Lakoff writes: "Yes, global warming systemically caused Hurricane Sandy - and the Midwest droughts and the fires in Colorado and Texas, as well as other extreme weather disasters around the world. Let's say it out loud, it was causation, systemic causation."
Residents in Little Ferry, N.J., were rescued from flood waters. (photo: Adam Hunger/Reuters)
Global Warming Systemically Caused Hurricane Sandy
30 October 12
Reader Supported News | Perspective
es, global warming systemically caused Hurricane Sandy - and the Midwest droughts and the fires in Colorado and Texas, as well as other extreme weather disasters around the world. Let's say it out loud, it was causation, systemic causation.
Systemic causation is familiar. Smoking is a systemic cause of lung cancer. HIV is a systemic cause of AIDS. Working in coal mines is a systemic cause of black lung disease. Driving while drunk is a systemic cause of auto accidents. Sex without contraception is a systemic cause of unwanted pregnancies.
There is a difference between systemic and direct causation. Punching someone in the nose is direct causation. Throwing a rock through a window is direct causation. Picking up a glass of water and taking a drink is direct causation. Slicing bread is direct causation. Stealing your wallet is direct causation. Any application of force to something or someone that always produces an immediate change to that thing or person is direct causation. When causation is direct, the word cause is unproblematic.
Systemic causation, because it is less obvious, is more important to understand. A systemic cause may be one of a number of multiple causes. It may require some special conditions. It may be indirect, working through a network of more direct causes. It may be probabilistic, occurring with a significantly high probability. It may require a feedback mechanism. In general, causation in ecosystems, biological systems, economic systems, and social systems tends not to be direct, but is no less causal. And because it is not direct causation, it requires all the greater attention if it is to be understood and its negative effects controlled.
Above all, it requires a name: systemic causation.
Global warming systemically caused the huge and ferocious Hurricane Sandy. And consequently, it systemically caused all the loss of life, material damage, and economic loss of Hurricane Sandy. Global warming heated the water of the Gulf and Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean, resulting in greatly increased energy and water vapor in the air above the water. When that happens, extremely energetic and wet storms occur more frequently and ferociously. These systemic effects of global warming came together to produce the ferocity and magnitude of Hurricane Sandy.
The precise details of Hurricane Sandy cannot be predicted in advance, any more than when, or whether, a smoker develops lung cancer, or sex without contraception yields an unwanted pregnancy, or a drunk driver has an accident. But systemic causation is nonetheless causal.
Semantics matters. Because the word cause is commonly taken to mean direct cause, climate scientists, trying to be precise, have too often shied away from attributing causation of a particular hurricane, drought, or fire to global warming. Lacking a concept and language for systemic causation, climate scientists have made the dreadful communicative mistake of retreating to weasel words. Consider this quote from "Perception of climate change," by James Hansen, Makiko Sato, and Reto Ruedy, Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences:
...we can state, with a high degree of confidence, that extreme anomalies such as those in Texas and Oklahoma in 2011 and Moscow in 2010 were a consequence of global warming because their likelihood in the absence of global warming was exceedingly small.
The crucial words here are high degree of confidence, anomalies, consequence, likelihood, absence, and exceedingly small. Scientific weasel words! The power of the bald truth, namely causation, is lost.
This no small matter because the fate of the earth is at stake. The science is excellent. The scientists' ability to communicate is lacking. Without the words, the idea cannot even be expressed. And without an understanding of systemic causation, we cannot understand what is hitting us.
Global warming is real, and it is here. It is causing - yes, causing - death, destruction, and vast economic loss. And the causal effects are getting greater with time. We cannot merely adapt to it. The costs are incalculable. What we are facing is huge. Each day, the amount of extra energy accumulating via the heating of the earth is the equivalent of 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs. Each day!
Because the earth itself is so huge, this energy is distributed over the earth in a way that is not immediately perceptible by our bodies - only a fraction of a degree each day. But the accumulation of total heat energy over the earth is increasing at an astronomical rate, even though the temperature numbers look small locally - 0.8 degrees Celsius so far. If we hit 2.0 degrees Celsius, as we may before long, the earth - and the living things on it - will not recover. Because of ice melt, the level of the oceans will rise 45 feet, while huge storms, fires, and droughts get worse each year.
