Changes in attitudes towards global warming

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
Locked

In the past 5 years I have become...

More concerned about man-made climate change
23
50%
Equally concerned about man-made climate change
9
20%
Less concerned about man-made climate change
6
13%
Never believed in it, still don't
5
11%
Climate change? Global warming? Bring it on!
3
7%
 
Total votes: 46

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:19 pm

Religious Responses to Climate Change -
COP23: With Trump absent at UN climate talks, Pope Francis blames 'short-sighted' humans for global warming

Pope Francis has denounced "short-sighted human activity" for causing global warming and rising sea levels, and urged world leaders at climate talks in Germany to act in tackling heat-trapping emissions.

The pontiff spoke out as he met a delegation of Pacific leaders in the Vatican and told them he shares their concerns about rising sea levels and increasingly intense weather systems that are threatening their small islands.

He decried in particular the state of oceans, where overfishing and pollution by plastics and micro-plastics are killing fish stocks and sea life that are critical to Pacific island livelihoods.

While several causes are to blame, "sadly, many of them are due to short-sighted human activity connected with certain ways of exploiting natural and human resources, the impact of which ultimately reaches the ocean bed itself," the pontiff warned. ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 50506.html

:thumbsup:
Kim

User avatar
manas
Posts: 2464
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by manas » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:46 pm

https://climatechangedispatch.com/has-p ... te-change/ Magnetic North has actually been SHIFTING, worth considering as a possible cause of climatic disruption, surely?
Knowing this body is like a clay jar,
securing this mind like a fort,
attack Mara with the spear of discernment,
then guard what's won without settling there,
without laying claim.

- Dhp 40

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:07 pm

manas wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:46 pm
https://climatechangedispatch.com/has-p ... te-change/ Magnetic North has actually been SHIFTING, worth considering as a possible cause of climatic disruption, surely?
:jawdrop:
New to me, so I looked it up.

In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift.
Global warming is changing the location of Earth’s geographic poles, according to a new study in Geophysical Research Letters.
Researchers at the University of Texas, Austin, report that increased melting of the Greenland ice sheet — and to a lesser degree, ice loss in other parts of the globe — helped to shift the North Pole several centimeters east each year since 2005.
See https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... uth-poles/ for the whole story.

:namaste:
Kim

chownah
Posts: 7493
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by chownah » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:22 am

Kim OHara wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:07 pm

In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift.
It is A cause, not THE cause. Evidently it has an effect (news to me) but I imagine it is very small. The N mag pole is always moving around.....always....never sits still....
chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:57 am

chownah wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:22 am
Kim OHara wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:07 pm

In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift.
It is A cause, not THE cause. Evidently it has an effect (news to me) but I imagine it is very small. The N mag pole is always moving around.....always....never sits still....
chownah
As my parents used to say, "More haste, less speed." I don't think you can have clicked on the link. I will quote from it, with added emphasis: "Global warming is changing the location of Earth’s geographic poles, according to a new study in Geophysical Research Letters."
Even so, you are partly right. The magnetic poles do always drift around, and so (independently) do the geographic poles:
"Scientists have long known that the locations of Earth’s geographic poles aren’t fixed. Over the course of the year, they shift seasonally as the Earth’s distributions of snow, rain, and humidity change. “Usually [the shift] is circular, with a wobble,” says Chen.
But underlying the seasonal motion is a yearly motion that is thought to be driven in part by continental drift. It was the change in that motion that caught the attention of Chen and his colleagues..." (emphasis added)
Read it all - it's not long.

:namaste:
Kim

chownah
Posts: 7493
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by chownah » Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:03 am

I'm not sure about the point you are making. To recap:

A comment was made that the magnetic pole was shifting around....and that might be effecting climate change.

You replied that "In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift."

You then presented an article which did not address the issue of the magnetic pole shifting but which instead dealth with the geographic pole shifting.

I replied, "It is A cause, not THE cause. Evidently it has an effect (news to me) but I imagine it is very small. The N mag pole is always moving around.....always....never sits still...."

I think that my reply to the movement of the N mag pole is accurate.....you then brought up the article about the geographic pole and I'm not sure why.....because the article does not even mention the magnetic pole.

Concerning the geographic pole: The article you brought mentions that climate change is not the only thing which causes the pole to drift when it said, "But underlying the seasonal motion is a yearly motion that is thought to be driven in part by continental drift." I think that since there seems to be more than one thing which causes the geographic pole to drift one can not say that climate change is "the" cause but rather one should say that it is "a" cause of the pole drifting.

Just wanting to keep the science clear on these issues.

The most important point, though, in my mind is that the shifting of the poles do not seem in anyway to be a cause of climate change. With respect to the geographic poles it seems that the pole shift is effected by climate change and there has been no evidence shown or even postulated which would indicate that the pole shift then in return effects climate change in any meaningful way. With respect to the magnetic poles there is no evidence that the pole drift and climate change are related in any meaningful way.....just questions.

chownah

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:56 am

chownah wrote:
Thu Nov 30, 2017 3:03 am
I'm not sure about the point you are making. To recap:

A comment was made that the magnetic pole was shifting around....and that might be effecting climate change.

You replied that "In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift."

You then presented an article which did not address the issue of the magnetic pole shifting but which instead dealth with the geographic pole shifting.

I replied, "It is A cause, not THE cause. Evidently it has an effect (news to me) but I imagine it is very small. The N mag pole is always moving around.....always....never sits still...."

I think that my reply to the movement of the N mag pole is accurate.....you then brought up the article about the geographic pole and I'm not sure why.....because the article does not even mention the magnetic pole.

Concerning the geographic pole: The article you brought mentions that climate change is not the only thing which causes the pole to drift when it said, "But underlying the seasonal motion is a yearly motion that is thought to be driven in part by continental drift." I think that since there seems to be more than one thing which causes the geographic pole to drift one can not say that climate change is "the" cause but rather one should say that it is "a" cause of the pole drifting.

Just wanting to keep the science clear on these issues.

The most important point, though, in my mind is that the shifting of the poles do not seem in anyway to be a cause of climate change. With respect to the geographic poles it seems that the pole shift is effected by climate change and there has been no evidence shown or even postulated which would indicate that the pole shift then in return effects climate change in any meaningful way. With respect to the magnetic poles there is no evidence that the pole drift and climate change are related in any meaningful way.....just questions.

chownah
Thanks, chownah. There has been some lazy reading and paraphrasing on all sides (including mine - sorry) and I'm not really sure it's worth trying to untangle but I will give it a go.
It starts with this:
Kim OHara wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:07 pm
manas wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:46 pm
https://climatechangedispatch.com/has-p ... te-change/ Magnetic North has actually been SHIFTING, worth considering as a possible cause of climatic disruption, surely?
:jawdrop:
New to me, so I looked it up.

In a word, no. It's the other way round - climate change is the cause of the polar shift.
Global warming is changing the location of Earth’s geographic poles, according to a new study in Geophysical Research Letters.
Researchers at the University of Texas, Austin, report that increased melting of the Greenland ice sheet — and to a lesser degree, ice loss in other parts of the globe — helped to shift the North Pole several centimeters east each year since 2005.
See https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... uth-poles/ for the whole story.

:namaste:
Kim
So ... manas said "Magnetic North has actually been SHIFTING" after reading "Has Polar Shift caused Global Warming and Climate Change?", the text of which doesn't mention Magnetic North at all, although its first image is labelled "400 years of Magnetic North Pole Shift".
I, however, read the first sentence, "Were the Inuits right when they suggested polar shift has caused global warming and climate change through watching the stars over hundreds of years?" and relied on the fact that star observations would only tell anyone about the movement of geographic north. Proceeding on that basis, I found the article I quoted.

I probably shouldn't have bothered, since manas' linked article is incredibly shoddy even by the normal standards of pseudo-scientific climate change denial. I don't know if anyone has created a plausibility index for this sort of thing (e.g. divide the total word count by the number of instances of 'might', 'may', 'probably' and 'likely', then deduct 10% for every irrelevant or unlabelled chart, and divide the result by the number of non sequiturs) but if they have, here's a wonderful example to test it on.

:toilet:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Sat Dec 02, 2017 11:56 am

Back to the main game ... here's a longish piece by Bill McKibben, veteran of the climate wars and always capable of putting the issues in perspective.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... ng-w512967
Winning Slowly Is the Same as Losing
His headline says it all, really, but he explains why this is so and then goes on to say that we still - just - have time to act fast enough to avoid disaster.
... By 2075 the world will be powered by solar panels and windmills – free energy is a hard business proposition to beat. But on current trajectories, they'll light up a busted planet. The decisions we make in 2075 won't matter; indeed, the decisions we make in 2025 will matter much less than the ones we make in the next few years. The leverage is now. ..

And so the only real question is, how do we suddenly make it happen fast? That's where politics comes in. I said earlier that Trump wasn't the whole problem – in fact, it's just possible that in his know-nothing recklessness, he has upset the ever-so-patient apple cart. You could almost see the oil companies wincing when Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement – for them, the agreement was a pathway to slow and managed change. The promises it contained didn't keep the planet from overheating – indeed, even if everyone had kept them, the Earth would still have gotten 3.5 degrees Celsius hotter, enough to collapse every ecosystem you'd like to name. The accords did ensure that we'd still be burning significant amounts of hydrocarbons by 2050, and that the Exxons of the world would be able to recover most of the reserves they've so carefully mapped and explored.

But now some of those bets are off. Around the rest of the world, most nations rejected Trump's pullout with diplomatically expressed rage. ...


Martin Luther King Jr. used to regularly end his speeches with the phrase "the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice." The line was a favorite of Obama's too, and for all three men it meant the same thing: "This may take a while, but we're going to win." For most political fights, it is the simultaneously frustrating and inspiring truth. But not for climate change. The arc of the physical universe appears to be short, and it bends toward heat. Win soon or suffer the consequences.
:jedi:
Kim

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 5:51 am

Magnetic Pole Movement & Magnetic Field Decline
manas wrote:
Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:46 pm
Magnetic North has actually been SHIFTING, worth considering as a possible cause of climatic disruption, surely?
I don't know of any senarios about the current movement of the magnetic poles.

But did you known that the global magnetic field has weakened 10% since the 19th century? At the current rate the earths magnetic field will be gone in about 1,600 years. Evidence for 171 magnetic field reversals during the past 71 million years has been reported.

Spooky? I think so.
But should we be worried? Probably not. But the reasons why are reminiscent of the reasons why the impacts of global warming might be relatively mild.
Earth's magnetic field is changing in other ways, too: Compass needles in Africa, for instance, are drifting about 1 degree per decade. And globally the magnetic field has weakened 10% since the 19th century. When this was mentioned by researchers at a recent meeting of the American Geophysical Union, many newspapers carried the story. A typical headline: "Is Earth's magnetic field collapsing?"

Probably not. As remarkable as these changes sound, "they're mild compared to what Earth's magnetic field has done in the past," says University of California professor Gary Glatzmaier.

Sometimes the field completely flips. The north and the south poles swap places. Such reversals, recorded in the magnetism of ancient rocks, are unpredictable. They come at irregular intervals averaging about 300,000 years; the last one was 780,000 years ago. Are we overdue for another? No one knows.
https://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/looki ... field.html
Movement of the Magnetic Poles
Scientists have long known that the magnetic pole moves. James Ross located the pole for the first time in 1831 after an exhausting arctic journey during which his ship got stuck in the ice for four years. No one returned until the next century. In 1904, Roald Amundsen found the pole again and discovered that it had moved--at least 50 km since the days of Ross.

The pole kept going during the 20th century, north at an average speed of 10 km per year, lately accelerating "to 40 km per year," says Newitt. At this rate it will exit North America and reach Siberia in a few decades.

