Education environment Politics: analogies sustainability
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 13: Ain’t No Place A Man Can Hide
The Barnstable Patriot discusses the ways climate change is affecting Cape Cod, Massachusetts’ own vacation paradise:
Climate change is costing Cape Codders. It is eating at our shorelines, causing storm surges to overrun our beaches and houses. It is raising the price of our homeowner’s insurance. Our vulnerable sandy habitation, 10 miles wide, is part of a global system of weather that affects us locally, according to four experts who spoke at a climate change forum sponsored by the League of Women Voters at the Harwich Community Center April 28.
The takeaway message is that while belief in climate change is falling, the reality of it is increasing via accumulated science from real events, according to Dr. Eric Davidson, executive director of the Woods Hole Research Center, which looks at climate science from the Amazon to the Arctic. Davidson warned that hard facts prove the dangers of rising global warming. He said that since the world focused its attention on this issue at Rio de Janeiro in 1992, emissions have been lowered in some nations, but by and large, little has been accomplished.
Unless we mitigate, adapt and change now, Davidson said, there will be increased suffering from heat, violent weather extremes, famine, drought and flooding, all of which, data collected, measured and sifted over time show, will increase exponentially. He added that actuarial information from insurance companies supports the data.
Describing global warming as the “parked car effect,” Davidson said that heat from the sun comes through the window, but in re-radiating back out it becomes trapped, heating up the car. The earth’s atmosphere is the same, trapping rising methane, carbon dioxide and other gases from fossil fuel use in a big puffy blanket of molecules that prevent the heat from getting back through the “car window.” Since Scripps Institute of Oceanography in California, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and others have been keeping records, from 1960 to now carbon dioxide has increased from 320 parts per million to 380 parts per million. (The Arab oil embargo of 1973 diminished greenhouse gas emissions briefly by lowering usage.) Davidson says that La Nina and a sun spot cycle actually are cooling the planet somewhat now, but when the solar cycle changes and we enter El Nino, warming will accelerate. Best scenario, the Cape will have a mid-Atlantic-states climate in the future; worst, a climate like South Carolina’s.
This is a generic letter, but one that makes a useful point. I’m going to do a few more on this theme today (May 4) if I get the time.
We often hear that combating climate change will require a “new Manhattan project” or a “new Apollo program.” But both of these analogies are inexact. America’s development of the atomic bomb was kept under wraps until the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki — but successful climate technologies must be transparent and accessible to all. While the race to the moon was no secret, there was little ordinary citizens could do beyond sending pennies to NASA — but preparation for global warming’s consequences has to happen in our daily lives, not just in the top echelons of government.
Mounting a robust and enduring response to the burgeoning greenhouse effect is not in itself a goal, like making an explosion or returning safely from the moon. Rather, it is an essential transformation in the way we collectively understand our responsibilities to the environment and to our posterity. If we are to survive and prosper in the coming centuries, our species and our civilization must change our focus to the long term. And, perhaps paradoxically, we’ve got no time to waste.
Warren Senders
Education environment: agriculture Gardening IPCC scientific consensus
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 12: Not Phrenology, Phenology
USA Today runs an article on phenology. Ominous:
As the climate warms, many plants are flowering 8.5 times sooner than experiments had predicted, raising questions for the world’s future food and water supply, a new international study concludes.
Higher carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels can affect how plants produce oxygen, and higher temperatures can alter their behavior. Shifts in natural events such as flowering or leafing, which biologists call “phenology,” are obvious responses to climate change. They can impact human water supply, pollination of crops, the onset of spring (and allergy season), the chances of wildfires and the overall health of ecosystems.
To better understand this, scientists from 22 institutions in Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States studied 1,634 species of plants across four continents. They compared how plants responded based on historical monitoring data and on small-plot experiments in which warming was artificially induced.
Jeez. Nobody saw that coming, did they? Sent May 3:
It’s unsurprising that researchers studying the responses of plants to increased atmospheric CO2 found their predictions nearly an order of magnitude too low. The uncomfortable fact is that almost without exception, scientific forecasts have underestimated the magnitude, speed and significance of climate change and its effects. There are two important reasons for this disconnect.
The first is that scientific language is inherently conservative, striving for accuracy without emotion. A phrase like “statistically significant correlation” doesn’t immediately trigger anyone’s adrenalin — even when it’s linking greenhouse gas concentrations to a warming planet. The second is that scientific research is usually specialized, thereby minimizing the effects of interacting factors in a complex situation — and if any situation deserves the term “complex,” it’s global warming.
America and the world must mount a robust and meaningful response to the climate crisis, if we are to avoid a future full of unpleasant surprises.
Warren Senders
Education environment: assholes idiots media irresponsibility scientific consensus
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 11: How About Putting In Some Animatronic Reindeer?
Why don’t I watch TV? Oh, right. Now I remember:
Forecast the Facts, the activist group that first confronted GM about its support of climate change doubters the Heartland Institute, now plans to muster a public campaign targeting the Discovery Channel. The purpose: to get Discovery to acknowledge the scientific consensus on man-made climate change in its programming.
The flap follows the recent airing of the final episode of Discovery’s lush exploration of the polar regions, “Frozen Planet.” The last of the seven-hour series, “On Thin Ice,” was devoted specifically to presenting evidence of climate change including discussion of the challenges facing polar bears, collapsing ice shelves, diminishing habitat, and naturalist David Attenborough (Alec Baldwin is the narrator and host of the series) saying, “The days of the Arctic Ocean being covered by a continuous sheet of ice seem to be past. Whether or not that’s a good or bad thing, of course, depends on your point of view.”
Strangely missing from the narration, however, is any mention of the causes of climate change, even presented as theory. An April 20 story in the New York Times revealed that the producers made a deliberate choice not to present this material, anticipating criticism from the small minority of viewers who do not accept scientific opinion about human causes of global warming.
Series producer Vanessa Berlowitz told the New York Times that including the scientific theories “would have undermined the strength of an objective documentary, and would then have become utilized by people with political agendas.”
Whores. Sorry. That’s a libel on whores. Sent May 2:
It is unfortunate but unsurprising that the Discovery Channel has chosen to soft-pedal any mention of the human causes of climate change in their “Frozen Planet” series. In the decades since Ronald Reagan’s deregulation of media ownership, the influence of corporate ownership on news and opinion programming has increased, invariably to the detriment of the truth.
The notion that discussing the facts of anthropogenic global warming would allow the series to be “utilized by people with political agendas” is utterly disingenuous. By omitting the facts of climate science from the documentary programs, the producers had already allowed their work to be “utilized” by corporations — whose political agendas are firmly anchored in the profit motive.
The scientific agreement on climate change is extremely robust. To characterize thousands of dedicated researchers as “people with political agendas” is both journalistically and morally irresponsible. Let us hope the Discovery Channel finds its conscience.
Warren Senders
atheism Education Politics: sheesh
by Warren
1 comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
I’d Like Tautology Dressing On My Word Salad, Please.
In response to a facebook meme that said, “Study one religion and you’re hooked for life. Study two religions and you’re done in an hour” an old colleague who’s gone Xtian posted the following:
Religion that is focused on and filled with spirituality, like life itself, does not and need not make sense in the human mind as it seeks to address the deep desires and highest aspirations in people who perceive themselves to have a soul. The human institutions of religion are imperfect expressions of human superconsciousness, and to the extent that any repetitive mental effort seeking to understand realities beyond its intended purpose mostly serves to confound intelligibility, I agree that studying multiple imperfect expressions of superconscious truisms must by definition produce an irrational and pointless result.
Does this mean anything?
environment Politics: assholes denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 10: All I Gotta Do Is…Act Naturally
Sigh. Another day, another moderate conservative who just can’t understand why his party is so darned unreasonable nowadays. The Iowa City Press-Citizen hosts the remarks of Mr. Bill Ferrel, who haz a sad:
As a conservative Republican who very much understands the need to reduce and control our spending, it may seem strange that I understand and accept that climate change is impacting my home, state and country.
It is beyond comprehension that my party would so adamantly avoid dealing with the fact that we now are facing historical events on such a regular basis that it is impacting our state and national budgets in the hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
Why do we continue to miss the chance to address proactively the adverse impacts of our past and current actions? Why is it that we have not connected the dots between climate change and real life events that have occurred in our own backyards? Why do we find it acceptable to have massive damage to our university, and yet sit by and be satisfied with the hundreds of millions of dollars that are being spent locally to repair the damage?
Another day, another chance to educate the increasingly rare moderate Republican on why his party is full of idiots. Sent May 1:
Bill Ferrel can’t understand why his party “would so adamantly avoid dealing with the fact” of global climate change. He’s not alone in finding the antics of the current Republican party incomprehensible, but one wonders why it’s taken him so long. While the GOP’s fraught relationship with inconvenient expertise dates back to the Truman administration, when “old China hands” were expelled from the State Department by Joe McCarthy’s henchmen on charges of communist sympathies, the party of Lincoln really left its moorings with the administration of Ronald Reagan, whose anecdotal governance left facts gasping for breath in choking clouds of fairy dust.
Mr. Ferrel wants his fellow conservatives to “ask the questions and seek reasonable solutions.” But their decades of anti-intellectual posturing and ideological inflexibility have made Republicans both incurious and unreasonable — and created an overheated political environment with likely consequences almost as damaging as the burgeoning greenhouse effect.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: apocalypse Barack Obama eschatology idiots Republicans theocrats
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 9: Please Don’t Wake Me, I’m Only Sleeping
The Fort-Wayne Journal Gazette runs the same WaPo editorial that has surfaced here before:
In his interview, the president expressed frustration that “internationally, we have not made as much progress as we need to make.” Surely, though, the inattention from leaders such as Obama has contributed to the slow progress at home, which is a major reason for the slow progress abroad. As a 2007 Foreign Affairs article explained, strong U.S. action is critical to international efforts to defeat this “epochal, man-made threat to the planet”:
“As the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases, America has the responsibility to lead. While many of our industrial partners are working hard to reduce their emissions, we are increasing ours at a steady clip. … We need a global response to climate change that includes binding and enforceable commitments to reducing emissions, especially for those that pollute the most: the United States, China, India, the European Union, and Russia.”
The writer was Sen. Barack Obama.
So I figured, since it’s in the Christian heartland and all, perhaps the paper wouldn’t mind a little eschatology. Sent April 30:
Anyone who’s paying attention knows that fossil fuel interests use their massive financial resources to co-opt media voices and redirect the energies of legislators away from policies that would hurt their profitability. But when it comes to the issue of climate change, President Obama’s dilemma is complicated by a factor that is rarely if ever discussed in polite company: religion. The uneasy alliance of corporate and theocratic conservatives has brought about a situation where a significant percentage of Americans and their representatives in Congress are actively and eagerly anticipating Apocalypse, finding a Biblical rationale for inaction in the face of a rapidly mounting crisis. While religion may provide solace for many, it should not become the vehicle for an irresponsible failure to plan for possible disaster.
“Wait for the Second Coming” is not a valid environmental policy. If we are to achieve sustainability in America, we must repudiate the Rapture.
Warren Senders
Some Nuts And Bolts Of Music Theory
When I started learning music seriously I was a teenager. I’ll turn 54 in a couple of weeks, and I’m still figuring out all this stuff, despite (or perhaps because of) being a professional musician and music teacher for three decades. Having a 7-year-old daughter is an enormous help.
In high school I took my first music theory class. The teacher’s name was Mr. March, which should have been a clue. The first day, he said to the class, “I’m going to test your musical ears.” He told us to take out a piece of paper. Then he said, “I’m going to play two intervals on the piano. You write down which is bigger, the first or the second.”
Then he turned his back to us and pressed some keys on the piano.
I did not have a freakin’ clue what was going on.
I did not recognize that he was hitting two keys simultaneously. What I heard was a series of sounds. What did he mean by “which one is bigger”? I’m pretty sure I just gave up on the exam.
Mr. March was operating under some default assumptions that were never stated. This is not uncommon in teaching, and it’s practically a given in music teaching, where teachers are distressingly likely to start where they are, rather than where their students are.
Here’s what I tell students who want to learn about music theory.
Musical sound concerns itself with vibration within the frequency range that our ears can perceive. Vibrations outside that range don’t get picked up by our ears, so we won’t talk about them.
Some vibrations have periodicity. Others do not. An example of the first kind is a tone played on a flute; an example of the second kind is crumpling a sheet of paper.
While musical performance uses both types of sounds, the study of harmonic relationships is only concerned with periodic sounds — the ones with identifiable frequencies, usually measured in cycles-per-second. Sounds with identifiable frequencies are called tones. If you take a series of rhythmic impulses and speed them up, they will turn into tones.
If you have two tones with the same frequency, they are in a very specific relationship. Their numbers match; they are in a 1-to-1 ratio. The musical term for this relationship is unison.
If you and I sing the exact same note, our vocal chords are vibrating at the exact same speed, and we are singing in unison. If we’re almost but not quite at the exact same speed, the frequency ratio between our voices changes from 1:1 to something more complicated. 189.235147 : 193.772121 is almost the same as 190:190 (which reduces to 1:1) but it’s a more complex relationship — and it’s perceived by our ears as “out of tune.” Obviously there are a lot more ways to be out of tune than to be in tune!
If you have two tones in the frequency ratio 2:1, their numbers no longer match, but their relationship is still simple. One vibration moves twice as fast as the other. The musical term for this relationship (in Western musical tradition) is octave.
Notice that the term “octave” means “eight,” which has absolutely nothing to do with the actual mathematics involved.
To our ears, the frequency of any power of 2 seems to have the same “quality” as any other. Notes an octave apart are given the same name in nearly every world musical system that goes so far as to name the notes in the first place. This means that experientially, 2:1, 4:1, 8:1, 16:1… are all identical 1:1.
———————————————————————————————-
Musical intervals can be quantified in various ways.
Keyboard or melodic distance simply measures how far you have to move your finger to get from one member of an interval pair to the other. From the lowest A on the piano to the highest is a finger distance of about a meter and a half. From “middle C” to the C-sharp immediately above it is a finger distance of about a centimeter. By this measure, the first interval is significantly “bigger.”
Ratio size just addresses the distance between the two numbers, and it maps nicely onto the melodic distance measure. From the lowest A to the highest is a ratio of 128:1; from middle C to the adjacent C# is a ratio of 16:15 (n.b., if you know this already, you also know that on the piano, thanks to the baffling miracle of equal temperament, this statement is untrue. Bear with me for the purposes of discussion, ‘k?). 128 to 1 is a bigger jump than 16 to 15, so the first interval is significantly “bigger.”
Harmonic distance, on the other hand, measures the complexity of the ratio involved. From the lowest A to the highest is a ratio of 128:1; from middle C to the adjacent C# is a ratio of 16:15 — but 128:1 reduces to 1:1, and 16:15 doesn’t reduce. An eight-octave jump has a harmonic distance of zero, while a “semitone” has a much greater harmonic distance. So when we use this measuring system, the second interval is “bigger.”
————————————————————————————
All harmonic intervals can be described as frequency ratios. Here are some of the ones we use most often:
3:2 is described in Western musical terms as a “fifth.”
Notice that the Western term describes the scalar or melodic distance (Do-Re-Mi-Fa-Sol / 1-2-3-4-5), which has nothing to do with the actual mathematics involved.
————————————————————————————
4:3 is described in Western musical terms as a “fourth.”
Notice that the Western term describes the scalar or melodic distance (Do-Re-Mi-Fa / 1-2-3-4), which has nothing to do with the actual mathematics involved.
————————————————————————————
5:4 is described in Western musical terms as a “Major Third.”
Notice that the Western term describes the scalar or melodic distance (Do-Re-Mi / 1-2-3), which has nothing to do with the actual mathematics involved.
————————————————————————————
5:3 is described in Western musical terms as a “Major Sixth.”
Notice that the Western term describes the scalar or melodic distance (Do-Re-Mi-Fa-Sol-La / 1-2-3-4-5-6), which has nothing to do with the actual mathematics involved.
————————————————————————————
As my little videos demonstrate, rhythmic impulses turn into pitch when you accelerate them. If you record yourself tapping 2-against-3 for an hour, then accelerate the recording by multiple orders of magnitude, you’ll wind up with two tones a fifth apart.
————————————————————————————
You don’t need to know about frequency ratios to use them effectively (just listen to the Beatles and you’ll hear some dynamite frequency ratios rendered with exquisite fidelity by people who never gave the math a moment’s thought). Most composers don’t know. Most musicians don’t know.
So why bother?
Speaking personally, I can say that learning all this has transformed my experience of music. I can spend a long time perfecting the tuning of a single interval — precisely because I have learned to perceive it as a source of deep experiential insight into simple mathematical relationships. Why bother? Because it’s cool; because it’s beautiful; because it’s universal.
Okay, that’s all for today.
Education environment: assholes denialists idiots media irresponsibility
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 8: I’d Like A Triple Oy With Vey-iz-Mir Sauce…
The denialist outlets are all a-twitter over James Lovelock’s recent remarks. The New York Daily News is a fine example:
Talk about an inconvenient truth: One of the scientists who most forcefully sounded the warning bells of climate change now says his predictions were a bit overheated.
Back in 2006, British environmentalist James Lovelock declared that “before this century is over, billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.”
Lovelock and fellow believers helped lead Al Gore to become the Earth’s most famous climate warrior.
But, in an interview with MSNBC, Lovelock admitted that his dire predictions were, excuse us, hot air.
“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,” he said. “We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books — mine included — because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.”
Almost wistfully, he noted: “We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.”
Assholes. Idiots. Sent April 29:
Yes, climate scientist James Lovelock, now 92, has drawn back a bit on his earlier apocalyptic forecasts. But it would be a very bad mistake to assume that climate change has now turned out to be a myth. That’s not what he said, that’s not what he meant, and that’s not a sensible response either to his words or to the climate crisis that is unfolding around us.
That Lovelock thinks we probably won’t face gigadeaths in the next few decades doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real. He, like other climatologists, is essentially a “planetary physician.” While it’s good news if your oncologist tells you that a tumor hasn’t spread as far or as fast as the worst-case predictions, that doesn’t mean you should start smoking again. Lovelock’s statement suggests simply that we have a tiny bit more time to change our ways before things get dangerously out of control.
Warren Senders
They published it, albeit in a highly edited form:
Medford, Mass.: Re “Hot air on climate change and the end of the world” (editorial, NYDailyNews.com, April 29): Yes, climate scientist James Lovelock has drawn back from his apocalyptic forecasts. But do not assume climate change is a myth. That Lovelock thinks we probably won’t face gigadeaths in the next few decades doesn’t mean climate change isn’t real. His statement simply suggests we have a bit more time to change our ways before things get out of control. Warren Senders
environment Politics: assholes Barack Obama denialists idiots Republicans
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 7: Joyous Free And Flaming Youth Was Mine…
The Toledo Blade speaks sooth in a guest editorial titled “Serious On Climate Change”:
In an interview that Rolling Stone magazine published this week, President Obama said he thinks climate change will be a big issue in the coming election and that he will be “very clear” about his “belief that we’re going to have to take further steps to deal with climate change in a serious way.” That would be a welcome switch.
Dealing forthrightly with the world’s rising temperatures has been far down the list of priorities in Washington. The President has shown little willingness to stick his political neck out on the issue.
Mr. Obama’s attempts to revive the Democrats’ cap-and-trade plan during the 2010 election season quickly led to nothing. White House rollouts on energy policy have focused mostly on energy independence or green jobs but not on the global threat of warming.
Republicans deserve blame for stifling fair discussion of the issue. And Mr. Obama can cite some achievements: He pushed through landmark fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. He invested in renewable energy sources and energy efficiency through the stimulus. The Environmental Protection Agency has worked on greenhouse-gas rules.
But these won’t adequately attack the big problem: how Americans produce and consume energy, particularly electricity. That requires a robust, economy-wide solution, such as a carbon tax or a simple cap-and-trade program.
A generic “we better do something soon!” letter…not much time today, as I was dealing with a sudden influx of lumber from an unexpected source. Sent April 28:
Hamstrung as he is by obstructionist Republicans and a national media determined to downplay the urgency of the crisis, it’s remarkable that President Obama’s been able to do anything about climate change at all. He surely deserves credit for a re-energized EPA, more stringent fuel efficiency standards, and multiple other initiatives that have largely gone unnoticed in the hysteria attendant on the 24-hour news cycle and an impending presidential election.
But the laws of physics and chemistry don’t care about the daily polls, and despite the denialist rhetoric of conservatives who only accept scientific findings that support their ideological biases, the greenhouse effect is real. Mr. Obama’s readiness to speak out on this issue during the upcoming campaign is very welcome — but global warming isn’t subject to a majority vote. If our leaders cannot address the crisis, we’ll all be the losers regardless of the outcome this November.
Warren Senders
environment Politics: agriculture conservation infrastructure Republican obstructionism Water
by Warren
leave a comment
Meta
SiteMeter
Brighter Planet
Year 3, Month 5, Day 6: Here’s Your Allowance For The Next Decade, Sweetheart. It’s All In Pennies.
The New York Times reports on a scary new study:
New research suggests that global warming is causing the cycle of evaporation and rainfall over the oceans to intensify more than scientists had expected, an ominous finding that may indicate a higher potential for extreme weather in coming decades.
By measuring changes in salinity on the ocean’s surface, the researchers inferred that the water cycle had accelerated by about 4 percent over the last half century. That does not sound particularly large, but it is twice the figure generated from computerized analyses of the climate.
If the estimate holds up, it implies that the water cycle could quicken by as much as 20 percent later in this century as the planet warms, potentially leading to more droughts and floods.
That’s pretty fucking alarming. Sent April 27:
A projected twenty percent acceleration in Earth’s water cycle holds the potential for catastrophic ripple effects throughout our lives and those of our posterity. Without a steady supply of water throughout the growing season, agriculture on civilization-feeding scales will become exponentially more difficult. While its impacts on farming will be profound, the drought-or-deluge model predicted by Paul Durack and his colleagues can be expected to transform beyond recognition many of the local and regional ecosystems our forbears took for granted.
To avoid the worst-case scenarios implicit in these findings, we must begin planning for a future in which water supplies will be irregular and extreme. We’ll need expanded and reinforced storage and conservation, water-stingy techniques of manufacturing, a completely re-imagined waste-processing system, and the infrastructure required by a host of other functions. Most difficult of all, we need to make our paralyzed political system respond constructively to an imminent crisis.
Warren Senders