The international consensus is that by 2.0 degrees Celsius, all civilization would be threatened if not destroyed.
What would it take to reach a 2.0 degrees Celsius increase over the whole earth? Much less than you might think. Consider the amount of oil already drilled and stored by Exxon Mobil alone. If that oil were burned, the temperature of the earth would pass 2.0 degree Celsius, and those horrific disasters would come to pass.
The value of Exxon Mobil - its stock price - resides in its major asset, its stored oil. Because the weather disasters arising from burning that oil would be so great that we would have to stop burning. That's just Exxon Mobil's oil. The oil stored by all the oil companies everywhere would, if burned, destroy civilization many times over.
Another way to comprehend this, as Bill McKibben has observed, is that most of the oil stored all over the earth is worthless. The value of oil company stock, if Wall St. were rational, would drop precipitously. Moreover, there is no point in drilling for more oil. Most of what we have already stored cannot be burned. More drilling is pointless.
Are Bill McKibben's and James Hansen's numbers right? We had better have the science community double-check the numbers, and fast.
Where do we start? With language. Add systemic causation to your vocabulary. Communicate the concept. Explain to others why global warming systemically caused the enormous energy and size of Hurricane Sandy, as well as the major droughts and fires. Email your media whenever you see reporting on extreme weather that doesn't ask scientists if it was systemically caused by global warming.
Next, enact fee and dividend, originally proposed by Peter Barnes at Sky Trust and introduced as Senate legislation as the KLEAR Act by Maria Cantwell and Susan Collins. More recently, legislation called fee and dividend has been proposed by James Hansen and introduced in the House by representatives John B, Larson and Bob Inglis.
Next. Do all we can to move to alternative energy worldwide as soon as possible.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 20 May 2013
|
 21 May 2013
|
 22 May 2013
|
 21 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
 22 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
|
23 May 2013
|
 20 May 2013
|
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Folks don't realize the extent of technology in the effort of the U.S. to control the planet. That is not hysteria or misinformation.
You are very right about other countries recognizing this program and showing concern over it.
I don't expect most people to know about the program or take it seriously but I threw it out there to get some discussion going and maybe more people can look into it with an open mind.
It will be increasingly difficult to differentiate between natural changes in the weather and human manipulation.
Question asking/truthful investgaring into both HAARP. I was amazed at what I accidentally overheard as two govt. agents discussed weather control satellites. I confirmed their existence with a retired rear admiral friend.
And questions/inves tigation is also needed into experimentation with chemical additives in atmosphere/wate r for weather manipulation and any and all other purposes.
Also needed, no assumptions re. fires. Certainly, global warming/drought were involved. But, what else?
Here in Colorado, a number of very honest firefighters and cops have verified to me that not one of this past season's fires here was accidental. All set with a purpose. Time plus for real McCoy investigation.
Many authors have been laughed at for questioning, as well as for warning, just as Michael Critchton was.
The HAARP facility, by the bye, may be seen on google earth.
"According to HAARP's management, the project strives for openness, and all activities are logged and publicly available. Scientists without security clearances, even foreign nationals, are routinely allowed on site. The HAARP facility regularly (once a year on most years according to the HAARP home page) hosts open houses, during which time any civilian may tour the entire facility. In addition, scientific results obtained with HAARP are routinely published in major research journals (such as Geophysical Research Letters, or Journal of Geophysical Research), written both by university scientists (American and foreign) or by U.S. Department of Defense research lab scientists. Each summer, the HAARP holds a summer school for visiting students, including foreign nationals, giving them an opportunity to do research with one of the world's foremost research instruments." Not that Wikipedia is a totally reliable source, but neither is SMoonz.
So, SMoonz, would you explain why the good ol' US Government would be using HAARP to create events like Sandy?
There is no way of knowing whether or not the government caused anything this time around, but it is possible to do that.
In truth, the HAARP program has been very secretive and is located in an isolated area. It may be that they are open to various organizations and students and such, but that does rule using the program with ulterior motives.
After all, even Hitler was mannerly.
The only thing missing from the avalanche of ads by the energy companies is any mention of the atmosphere in which their product must burn. Hopefully we are not all energy voters who obviously get most of their education from the TV.
Do You think God is in charge of Our health as well? Do You go to a doctor? By Your logic, going to a doctor would be sacriligious.
I trusted God to show us His Way and He did! I don't smoke, I don't overeat, I don't drink and drive and adding to the long list I work every day to help create an economic alternative to using fossil fuels as a source for energy.
I am also an Energy for Life Voter.
Loves me to death!
Seriously, some of you have an inflated opinion of humanity. We are less than some mold staining the surface of a very small billiard ball - in the grand scheme of things.
Then that spiel about “His right to control the earth He created”. None of this squares with the Bible or anything else. You do your religion and the God you worship a grave disservice.
If you want to talk about God, go study basic theology, what a “myth” is, plus notions like “freedom of choice” and all the biblical dialogues between God and man: why He asked Adam (Gen. 3:8-10) “Where are you?” or Cain where his brother Abel was. Did God “control” the brothers’ parents when they disobeyed Him? Did He “control” Cain when he killed Abel? Did He “control” every thought, word and deed against His will – with which the book is filled from end to end? Try reading Job for a start.
Your writing diminishes the deity you worship – as though He were some sublunary demiurge with a wristwatch whose business was to create and “control” this speck of dust on which we live, lost amidst endless universes.
Weirdest of all, you insist “God’s in control” while advocating zero control over human actions… It's as though you asked Him "Am I earth's keeper?"
It seems your invisible imaginary friend doesn't have much in the way of scruples and doesn't give a crap about "his" creations!
We are our own Creations...unl ike the vegetation, the animals, we have the ability to give joy, life....we choose to ignore or kill. We were given Life...
Mother Nature I like to believe is trying to tell us something....ho wever, if God had the time to sit there pointing disasters at us, then there would be no reason to believe God is a Good Being. After all did the Creator not Create this beautiful Planet, all it contains.... If God wanted to destroy us, why now and not after the Sins in the Garden? Christ Crucified? Crusades of Children? Please we are destroying all that was given, most do not care...esp GOP
Really? I'm thrilled to hear it! So, while we're at it, let's give a big shout out to god (whoops, sorry I got generic there) about leukemia and Alzheimer's, drones and scuds, witch-burnings and gay-haters ... oh, the list is endless.
I know we don't deserve all these wondrous things, especially after that little display of hubris in the garden ... eating from the tree of knowledge and all that. But, I am sure that if you keep sending us endearing treats like genocide and child poverty (or any poverty for that matter), we'll finally get the message and start being truly worthy of his/her/its "love."
"He" notes that he gets the credit for all the good stuff and his (supposed) competitor gets blamed for all the bad.
I'd say we are stuck with the problem. (and with fundamentalists and all kinds of faith filled "believers."
Well, stupidity does suit the Republican party, so yeah, from their perspective, I guess so.
God gave us life, Planet life Aetheism doesn't give you anything or any less disease, murder.
We created the messes, or wondrous stuff...that was our doing. If people get diseases from the chemicals we allowed, the fertilizers we encouraged, the Monsantos, the Fracking,... When any of you smoked around kids, animals or other adults every wonder what you could have started? Goes for everything we have done. Mostly unknowing, any of us could have given someone something....
I carry that weight, I blame no one for my ills.
Actually it is about our accepting others, loving ourselves. We need not be worthy of God's Love....Creator loved us from day one. Time we start working together to show our love and thankfulness for being given the chance to Life. Life is what We Make It...
If that was irony, you got it right, if not you proved you don't know facts when they hit you in the face.
You must be a sheeple...follo wer
The earth does not take kindly to those who interfere with it on the scale we have been for centuries.
In case you haven't noticed, Romney DOES NOT like the idea. In fact, he plans to DISMANTLE the green investments made by the President.
Still think there's no difference?
The big contributors include all the major energy interests so you get government of, by, and for, the energy interests.
