Global Warming: Recent Data

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Wed Jun 21, 2017 12:33 pm

Whaddaya know? The Heartland Institute rides again: https://www.heartland.org/about-us/who- ... l-matthews
Just so you all know who you're reading:
Merrill Matthews, Ph.D., is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation
"Institute for Policy Innovation" ? Who dat?? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/In ... Innovation
IPI is an associate member of the State Policy Network (SPN), a network of right-wing "think tanks" and other non profits spanning 49 states, D.C., and Puerto Rico.[2] ...
The conservative Capital Research Center ranked IPI as amongst the most conservative groups in the US, scoring it as an "eight" on a scale of one to eight.[3] IPI has received funding from corporations like Exxon Mobil and organizations like the Kochs' Claude R. Lambe Foundation, Scaife Foundations, the Bradley Foundation and others.
"State Policy Network" ? Who dat?? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/St ... cy_Network
The State Policy Network (SPN) has franchised, funded, and fostered a growing number of “mini Heritage Foundations” [emphasis added] at the state level since the early 1990s.[1] SPN is a web of right-wing “think tanks” in 49 states, Puerto Rico and the U.K. It is an $83 million right-wing empire as of the 2011 funding documents from SPN itself and each of its state "think tank" members. Although SPN's member organizations claim to be nonpartisan and independent, the Center for Media and Democracy's in-depth investigation, "EXPOSED: The State Policy Network -- The Powerful Right-Wing Network Helping to Hijack State Politics and Government," reveals that SPN and its member think tanks are major drivers of the right-wing, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)-backed corporate agenda in state houses nationwide, with deep ties to the Koch brothers and the national right-wing network of funders.[2]
this is kinda fun, in a gruesome sorta way ...
The Koch brothers -- David and Charles -- are the right-wing billionaire co-owners of Koch Industries. As two of the richest people in the world, they are key funders of the right-wing infrastructure, including the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the State Policy Network (SPN). In SourceWatch, key articles on the Kochs include: Koch Brothers, Koch Industries, Americans for Prosperity, American Encore, and Freedom Partners.
Hey! We got back to Trump!!
The Heritage Foundation (nicknamed Heritage[1][2]) is an American conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. The foundation took a leading role in the conservative movement during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, whose policies were taken from Heritage's policy study Mandate for Leadership.[4] Heritage has since continued to have a significant influence in U.S. public policy making, and is considered to be one of the most influential conservative research organizations in the United States. After the 2016 election of Donald Trump as U.S. President, Heritage played a major role in shaping his transition team.[5][emphasis added]
That's not SourceWatch but - just for variety - Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heritage_Foundation

:toilet: all the way down? Looks like it.

:coffee:
Kim

chownah
Posts: 6601
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by chownah » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:19 pm

pulga wrote:
paul wrote:Bikkhu Bodhi acting for the environment :
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017 ... nd-callous
Had President Obama submitted the Paris Agreement to the Senate to be discussed, amended, then ratified it would have had the legitimacy that it deserves -- at least from an American perspective. Short of that, it's unconstitutional.

Senate must have role in Paris climate deal
Did you read this from the article?:
While the Supreme Court has ruled that some international agreements don't need Senate ratification
Perhaps this means that it is not unconstitutional....I don't know peronally. I would like to learn more about whether it is unconstitutional or not. Can you provide a link to the reference that you use to support the claim that it is unconstitutional? Also, isn't the question about whether some things are constitutional or not really a matter of going to the supreme court and having them write a decision? Short of this how can you be sure?
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by pulga » Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:51 pm

chownah wrote:
While the Supreme Court has ruled that some international agreements don't need Senate ratification
Perhaps this means that it is not unconstitutional....I don't know peronally.
I'm willing to grant that the deal could have been pushed through as an executive order, but in my opinion both Obama then and Trump now have abused that privilege to a worrisome degree. In spirit the agreement should have been ratified by the Senate.

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:38 am

Resettling the First American ‘Climate Refugees’
In January, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced grants totaling $1 billion in 13 states to help communities adapt to climate change, by building stronger levees, dams and drainage systems.

One of those grants, $48 million for Isle de Jean Charles, is something new: the first allocation of federal tax dollars to move an entire community struggling with the impacts of climate change. The divisions the effort has exposed and the logistical and moral dilemmas it has presented point up in microcosm the massive problems the world could face in the coming decades as it confronts a new category of displaced people who have become known as climate refugees. ...

The Isle de Jean Charles resettlement plan is one of the first programs of its kind in the world, a test of how to respond to climate change in the most dramatic circumstances without tearing communities apart. ...

Whether to leave is only the first of the hard questions: Where does everyone go? What claim do they have to what is left behind? Will they be welcomed by their new neighbors? Will there be work nearby? Who will be allowed to join them?

