Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

Off-topic => The rest => Topic started by: johnm33 on February 17, 2017, 01:50:12 PM

Title: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on February 17, 2017, 01:50:12 PM
If it's about the Arctic and 2017 with no obvious home here's where it belongs.
This paper outlines the area l've been thinking about http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505 (http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505) illustrated here.
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505/figures/1 (http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505/figures/1)
 Whenever i thought tides and turbulence were running high in Baffin/Labrador there'd be streamers emerging from the ocean, there must be a more technical name for them but illustrated here. http://go.nasa.gov/2lpzqDm (http://go.nasa.gov/2lpzqDm) just by Hudson strait last full moon. So now when i see streamers i suspect vortices, this implies that angular momentum is carried through phase transition, is that possible? c+d in fig 4 from the paper illustrate the current across the north barents sea slope, it's my contention that this is a tidally driven current that is increasing as the resistance of the ice in the Arctic weakens. The weakening has two immediate causes the first is the reduction in the amount of kinetic energy needed to forge a path through the ice, that is when there was thick ice the underside caused huge amounts of turbulence dissipating any coherent stream, like a baffle, the second is that the ice has less mass and moves more readily. This second means that given the right/wrong wind conditions the current will be accelerated or slowed by mass ice movement.   The only analogy that springs to mind is where every turn of a roundabout you add a little to the momentum,and when the current reaches some threshold the fractions within it become organised and an overturning c/w current evolves, so as the tidal forcing continues and the resistance fails the current increases and we may have some way to go before both its flow and vorticity peaks.
In the first image below, despite being long after the full moon some streamers are showing, and possibly some ice is being accelerated away from the front. The second shows some streamers a little closer to Svalbard.
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201702%2FS1B_EW_GRDM_1SSH_20170216T113855_368F_N_1.jpg&hash=41f38a60183af84cfe213cd4f489fb56)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201702%2FS1A_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170215T065537_F3F7_N_1.jpg&hash=d5d7e9f0bbc9f190984003d98942af58)
Food for thought.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on February 22, 2017, 03:26:38 PM
It's worth clicking through the days on these two, http://go.nasa.gov/2kVUm0r (http://go.nasa.gov/2kVUm0r)  http://go.nasa.gov/2kYzDcs (http://go.nasa.gov/2kYzDcs) both set to jan27 just before last new moon, This is a detail from the paper mentioned above, showing the flow of Atlantic waters into the arctic.
(https://puu.sh/uc5pq/a35f167d40.jpg)
There's a lot going on but look at feb.8 et. seq. when the winds drove the ice back from Fram, and generally back towards Laptev there appears to be a surge of warmer water from [?] Amundsen/Nansen basins which dislodges this seasons [4m+] fast ice/ ice shelf from northern Greenland this water then appears to flow as a deep stream down the east coast, generating its own streamers which then grow in scale. Is that an induced flow of Atlantic water? but by feb.13, 2 days after the full moon the streamers reappear north of Barents, which I'm assuming indicates the re-establishment of the overturning current. One other thing is that streamers appear from the course of Atlantic waters flowing through to St. Anna trough which surprised me.
Looking forward we have the new moon in a few days and the associated tidal extremes. So in the abscence of high winds moving the ice around disrupting bottom waters I expect we'll see the establishment of a powerful flow across the north slope, and rapid acceleration of the ice to it's destruction in Barents, but even with disruption the shattered state of the ice presents no resistance to the influx of Atlantic waters and whatever surges in will displace the same amount of near surface 'resident' mass.
There's a tide chart here indicating the change of flow, I chose this assuming it's limited tidal range indicated it wasn't in a large bay or estuary. https://www.tide-forecast.com/locations/Bodo-Norway/tides/latest (https://www.tide-forecast.com/locations/Bodo-Norway/tides/latest)
ht to bairgon and seaicesailor for the layers on worldview.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on February 25, 2017, 02:17:30 PM
Regarding the above speculation i was looking at east Greenland for signs of melt or movement, and saw this. Is it really that full of sediment, and from where?
(https://puu.sh/uj9Zk/23b119512a.jpg)
from http://go.nasa.gov/2lUmoOh (http://go.nasa.gov/2lUmoOh)
 http://membrane.com/sidd/greenland-2013/45-090.jpg (http://membrane.com/sidd/greenland-2013/45-090.jpg)
added, this surge east is probably relevent
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201702%2FS1B_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170224T184317_03C7_N_1.jpg&hash=a17789378d8ccb369f85199b05615d8d)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: bairgon on February 25, 2017, 07:29:01 PM
From what I have observed, that is melting ice.