... Compass needles in Africa, for instance, are drifting about 1 degree per decade.

SarathW
Posts: 9996
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by SarathW » Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:21 am

I was concern about the man made pollution even when I was a child. I conserve even when I was young and some interprete as that I was stingy. So as far as I am concern nothing has changed.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:31 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon May 01, 2017 8:02 am
I'm interested to know whether people's attitudes towards global warming or climate change have changed over time?
Feel free to explain your reasoning...
To be consistent the survey question was about change in attitude towards global warming in the past 5 years.
No, my level of concern has not changed that I'm aware of.

I can't think of some event or discovery or report in the last 5 years that IMO would be basis for a change in concern.
Not much change in:
  • basic science related to climate (that would be cause for more concern)
  • trends in weather measurements (climate = trends or patterns of weather over say 30 years)
  • extreme weather (it surprizes me how stable those trends are)
  • climate models
  • international agreements (Paris treaty)
  • national progress on climate goals
  • public attitudes / polling results - fairly stable
  • IPCC reports
  • Little change in climate research direction or funding for basic science
  • Little change in funding levels for research on climate adaption, mitigation or energy technology
In my mind notable events over the last 5 years related to climate change include:
  • Paris treaty - US president signs with questionable constitutional authorization
  • Release of IPCC AR5 (Assessment Report # 5) in 2013
    https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/
  • Plans, pressure or actual early decommissioning of nuclear power plants - in some countries those plans have been reversed.
  • Increasing awareness of the impact/possible importance of nuclear electrical power
  • Increasing political polarization in western countries
  • Possible increase of talk or threats to investigate or criminalize "climate change denial"

====================
POLL RESULTS
I think it's telling that of the over %45 of respondents who said they were more concerned ... zero or close to zero offered an explanation.
  • Perhaps the numbers might be partly explained by a small sample size and a self-select audience.
  • I assume that most of the respondents were familiar with the topic 5 years ago.
  • The missing explanations might be understood in part as posters are used to responding with what related thoughts come to mind rather than addressing the topic posed in the initial post (a common practice in forums sometimes called "coat racking").
But if that poll result is representative then given my analysis at this time I would expect significant levels of ineffective or counter-productive leadership from nearly half the Buddhist community on this issue.

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Dec 25, 2017 10:25 am

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:31 am
POLL RESULTS
I think it's telling that of the over %45 of respondents who said they were more concerned ... zero or close to zero offered an explanation.
  • Perhaps the numbers might be partly explained by a small sample size and a self-select audience.
  • I assume that most of the respondents were familiar with the topic 5 years ago.
  • The missing explanations might be understood in part as posters are used to responding with what related thoughts come to mind rather than addressing the topic posed in the initial post (a common practice in forums sometimes called "coat racking").
But if that poll result is representative then given my analysis at this time I would expect significant levels of ineffective or counter-productive leadership from nearly half the Buddhist community on this issue.
Your first three reasons are enough to explain any peculiarities of the results. Polls like this on any online forum are statistically meaningless and can only give the most general indication of what the members might think, and no indication at all of what the wider community might think.

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Dec 25, 2017 10:28 am

Here's a change in attitudes which will make more of a difference than most, and in itself indicates a broader change in attitudes.
B.H.P. Billiton, Acknowledging Climate Change, to Quit Coal Group

MELBOURNE, Australia — One of the world’s largest coal companies, acknowledging the growing momentum toward addressing climate change, said it planned to pull out of a major industry group over its environmental stances.

B.H.P. Billiton, the British-Australian mining company, said in a report Tuesday that it planned to withdraw from the World Coal Association, an international lobbying group, because of differences in climate and energy policies. The report also noted that B.H.P. would review its relationship with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in light of the Trump administration’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord.

The move highlights the delicate considerations huge mining companies must contend with as they seek to balance profit with social and environmental awareness.

