[FRIAM] climate change questions

Thu Jan 2 12:56:02 EST 2020

I think he should say reducing greenhouse gases and

Other mitigation strategies include:

   - Improving the energy efficiency of buildings to reduce emissions from
   heating/cooling
   - Planting forests and tree to remove excess carbon dioxide from our
   atmosphere
   - Reducing fuel emissions associated with motor vehicles

I like the planting approaches.
-----------------------------------

Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Thu, Jan 2, 2020, 10:51 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Merle,
>
>
>
> I think he is going to say that the migration IS the treatment.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>
> Clark University
>
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Marcus Daniels
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 2, 2020 10:46 AM
> *To:* Tom Johnson <tom at jtjohnson.com>; The Friday Morning Applied
> Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions
>
>
>
> Dave writes:
>
>
>
> < Even more scary are all the side effects as massive migrations that fail
> to respect existing political boundaries ensue with a concomitant rise in
> nationalism and all the joys it will bring us.>
>
> Tom writes:
>
>
>
> < So perhaps "existing political boundaries" are no longer a viable or
> rational concept? >
>
>
>
> *Side effects* is a good way to look at it.   No drug that works doesn't
> have side effects.   Just have to ride them out and let the treatment do
> its thing.
>
>
>
> Marcus
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Tom Johnson <
> tom at jtjohnson.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 2, 2020 1:20 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions
>
>
>
> RE Dave West: So perhaps "existing political boundaries" are no longer a
> viable or rational concept? (But I have yet to find a potential
> alternative.)
>
> Tom Johnson
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020, 8:18 AM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well we certainly agree on that.
>
> So should we put it before the Jury?
>
> N
>
> Nicholas Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
> Clark University
> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 12:30 PM
> To: friam at redfish.com
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions
>
> Nick,
>
> I am not overwhelmingly concerned with steady climate change per se; it is
> the variability that is the real concern, as you point out. Even more scary
> are all the side effects as massive migrations that fail to respect
> existing
> political boundaries ensue with a concomitant rise in nationalism and all
> the joys it will bring us.
>
> davew
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, at 7:09 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > I like these questions, and I think The Congregation should take them
> > as a challenge.
> >
> > What can we-all, we who have long association, and a generalized (if
> > somewhat guarded) respect, come to agree upon with respect to climate
> > change and human activity?  By what process, with what attitudes, by
> > what rules of engagement, are we likely to arrive at ANY truth of that
> > matter.  Because, if we, here, cannot agree on some matters, agreement
> > would seem to be beyond human reach.
> >
> > So, for starters, I find I am inclined to disagree with your facts as
> > stated.  They seem to assert that Things (whatever Things are) are not
> > as bad as they were predicted to be.  Yet, I find, I am inclined to
> > believe that in fact Things are worse.  The only specific data I feel
> > I have been exposed to recently is ocean surface rise and glacial
> > melting.  But even there, I would be hard pressed to match your
> > specific references to any of my own.  So, I guess the conclusion is,
> > I disagree, but I don't know what I am talking about.  Ugh!
> >
> > I could (after some labor) cite data to support the following concern:
> > what we should be watching out for, perhaps more than long term
> > climate warming, is increases in year-to-year climate variability.
> > You can grow rape seed in Canada and maize in the US, and as the
> > climate alters, the bands of climate supporting these two crops will
> > move north.  But what happens if one year the climate demands one crop
> > and the next the other?  And the switch from one to the other is
> > entirely unpredictable.  Anybody who plants a garden knows that only
> > two dates have a tremendous effect on the productivity of your garden:
> > first frost and last frost.  The average frost free period in my
> > garden in Ma 135 days or so, but only a few miles away, it is as short
> > as 90.  And while we have never had a 90 day frost year, we have had
> > last frost dates in June and first frost dates in early September.  It
> > would take a very small year-to-year increase in variability to turn
> > my garden from something that could support life for a year in New
> England
> into a 30 x 50 wasteplot.
> >
> > I think I could show you that the period in which we live, the
> > Holocene, is a period of remarkably low, year-to-year, variation in
> climate VARIABILITY.
> > I think I could convince you that everything that has occurred in the
> > last ten thousand years by way of civilization is entirely dependent
> > on that anomalous stability.  The neanderthals were not too stupid to
> > do agriculture; the climate of the Pleistocene would not permit it.
> > The whole idea of nation states depends on the idea that one can make
> > more or less the same kind of living by staying more or less in the
> > same place and doing more or less the same thing.  A return to
> > Pleistocene year-to-year variation would obliterate that possibility.
> >
> > If then, I could convince you, that --quite apart from Global
> > Warming-- we are seeing an increase in climate variability, then, by
> > God, I think I could scare the Living Crap out of you.
> >
> > The only question is whether we have the energy and sitzfleisch to do
> > it, and some way to keep our correspondence is order so that it's
> > value could be harvested for the long run.
> >
> > Happy New Year!
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > Nicholas Thompson
> > Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University
> > ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Prof David West
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 9:45 AM
> > To: friam at redfish.com
> > Subject: [FRIAM] climate change questions
> >
> > Questions,  that do NOT, in any manner or form deny the reality of
> climate
> > change.
> >
> > In 1990, citing the "best scientific models available" stated that
> because
> > of carbon dioxide emissions, the Earth would warm by an average of 3
> degrees
> > Fahrenheit and the U.S. as the largest producer, by an average of 6
> degrees
> > Fahrenheit by 2020.
> >
> > The UN IPCC report of the same year predicted a range of temperature
> > increases ranging from 1-5 degrees F, with the most likely expectations
> > being 3-5 by the year 2020.
> >
> > The current report predicts a rise of 2-5 degrees by 2100.
> >
> > The New York Times, CNN, and the President of Exxon USA predicted the end
> of
> > domestic oil and gas reserves by 2020.
> >
> > The undisputed rise in Earth (and US) temperature as of 2020 is 1 degree.
> >
> > Exactly how does one go about constructing a reasoned, and accurate,
> > argument for the need to address climate change in the context of badly
> > incorrect predictions, grounded in the best available scientific models,
> and
> > over-hyped "disaster scenarios" promulgated by those with political or
> > simply "circulation" motives.
> >
> > In light of this context of "error" and "hype," is it fair to tar
> everyone
> > expressing questions or doubts with the same "deny-er" brush?
> >
> > Is it possible to constructively criticize either the models or the
> proposed
> > "solutions" without being dismissed as a troglodyte "deny-er?"
> >
> > Is there a way to evaluate a spectrum of means (eliminating coal to
> carbon
> > scrubbers to ...) along with analyses of cost/benefit ratios, human
> > socio-economic impact, etc. and compare them?
> >
> > Is there more than one strategy for getting out of this mess; and if so,
> how
> > do we decide (and/or construct a blend) on one that will optimize our
> > chances?
> >
> > davew
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe
> > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> >
> >
> > ============================================================
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> >
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200102/a5c2cacd/attachment-0001.html>