There is a load over on the Bering side which could not have any sediment (1st image):

https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=arctic&l=VIIRS_SNPP_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Aqua_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor,Reference_Labels(hidden),Reference_Features(hidden),Coastlines&t=2017-02-24&z=3&v=-3345687.438445648,1541377.1209762432,-2362647.438445648,2045697.1209762432 (https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=arctic&l=VIIRS_SNPP_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Aqua_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor,Reference_Labels(hidden),Reference_Features(hidden),Coastlines&t=2017-02-24&z=3&v=-3345687.438445648,1541377.1209762432,-2362647.438445648,2045697.1209762432)

There are some spectacular examples on the east coast (2nd image):

https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=arctic&l=VIIRS_SNPP_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Aqua_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor,Reference_Labels(hidden),Reference_Features(hidden),Coastlines&t=2017-02-24&z=3&v=-56076.41212691949,-3252172.3402470793,435443.5878730805,-3000012.3402470793 (https://worldview.earthdata.nasa.gov/?p=arctic&l=VIIRS_SNPP_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Aqua_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor(hidden),MODIS_Terra_CorrectedReflectance_TrueColor,Reference_Labels(hidden),Reference_Features(hidden),Coastlines&t=2017-02-24&z=3&v=-56076.41212691949,-3252172.3402470793,435443.5878730805,-3000012.3402470793)

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 25, 2017, 07:39:24 PM
@bairgon

You should cross-post those pics in the melting thread. Good ones.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 25, 2017, 07:53:12 PM
Some crazy thoughts about strengthening the ice cap...  not sure if this has been proposed before, but its quite a simple...

In order to more fully take advantage of the FDDs, we need to constantly flood the top of the cap with sea water.  The right flow should all freeze with the minimum effort.   Something on the order of 1 cm top ice per FDD with a constant flow of near freezing sea water.

In this manner 5M thick ice could be produced over large area each winter.  The pumping technology should be easy....  wind power perhaps.  Not so easy maybe, given the environment, but a good challenge for the oil majors anyway.

 Flame away...   8) 8) 8)



 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 25, 2017, 08:34:30 PM
You're not the first to think of this and it's been covered at the Forum a few times as well:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/12/plan-to-refreeze-arctic-before-ice-goes-for-good-climate-change (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/12/plan-to-refreeze-arctic-before-ice-goes-for-good-climate-change)

Tough environment to build lots of windmill pumps, no?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Archimid on February 26, 2017, 01:26:46 AM
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on February 26, 2017, 05:56:28 AM
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on February 26, 2017, 08:06:26 AM
When there is nothing that can be done, that which cannot be done will be grasped at, rather than admit it is beyond us.

By the time we knew there was a problem, we were far past solutions.  Sometimes you just don't realize until it's too late.

Irrigation, dams and agriculture put us outside the envelope, beyond the environment governing our numbers and impact.

Which puts us thousands of years late in grasping the consequences.  Shit happens.

We had a good run.   
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on February 26, 2017, 08:30:51 AM
Very nice Cid, and very true.
The future was ours, and be blew it.



Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 12:51:46 PM
Very nice Cid, and very true.
The future was ours, and be blew it.



Terry
It's pretty true. However I think many of us are inclined to grasp at straws now as there's no lifeline left to reach for.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Archimid on February 26, 2017, 12:59:05 PM
When there is nothing that can be done, that which cannot be done will be grasped at, rather than admit it is beyond us.

I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.

I do not fail to grasp the magnitude of what I'm suggesting. Whatever is done to stop or reverse climate change will take a significant percentage of the total energy used during the 20th century. That is unthinkably large.

That something is extremely difficult doesn't mean it is impossible.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 01:05:11 PM

I do not fail to grasp the magnitude of what I'm suggesting. Whatever is done to stop or reverse climate change will take a significant percentage of the total energy used during the 20th century. That is unthinkably large.

That something is extremely difficult doesn't mean it is impossible.

It does when there's no collective focus or any push to do anything right now, which is a variable that most are accounting for but not thinking up solutions for.

There are no replies in the thread I posted, but what option do we have left for focus rather than a paradigm shift in news media, leading them to work together to direct the attention and focus of most of humanity towards solutions immediately.

There really is no way forward right now without newsmedia coming together and basically forcefeeding reality to everybody, rather than distracting and diverting as it does now. They need to get on the same page and stop reporting inconsequential bullshit or I see no way to begin reversing trends or implementing real solutions.

There's not really any refuting it, we need a shift and focus of global consciousness ASAP and the only way to achieve that is through the collective forces of existing news media, which reaches most everybody, every day.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 01:19:45 PM
I'm struggling to understand things myself 5to10?