It represents the latest example of a business that is largely built around traditional fossil fuels responding to investor and government concern over climate change.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/busi ... .html?_r=0

:twothumbsup:

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

:D
Kim

User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Kim OHara » Mon Dec 25, 2017 10:43 am

This new movie may help shift things along faster ...
Clean Energy Revolution Will Usher in a 'New Normal', Says James Redford
The filmmaker explains why his new documentary had to happen now.


James Redford knows that you know renewable technology will help fight climate change. But the filmmaker is also aware that you don’t really know what renewable technology actually looks like — and that there are steps regular people can make to ensure it’s universally adopted.

That’s why he made Happening: A Clean Energy Revolution. The documentary, which premiered Monday on HBO, follows Redford on a clean energy road trip across the United States, during which he gazes up in awe at wind turbines, stands among thousands of sun-tracking mirrors, and listens as people from Nevada to New York explain how their communities are pushing for the switch to clean energy. Rather than use this documentary to convince viewers that climate change is real — that’s already obvious, in his opinion — he aims to show people how they can actively mitigate its threat. ...
:reading: https://www.inverse.com/article/39336-c ... ocumentary

:namaste:
Kim

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Changes in attitudes towards global warming

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:06 pm

Kim OHara wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 10:25 am
Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:31 am
POLL RESULTS
But if that poll result is representative then given my analysis at this time I would expect significant levels of ineffective or counter-productive leadership from nearly half the Buddhist community on this issue.
Your first three reasons are enough to explain any peculiarities of the results. Polls like this on any online forum are statistically meaningless and can only give the most general indication of what the members might think, and no indication at all of what the wider community might think.
Kim I interpret the poll in much the way you did but I think you push your conclusion too hard. This is salient because there is more information from multiple sources about what self-identified Buddhists and major political figures say about the issue that supports the perspective that there are significant levels of ineffective or counter-productive leadership on this this topic. (Acknowledged: That conclusion, much like estimating the impacts of CO2 on society, entails a multi-step analysis) What we don't have is more detailed polling about beliefs and approaches to determine the magnitude.
  • Obviously the poll does give some indication /general read on the %45 who answered this poll.
  • Because this sub-group is part of the wider community we do have an indication of what the wider community thinks. What we don't know is how many.
I believe our exchange on this topic illustrates why socially engaged Buddhism is unlikey to do well unless it's informed by a diversity of viewpoints (inter-dependency, interconnectioness); that seeks to have a multi-partisan understanding (the roots of "the middle way"; and perhaps even the choice to be actively trans-partisan.

Importance of viewpoint diversity with a focus on the quality of social science research: https://heterodoxacademy.org/problems/

----------------------------------------
The Science of Science Communication
Example of a process and practice that is more likely to change attitudes:
https://climateoutreach.org/
https://climateoutreach.org/ wrote:Our purpose is to ensure that climate change and its impacts are understood, accepted and acted upon across the breadth of society.

We produce world-leading advice and practical tools for engagement by combining scientific research methods with years of hands-on experience. Our services support governments, businesses, NGOs and grassroots organisations. We specialise in how to engage hard-to-reach audiences – developing climate connection programmes with communities such as youth, the centre-right, faith and migrant groups

In our decade as leaders in climate change communication we’ve seen it all: the photographs of sad polar bears, the complicated graphs, the science speak, the doom and gloom omens of the apocalypse, and the wailed laments of “won’t somebody please think of the future of the planet?!”.

Our rigorous research has shown us that these messages simply aren’t effective for the majority of people. Worse than that, they can be disempowering. These stories make many people turn away, because climate change is seen as a niche concern, a complex scientific problem, an issue for the future only, and something that makes us fearful.

Climate change demands a response across society, from people of all ages, faiths, nationalities and sides of the political spectrum. That’s why our mission is to engage people with climate change from their perspective – not ours.
I’ve learnt the most about climate change from those who deny it | George Marshall | TEDxEastEnd

I can think of a couple of secular organization or reports that are similar in approach to climateoutreach.org. But I can't recall a Buddhist one. Anyone??
Last edited by Leeuwenhoek2 on Wed Dec 27, 2017 3:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests