Citizenschallenge, why are you an Earth Centrist?

First there was a lifetime of living and absorbing lessons, then there was an essay, then there was an invitation to give a talk, then the challenge to inject some relevant bio and double the essay into 20 minutes that hold the audience's attention, okay can do, at least I’ll try.   

Then the skeptics’ group that invited me imploded.   

So it goes. 

Life is busy and now the script sits here, I like it, though I keep tinkering with it. Guess foremost it’s a continuing education project for me.  Still now with spring loading me up with chores and distractions I want to do something with it. So, I’m putting it out here and I invite thoughtful responses.

{For a fun distraction, any Bluegrass fans out there? }

Rational comments, pro, con, observational, are all welcome, nonsense will be ignored.  Thoughtful will be respected and posted no matter what it says.   

Hello, my name is Peter Miesler and I am an Earth Centrist,

… and I admit, I’m hoping you’re wondering what in the world is that and why on Earth should you care.

I even spent a couple weeks last year writing an essay describing this particular perspective.  It turned out pretty good, it was tight, flowed well, told a good story that held attention and people liked reading it.

I sent it around, even received a couple attaboys from some genuine science Who’s Who, who are usually silent, which did me a bit of good.  I’m not the crazy one after all.  :-)  I have enunciated something valuable.  But that was about it, then a return to the good 'ol sound of one hand clapping.

© Steven Orfield 

https://www.orfieldlabs.com/sorfield.html

When reading it to friends, though they listened with interest, it left them a bit perplexed rather than enlightened.  Okay? Fun interesting read, now what am I supposed to do with it?  What is it actually about?  And so on.  In responding I was down to, ‘it’s about perspectives and how we process the information that’s flowing through our senses.’  

Thinking on it some more I know that it's about much more than that.  It's about grasping for an appreciation of DeepTime, Evolution, and the dance of life and geology that created this world we were born out of and will die back into.  Something that offers individuals a path to understanding their own place in time and the universe within a sane reality based over-arching perspective.

Something that offers peace in the face of our individual mortality and that eternal question of “Why?”.

Something that offers spiritual fulfillment through a visceral appreciation for how time and life on this Pale Blue Dot created us and this world we inhabit today and will return to upon finishing our short dance across life’s stage.  Why isn't that cosmic gift enough?

Something that can offer rationalists and atheists a sense of our own spiritual fulfillment - in contrast to the faith-shackled's nonstop trumpeting about praising EGO and being intolerant towards others.  

Something that offers us Children of the Intellectual Enlightenment the inner moral foundation and spiritual fortitude to step up and lovingly, constructively, challenge and confront those sad brainwashed souls eye to eye.  

All of us have them in our lives, why not discover ways to ask them how they live with the cognitive dissonance inherent within their “my way only” religions? 

Maybe slow down those self-certain ME FIRST Trumpkins from steamrolling rationalists into oblivion.  Listen to them, lordie knows it's what they’re dreaming of doing.  We had better stop ignoring that or a genuine horrendous civil war will unfold in parts of our country.  They haven’t been stocking piling those straw men and contrived angry passions and weapons and ammo for nothing! (4/3/19)  But I digress.

Before I get to the Earth Centrism, I think I need to look at some of the origins of my own individual perspective.  After all, give the same book to a dozen readers of diverse backgrounds, …  

#8 Debating GOP Disconnect From Climate Science - It’s The Economy Stupid!

It didn’t take long for EM to get around to our economy as some sort of justification for ignoring the seriousness of what we are doing to our global life supporting climate system.  What confuses me EM, how the hell is ignoring an imminent destructive threat going to help economic sustainability?  What world will we be handing over to our children the next few decades?  Doesn’t that concern you at all? 

If you or anyone else could explain how that train of Republican logic works, I sure would appreciate a lesson.

The other point I will touch on in this installment is EM’s refusal to recognize the deliberate and strategic Republican attack on serious science.  But first let me jump ahead for a moment to EM’s key sentence.

________________________________________________

1. "me not wanting to cripple the national economy"

EM, have you never thought about how much weather impacts every aspect of the things that make our lives and economy hum?  

Our society and the biosphere that sustains us developed under the current climate regime - cranking up our atmospheric insulation, warming up and energizing our climate engine, think simple unavoidable physics, no way around it, we are already facing the cascading consequences of increasingly extreme wind and rain extremes, long lived heat ‘domes’ and droughts, followed by torrential downpours that can be more damaging than the withering drought was.  But, not just heat, also localized extreme cold events because of warm air mass excursions into the Arctic which in turn displaces the frigid Arctic air mass which blows down into temperate zones, a product of our planet’s Jet Streams, which are getting more meandering and erratic with every year on account of various geophysical changes over the past decades due to global warming.

#6 Debating Republican Disconnect From Climate Science - Model substance + contrarian scientists

After my dialogue with EM I share links to information relating to the substance of climate models, then a hard look at some renowned scientists who have become climate science contrarians for hire, Seitz, Singer, Lindzen, Spencer, Christy.  

_____________________________________________________________ 

EM writes:  I would like to articulate now the ONLY point I was trying to make at any point of this discussion: AGW is real. That is clear. That is obvious. I am making no sort of denial of this fact nor am I being “disingenuous” by stating that we don’t fully understand the way the climate system operates over a long period of time.  I’m sure you’ll give me the “bull shit!” response, but this is not at all a bullshit statement.

___________________________________________

What you have proffered is feigned agreement with the obvious.  What makes it feel disingenuous is your “we don’t fully understand” - That argument can be applied to anything and everything (except religion with it’s blinding self-certainties, although that’s about the landscape of the human mind and ego rather than physical realities.  -  Or would you disagree?).

To retain a bit of added truthiness, you toss in “long period of time” - What’s that mean?  How long?  What uncertainties?  EM, can you explain why do those uncertainties concern you more than what’s known for certain?  Simply implying that there might be game changing uncertainties out there without offering anything is what could politely be called disingenuous.

_____________________________________________________________

EM writes:  Climate science (in the scope of science) is relatively new and we certainly can and will improve our holistic knowledge in the subject in the coming months, years, and decades. 

___________________________________________

Nearly two centuries is not relatively new!  I’ve already addressed this misleading Republican meme with a list of climate science milestones: 

4. Debating Republican Disconnect From - Climate Science History

http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2017/01/4-gop-disconnect-climate-science-history.html

Beyond that, I don’t think EM appreciates how consistent the long development of climate science has been.  I learned about the fundamentals more than forty years ago and nothing has changed radically.  Refinements of understand, sure, non-stop, and sometimes startling “why didn’t I think of that” surprises.  But, at the end of the day, it’s all been amazingly consistent and new pieces keep fitting into the whole of our understanding with logical consistency and even harmony.  

If I’m mistaken, or you think I’m misleading, show me.

_____________________________________________________________

#5 Debating Republican Disconnect From Climate Science - Model Uncertainty

CC: I compliment E.M. for making the effort to explain himself and open himself up to critique.  That said, after reading his more detailed arguments, I don’t think I misunderstood at all.  I rather suspect E.M. isn’t aware of the memes he’s passing along like a destructive virus.

He has offered me the opportunity to describe the many games Republicans play with themselves in order to avoid facing our planet’s geophysical realities, for this opportunity I am grateful.

  

This will need to become a series if I’m going to do E.M.’s list justice.  For instance, the first paragraph offers me an opportunity to focus on the Republican PR machine’s unhinged dismissal of climate models and their accuracy.

_________________________________________________

E.M. writes:  I’m going to start this post by pointing out that you are taking the substance of my thoughts completely incorrectly. I put this on myself, as my thoughts were quickly written in a comment section and not articulated nearly as clearly as they could have been. 

My original statement came out poorly, and the questions I posed were intended not to critique the science of AGW, but to point out the limitations that arise from scientific modeling, easily the hardest task any research team is faced with.

