- I use the scare quotes because today’s “libertarianism” has nothing to do with pluralism and American Liberty and everything to do with Me First and an attitude of: ‘If I can grab it, it’s mine - what’s mine is mine and fuk you and yours.’
- Worst, in practice most “libertarians” believe that lying about geophysical facts is some free speech right and they have convinced themselves it’s okay to ignore physical reality with a white wash of self deception, rhetorical gotcha tricks, and distracting malicious slander. ___________________________________________
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
A study guide to Jim Steele’s “What’s Natural?”, featured in the Pacifica Tribune.
A friend from California has been sending me copies of a new column appearing in the Pacifica Tribune, a paper that, surprise surprise, is owned by a “libertarian” activist Sherman Frederick*. I was able to sidestep the first couple, but this one. Asked to do some fact checking and one thing leads to another.
Based on his first three columns it promises to be a revealing collection of artfully fabricated obfuscation, rhetorical misdirection, deliberate deception through omissions, spiced with a peppering of derogatory spin towards established experts in climatology and related Earth sciences. All in all ripe to serve as a case study in political brainwashing.
I'll beginning with a short Letter to the Editor that I emailed to Pacifica Tribune this morning; followed by a copy of Jim Steele’s opinion piece; this in turn is followed by a detailed exploration of its mischief.
Letter to the Pacifica Tribune Editor about "What’s Natural?" a fishy climate tale.
Regarding your “What’s Natural?” column of January 30th (“Climate fish tales”). What I found fishy was that if the goal was trying to better understand climate expert’s warnings Jim Steele would have been obligated to first explain the simple fundamentals from which all else follows.
First and foremost being the reality that global warming is caused in our atmosphere, by our atmospheric insulation regulator, that is greenhouse gases.
This scientific certainty was driven home by intensive Air Force atmospheric studies conducted from late ’40s through to the ‘70s by various nations, working independently, all arriving at the same figures and conclusions.
The next is recognizing that humanity is injecting on the order of 3 billion metric tons of CO2 month after month. That translates to our ‘atmospheric insulation regulator’ being ratcheted from around 280 ppm when the steam engine was invented, to over 410 ppm and climbing today.
Discussing “natural” oscillations and impacts on fisheries is fine. But not if you ignore the fact that all those oscillations merely push and pull heat around our global heat and moisture distribution engine which includes our oceans.
Today’s PDO, AMO and others are embedded within a warming climate engine, so naturally they are also warming.
Next is the copy of Steele's column, followed by a detailed Student’s Guide regarding What’s Natural’ about Steele’s fishy climate tales.
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
A couple days ago I stumbled on AEI’s Mark J. Perry’s April 21st article (yet another regurgitation of Ronald Bailey’s imaginative 2000 Political PR con job): “18 spectacularly wrong predictions made around the time of first Earth Day in 1970, expect more this year.” This “18” PR campaign is related to the malicious attacks on the book The Limits of Growth. Ugo Bardi who has spent many years studying "The Limits to Growth” points out Bailey ignored the facts of the matter:
“In 1993 Bailey reiterated his accusations in the book titled “Ecoscam.” This time, he could state that none of the predictions of the 1972 Limits study had turned out to be correct. Of course, Bailey’s accusations are just plain wrong. …”
“Reducing The Limits of Growth, a book of more than a hundred pages, to a few numbers is not the only fault of Bailey's criticism. The fact is that none of the numbers he had selected was a prediction and nowhere in the book was it stated that these numbers were supposed to be read as such. Table 4 was there only to illustrate the effect of a hypothetical continued exponential growth on the exploitation of mineral resources. Even without bothering to read the whole book, the text of chapter 2 clearly stated that continued exponential growth was not to be expected.
The rest of the book, then, showed various scenarios of economic collapse that in no case took place before the first decades of 21st century.
Below I share links and quotes from Ugo Bardi’s series looking at the Limits To Growth book and project. Here you’ll find the other side of the malicious bullshit the right wing PR monster has plastered all over the internet about LTG.
Bailey and Perry provide textbook examples of how ridicule, deception and fraud are the basic tools of choice in the GOP’s propaganda war against learning about our planet’s physical reality, I am working on a dissection and commentary, but it seems important to start with the facts.
Monday, December 31, 2018
... and this one was the climax of my journey. Doesn't matter much that few seem to get it or care, this one is my gem. The culmination of my heroic introspective journey. See, I was a genuine dharma bum, as a young man I threw myself to experiencing life and the road, the wind and my own wits. Been able to walk in many shoes for a distance, known many beautiful people and have enjoyed many wonderful discussions, seen many ups and downs. Back in those 70s, 80s our country wasn't so scared and angry. Being of poor but healthy honest stock people hired me, so I had opportunities to work many diverse jobs and live many experiences over the succeeding decades. Considering the odds I've had a great ride.
I'm a bonafide student of the University of Life you could say. Among my early professors were a parade of enthusiastic research librarians before the days of personal computers. Next to living, there was keeping up on science news and proactively researching things that interested me and since understanding myself and the entire Earth and her story interested me, it's been a busy life. I dare say I've been attentive to every day, good and bad. These days I'd label myself an Earth Centrist and I've accumulated some deep understanding. Here I was finally able to summarize it in a way that feels complete and that opens whole new vistas for me. I fancy this my U of L Master's Thesis. ;- )
(Evening Jan 1, 2019: Spent many hours today reviewing this 6 post collection and making final changes, then more final adjustments, plus adding some closing observations at the end of this piece. I do believe this annotated collection is now finished.
Happy New Year to you and best wishes, cc.)
The Missing Key to Stephen Gould’s
“… missing was a much more fundamental division crying out for recognition. Specifically,
the magisteria of Physical Reality vs the magisteria of our Human Mindscape. …”
The increasingly shrill and disconnected from physical reality attacks on science by faith-based organizations and individuals has me thinking about an essay evolutionary biologist and historian of science Stephen J. Gould wrote some twenty years ago in an attempt to address the tension between scientific truths and religious truths.
His solution was the notion of “Non-overlapping Magisteria” which delineated two teaching “authorities” (magisterium), the “magisteria of science” and the “magisteria of religion.” It wasn’t his original idea, rather a continuation of a centuries old dialogue between scientists and the Catholic Church that I don’t have the space to get into.
In any event, Gould concluded there should be no conflict because each realm has its’ own domain of “teaching authority.” Since these “magisteria” do not overlap, they cannot contradict each other and should be able to exist in mutual respect.
When it first came out
. . . since New Year's Eve is upon us, I feel like collecting some of my favorite essays in an effort to summarize my perspective.
Here are explanatory highlights from two articles that seemed to totally piss off the big boys. 'How dare a street urchin insinuate himself into their discussion,' is the message I received loud and clear. Well I dared because I thought the academic system was about increasing understanding, discussing ideas, finding and nurturing talent, but I've come to realize all those romantic notions belong to earlier more innocent days, back when principles and morality meant something and before the drive for profits and prominence dominated as it does today. We live and learn.
I share the key excerpts from two previous articles that look at a couple climate science communication pitfalls that are important and need much more open discussion. At least if we're concerned with translating science speak into regular people speak. The "Map v Territory Problem' and 'Statistical Certainty vs Geophysical Realities.'
Exploring the Map v Territory Problem - via the Brown Ocean Effect and Dr. Trenberth
Colorado Floods - statistical certainty vs geophysical realities - 2013
Exploring the Map v Territory Problem - via the Brown Ocean Effect and Dr. Trenberth
On November 9th, 2017 Dr. Trenberth visited our local Fort Lewis College and was the featured speaker at an afternoon climate change symposium.
A Distinguished Senior Scientist (in the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research), he is a cartographer if you will. His entire being is about getting the science, the models, the map, as close to representing reality as resources and ability allow. This dedication has made him among the best in his field of climate studies.
As a self-taught Earth and climate science enthusiast I’ve been familiar with his work for decades and have learned a great deal from his articles and in past years talks on YouTube and I was glad to finally have the chance to see and hear him in person. …
2018 was the climax of a decade long crescendo in my decades long effort to network with rationalists, scientists and science communicators, in what I fancied was our communal struggle to confront the mischief that corporate funded science contrarians and select politicians were so successfully peddling to an under-informed and mostly disinterested public - and since New Year's Eve is upon us, I feel like collecting some of my favorite posts in an effort to summarize my perspective.
This is the flip-side of my flier for the Democratic State Convention, it's a list of various important aspects of climate science communication along with key pit-falls and observations, in 14 verses.
1) Uncertainties vs. known Physical Certainties
It is a disservice to constantly allow trivial uncertainties to become the focal point of the public discussion.
In real life when we get mired or overwhelmed by increasingly complex situations, we stop, back off a little, get reoriented with the big picture, reacquaint ourselves with what we do know for certain, then move forward again.
I’m not saying ignore uncertainties! I’m saying keep reminding us of the overriding fundamental certainties! Thus putting contrarian trivial pursuits into real world perspective.
2) Map vs. Territory Problem
Scientists are Cartographers mapping out the geophysical realities of our planet, the Territory if you will. They do the best they can with the data they have available.
Too often we get trapped into assuming that until our scientists can define all aspects with statistical certainty, we should assume it's okay to ignore.
That's getting lost on the Map and forgetting we exist within the Territory.
3) Sloppy usage of “Natural Variability”
Why not challenge people to realize no human has ever been born capable of understanding the true “God Almighty of Light and Time, Creation and Love” ?
( 2018 was the climax of a decade long crescendo in my decades long effort to network with rationalists, scientists and science communicators, in what I fancied was our communal struggle to confront the dishonest nonsense that corporate funded science contrarians and select politicians were so successfully peddling to an under-informed and mostly disinterested public - and since New Year's Eve is upon us, I feel like collecting some of my favorite essays in an effort to summarize my perspective.
This is half of a flier that I circulated at the Colorado Democratic Assembly and Convention and where I did my best to summarize a challenge to confront faith-based thinking and dogma driven deceptions - along with some retrospective at the end. )
The Memes Courier
Colorado Democratic Assembly - April 13, 2018
Intellectually Confronting Faith-Based thinking and Dogma Driven Deceptions.
The opposing sides: Children of the Intellectual Enlightenment vs Faith-based dogmatism spearheaded by the evangelical movement (driven by wannabe oligarchs). Winning at the polls is only half our challenge when well over a third of our country fully supports this amoral president and his white supremest bullying and his attacks upon our government and democratic institutions.
Beyond winning in the 2018 elections, we need to nurture a massive grassroots movement of informed and engaged voters who are willing to confront faith-based delusional thinking on an individual level, while also standing behind those we elect to make sure they get their jobs done.
Faith-based thinking demands a rejection of serious science along with hostility towards learning from down to Earth evidence. This attitude is enabled and reinforced by a constant flow of contrived high pitched fear-mongering and paranoid machinations towards “the other” be it different people or ideas.
Why have we allowed their religion and God a free pass?
Sunday, December 30, 2018
Since, 2018 was the climax of a decade long crescendo in my decades long effort to network with rationalists, scientists and science communicators, in what I fancied was our communal struggle to confront the nonsense that corporate funded science contrarians and select politicians were so successfully peddling to an under-informed and mostly disinterested public - and since New Year's Eve is upon us, I'm collecting some of my favorite essays in an effort to summarize my perspective.
Here's another look at the importance of understanding evolutionary reality.
Working title was: Explaining the Geologic Column to the Faith Blinded Psalm1Tree.
Colorado's Grand Staircase's Geologic Column - Wayne Ranney
(click on image for a better view)
Recently, I was minding my own business listening to a fascinating talk on YouTube titled, “Rooted in Earth History: the Devonian transition to a forested planet.” It was about strategies that Earth’s first ground-hugging plants adapted to escape the confines of Earth’s surface. They did this in order to reach closer to our sun and further away from plant-eaters.
This led to Earth’s first forests, which in turn led to an explosion of new environmental niches for life to radiate into.
I learned some fascinating details regarding questions I’d been wondering about for a long time. The lecture increased my understanding of evolution on this fantastic planet of ours, which has been a lifelong passion for me.
But my pleasant reverie was shattered by a YouTube comment that blind-sided me. One ‘Psalm1Tree’ wrote in all seriousness:
“There never was a Devonian period, just as there never was a Cambrian, Jurassic, Triassic etc. period. That's because there never was a Geologic Column. That is a 19th century construct that has no data whatsoever to support it.”
Besides avoiding the topic of the video, the comment is such an ignorant statement on so many levels that most who know anything about geology and evolution would simply clamp on the head-vise and back away.
Unfortunately, decades of ignoring such belligerent ignorance about important aspects of our life and planet have led to its becoming so insidious and commonplace that our government is controlled by Republicans who disregard obvious physical realities on personal whim. Justified only by a hubristic conceit that they are doing “God’s duty,” they are in fact all about pursuing their own EGO’s bidding.
I decided to engage Psalm with a short video that rationally explains what the geologic column is all about. Then came my second shock.