I worry that there is such a thing as 'The Elite' and that they do only have their interests at heart. If so then they know full well what is coming but feel secure that they can avoid harm?

My concern is part of their 'belief' relies upon us ripping ourselves apart and leaving them alone.

I have seen the way they have divided the developed world with fear of 'other' and set person against person. I have seen the way Media was utilised in providing these conditions.

Why would they suddenly decide to try and undo all they have achieved over the past 30 years???

As with a lot of things I believe the only way for us to bring about meaningful change is from the 'bottom up'. We, the people, have the expertise and access to our own 'media' so it is up to us to force an understanding of the peril we face to a distracted populace? The more people aware the bigger the chance of finding folk whose ideas/outlook are what we are needing but we need to organise.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 02:04:48 PM
I'm struggling to understand things myself 5to10?

I worry that there is such a thing as 'The Elite' and that they do only have their interests at heart. If so then they know full well what is coming but feel secure that they can avoid harm?

My concern is part of their 'belief' relies upon us ripping ourselves apart and leaving them alone.

I have seen the way they have divided the developed world with fear of 'other' and set person against person. I have seen the way Media was utilised in providing these conditions.

Why would they suddenly decide to try and undo all they have achieved over the past 30 years???

As with a lot of things I believe the only way for us to bring about meaningful change is from the 'bottom up'. We, the people, have the expertise and access to our own 'media' so it is up to us to force an understanding of the peril we face to a distracted populace? The more people aware the bigger the chance of finding folk whose ideas/outlook are what we are needing but we need to organise.

I have been forgetting that many people aware of impending climate change disaster are not necessarily proponents that much of what we know is a lie.. But I am. If it isn't obvious by the almost complete and total lack of mention of climate change by either party in the recent election, it should be.

There is absolutely no scenario wherein elites of this world are not aware of the truth. Many of their businesses have no doubt been affected by climate change. Also, while we as the public are exposed to untold amounts of information, only some of which may be true, and we have to discern that for ourselves... They get the best think tanks and intelligence delivered directly which they can immediately trust as being factual.

They have known about this for decades, it's time anyone on the fence here accepted it. We are a society of debt slaves living in a state of partial fantasy which is regulated and maintained by the very upper sect, by way of using and ultimately controlling LANGUAGE (the written and spoken word, i.e. newsmedia) as a means of mass mind control. That is, the most powerful and consistent influence in our opinions and thus worldviews. At its most fundamental this is what is happening, this is what has been happening for decades or more.  A cursory glance into the work and influence of Edward Bernays in the early 20th century will cement this for you.

My current belief is that all are aware we are doomed, very soon. Trump is not only casting doubt on news, but INFORMATION AS A WHOLE. So, pretty much all of us will inherently have less of an instinct to trust any information we read online as a result of this recent war on "fake news". There is a campaign to leave us utterly confused as to what is real, and what is not.

As more information on the abrupt changes we are facing comes out, it will be in a world where it is harder and harder for us to tell that it is real, because there has been a campaign of forced recognition that unfortunately, at the end of the day, we cannot know what is true or not without witnessing/doing/studying it firsthand.

I know this is all fringe, but what else makes sense? Sure, I get it, all humans are subject to confirmation bias etc etc., but elites have access to information we do not. Especially in politics. There is no reason for them to doubt their intelligence.

So why is the question of the validity of available information being forced upon us? Trump is an actor. This is a facade to distract us from our imminent collapse, such that it doesn't happen due to panic earlier than a natural collapse. The faster we know it for certain, the faster collapse follows. Thus, confusion and ultimately widespread ignorance/disbelief/hope is required to maintain things as they are as long as possible (until we collapse naturally)

This is a very real example of "What we believe manifests in the external world". Collectively, if we all recognized what was going on (as most here do, intimately) and believe we are doomed quite soon, it will happen almost immediately out of panic, self-fulfilling prophecy/belief. This is more of an existential danger in relation to collapse: What the majority believe is extremely important right now. Depending on how you look at it (Is it better to maintain normalcy as long as possible, or is it better to collapse now and spare the planet further damage?) the elites are being merciful by keeping us uninformed, should collapse be a near-term certainty, as it maximizes our time here (the longer we are ignorant, the less chance of panic collapse). If collapse is NOT a certainty, they are not being merciful but pure evil.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Dave C on February 26, 2017, 02:44:25 PM
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.


Maybe. That depends almost entirely on how strong the barrier needs to be.

You would need about a 100 mile floating cable anchored to Greenland and the Barents shelf to make a big difference in Fram outflow. It's about 1000m deep where it needs to be anchored, which is a manageable depth. We have built underseas cables a whole lot longer than 100 miles at a moderate cost.
So if the cable can be weak then this is easily achievable.

I don't have any sort of guess for how strongly ice pushes horizontally though so I can't give a real feasibility estimate.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 03:02:15 PM
. If collapse is NOT a certainty, they are not being merciful but pure evil.

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 03:14:37 PM
. If collapse is NOT a certainty, they are not being merciful but pure evil.

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......

I believe that big of a collapse leads to total collapse anyways, then human extinction or near extinction, factor that into it. Global nuclear meltdown (arguably avoidable by means of planning to man all of them throughout) global dimming reduction... The only way the planets surface is habitable soon after total collapse is if gigantic chunks of scientific data are falsified, because it's quite clear what the projections are after total collapse. Immediate global warming as a result of dimming reduction is one of the first consequences. The start of the breakdown is by no means the peak.

I cannot see any scenario wherein the surface is habitable for tens, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of years after human civilization collapses, again barring, at minimum, the majority of scientific data and modeling being falsified.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Archimid on February 26, 2017, 03:16:06 PM

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......


That is what is happening. Xenophobic protectionism. The image attached is what they have in mind.

Of course that is a very foolish way to protect themselves from global climate change. That Ark will have leaks that can only be solved in cooperation with other countries. It will sink with the rest of the world as the chosen fight with each other over scraps.

At the end there will be some  winners, but most will be losers. If you exclude life losses, then the rule will be that the ones who have the most today will lose the most. If you include life, then the ones who have the least will lose the most.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 03:21:44 PM

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......


That is what is happening. Xenophobic protectionism. The image attached is what they have in mind.

Of course that is a very foolish way to protect themselves from global climate change. That Ark will have leaks that can only be solved in cooperation with other countries. It will sink with the rest of the world as the chosen fight with each other over scraps.

At the end there will be some  winners, but most will be losers. If you exclude life losses, then the rule will be that the ones who have the most today will lose the most. If you include life, then the ones who have the least will lose the most.


It doesn't add up at all. They know that it won't protect them. If you know it, certainly they do too with an even deeper grasp given the information available to them.

The highest possibility in my mind is that it is all pure distraction. None of it is meant to go anywhere, because it won't matter soon anyways. It's just political dick-swinging to the max as a means of distracting us, so we don't panic. Again, Trump has been a bit of a career actor for many years prior to this. He is a reality show actor. Reality shows are designed to distract, we all know how well they did that for a long time (Until they mostly became patently unrealistic and people lost interest). This is a reality show on the biggest stage in the world for the same purpose: Distract the world. Finally, a reality show we can all commit to! This time there's no denying it's reality, it's happening, right? So my GOD is it ever enthralling, because now it's really real! Is it though?

Nothing else makes sense unless you think the highest of the elite are oblivious to the coming, unavoidable, crippling effects of climate change. Unless they have some kind of insane terraforming technology that none of us can fathom or conceptualize as being possible. The black swan.

Doubt it. I don't have direct evidence of the claims that they know collapse is imminent, but based on some fair assumptions we can make (especially the access to and amount of knowledge they have vs us) I don't see any more logical hypothesis for what's happening right now.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Archimid on February 26, 2017, 03:37:48 PM

It doesn't add up at all. They know that it won't protect them. If you know it, certainly they do too with an even deeper grasp given the information available to them.


I don't think that's true. I know I am just another animal. They think they were created in an image of god. They think humans have choice, I know choice is an illusion. I know I know nothing. They think they know everything.

 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on February 26, 2017, 03:39:08 PM

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......


That is what is happening. Xenophobic protectionism. The image attached is what they have in mind.

Of course that is a very foolish way to protect themselves from global climate change. That Ark will have leaks that can only be solved in cooperation with other countries. It will sink with the rest of the world as the chosen fight with each other over scraps.

At the end there will be some  winners, but most will be losers. If you exclude life losses, then the rule will be that the ones who have the most today will lose the most. If you include life, then the ones who have the least will lose the most.


It doesn't add up at all. They know that it won't protect them. If you know it, certainly they do too with an even deeper grasp given the information available to them.

The highest possibility in my mind is that it is all pure distraction. None of it is meant to go anywhere, because it won't matter soon anyways. It's just political dick-swinging to the max as a means of distracting us, so we don't panic. Again, Trump has been a bit of a career actor for many years prior to this. He is a reality show actor. Reality shows are designed to distract, we all know how well they did that for a long time (Until they mostly became patently unrealistic and people lost interest). This is a reality show on the biggest stage in the world for the same purpose: Distract the world. Finally, a reality show we can all commit to! This time there's no denying it's reality, it's happening, right? So my GOD is it ever enthralling, because now it's really real! Is it though?