“This is not just a simple matter of writing a check and moving happily to a place where they are embraced by their new neighbors,” said Mark Davis, the director of the Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law and Policy.

“If you have a hard time moving dozens of people,” he continued, “it becomes impossible in any kind of organized or fair way to move thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or, if you look at the forecast for South Florida, maybe even millions.”
:reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/03/us/r ... ugees.html

And this is in one of the wealthiest countries on earth. How are the poorest going to respond?

:namaste:
Kim

chownah
Posts: 6601
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by chownah » Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:41 am

Image
This is the road to Isle de Jean Charles. Whenever a hurricane is coming people have an immediate avenue of escape and a convenient way to return altough they may have to wait for repairs to the road.

The residents of the island are native americans (indians) and moving them is a major political and legal issue with historic roots.....this is why so much money is being spent.

Anyone interested should find out about the "trail of tears". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears
chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Sat Jun 24, 2017 12:40 am

Seven more hot-spots of climate change: https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e-hotspots
Global warming will not affect everyone equally. Here we look at seven key regions to see how each is tackling the consequences of climate change ...

The bottom line

Whether it’s faster than average warming, more vulnerable than average populations, or more severe than average drought, floods and storms, it’s clear that some places are being hit harder than others by Earth’s altered climate, and so face extra urgency when it comes to adapting to a new reality.

But the bottom line is that climate hotspots intersect, and nowhere will we escape the changes taking place. What happens in the Amazon affects West Africa; the North American growing season may depend on the melting of Arctic ice; flooding in Asian cities affected by warming on the high Tibetan plateau. And urban areas ultimately depend on the countryside.

We’re all in a hot spot now.
:namaste:
Kim

paul
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Vietnam

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by paul » Mon Jul 03, 2017 4:53 am

Are the three unwholesome roots the cause of climate change?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.3295853

chownah
Posts: 6601
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by chownah » Mon Jul 03, 2017 5:30 am

paul wrote:Are the three unwholesome roots the cause of climate change?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.3295853
No. The main cause is carbon dioxide emissions from the use of fossil fuels.
chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:57 pm

chownah wrote:
paul wrote:Are the three unwholesome roots the cause of climate change?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.3295853
No. The main cause is carbon dioxide emissions from the use of fossil fuels.
chownah
I'm going to suggest you are both right. :smile:
A proximate cause is an event which is closest to, or immediately responsible for causing, some observed result. This exists in contrast to a higher-level ultimate cause (or distal cause) which is usually thought of as the "real" reason something occurred.

Example: Why did the ship sink?
Proximate cause: Because it was holed beneath the waterline, water entered the hull and the ship became denser than the water which supported it, so it could not stay afloat.
Ultimate cause: Because the ship hit a rock which tore open the hole in the ship's hull.
In most situations, an ultimate cause may itself be a proximate cause for a further ultimate cause. Hence we can continue the above example as follows:

Example: Why did the ship hit the rock?
Proximate cause: Because the ship failed to change course to avoid it.
Ultimate cause: Because the ship was under autopilot and the autopilot's data was inaccurate.
(even stronger): Because the shipwrights made mistakes in the ship's construction.
(stronger yet): Because the scheduling of labor at the shipyard allows for very little rest.
(in absurdum): Because the shipyard's owners have very small profit margins in an ever-shrinking market.
Separating proximate from ultimate causation frequently leads to better understandings of the events and systems concerned. ...
In philosophy[edit]
In analytic philosophy, notions of cause adequacy are employed in the causal mechanistic model of explanation. In order to explain the genuine cause of an effect, one would have to satisfy adequacy conditions, which include, among others, the ability to distinguish between:
1. Genuine causal relationships and accidents.
2. Causes and effects.
3. Causes and effects from a common cause.

One famous example of the importance of this is the Duhem-Quine Problem, which demonstrates that it is impossible to test a scientific hypothesis in isolation, because an empirical test of the hypothesis requires one or more background assumptions. One way to solve this issue is to employ contrastive explanations. Several philosophers of science such as Lipton argue that contrastive explanations are able to detect genuine causes.[1] An example of a contrastive explanation is a cohort study that includes a control group, where one can determine the cause from observing two otherwise identical samples. This view also circumvents the problem of infinite regression of 'why's that proximate causes create
That's all from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate ... _causation
In the case of climate change, we have an ultimate cause which we know could take eons to solve and a proximate cause which we can - and must - solve in a matter of decades so let's focus on reducing CO2 emissions.

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:13 am

Here we go: Republicans, Kochtopus and Heartland all tied up in one neat little story: https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/07/05/k ... -institute
A former Republican congressman with a history of rejecting action on climate change while accepting funding from the fossil fuel industry has been picked as the new president of the Heartland Institute.

Tim Huelskamp, a prominent Tea Party figure, will take over from current president and institute founder Joseph Bast, who said he would stay on as CEO until some time in 2018.

Despite financial backing from groups affiliated with the Koch brothers, Huelskamp lost his March 2016 primary race, ending almost 20 years in Kansas state and federal politics.

According to Federal Election Commission disclosures, the oil and gas industries and groups affiliated with Koch Industries have been among Huelskamp’s most enthusiastic financial supporters. ...
:toilet:
Kim

chownah
Posts: 6601
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by chownah » Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:13 am

I found this on slashdot:
Japan's population, excluding resident foreigners, fell at the beginning of this year at its fastest pace since comparable figures were kept in 1968
https://news.slashdot.org/story/17/07/0 ... since-1968
I view this as a great victory for not just for its benefits for climate change but also for humanity in general.
chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jul 06, 2017 6:46 am

chownah wrote:I found this on slashdot:
Japan's population, excluding resident foreigners, fell at the beginning of this year at its fastest pace since comparable figures were kept in 1968
https://news.slashdot.org/story/17/07/0 ... since-1968
I view this as a great victory for not just for its benefits for climate change but also for humanity in general.
chownah
:thanks:
Yes, there are too many of us - but how to manage a calm, peaceful decline in population is a problem. That article's first sentence is, "Japan's population, excluding resident foreigners, fell at the beginning of this year at its fastest pace since comparable figures were kept in 1968, highlighting the demographic challenge to economic growth," and, "highlighting the demographic challenge to economic growth," bundles up a lot of important assumptions and hides most of them. The biggest one is that the need for "economic growth" is implicitly unchallengeable, axiomatic, but continuous "economic growth" is a Ponzi scheme. It's unsustainable but stopping it without a crash landing seems impossible. And the "demographic challenge" is not only about how many people but about how many workers and taxpayers. If the Japanese just stopped having children altogether, they would have an again population needing more services and unsupported by taxes or even service workers.
Tricky!

:namaste:
Kim

Phena
Posts: 469
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 6:40 am

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Phena » Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:34 am

paul wrote:Are the three unwholesome roots the cause of climate change?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.3295853
Yes, absolutely!

paul
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 11:27 pm
Location: Vietnam

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by paul » Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:16 am

Mind precedes all conditions:
“…we must also note that all these other factors influencing the mind are at some level themselves manifestations of mental activity. Thus the other orders of causality affecting the mind— social, economic, cultural and political— can in turn be considered objectifications of mind, embodying and “externalizing” specific attitudes, views, and psychological agendas. For this reason the Buddha says that “all conditions are preceded by the mind, dominated by the mind, fashioned by the mind “, (Dhammapada, vv. 1-2).
[…]
In the Buddha’s teaching, the dark forces of the mind responsible for human suffering are called the defilements (kilesas), of which the most powerful are the three “unwholesome roots”, greed, hatred and delusion.
In its classical expression, the Buddha’s teaching focuses upon the role of the defilements in our personal lives, showing how they are the determinants of psychological and existential suffering. Today, however, as our world has become tightly integrated into a single global order, a shift in emphasis is necessary if we are to analyse and address our common plight. Since institutions and organisations have become ever more influential in moulding our circumstances and determining our destiny, we must closely investigate how the defilements assume a collective expression. We must lay bare the detrimental impact of our economic and political structures and discover how our forms of social organization, both national and international, sustain the grip of greed, hatred and delusion upon our minds.—- “Facing the Future- Four Essays”; ‘A Buddhist Social Ethic for the New Century’, Bikkhu Bodhi.

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:02 am

paul wrote:Mind precedes all conditions:
“…we must also note that all these other factors influencing the mind are at some level themselves manifestations of mental activity. Thus the other orders of causality affecting the mind— social, economic, cultural and political— can in turn be considered objectifications of mind, embodying and “externalizing” specific attitudes, views, and psychological agendas. For this reason the Buddha says that “all conditions are preceded by the mind, dominated by the mind, fashioned by the mind “, (Dhammapada, vv. 1-2).
[…]
In the Buddha’s teaching, the dark forces of the mind responsible for human suffering are called the defilements (kilesas), of which the most powerful are the three “unwholesome roots”, greed, hatred and delusion.
In its classical expression, the Buddha’s teaching focuses upon the role of the defilements in our personal lives, showing how they are the determinants of psychological and existential suffering. Today, however, as our world has become tightly integrated into a single global order, a shift in emphasis is necessary if we are to analyse and address our common plight. Since institutions and organisations have become ever more influential in moulding our circumstances and determining our destiny, we must closely investigate how the defilements assume a collective expression. We must lay bare the detrimental impact of our economic and political structures and discover how our forms of social organization, both national and international, sustain the grip of greed, hatred and delusion upon our minds.—- “Facing the Future- Four Essays”; ‘A Buddhist Social Ethic for the New Century’, Bikkhu Bodhi.
That's all good and may well be true but I'm afraid it isn't useful.
"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.
Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta: The Shorter Instructions to Malunkya
We need to pull the arrow out.

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:13 am

Recent data:
How much global temperatures rise for a certain level of carbon emissions is called climate sensitivity and is seen as the single most important measure of climate change. Computer models have long indicated a high level of sensitivity, up to 4.5C for a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere.

However in recent years estimates of climate sensitivity based on historical temperature records from the past century or so have suggested the response might be no more than 3C. This would mean the planet could be kept safe with lower cuts in emissions, which are easier to achieve.

[but] new research, published in the journal Science Advances, has ended that. “The worrisome part is that all the models show there is an amplification of the amount of warming in the future,” he said. The situation might be even worse, as Proistosescu’s work shows climate sensitivity could be as high as 6C.

Prof Bill Collins, at the University of Reading, UK, and not part of the new research, said: “Some have suggested that we might be lucky and avoid dangerous climate change without taking determined action if the climate is not very sensitive to CO2 emissions. This work provides new evidence that that chance is remote.” He said greater long term warming had implications for melting of the world’s ice sheets and the rise of sea levels that already threatens many coastal cities. ...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... w-research

:thinking:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:39 am

Here's a great visualisation tool - unfortunately limited to covering the US. https://www.climaterealityproject.org/b ... e-explorer

:coffee:
Kim


User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:32 am

I won't say "This changes everything" (partly because Naomi Klein already got there :smile: ) but it is a great step both in both politics and energy - and not just for one small state of one smallish country.
Elon Musk’s agreement to build the world’s largest battery for South Australia https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... -australia isn’t just an extraordinary technological breakthrough that signs coal’s death warrant. It’s potentially a game changer in the way we do politics, reinserting the importance of basic reality into a debate which has been bereft of it for too long. ... the idea sprang into the global mainstream last year with Donald Trump’s election campaign and the Brexit bus.

It seemed that truth no longer mattered. Facts were not just unimportant, but barriers to be smashed through with rhetoric. Demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that a politician was lying no longer had any impact.

What’s this got to do with Elon Musk’s great big battery?

Often politics deals in ephemeral ideas, subjective ideas, ideas about how well off we are, how confident we might be about the future, how safe we feel. Decades of political focus on the dismal science of economics has enabled this. Politics can become a confidence game.

But sometimes politics comes up hard against reality.

For months now, Malcolm Turnbull, Josh Frydenberg, various fossil fuel energy executives and media commentators like Paul Kelly have been rabbiting on about the “energy trilemma”. It’s their contention that energy policy must deal with cost, reliability and emissions, and that it is impossible to achieve all three at the same time. Conveniently, they choose to put emissions at the bottom of this list and bury it under a pile of coal, which they claim is cheap and reliable. This is not true. Not even close to it. It doesn’t stand up to basic scrutiny.

Musk’s gambit closes this book. He has brought reality crashing in.

Within 100 days, there will be a huge battery system making South Australia’s energy grid clean, affordable and reliable, and benefitting the eastern states along with it.

All the talk of building new coal-fired power stations, or a Snowy Hydro 2.0, no longer sounds vaguely “truthy”. It sounds ridiculous. It sounds silly. It sounds like old men yelling at clouds.

This won’t suddenly bring back a cherished (and somewhat mythological) era of truth in politics. But it will have a real, demonstrable impact. It will help. We all owe deep gratitude to those who have made it happen.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ruth-world

:twothumbsup:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4539
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Global Warming: Recent Data

Post by Kim OHara » Sat Jul 08, 2017 1:46 am

That's a bit hard to reconcile with this:
http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/pu ... -may-2017/
Our most recent nationally representative survey finds that More than half of Americans (58%) believe climate change is mostly human caused. That’s the highest level measured since our surveys began in 2008. By contrast, only 30% say it is due mostly to natural changes in the environment, matching the lowest level measured in our November 2016 survey.

Four in ten Americans (39%) think the odds that global warming will cause humans to become extinct are 50% or higher. Most Americans (58%) think the odds of human extinction from global warming are less than 50%.

One in four Americans (24%) say providing a better life for our children and grandchildren is the most important reason, for them, to reduce global warming. More than one in ten Americans said preventing the destruction of most life on the planet (16%) or protecting God’s creation (13%) was the most important reason. ...
:namaste:
Kim

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests