Despair, Courage, & Hope in an Age of Environmental Turmoil

[Cutlass]

I'm just trying to discuss how to manage the "sell" effectively. People aren't going to start seeing the forest when they're very much busy trying to handle their tree. But you can address the forest nontheless. Take the pesticide resistance programs as an example. Farmers will put in refuge areas willingly, decreasing the boon they get from cleaner, newer, and effective GMO pesticides(which are less polluting too while we're at it) in any given year, with the understanding that doing so will increase the effective lifespan over many years of that control before the insects adapt to it. They just wouldn't be willing to do so if a) they couldn't see a concrete benefit to themselves in timeframe that humans operate within and b) everyone has to play by the same rules so that they aren't getting screwed.

The problem with that is that it's almost never really possible to show an environmental improvement on the time scale that people think on. So it's bad metric. And improvement is gradual, so people don't really notice on a year to year basis. You put in environmental regulations in the 70s, and by the 90s they've had some pretty impressive results. But the year to year difference isn't really all that noticeable.

 

[Farm Boy]

20 years is a human scale that people think on. Isn't it?

 

[Murky]

It's pretty cloying though. I'm only observing on it because I think it would be the major problem with it for the people I know. Just like crystal magic energy might be a fine thing for your masseuse to ramble on about, it's not something they would really be comfortable with their doctor proselytizing. Particularly when it's related to concrete action that will impact them. That sort of sell immediately alienates a lot of people.

Who says we're trying to use "crystal magic energy" to sell anything?

 

[Farm Boy]

The article seemed to be pretty hard, since it was in the OP, it is what I was addressing.

 

[Murky]

The article seemed to be pretty hard, since it was in the OP, it is what I was addressing.

Not that I noticed. It was more psychology based. That's not magical in the sense of "earth-worship" or "magic crystal energy." It was about turning pain into power to drive action.

 

[Farm Boy]

If you take something people don't believe is true, or are dubious is true, then label them clearly as being in denial - they're going to be offended and shut you out, as it immediately will sound like they're "too stupid" to agree with what seems to be a presumed(for whatever reason, good or bad) article of faith.

I mean, it's a shame some people don't believe in the glory, mercy, and righteousness of worshiping the Lord Allmighty and Christ reborn too. For those who have objections or lack of faith regarding the truth of this, see section on denial.

 

[Murky]

The article doesn't set out to offend people who don't accept the science anymore than an article on addressing obesity would set out to offend people who don't accept the reality of a large number of people being obese. It's not really even targeted towards the denier set.

 

[Farm Boy]

Heheh. Ok then, no wonder environmentalism struggles.

 

[Murky]

Heheh. Ok then, no wonder environmentalism struggles.

I think it mainly struggles because people have so much on their daily plate already that they don't have the time to fit it in without sacrificing something else.

Most people have room for about six things to spend most of their time on.

1) Taking care their own body's needs
2) Taking care of their family
3) Doing their job well enough to keep it, possibly get promoted
4) Taking care of their home
5) Doing their shopping
6) Participating in local events

So unless their job has something to do with the environment it's unlikely that they will spend much time on it. One idea that has been floated around is going to a 30 hour work week but that's probably not going to fly with the business community.

 

[Farm Boy]

Yea, but it still helps to get them on board with broader changes. Overall decrease in American gasoline consumption is a reality due to fuel efficiency guidelines, overall changes in car purchasing habits, and overall driving habits. That's not enough alone, but it's still huge. Queue the next round of bitter fights as the large petroleum companies wage war on ethanol to get their market share back for Canadian tar sands.

 

[uppi]

Not that I noticed. It was more psychology based. That's not magical in the sense of "earth-worship" or "magic crystal energy." It was about turning pain into power to drive action.

The conclusion:

When we recognize our embeddedness in the web of life that extends out into the cosmos, all the way through minerals that enter our bodies and starlight that energizes us, we can then recognize that the suffering of other people and animals and the degradation of all parts of nature are our suffering and our degradation

Sentences like this are about as "magic crystal energy"-ly as they get.

 

[Dale]

I still prefer take a science/facts based approach myself. Just one problem with that. Most people don't take the time to study science journals and would be more readily be influenced by religious sources to change their ways.

Here's a nice article from RealScience that should turn heads but so far isn't getting much play in the mainstream media. The denier blogs have been quick to downplay the significance of it. You know how they like to go on about how warming has paused since 1997? Well, according to a new study, it hasn't.

That study is misleading as it only tells half the story. Sure La Nina hides the warming but dont forget that El Nino exaggerates it as this study from last week also points out.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13143-014-0011-z.

Bottom line is, alarmists tell the parts that support their agenda but not the entire science. Human influence on climate is only half what the alarmists say.

 

[Murky]

Sentences like this are about as "magic crystal energy"-ly as they get.

It's not magical. Our bodies require some minerals to function and almost all energy is derived from sunlight which is from a star. It was just a creative way of saying the reason we feel pain by experiencing environmental degradation is because we are part of it and depend on it.

 

[Borachio]

Here's some "alarming" news.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24904143

The world's oceans are becoming acidic at an "unprecedented rate" and may be souring more rapidly than at any time in the past 300 million years.

In their strongest statement yet on this issue, scientists say acidification could increase by 170% by 2100.

They say that some 30% of ocean species are unlikely to survive in these conditions.

The researchers conclude that human emissions of CO2 are clearly to blame.

The study will be presented at global climate talks in Poland next week.

In 2012, over 500 of the world's leading experts on ocean acidification gathered in California. Led by the International Biosphere-Geosphere Programme, a review of the state of the science has now been published.

This Summary for Policymakers states with "very high confidence" that increasing acidification is caused by human activities which are adding 24 million tonnes of CO2 to oceans every day.

Pickled waters

The addition of so much carbon has altered the chemistry of the waters.

Since the start of the industrial revolution, the waters have become 26% more acidic.


What worries the scientists is the potential impact on many ocean species including corals.

Studies carried out at deep sea vents where the waters are naturally acidic thanks to CO2, indicate that around 30% of the ocean's biodiversity may be lost by the end of this century.

These vents may be a "window on the future" according to the researchers.

ACIDIFYING OCEANS
The oceans are thought to have absorbed up to half of the extra CO2 put into the atmosphere in the industrial age
This has lowered their pH by 0.1
pH is the measure of acidity and alkalinity
It usually ranges from pH 0 (very acidic) to pH 14 (very alkaline); 7 is neutral
Seawater is mildly alkaline with a "natural" pH of about 8.2

"You don't find a mollusc at the pH level expected for 2100, this is really quite a stunning fact," said Prof Gattuso.
"My colleagues have not found in the geological record, rates of change that are faster than the ones we see today."

Still, I daresay those of us inclined to do so can just dismiss this as more alarmist propaganda.

 

[Murky]

That study is misleading as it only tells half the story. Sure La Nina hides the warming but dont forget that El Nino exaggerates it as this study from last week also points out.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13143-014-0011-z.

Bottom line is, alarmists tell the parts that support their agenda but not the entire science. Human influence on climate is only half what the alarmists say.

Are we talking about the same thing? The study the article that I linked to was about filling in missing temperature data using satellite records. Did you read it?

 

[Farm Boy]

It's not magical. Our bodies require some minerals to function and almost all energy is derived from sunlight which is from a star. It was just a creative way of saying the reason we feel pain by experiencing environmental degradation is because we are part of it and depend on it.

If it then didn't leap into a morality judgement based on these, erm, creatively worded facts maybe then. I'm part of the universe! =/= the pain of the tree is my pain because rocks, moon, and stars.

 

[Dale]

Are we talking about the same thing? The study the article that I linked to was about filling in missing temperature data using satellite records. Did you read it?

I'm on my phone and it wouldn't open the link. I thought you referred to a different one. My mistake.

 

[El_Machinae]

Here's some "alarming" news.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24904143

Still, I daresay those of us inclined to do so can just dismiss this as more alarmist propaganda.

Aaaah, acidification. Kinda worrisome, tbh, because we don't know how quickly species will evolve/adapt.

With heat changes in the ocean, we have a bit of a 'buffer' because species can migrate. Sure, the oceanic dead zones are bit of a hiccup in that plan, but they're a minor one. (migration of land animals due to climate change might be less reliable). But, the acidity changes don't have such a buffer available. The buffering of the ocean (chemically) is the buffer, and we're already measuring the change after that buffering has occurred.

 

[uppi]

It's not magical. Our bodies require some minerals to function and almost all energy is derived from sunlight which is from a star. It was just a creative way of saying the reason we feel pain by experiencing environmental degradation is because we are part of it and depend on it.

Neither the sun (which is only technically associated with starlight), nor the minerals are alive in any way. So there is no "web of life that extends onto the cosmos". Sentences like this immediately make me think of pseudoscience.

 

[Dale]

Are we talking about the same thing? The study the article that I linked to was about filling in missing temperature data using satellite records. Did you read it?

I did some reading up on it, and it appears some serious questions have been raised regarding the use of satellite data at the poles to infill surface temperatures.

It should first be noted that NOAA, NASA, UAH and RSS do not use polar satellite readings for two very important reasons:

1. The satellites don't actually orbit over the poles (they get close, but not to the poles); and
2. Ice has a very complex spatially varying microwave emission signature.

So basically, large questions over the polar readings have been raised because the satellites don't actually take polar readings at all, and what readings there are above/below 80 degrees N/S is patchy (due to the orbit) and highly unreliable due to the nature of ice microwave signatures.

So I wouldn't hold too much stock in this paper.

There's also the secondary question of the unreliability of the HadCRUT4 data which has been shown to have high unreliability in some parts of the world it covers.