Nothing else makes sense unless you think the highest of the elite are oblivious to the coming, unavoidable, crippling effects of climate change. Unless they have some kind of insane terraforming technology that none of us can fathom or conceptualize as being possible. The black swan.

Doubt it. I don't have direct evidence of the claims that they know collapse is imminent, but based on some fair assumptions we can make (especially the access to and amount of knowledge they have vs us) I don't see any more logical hypothesis for what's happening right now.

Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: wili on February 26, 2017, 03:55:57 PM
5to10, the level of effect of the loss of dimming is overstated by Guy McPherson, iirc. I don't dismiss the everything he says, but that is one place where he, at least, is assuming the highest level from a range of probability, and uses a early study that has been superseded.

But yes, loss of dimming will indeed make already bad consequences even worse. We just don't know exactly how much worse, but last I saw it was more like a half degree C rather than the two plus degrees assumed by Guy.

On the other thing, I think Arch and GW have it essentially right. Don't assume the super rich aren't also super crazy. We get a glimpse of that elite insanity watching Trump.

And you're right about distraction, but mainly to distract us from the fact the country is in the process of being robbed blind by the robber baron class. Yes, the robbery has been going on for a long time, but it's now kicking into even higher gear.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 04:02:28 PM

And what if they wish to continue in position after the collapse? Do they force an issue to cover the environmental dangers their kind has brought into being and so leave them 'blameless' post apocalypse?

I gave up concerns over a Nuclear mishap with the fall of the USSR but the past few years have raised those fears back to their cold war levels. Would they really use a Nuke exchange to topple todays civilisation but retain enough modern technology to rebuild post 'war'? If they know the middle east is to become uninhabitable due to temps over the coming decades then why not depopulate the region ( mass refugee crisis) then nuke the region leading to the very 'panic collapse' you envisage?

They lose a portion of the planet they know is doomed and they over halve the global population...... then they use modern technologies to rebuild the globe on a low workforce/high robotic reality ......


That is what is happening. Xenophobic protectionism. The image attached is what they have in mind.

Of course that is a very foolish way to protect themselves from global climate change. That Ark will have leaks that can only be solved in cooperation with other countries. It will sink with the rest of the world as the chosen fight with each other over scraps.

At the end there will be some  winners, but most will be losers. If you exclude life losses, then the rule will be that the ones who have the most today will lose the most. If you include life, then the ones who have the least will lose the most.


It doesn't add up at all. They know that it won't protect them. If you know it, certainly they do too with an even deeper grasp given the information available to them.

The highest possibility in my mind is that it is all pure distraction. None of it is meant to go anywhere, because it won't matter soon anyways. It's just political dick-swinging to the max as a means of distracting us, so we don't panic. Again, Trump has been a bit of a career actor for many years prior to this. He is a reality show actor. Reality shows are designed to distract, we all know how well they did that for a long time (Until they mostly became patently unrealistic and people lost interest). This is a reality show on the biggest stage in the world for the same purpose: Distract the world. Finally, a reality show we can all commit to! This time there's no denying it's reality, it's happening, right? So my GOD is it ever enthralling, because now it's really real! Is it though?

Nothing else makes sense unless you think the highest of the elite are oblivious to the coming, unavoidable, crippling effects of climate change. Unless they have some kind of insane terraforming technology that none of us can fathom or conceptualize as being possible. The black swan.

Doubt it. I don't have direct evidence of the claims that they know collapse is imminent, but based on some fair assumptions we can make (especially the access to and amount of knowledge they have vs us) I don't see any more logical hypothesis for what's happening right now.

Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....

Certainly any politician with access to the full scope of a good intelligence system. Media giants would surely have similar information pipelines. I can't "name names" and I don't intend to. If the present situation was known 30-40 yrs ago, there's just no way all the intelligence and research communities wouldn't make the American president for example fully aware of the situation from the moment it was recognized onwards. It's a completely ludicrous idea to me. Once it's known, it's known, and the ramifications pretty much ALWAYS would have been "If we release this info and make people understand it, panic and a paradigm shift will ensue and things won't go the way we are making them go anymore".

I already said I don't have direct evidence of any of this, but I challenge anyone to come up with a more rational scenario. You must factor in the amount of GOOD information upper elite portions of our society are able to receive that we don't even hear about.. that they can trust is accurate. Unless you believe some or all of them do not seek that information out, or believe it, there's no real alternative than some scenario close to this.

Remember that your disbelief that it has all been a bit of a lie for so long now, is hinged on your belief that first world politicians have never, at any point, been informed or understood that collapse was inevitable based on trajectory, when they have THE BEST intelligence you could ever hope for SPOONFED to them.

If that ever happened even once in the past 40 yrs, that it was accepted as truth by a world leader, the knowledge would be thereafter very present within this tiny upper circle of world politicians/bankers/media barons as it slowly seeped out, and they would all understand that their best option from a self-interest perspective (AND from a "everyone will panic, right now, and cause collapse immediately" perspective) is to act like they don't know anything about it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Pmt111500 on February 26, 2017, 04:04:03 PM
Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Shortening the quote chain. I bet they know more about stocks and monetary derivatives than about steam engines.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 04:18:14 PM
Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Shortening the quote chain. I bet they know more about stocks and monetary derivatives than about steam engines.

Every single one of them since Limits to Growth and even a little before? Again, given that their access to information and their ability to verify it as true within their own minds (due to sources) far exceeds the average persons? Super improbable.

I find it hilarious that so many people view the elite tier as unaware buffoons like the rest of society appears. Sure, some are, but a lot of them are way more aware than the average joe, because they have better quality information, which destroys cognitive dissonance quite often when lesser quality/less convincing info would not have.

And those people mingle with each other - not me or you - so the information on climate risk has likely been shared and widely known/believed by a good portion of them, for quite some time. Way in advance of the public, certainly. We do not have access to the knowledge some of them do, that's all there is to it. To suggest that all of them are oblivious is irrational.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 26, 2017, 04:24:43 PM
Some crazy thoughts about strengthening the ice cap...  not sure if this has been proposed before, but its quite a simple...

In order to more fully take advantage of the FDDs, we need to constantly flood the top of the cap with sea water.  The right flow should all freeze with the minimum effort.   Something on the order of 1 cm top ice per FDD with a constant flow of near freezing sea water.

In this manner 5M thick ice could be produced over large area each winter.  The pumping technology should be easy....  wind power perhaps.  Not so easy maybe, given the environment, but a good challenge for the oil majors anyway.

 Flame away...   8) 8) 8)

hi,

i know exactly the motive of your post and it's very much appreciated. even though things are most often (never) as easy as they seem to be on first glance, and only to throw in my 2cts, i'm against any manmade artificial solution other than to revert or at lest stop/reduce the root cause of the problem.

history shows that whenever we attempted to correct a problem we inflicted ourselves with so called "technical solutions" the resulting new problem was greater, more difficult to control and ultimately leading to catastrophic events. and i'm not only talking climate change of course. the financial system is on heart/lung machine, the political system (democracies) is quickly heading towards revolutionary times, climate is changing with huge impacts of which we know little about the scale and the many more things are going into the wrong (or at least a bad) direction and each attempt to correct the course makes things worse.

this and other reasons ultimately lead to the collapse of each man-made system in the past, be it social, technological, cultural, economical, political, military power, empire or all of them.

the main reason for all this to happen are greed, laziness and profiling neuroses based on uncontrolled egos and no other solution or workaround will avoid such things to happen but mankind starting to hold their lower instincts and interests in check.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: SteveMDFP on February 26, 2017, 04:34:09 PM
Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Shortening the quote chain. I bet they know more about stocks and monetary derivatives than about steam engines.
Exactly correct.  Too many here seem to characterize "the elite" as an amorphous or monolithic force.  They're a collection of individuals, very diverse.  They individually rise to the top of their particular realms by a single-minded focus on achievement in their fields.  Very few understand basic physics, let alone climate science.

Those in political power have a variable appreciation of intelligence.  And intelligence services have a variable interest in modeling socioeconomic consequences of climate change.  If folks have been reading the thread "conservative science and its consequences" you'll appreciate that some of the most authoritative science out there routinely errs on the side of least drama--a great phrase used by AbruptSLR.  Reading the science material most intelligence services would rely on, they wouldn't be telling their leaders that global socioeconomic collapse in a few decades is a plausible scenario.

By and large, I believe "the elite" are as clueless here as the typical viewer of Fox News.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 04:51:09 PM
Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Shortening the quote chain. I bet they know more about stocks and monetary derivatives than about steam engines.
Exactly correct.  Too many here seem to characterize "the elite" as an amorphous or monolithic force.  They're a collection of individuals, very diverse.  They individually rise to the top of their particular realms by a single-minded focus on achievement in their fields.  Very few understand basic physics, let alone climate science.

