<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Merle, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I think he is going to say that the migration IS the treatment. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Nick <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Nicholas Thompson<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Clark University<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com"><span style='color:#0563C1'>ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/"><span style='color:#0563C1'>https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Friam <friam-bounces@redfish.com> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Marcus Daniels<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 2, 2020 10:46 AM<br><b>To:</b> Tom Johnson <tom@jtjohnson.com>; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Dave writes:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>< 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.><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Tom writes:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>< So perhaps "existing political boundaries" are no longer a viable or rational concept? ><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i>Side effects</i> 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. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Marcus<o:p></o:p></p></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><hr size=2 width="98%" align=center></div><div id=divRplyFwdMsg><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='color:black'> Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> on behalf of Tom Johnson <<a href="mailto:tom@jtjohnson.com">tom@jtjohnson.com</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 2, 2020 1:20 AM<br><b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions</span> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>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.) <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Tom Johnson <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Thu, Jan 2, 2020, 8:18 AM <<a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><p class=MsoNormal>Well we certainly agree on that. <br><br>So should we put it before the Jury? <br><br>N<br><br>Nicholas Thompson<br>Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology<br>Clark University<br><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com" target="_blank">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</a><br><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/" target="_blank">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</a><br><br><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> On Behalf Of Prof David West<br>Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 12:30 PM<br>To: <a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a><br>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] climate change questions<br><br>Nick,<br><br>I am not overwhelmingly concerned with steady climate change per se; it is<br>the variability that is the real concern, as you point out. Even more scary<br>are all the side effects as massive migrations that fail to respect existing<br>political boundaries ensue with a concomitant rise in nationalism and all<br>the joys it will bring us.<br><br>davew<br><br><br>On Wed, Jan 1, 2020, at 7:09 PM, <a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>> Dave,<br>> <br>> I like these questions, and I think The Congregation should take them <br>> as a challenge.<br>> <br>> What can we-all, we who have long association, and a generalized (if <br>> somewhat guarded) respect, come to agree upon with respect to climate <br>> change and human activity? By what process, with what attitudes, by <br>> what rules of engagement, are we likely to arrive at ANY truth of that <br>> matter. Because, if we, here, cannot agree on some matters, agreement <br>> would seem to be beyond human reach.<br>> <br>> So, for starters, I find I am inclined to disagree with your facts as <br>> stated. They seem to assert that Things (whatever Things are) are not <br>> as bad as they were predicted to be. Yet, I find, I am inclined to <br>> believe that in fact Things are worse. The only specific data I feel <br>> I have been exposed to recently is ocean surface rise and glacial <br>> melting. But even there, I would be hard pressed to match your <br>> specific references to any of my own. So, I guess the conclusion is, <br>> I disagree, but I don't know what I am talking about. Ugh!<br>> <br>> I could (after some labor) cite data to support the following concern: <br>> what we should be watching out for, perhaps more than long term <br>> climate warming, is increases in year-to-year climate variability. <br>> You can grow rape seed in Canada and maize in the US, and as the <br>> climate alters, the bands of climate supporting these two crops will <br>> move north. But what happens if one year the climate demands one crop <br>> and the next the other? And the switch from one to the other is <br>> entirely unpredictable. Anybody who plants a garden knows that only <br>> two dates have a tremendous effect on the productivity of your garden: <br>> first frost and last frost. The average frost free period in my <br>> garden in Ma 135 days or so, but only a few miles away, it is as short <br>> as 90. And while we have never had a 90 day frost year, we have had <br>> last frost dates in June and first frost dates in early September. It <br>> would take a very small year-to-year increase in variability to turn <br>> my garden from something that could support life for a year in New England<br>into a 30 x 50 wasteplot.<br>> <br>> I think I could show you that the period in which we live, the <br>> Holocene, is a period of remarkably low, year-to-year, variation in<br>climate VARIABILITY.<br>> I think I could convince you that everything that has occurred in the <br>> last ten thousand years by way of civilization is entirely dependent <br>> on that anomalous stability. The neanderthals were not too stupid to <br>> do agriculture; the climate of the Pleistocene would not permit it. <br>> The whole idea of nation states depends on the idea that one can make <br>> more or less the same kind of living by staying more or less in the <br>> same place and doing more or less the same thing. A return to <br>> Pleistocene year-to-year variation would obliterate that possibility.<br>> <br>> If then, I could convince you, that --quite apart from Global <br>> Warming-- we are seeing an increase in climate variability, then, by <br>> God, I think I could scare the Living Crap out of you.<br>> <br>> The only question is whether we have the energy and sitzfleisch to do <br>> it, and some way to keep our correspondence is order so that it's <br>> value could be harvested for the long run.<br>> <br>> Happy New Year!<br>> <br>> Nick<br>> <br>> Nicholas Thompson<br>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University <br>> <a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com" target="_blank">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</a> <a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/" target="_blank">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</a><br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: Friam <<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a>> On Behalf Of Prof David West<br>> Sent: Wednesday, January 1, 2020 9:45 AM<br>> To: <a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank">friam@redfish.com</a><br>> Subject: [FRIAM] climate change questions<br>> <br>> Questions, that do NOT, in any manner or form deny the reality of climate<br>> change.<br>> <br>> In 1990, citing the "best scientific models available" stated that because<br>> of carbon dioxide emissions, the Earth would warm by an average of 3<br>degrees<br>> Fahrenheit and the U.S. as the largest producer, by an average of 6<br>degrees<br>> Fahrenheit by 2020.<br>> <br>> The UN IPCC report of the same year predicted a range of temperature<br>> increases ranging from 1-5 degrees F, with the most likely expectations<br>> being 3-5 by the year 2020.<br>> <br>> The current report predicts a rise of 2-5 degrees by 2100.<br>> <br>> The New York Times, CNN, and the President of Exxon USA predicted the end<br>of<br>> domestic oil and gas reserves by 2020.<br>> <br>> The undisputed rise in Earth (and US) temperature as of 2020 is 1 degree.<br>> <br>> Exactly how does one go about constructing a reasoned, and accurate,<br>> argument for the need to address climate change in the context of badly<br>> incorrect predictions, grounded in the best available scientific models,<br>and<br>> over-hyped "disaster scenarios" promulgated by those with political or<br>> simply "circulation" motives.<br>> <br>> In light of this context of "error" and "hype," is it fair to tar everyone<br>> expressing questions or doubts with the same "deny-er" brush?<br>> <br>> Is it possible to constructively criticize either the models or the<br>proposed<br>> "solutions" without being dismissed as a troglodyte "deny-er?"<br>> <br>> Is there a way to evaluate a spectrum of means (eliminating coal to carbon<br>> scrubbers to ...) along with analyses of cost/benefit ratios, human<br>> socio-economic impact, etc. and compare them?<br>> <br>> Is there more than one strategy for getting out of this mess; and if so,<br>how<br>> do we decide (and/or construct a blend) on one that will optimize our<br>> chances?<br>> <br>> davew<br>> <br>> ============================================================<br>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe<br>> <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>> archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>> FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<br>> <br>> <br>> ============================================================<br>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br>> to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>> archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>> FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<br>><br><br>============================================================<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br>to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<br><br><br>============================================================<br>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College<br>to unsubscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>archives back to 2003: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> by Dr. Strangelove<o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div></div></div></body></html>