Not that any of that matters to you. You'd rather see it all destroyed than allow President Obama another term.
Could you be a little more specific rather than speaking so vaguely what you're trying to say? What do you want the President to do?
No one can level the playing field and everyone trying to is why we are in the shape we are. Selfish people out for themselves and their stuff. Right now I would wonder what you will do for those in disaster areas? OB is out helping are you?
Want a level playing field, buy a bull dozer do it yourself
Been waiting for twenty five years to see you all actually run for office. So many of these parties are elitists, snobs....do not move among people. Like the Republicans your uninterest, leaves us uninterested. Your vote for stein is a vote for Nit
We have some Solar Companies that have stood firm and I am looking to them for mine.
Twenty five years the GOP have booed alternative Energy. I was at the meetings...Gov Ridge was the scariest.
All of you, who "believe" (translation=no t knowing) that
scare me to death.
Shanti
The logic works for me... and George Lakoff.
The logic works for me.
God created Sandy to show how shallow and unethical the repunblican right is - to show the fact that privatizing FEMA won't help people who need it.
Shanti
But I'm interested in tracking how the right wing whackos will modify their spin on global warming as the disasters continue and thus support Al Gore's science. By the way, this spin is indeed being funded by the mega billionaires out of their greed for more profits--and to hell with mankind!
Shanti
I do believe drilling can cause earthquakes.... these earthquakes due to toxins will add to global warming. Iceberg melt is real...I talked to real people not scientists.
SERIOUSLY! TOM!
PLEASE start looking up your statements before posting them. I'm embarrassed for you. You don't seem like a complete partisan repug. You just seem to be easily manipulated by right-wing media.
The "research" you're discussing was flawed and it's been discredited. It's only known to you because it's been repeated ad nauseum by the right-wing press.
Be honest with yourself. Do you really think the 98% consensus among climate scientists is a conspiratorial boogyman with an ulterior agenda? What would it be?
When you hear something that so fundamentally disagrees with the overwhelming consensus, rather than cherry picking it as your sole source of information, why not actually check it out first?
The "research" you're discussing was flawed and it's been discredited. It's only known to you because it's been repeated ad nauseum by the right-wing press.
Be honest with yourself. Do you really think the 98% consensus among climate scientists is a conspiratorial boogyman with an ulterior agenda? What would it be?
Tom is in the pocket of RoMoney/big oil/coal. He knows better, but cannot let his voice speak or type it.
There is some very serious data that has recently been assembled concerning the HAARP project. H-A-A-R-P stands for "High frequency Active Auroral Research Program established by elites in Navy and Army intelligence and funded by U.S. Taxpayers. see>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Frequency_Active_Auroral_Research_Program
On October 26, 2012 the highest HAARP readings ever recorded were discovered near the eye of Hurricane Sandy while it was still hundreds of miles from any land. According to http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html
There appeared to be a deliberate attempt to steer the storm into the United States rather than allow it to follow a path to Greenland. If this is true, the American People must wake-up and demand an end to ALL weather modification programs, including CHEM-TRAILING, and the arrest of ALL government and military personnel responsible for this act of murder!
Seems to me that you believe in magical thinking: I suppose you think that God SENT the storm for a reason??
Yes, God loves us..AND all of creation.
God loves humanity so much that God gave us free-will and also stewardship of, and thus responsibility for, the good use of the earth for the common good of ALL.
God loves us so much that God will not interfer in what we manifest by our own actions and decisions.
Destroying God's creations -- the plants, minerals, animals, waters and all other organisms as well as ourselves -- is not part of the picture portrayed in Genesis. Destroying creation seems instead completely disrespectful and arrogant.
So far, humanity is demonstrating that we are selfish, greedy beings, stupid enough to pollute and destroy everything given to us by God for our measly short-term pleasure, with no thought of the impact on our children or children's children or the rest of creation.
"The monster storm of our lifetime"
Lifetime ?
Easy! Easy!
Just wait till 2013, 2014, 2015 .......
Too often we think 'well, that's a 100 year storm' and simply repair or rebuild what failed. In this case, it's either move up (in elevation) or move back (away from the shoreline). Because the water will rise again.
Let's unite, as we always do, and help all who need it. And give thanks "Brownie" is no longer leading FEMA.
I have small woodstove back up. I needed it for four days now and up to fourteen on other black out...it heats, feeds, sterilize water. But I use GeoThermal as it is yours to use. Next is solar so I pay less to Electric.
I use a hundred a month in winter to heat, and electrify my home....6000 sq ft... what's your oil bills? Apartment dwellers can look to solar to help offset some lighting, appliance.
Obama approved opening the Powder River Basin to coal exploitation, and approved the XL pipeline. His administration refused to sign climate accords, and Obama brags about opening yet more coal, gas and oilfields.
http://www.voterocky.org/
If Rocky Anderson was to win the Presidency how would he deal with a House of Representatives who state from day one that they will make sure that every detailed shaped paving stone never gets delivered to that new highway. They are the poster boys for biting off your nose to spite your face.
Don't you get it yet?
The only use the current H.of R. has for the word 'highway' is the following: "It's our way or the highway, Mister President."
They also say that their pledge to Grover Norquist is more important then the oath they swore to when they took office, and the former came before the latter.
In grade school I learned that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
I learned that the Sun heats up the waters, and this now gaseous form of water rises into the sky and collects in clouds. Some heat gets reflected and escapes into cold space. The clouds are blown by the wind; wind is created when the Earth rotates on its axis as it revolves around the Sun. When the cloud gets so full of gaseous water that it can't hold it in any longer (like when you really have to piss so badly, and you can't find a toilet), and it just lets it go wherever it happens to be, over land or sea. If over the sea it replenishes the sea; if over land it feeds the soil and the rivers, and the rivers flow down to the seas to replenish the seas. The whole cycle keeps repeating itself.
Gases produced when certain things are burned go into the sky, they form a barrier to the escaping heat. They're called 'Greenhouse' gases.
Now the waters are warmer; it takes less Sun heat to make it gaseous; the clouds fill up faster & more often (like if you have a prostate condition), and there are more rain clouds. More heat fuels these clouds; the storms get bigger and stronger.
I learned that it's the man made hothouse gases that cause the problem.
Then we had recess, and I had milk and cookies!
I think Mr. Romney missed school that day-he had a riding lesson.
The nations are indeed angry: they fight wars forever and are very corrupt. I think you guys need to bring this religious imagery into the equation.
I know most of you don't want to believe in any God that would let the RR go on the way they do, and you're having way too much fun to hold back. But still, you can take the imagery back to the RR and let them know they're in the mix too.
This will likely go over your heads, but maybe ...
In other words, this is only important if you're concerned about the fact that billions will starve if we don't do something about it.
I see that he is a professor of linguistics, studied at Indiana University and MIT. Pretty good credentials, eh?
Then, I see that he claims to have tried to bring logic to Professor Chomsky's work. Things are heating up now. I detect a systemic cause coming to fruition.
Then I read more and see that Chomsky says of that Lakoff has "virtually no comprehension of the work he is discussing" (the work in question being Chomsky's).
Ah systemic confusion.
How is it that a professor of linguistics with just a little bit of training in science can make such grandiose pronouncements?
Yet, I don't want to be rude.
It is POSSIBLE, perhaps even PROBABLE that global warming or climate change may have had something to do with the freak nature of this storm.
On the other hand it may just have been a crazy coincidence that we had a Hurricane (after all, it is just the beginning of November and not quite the end of hurricane season) bashing up against arctic air coming from Canada (after all it is almost November and cold up there)and a high pressure system off Nova Scotia that generated a Nor'easter like vortex.
The truth is I just don't know.
Perhaps someone does but I doubt that someone is a person with the credentials of Prof. Lakoff. Maybe Al Gore knows.
Thanks for a useful and (for once) relevant comment. My own first reaction to the title of the Professor's article was also: What nonsense! How could anyone voice so categorical a statement about a single weather phenomenon? And that, while it's actually happening.
I did notice the intelligent and logical use (and even over-use) of a concept in the article - that of "systemic causation". But then I let myself get blown right off course by a primitive Super Pangloss, whom I answered a little too much like Voltaire's snitch to the Inquisition (http://www.literature.org/authors/voltaire/candide/chapter-05.html).
Voltaire goes on to tell "How the Portuguese Made a Superb Auto-De-Fe to Prevent Any Future Earthquakes", and I fear that, in another age, the Professor might for his pains have ended up being burned "alive by a slow fire, and with great ceremony" as an infallible preventive of hurricanes.
That being said, the evidence does point to NYC, Florida and many of the world's port cities being swamped in the coming decades. Whatever happens, corporate America (and serfs) will, like Voltaire's pig-ignorant sailor, have the answer: "Damn it, there's something to be got here."
I must say that I am confused by the conflicting claims from all sides. Yes, I know that there is a consensus - maybe 98% is more than a consensus - among scientists that we have climate change or global warming.
Let's say climate change because that is pretty much visible.
Let's also say that man's activities contribute mightily to climate change.
The important questions for me are:
1. Can we do anything about it?
2. If the answer to 1 is yes, should we try? Do we understand the consequences?
I don't know the answers. From what I've read, even if the US and Europe were to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero, India and China would double them over some definable period (I don't know if that is 10, 20 or more years but the number I recall reading was about that magnitude).
You call yourself a 'pundit.' Continuing the theme of not being rude, I ask you what makes you a pundit? What is your expertise, or area of punditry that makes you a take on the title of pundit?
It sounds like you are spending a lot of time researching the credentials of the messenger, rather than the viability of his message. This "Systemic causation" concept seems very logical to me. Prof. Lakoff gave many of examples of just how this idea works in our daily lives.
You say, "It is POSSIBLE, perhaps even PROBABLE that global warming or climate change may have had something to do with the freak nature of this storm."
This statement is confusing to me. First off, anything is 'possible' in this world of ours, so we can eliminate that word from your statement...it' s obvious and therefore redundant. Next you say that it's, "perhaps even PROBABLE." If something is labeled 'probable' it has arrived at the threshold of near certainty.
If you don't like the way the message is presented, or who the messenger is, don't shoot the messenger; investigate the message.
I close with a quote from that renown poet and musical pundit, Bob Dylan:
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."
Nothing, it is a moniker I chose as a humorous reminder that most of what read on these pages is pontificating (punditry) by people who don't know.
In my line of work, assessing the credibility of the message necessarily involves assessing whether the messenger is qualified to opine as he does.
OK, I can live with that. In my opinion, it is nonsense.
I am postulating that because I don't "know" I have to concede possibility and/or probability.
You will have to take a course in logic or analysis to sort out your confusion.
To be absolutely fair, Chris Christie Gov' of New Jersey credited FEMA and Obama for their readiness and chastised those who wouldn't leave their homes as putting first responders and their families at risk (maybe they were waiting for God to jump in and pluck 'em out of the shit!) and acted as a responsible Governor, speaking directly to and dealing with the President in a mutually respectful exchange, putting partisan politics aside in a time of need.
Nice change from Dimwits and Co's un-handling of Katrina.
As for the Global warming, I'm not a qualified climatologist nor qualified to write knowledgeably on't but have been hearing speculation for some time in some pretty credible sources about "Manhattan being under water" some day.
Quod erat demonstratum.
For the climate change naysayers, "Glug, glug, glug" and out.
For the God-botherers, go build an ark on a Pacific atoll.
If you do not believe in God, then you would have no problem believing that human-kind as a group should not want to destroy ourselves.
So all this discussion about God does not change the conclusions.
The only difficult part is the connection between continuing to live the way we live and not taking care of the earth. This means burning fuels and eating food out of season and driving everywhere etc.
Personally, I enjoy thinking about the possibility of making a gasoline replacement out of industrial hemp, but I lack the training to know whether it is possible, much less whether the price would be acceptable.
I also don't know whether growing and then burning the products of hemp would solve the problem if nothing else changes.
Solar and wind energy are unlikely to provide enough energy to entirely replace petroleum. If we could turn all highways into solar cells, it might help a whole lot, but it would not be enough. A partial solution may still buy us time.
If you do not live in a swing state, voting 3rd party may send a message, but in practice we can expect either Obama or Romney will win. Neither seems interested in solving this problem. Either they don't understand it needs solving, or they are not convinced of the best way to solve it.
The authors of the 'New Testament' misread the Hebrew word and substituted the word 'dominion' for the word stewardship. The two concepts are very different, and has caused much conflict and strife for nearly 2000 years.
Gaia does not take kindly to the idea of dominion. We are paying dearly for this human arrogance.
Have a look in the Bible:
Samuels 1st Book/chapter 15
where God orders genocide of the
Amaleks
and
Moses 5th Book (Deuterium)
chapter 21 where it is recommended
to stone small boys to death if they
don´t behave.
God should be in the Hague accused
of genocide and human right abuses,sitting besides Karadzic and
Mladic.
God didn´t create Sandy,
Sandy was "created" by the most
stupid of his creations: mankind.
"Hurricane Katrina cannot be attributed to global warming. The number of hurricanes hitting the United States has been going down, not up; likewise for intense tornadoes. Polar bears aren’t dying from receding ice, and the Himalayan glaciers aren’t going to melt by 2035. And it’s possible that we are currently no warmer than we were a thousand years ago, during the “Medieval Warm Period” or “Medieval Optimum,” an interval of warm conditions known from historical records and indirect evidence like tree rings. And the recent warm spell in the United States happens to be more than offset by cooling elsewhere in the world, so its link to “global” warming is weaker than tenuous." (NYT, 12JUL2012). Perhaps, a "heated" debate could take place? Regardless, God bless them both, eh?
Not being a professor of linguistics, please enlighten me as to the meaning of "edumacated." What happens when one is edumacated? Does it hurt much? Is it catching? Has Dr. Muller performed many of these procedures in his career? Is it covered by most health insurance plans, even if it happens to be a pre-existing condition?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Vote ROMENY-RYAN and put and end to Liberal Scientific Theorizing forever..!
Any IDIOT knows that God sent Sandy to wash away Liberalism and Scientistism.
:-D.
Heh-heh!
Gawd bless you my son (or daughter)!
I appreciate your satirical remarks-I grok it!
But, be aware that many contributors to this comment page are lacking that gene to a large degree. To them, your words and statements are your true feelings, as presented.
Then they was the case of the retired gentleman who proudly held up his sign at a 2010 Tea Party Rally. The sign read the following:
KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OFF MY MEDICARE!
Now here was somebody who totally lacked the irony gene!
The key words here - "Profit worthy". You must get beyond that to get to first base in the discussion of global energy, universal pathways and solutions.
"Profit" for whom? This circumscribes any possible solution to any issue.
"Who the potter and who the pots?"
There are cycles, but what we call global warming is much too fast for the orbital cycles and slower than the short-term cycles like El Nino and sunspot activity. The closest analogy is what happened during most of the past mass extinctions, when volcanic activity released greenhouse gases. Those were not cycles, and neither is global warming, which is progressing about 10 times as fast.
Al Gore is not making this stuff up. He is just reporting what the climate scientists are discovering because he thinks it is important for people to know what is happening. The lies are coming from the deniers, who don't understand the science they attempt to criticize.
Both my thumbs down on your comment, but I will concentrate on just one of your statements, in depth.
But first, answer this question, please:
Would you pay 10% above the price of a regular can of peanuts, if the can was labeled 'No Cholesterol' in bold yellow letters?
It's obvious to me that you don't know jack, when it comes to science! You make a statement like this:
"Carbon Dioxide can not heat the atmosphere - it's one of the big lies told by Al Gore."
Who told you that Al Gore said CO2 heats the planet? Not Al Gore!
CO2 never could, never would act as a 'heating' agent. The Earth gets ALL its heat from the Sun. If the Earth gets too much heat from that very hot ball in the sky we will all burn up-poof! We would be like Venus!!
Instead the Earth regulates itself by 'sweating.' We humans also regulate our core body temperature by 'sweating.' If we don't sweat properly, the heat builds up and we get 'heat stroke' and we can die if we're not cooled down. When you wear a 'sweat suit' the material of the suit prevents the heat from naturally evaporating into the atmosphere, and you get hotter and hotter. This is supposed to burn off fat!
CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE ACTS AS THE SWEAT SUIT OF THE EARTH. IT TRAPS THE SWEAT, AND REFLECTS IT BACK. THUS IT HEATS THE EARTH BEYOND A SAFE LEVEL.
CO2 IS GIVING THE EARTH HEAT STROKE!!!
What's your answer? Would you pay for the more expensive peanuts?
I'd use the words "Cautionary" rather than "Inflammatory", especially given the limited understanding and exposure of the average American to the omnipresent Owner media who are "All but rude to the (problem's) solitude".
Please provide examples of "Clean Coal" (Mountaintop removal and desecration of whole communities in Appalachia perhaps?). Oil and gas have their own tales of deceit and pollution to need no more referrals.
It all ends up as "National Sacrifice Areas" or if you like "Domestic Collateral Damage" (My term) and sadly mostly to feed that resource-guzzli ng behemoth, the US military.
"Safe Nuclear" anyone?
"The right laughs at you!
Well we Must be doin; something right.
Only news is that the right has any kind of sense o' humor.
It is at:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/94h69o8
We are not causing these things, but we are making them stronger. And, frankly, we are in big trouble, mainly because we are stupidly continuing, even increasing, the actions that are causing this. If we had any sense we would stop.
or mentioned in the election debates
!!!
Whether it is evolution, climate change, the bacterial cause of disease, immunizations that prevent disease, gravity or the earth revolving around the sun the FACTS of science rule the day everywhere from particle to quantum physics nothing escapes the fundamental facts science tells us and these facts of biology and physics even pertain to outer space. There are some eternal truths of science no party, no political thought, no religious wingnut fantasy and no one human being can deny. To do so means vast death and utter immolation of places like Manhattan, the New Jersey shore and much much more.
Deny science at your peril and at the peril of all of us who know the veracity of science when it stares us in the face.
Some weather conditions have happened forever...canno t deny this. Sandy might not have been the largest or worst. I believe we have had storms if each Century, we have more toys now to measure better.
We have created Global Warming since the Industrial Revolution. We have perfected it in the past hundred years.
Environmentalists made strides, in past 20 years I have watched the string unravel and Yuppies not give a damn. In past ten years I have seen laws gutted, still everyone looked the other way. Instead of blaming others like birther bs, we should be looking how we can make changes in the future, build the path together.
NY will come back, other States will rebuild...all will rebound. But it is going to take everyone to do it.
Go look at how many things you own that uses gas, oil, kerosene, gas, electricity. Think of where they were manufactured, think about what you live in, wear....we are all part of the problem. God is not going to save you, Government isn't going to save you.
You want Change....guess what, it is up to you.
It would be nonsense to say that smoking hasn't been proved to cause cancer, just because we cannot prove that somebody's cancer was caused by a particular cigarette.
The health of the Earth also needs action. Not excuses for doing nothing, concocted by by the corporate disinformation industry.
There are three things missing from the above article:
01 It lacks a strategic analytic model within which to comprehend the inter-play between threats such as poverty and human system irresponsibilit y such as war, paving over the wetlands, etc.
02 Because of #1, it does not see that global warming aka climate change is a small part of Environmental Degradation, threat #3 among the high-level threats, following poverty and infectious disease.
03 It fails to distinguish between natural disasters and human-centered catastrophe. Sandy was turned into a catastrophe by human system apathy and government to corporate corruption. Subways have never been been built to recover from flooding, power systems are still archaic instead of resilient, gasoline, water and food were not pre-positioned, the list is long.
Coming back to language: we need a language that presents the true cost of all decisions, all goods and services, all the time: the virtual water, the virtual fuel, the virtual child labor, the virtual tax avoidance, and the not so virtual toxins that come with everything including a standard cotton T-shirt.
Learn more at Phi Beta Iota the Public Intelligence Blog (http://www.phibetaiota.net).
RSS feed for comments to this post