Those in political power have a variable appreciation of intelligence.  And intelligence services have a variable interest in modeling socioeconomic consequences of climate change.  If folks have been reading the thread "conservative science and its consequences" you'll appreciate that some of the most authoritative science out there routinely errs on the side of least drama--a great phrase used by AbruptSLR.  Reading the science material most intelligence services would rely on, they wouldn't be telling their leaders that global socioeconomic collapse in a few decades is a plausible scenario.

By and large, I believe "the elite" are as clueless here as the typical viewer of Fox News.

I don't view them as a "force". I view them as having access to an information bank that we do not. The reports they receive are different than the reports the public receives. The IPCC for example would have been told "Make it conservative" when their findings were likely very different.

Hiding the truth of climate change is profitable. Hiding the truth of cilmate change prevents panic. Hiding the truth of climate change allows you to continue directing the focus of humanity, rather than have humanity direct YOUR focus.

It is simply ludicrous in my mind to postulate that they are, on average, as or less informed and thus aware than the average individual when they logically have access to and are given better information. It makes no sense at all, and I ask how you get around that statement. You are basically saying the pinnacle of human intelligence entities are about as good as a dude with an internet connection and a vast assortment of disconnected papers that detail individual climate risks, some scientific think tank predictions.

Intelligence agencies, think tanks, R&D, etc... We don't have those, we have the internet, or maybe all the studies from a university and our own research. They have nigh unlimited resources and time to pay smarter people to put all that shit together for them and give them the most likely predictions, or data based on events. You're telling me they pay for all that and then ignore all the results when their pocketbooks or influence is at stake? That's a good one.

You are not giving at least SOME portion of powerful people enough credit mentally.

You can't begin to tell me that the Bush and Clinton families couldn't be aware, for example, and their history as huge figures in American politics is a pretty long one.

What you are suggesting is just plain unlikely.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on February 26, 2017, 05:04:46 PM
If the world is going to end on Tuesday, they want you showing up for work Monday morning.  Simple as that.

The average IQ is 100 regardless of social-economic status.  That is why we are witnessing Idiocracy vs Armageddon.

Maybe we could pump Brawndo onto the ice.  It has electrolytes.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: SteveMDFP on February 26, 2017, 05:06:29 PM
Who are these, the highest of the elite? .....
Shortening the quote chain. I bet they know more about stocks and monetary derivatives than about steam engines.
Exactly correct.  Too many here seem to characterize "the elite" as an amorphous or monolithic force.  They're a collection of individuals, very diverse.  They individually rise to the top of their particular realms by a single-minded focus on achievement in their fields.  Very few understand basic physics, let alone climate science.

Those in political power have a variable appreciation of intelligence.  And intelligence services have a variable interest in modeling socioeconomic consequences of climate change.  If folks have been reading the thread "conservative science and its consequences" you'll appreciate that some of the most authoritative science out there routinely errs on the side of least drama--a great phrase used by AbruptSLR.  Reading the science material most intelligence services would rely on, they wouldn't be telling their leaders that global socioeconomic collapse in a few decades is a plausible scenario.

By and large, I believe "the elite" are as clueless here as the typical viewer of Fox News.

I don't view them as a "force". I view them as having access to an information bank that we do not. The reports they receive are different than the reports the public receives. The IPCC for example would have been told "Make it conservative" when their findings were likely very different.

Hiding the truth of climate change is profitable. Hiding the truth of cilmate change prevents panic. Hiding the truth of climate change allows you to continue directing the focus of humanity, rather than have humanity direct YOUR focus.

It is simply ludicrous in my mind to postulate that they are, on average, as or less informed and thus aware than the average individual when they logically have access to and are given better information. It makes no sense at all, and I ask how you get around that statement.

Intelligence agencies, think tanks, R&D, etc... We don't have those, we have the internet, or maybe all the studies from a university and our own research. They have nigh unlimited resources and time to pay smarter people to put all that shit together for them and give them the most likely predictions, or data based on events. You're telling me they pay for all that and then ignore all the results when their pocketbooks or influence is at stake? That's a good one.

You are not giving at least SOME portion of powerful people enough credit mentally.

You can't begin to tell me that the Bush and Clinton families couldn't be aware, for example, and their history as huge figures in American politics is a pretty long one.

What you are suggesting is just plain unlikely.

I think it's quite variable, depending on which paticular elite individual you're thinking about.  I'm fairly confident that the US DoD and CIA have a reasonably good grasp of future possibilities.  I think Obama paid attention, and thus stated that climate change is the greatest single risk to global security.  But Trump, as a counter-example, refuses to meet with such experts, and doesn't believe them, and has no patience with long briefing papers.

For example, the DoD has decades of detailed, precise arctic sea ice data, courtesy of nuclear subs continuously in the arctic since the 1950s.  The DoD has been notably active in focusing on developing a climate-resilient force.  But the underlying data and analysis is classified.  Its there for the President and member of the Congressional Intelligence committees, and nobody else.

