... ;o)
Open your eyes, your school swims in a most shallow sea
ARCTIC COLD BLASTS IN SOUTH AMERICAN REGIONS
Last Updated: 2012-06-07
BRASILIA, June 7 (NNN-PRENSA LATINA) - Record cold winter temperatures have come to South America this year, in places such as the town of Quaraí in the Brazilian region known as the Western Frontier, where a temperature of 2.2 degrees Celsius, the lowest of the year, was registered.
In this region, where winter extends between June and September, the outbreak of Antarctic air keeps millions of people on alert.
According to the Meteorological Institute, other Brazilian towns reported freezing temperatures, such as Vacaria with -2.1 degrees, Sao Jose dos Ausentes, with -0.9 degrees, Sao Gabriel, -0.8 and Santa Rosa, -0.8 degrees.
In the capital of Argentina and adjacent areas there was sleet this morning, and the locals do not rule out a snowstorm, a rare phenomenon in Buenos Aires, where the last snowfall occurred in 2007, after an 89 year gap.
However, meteorologist Mauricio Saldivar, told Perfil.com that for a snowstorm different conditions are required.
In Santiago, Chile, at sunrise, thermometers recorded the lowest temperature of the year, -3.7 degrees Celsius, weather officials confirmed.
According to the regional director of the National Emergency Office, Miguel Munoz, weather conditions for the Chilean capital are below the average temperature, given that winter is just beginning.
In Uruguay, the National Office of Meteorology issued an alert yesterday for the entire nation, because the cold will last until Saturday and will cause a marked decrease in the minimum temperatures which range between zero and -5 degrees Celsius.
--NNN-PRENSA LATINA
http://www.namnewsnetwork.org/v3/read.php?id=MTk2 NDA0
Link
We are aware that South America is located in the Southern Hemisphere which currenlty is in the midst of winter. Extreme cold weather is not unusual in the winter. Please provide dates and locations that broke all-time records. For that information to be meaningful to us, please provide data that shows which extremes were more than 2 Standard Deviations outside the long term average for that reporting station.
To the contrary, it's a rather deep and tumultuous sea filled with great knowledge slowly rising above the decaying fecal matter, deposited by WUWT, FAUX News and their minions, which is rapidly sinking to the lowest depths of the deepest trenches.
Now, now, no need to be petulant, just stating facts.
Yes Sir, I always post those records, just for y'all's pleasure.
CB, stick to your plan, best I've seen so far.
Here you go...
...and here...
...and here...
Simplistic comparisons are quite simply not appropriate here. One may as well look at the climate in, say, the southern Sahara and the northern Gobi, and exclaim, "Why aren't they the same?! Aren't they both both deserts?!"
The Battle Over Climate Science
Popular Science Magazine
Paleoclimatologist Michael Mann directs Penn State University's Earth System Science Center. Several months ago, he arrived at his office with an armload of mail. Sitting at his desk, he tore open a hand-addressed envelope and began to pull out a letter. He watched as a small mass of white powder cascaded out of the folds and onto his fingers. Mann jerked backward, letting the letter drop and holding his breath as a tiny plume of particles wafted up, sparkling in the sunlight. He rose quickly and left the office, pulling the door shut behind him. "I went down to the restroom and washed my hands,he says. Then I called the police.
Those crude acts of harassment often come alongside more-sophisticated legal and political attacks. Organizations routinely file nuisance lawsuits and onerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to disrupt the work of climate scientists. In 2005, before dragging Mann and other climate researchers into congressional hearings, Texas congressman Joe Barton ordered the scientists to submit voluminous details of working procedures, computer programs and past funding essentially demanding that they reproduce and defend their entire life's work. In a move that hearkened back to darker times, Oklahoma senator James Inhofe, the ranking member of the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee, released a report in 2010 that named 17 prominent climate scientists, including Mann, who, he argued, may have engaged in a potentially criminal behavior.Inhofe outlined three laws and four regulations that he said the scientists may have violated, including the Federal False Statements Act - which, the report noted, could be punishable with imprisonment of up to five years.