________________________________________________

CC: No doubt climate models are among the most difficult and exacting challenges climate scientists undertake.  

But I wonder, Why not begin this topic with a review of all that climate models have been nailing with amazing precision?  What is the point of laser focusing on model uncertainties that deal with fine details?  Why do Republicans ignore the fundamental well understood facts?  
Being obsessed with all you don't know, does not enable learning!

E.M., are you willing to consider all the things climate models have been getting correct?

___________________________________________________

‘Climate models are unproven’–Actually, GCM’s have many confirmed successes under their belts

By Coby Beck on Nov 20, 2006

http://grist.org/article/climate-models-are-unproven/

… In 1988, James Hansen of NASA GISS fame predicted [PDF] that temperature would climb over the next 12 years, with a possible brief episode of cooling in the event of a large volcanic eruption. He made this prediction in a landmark paper and before a Senate hearing, which marked the official “coming out” to the general public of anthropogenic global warming. 

Twelve years later, he was proven remarkably correct, requiring adjustment only for the timing difference between the simulated future volcanic eruption and the actual eruption of Mount Pinatubo.

And let’s face it, every year of increasing global mean temperature is one more year of success for the climate models. The acceleration of the rise is also playing out as predicted, though to be fair, decades will need to pass before such confirmation is inarguable.

Putting global surface temperatures aside, there are some other significant model predictions made and confirmed:

• models predict that surface warming should be accompanied by cooling of the stratosphere, and this has indeed been observed;

• models have long predicted warming of the lower, mid, and upper troposphere, even while satellite readings seemed to disagree — but it turns out the satellite analysis was full of errors and on correction, this warming has been observed;

• models predict warming of ocean surface waters, as is now observed;

• models predict an energy imbalance between incoming sunlight and outgoing infrared radiation, which has been detected;

• models predict sharp and short-lived cooling of a few tenths of a degree in the event of large volcanic eruptions, and Mount Pinatubo confirmed this;

• models predict an amplification of warming trends in the Arctic region, and this is indeed happening;

• and finally, to get back to where we started, models predict continuing and accelerating warming of the surface, and so far they are correct. …

#4 Debating Republican Disconnect From - Climate Science History

A good way to continue this debate is to first take a moment to review the milestones of Climate Science achievements.  This will offer a more realistic portrait than E.M.’s assessment:  “Climate science (in the scope of science) is relatively new”  The list starts with Joseph Fourier discovering the greenhouse effect in 1824 and was compiled by Dr. Spencer Weart the retired Director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics.  

After the list I will return to the above sentence and its related paragraphs.

____________________________________________________________________

The History of Modern Climate Science

Source “The Discovery of Global Warming” by Spencer Weart

Second edition (revised and updated 2008)

The history of climate science goes back to the early 1900's. This section contains a chronological listing of relevant climate science discoveries and events related to anthropogenic global warming. The information here was compiled by Spencer Weart the retired Director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics.

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/climate-science-history

The Short History:

▪ 1824 - Joseph Fourier discovered the greenhouse effect.

▪ 1859 - John Tyndall discovered that H₂O and CO₂ absorb infrared confirming the Fourier greenhouse effect.

▪ 1896 - Svante Arrhenius proposed human CO₂ emissions would prevent earth from entering next ice age (challenged 1906).

▪ 1950’s Guy Callendar found H2O and CO2 did not overlap all spectra bands, therefore warming from CO₂ expected (countered the 1906 objections against Arrhenius).

#3 E.M. has his say. Debating the Republican Disconnect from Earth's realities.

E.M. has accepted my invitation and here is his guest post taking issue with my commentary.  As agreed I have only added formatting for clarity and tried correcting for the list numbers error that I don't have time to figure out.  I'm hoping E.M. leaves a comment acknowledging that I've left his words untouched.  I will be responding in a following post or two.  Hopefully I'll have the first one finished and posted by this evening.

