We Are In the Years of Living Dangerously
The first episode of a new Showtime (US Cable channel) which will premiere April 17 starting April 13 at 10pm ET/PT." (US) [Thanks to Susan Anderson in the comments for pointing this out]. More at the website. Unfortunately others are in the years of lalala
Posts
16 comments:
From lalala land, the tired old accusation of alarmism. Shooting the messenger. How to tell the lala folks about inherently alarming things?
@florifulgurator : if they can't hear the turmoils in Texas and the testimonies of the Syrian refugees, they will never.
Better let them bluster and persuade people to move on without them.
And Northern summer is coming too!!!!
Florifulgurator
Did you watch the part, at c 28:00, where Katherine Hayhoe explains why current warming is not down to the usual suspects?
Did you understand what that means?
I'm urging everyone to cut back on their weenie roasts.
I was struck by this sentence in Schellenberger and Nordhaus's op-ed, to which you link: "Some people, the report noted, 'are likely to buy an SUV to help them through the erratic weather to come' for example, rather than support fuel-efficiency standards."
S&N (along with Pielke and Sarewitz) used to argue those who thought support for adaptation would undermine support for mitigation were badly wrong. Now they embrace that zero-sum policy analysis: Adaptation ('buy an SUV') undermines mitigation ('support fuel-efficiency standards').
This seems an important change in policy analysis over at the Breakthrough Institute: something that deserves note and comment.
Anon: Ethon likes tasty Revkin for lunch.
So Revkin's a weenie?
Good point, Jonathan. But just saying that arguments for mitigation will drive people toward adaptation wasn't enough for S+N, they had to imply that it would be forms of adaptation that will make the problem worse.
So it's off topic, but I wanted to post this juxtaposition where it would survive for the ages:
Recently, a prominent skeptic:
-------quote------
Also, consider how difficult it would be for the primitive computer and guidance systems of the day to compute and achieve the exact trajectory required to orbit the moon; return to earth; etc. Even with modern equipment such space navigation would be difficult. It would have been impossible with 1960s technology.
----end quote------
-- Paul Clark, climate skeptic, at
http://planetaryvision.blogspot.com.au/search/label/apollo%20moon%20hoax
Long ago, a beloved writer:
------quote------
A few years ago, I was visited by a astronomer, young and quite briliant. ... I was telling him about the time I needed a synergistic orbit from Earth to a 24-hour station; ... I'm married to a woman who knows more math, history, and languages than I do. This should teach me humility (and sometimes does, for a few minutes). ... I was telling this young scientist how we obtained yards of butcher paper, then each of us worked three days, independently, solved the problem, and checked each other—then the answer disappeared into one line of one paragraph (SPACE CADET) but the effort had been worthwhile as it controlled what I could do dramatically in that sequence.
Doctor Whoois said, "But why didn't you just shove it through a computer?"
I blinked at him. Then said slowly, gently, "My dear boy, ... this was 1947."
It took him some seconds to get it, then he blushed.
-----end quote-----
-- Robert A. Heinlein, in Expanded Universe, "The Happy Days Ahead", p.519–520:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ARobert_A._Heinlein/Archive2#Destination_Moon.2C_Rocket_Ship_Galileo.2C_and_The_Man_Who_Sold_the_Moon
I don't know how you're gonna mitigate something like this.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
I don't know how you're gonna mitigate something like this.
Damn spoiler!
You've ruined Episode III for thr rest of us !
Remember Crutzen's warning about bromine, in his Nobel speech?
Damn!
clever software hosed the links, which should be:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140404092931.htm
and
http://books.google.com/books?id=Vn1f9FznpmIC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=bromine+ozone+nobel+crutzen&source=bl&ots=iWxwn_6r1V&sig=Mww6-gduQVk6iWxoFRVGy5Mlktk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RlhGU9ftL6H7yAGBy4C4Ag&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=bromine%20ozone%20nobel%20crutzen&f=false
Worth the visit, thanks all. Farts and Wieners, spoilers?! Seriously excellent reminder from Heinlein. SUVs/adaptation/mitigation/villainization. Hayhoe and religion (she does it just right, and we should pay attention and cut it out with sniping at faith as if it were something it's not. Bromine fascinating too.
And I repeat, mitigation is bloody awful jargon, even if hallowed and necessitated by history. Can't cure a serious and escalating disease with symptoms or fakery.
aargh, by symptomatic relief with or without fakery ...
Please correct date; from website:
"Years of Living Dangerously airs on Showtime starting April 13 at 10pm ET/PT." (US)
Post a Comment