Propped into a corner is a hockey stick, a post-lecture gift from Middlebury College, which Mann jokingly says he keeps "for self-defense." (good to have a sense of humor)
Just to add some "perspective" - the next two links are to opensecrets.org (as they say - just "follow the money")
Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX)
Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)
Remember when I told you this prevents that?
Thank you Iceagecoming. Just trying to make you more happy with more ice extent and mass... You with me?
Nice pic. Have you seen this one?
"Certainly we are seeing an increase in large landslides over the past decades," Geertsema said, citing his 2006 study that found between 1973 and 2003 the average in northern British Columbia increased from 1.3 large landslides per year to 2.3.
Moreover, he said, most of the slides in northern British Columbia are happening in the warmest years.
Landslides like this one can also be triggered by other factors, Geertsema added, such as a combination of large snowpack and a cold spring that results in a delayed and then rapid melt.
Link
This prevents that:
Can you post the "Death Spiral" chart that you posted on Neven's blog today?? THANKS!!
There seems to be a lot of water warming in the Beaufort Sea and along the West Coast of Greenland. This doesn't bode well for maintaining the Arctic Ocean ice or the Greenland Ice Sheet this year.
Danish Meteorological Institute Map
One of the most astounding stats: between September 1979 and September 2011, roughly 75% of Arctic ice has disappeared--and the loss rate is increasing. Next time a denialist claims the planet isn't warming, ask him to then explain by what mechanism 3/4 of the ice has vanished in just 32 years
The satellite sensors that measure area apparently have trouble differentiating between open water and melt ponds - accumulations of melted water on top of the ice.
As the season progresses those melt ponds heat up (lower albedo) and generally melt through, creating open water. But right now they can make area look lower than it actually is.
I'm starting to view area as a great statistic when the temperature is low enough to freeze melt ponds, but sketchy during the melt season. If reliable, area is more meaningful than extent.
Thank you very much. With the current warm SSTs and air temps in the arctic regions, this will certainly approach being a record year of losses for both the Arctic Sea and the Greenland Ice Sheet. Next year could easily be more of the same.
Correct today it has already surpassed those years you mentioned Neapolitan. You have any idea how to restore the ice to pre industrial revolution extent/mass? How you like my idea on doing that?
A downward spiral, indeed...
I comment about once every other year, but you have inspired me cyclonebuster.
Having been in a similar situation as yourself, i have some questions that might help you. I won't comment again, so you don't need to bother posting answers.
1. What happens when the Gulf Stream stops?
2. Have you been to the Small Business Administration for help? I went there and they hooked me up with an experienced guy that helped me.
3. Do you have a business plan?
4. How many grants have you applied for? I just googled for "research grants" and got a shitton of leads. How about grants.gov?
5. How many venture capitalists have you shopped your business plan to? I found that it is best to go to their office (in my case silicon valley).
6. How about SCORE?
You keep posting your cute drawing on this forum, but dude, look at it. There are 8-10 posters here including an obvious troll, and about, what, 100 lurkers.
We get it!!
You have done the easy part, and have an invention to sell. Time to start selling!! (and this ain't the place.)
I'm glad to see that you've expressed an interest in South Polar sea ice. Perhaps you'd like to delve a little more into the fascinating topic; you may be interested to learn that, while they have certain similarities, the two poles are subject to very different mechanisms, and they respond to a warming climate in two very different ways.
Here you go...
...and here...
...and here...
Simplistic comparisons are quite simply not appropriate here. One may as well look at the climate in, say, the southern Sahara and the northern Gobi, and exclaim, "Why aren't they the same?! Aren't they both deserts?!"
Neap,
What bothers, or amazes me is that some people just post a chart or graph with no attribution or sourcing information. Not only that, they do not provide any comments about what that data tells them or what they expect us to infer from that data. If they are seriously concerned about learning and are just not interpreting the data correctly, we can help them learn. Otherwise, they're just wasting bandwidth and their time....but they're not going to waste my time.
Does Purple even know that it's winter in the Southern Hemisphere?
Viewing: 251 - 289
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 — Blog Index