___________________________________________________________

E.M. writes:  I’m going to start this post by pointing out that you are taking the substance of my thoughts completely incorrectly. I put this on myself, as my thoughts were quickly written in a comment section and not articulated nearly as clearly as they could have been. My original statement came out poorly, and the questions I posed were intended not to critique the science of AGW, but to point out the limitations that arise from scientific modeling, easily the hardest task any research team is faced with.

I would like to articulate now the ONLY point I was trying to make at any point of this discussion: AGW is real. That is clear. That is obvious. I am making no sort of denial of this fact nor am I being “disingenuous” by stating that we don’t fully understand the way the climate system operates over a long period of time. 

#2 Debating the Republican Disconnect from Earth's realities

My pal returned with another comment, which I gladly share in this second installment, since it affords me an opportunity to list a lot of valuable links that support my claims and that will help inform the curious.   Update, I've received an email from E.M. who requested I refer to him by his initials.  He also offered a four thousand word response that I want to read through before posting it, it'll probably be Saturday night or Sunday before I'll be able to do get it posted.  (12/30/16. 10PM). > It has been posted at #3 E.M. has his say. Debating the Republican Disconnect from Earth's realities.

______________________________________________________________________

E.M. at 11:26pm 12/29/16 writes:  You've got me entirely wrong. Don't warp my broad claim that both sides of this argument are self-interested into labeling me as an "astro-turfer'. 

_______________________________________________

Then why are your words so predictable?  It’s like you’re reading off the script.

Oh and you are entirely wrong about the scientists and I suspect you've never actually listened to them discussing their work and results.

I appreciate it's hard for someone trapped within the self-serving Republican mind-set to imagine a community of people dedicated to getting as close to objective truth as humans can hope for.  But, so it is.  This list is incomplete, but it's lecture videos I'm familiar with, I know there are many others out there.

Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast 

Video Lecture Series by David Archer PhD | University of Chicago

http://forecast.uchicago.edu/lectures.html

_________________________________________________________________________

135 Years of Global Ocean Warming - Perspectives on Ocean Science

University of California Television (UCTV)

http://www.uctv.tv/oceanscience/

TAKE A STAND, DEMOCRACY USE IT OR LOSS IT!

http://www.December19.us    |    http://www.AskTheElectors.org

Excuse the shouting, - please understand, sometimes shouting is necessary.

WE THE PEOPLE WANT A FULL TIME PRESIDENT COMMITTED TO OUR 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN

NOT SOME WHEELER/DEALER RUSSIAN OBLIGATE 

CEO OF THE new CORPORATION OF AMERIKA !

{A disconnected individual who believes "truth" is anything he wants it to be.}

DO YOU SHARE MY FEARS FOR THE DESTRUCTION TRUMP'S PEOPLE PROMISE TO REIGN ON AMERICAN AGENCIES ALL OF US DEPEND ON 

FOR PROTECTIONS AND HELP AND A WAY OF LIFE TOO MAY TAKE FOR GRANTED?  THIS IS FOR KEEPS !

THEN YOU MUST MAKE YOUR FEELINGS KNOWN NOW !

AMERICA LITERALLY DEPENDS ON YOU ADDING YOUR VOICE TO THE CHORUS.  YES, THIS IS FOR KEEPS ! 

Remember politicians are hard of hearing, we must shout to be heard.

IMMEDIATELY, BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY DAYS TO GO BEFORE

THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE MEETS TO MAKE 

TRUMP OUR RUSSIAN OBLIGATE PRESIDENT-ELECT.

GET THAT.  HE IS NOT THE PRESIDENT YET.

NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE YOUR STATEMENT,

THE REST WILL BE HISTORY.

http://www.december19.us   -   Here's a movement we've been looking for and it needs your support.  Protest where it needs to happen, better late, than . . .  We need to send the Electoral College a clear message they have a obligation to our United States Constitution and to protecting our America as one nation indivisible.

FIND YOUR PROTEST | VOLUNTEER | GET CONNECTED