All other "elites" have, at best, only the available science that errs on the side of least drama.  Most aren't interested in anything that happens after the next election, or next corporate quarterly repot, or after they enter retirement.  They know that the only other thing that matters to them, their own families, can be best protected by amassing wealth.  They don't have time for any other concerns, nor much interest, nor much comprehension.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 05:13:26 PM
I think it's quite variable, depending on which paticular elite individual you're thinking about.  I'm fairly confident that the US DoD and CIA have a reasonably good grasp of future possibilities.  I think Obama paid attention, and thus stated that climate change is the greatest single risk to global security.  But Trump, as a counter-example, refuses to meet with such experts, and doesn't believe them, and has no patience with long briefing papers.

For example, the DoD has decades of detailed, precise arctic sea ice data, courtesy of nuclear subs continuously in the arctic since the 1950s.  The DoD has been notably active in focusing on developing a climate-resilient force.  But the underlying data and analysis is classified.  Its there for the President and member of the Congressional Intelligence committees, and nobody else.

All other "elites" have, at best, only the available science that errs on the side of least drama.  Most aren't interested in anything that happens after the next election, or next corporate quarterly repot, or after they enter retirement.  They know that the only other thing that matters to them, their own families, can be best protected by amassing wealth.  They don't have time for any other concerns, nor much interest, nor much comprehension.

Yes, but in the context of my suggestion (Important sects of the elite tier have known about this for a long time. Trump knew before running and still knows we have no salvation and imminent collapse [between now and 20-30 yrs] is coming, and that he is the gigantic distraction required at the moment to get peoples attention off the natural world, as it becomes more obviously frightening) then it doesn't matter whether or not Trump goes to meet with said agencies etc. All of that news is irrelevant and part of the distraction. Every boorish, outlandish, incomprehensible statement he says is part of the distraction.

You can no longer take any of his actions at face value, but must view all of them as individual parts of the purpose: extremely effective, world attention-grabbing distraction from the coming fright of the natural world collapsing around us.

Again, if everyone ACTUALLY realized today that we're screwed soon, the collapse just happens right away out of panic.

Whether or not any of this is true, and I realize I can't produce evidence here, it is all more than plausible at the very least. In fact all of the ideas I'm sharing here fit together to compile a very sensible hypothesis of what's been going on behind the scenes for many years perhaps: They've known about this for a long time and have been distracting/keeping us ignorant as long as possible either out of self-interest, or to save us from ourselves, or some combination of both.

Regardless of all other goings-on, the knowledge that the world is going to collapse someday, possibly (or now probably) within your lifetime will certainly be a big motivator behind your actions. And if they understood it, I have to believe they came to the same conclusion: Letting the cat out of the bag may cause immediate collapse.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on February 26, 2017, 05:36:25 PM
Very nice Cid, and very true.
The future was ours, and be blew it.



Terry

I'm sorry to have to yawn on your parade, but the rate of computer hardware development is outstripping climate change.  Mankind will not even notice when Homo Sapiens becomes extinct.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: epiphyte on February 26, 2017, 05:38:28 PM
Whether or not any of this is true, and I realize I can't produce evidence here, it is all more than plausible at the very least. In fact all of the ideas I'm sharing here fit together to compile a very sensible hypothesis of what's been going on behind the scenes for many years perhaps: They've known about this for a long time and have been distracting/keeping us ignorant as long as possible either out of self-interest, or to save us from ourselves, or some combination of both.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to Malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 06:07:56 PM
Whether or not any of this is true, and I realize I can't produce evidence here, it is all more than plausible at the very least. In fact all of the ideas I'm sharing here fit together to compile a very sensible hypothesis of what's been going on behind the scenes for many years perhaps: They've known about this for a long time and have been distracting/keeping us ignorant as long as possible either out of self-interest, or to save us from ourselves, or some combination of both.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to Malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Yes well, here's 5to10's Razor: Never assume philosophical principles such as Hanlon's Razor are accurate for every scenario.

Plus, again, stupidity is not a likely proposition when they have more direct access to better information and their livelihoods, businesses or political power are more reliant on such things.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 06:37:00 PM
[
I find it hilarious that so many people view the elite tier as unaware buffoons like the rest of society appears. Sure, some are, but a lot of them are way more aware than the average joe, because they have better quality information, which destroys cognitive dissonance quite often when lesser quality/less convincing info would not have.


Who funded 'Denial'? Why would they have any issue with what is occurring/about to occur?

They had information decades ago that ,even today, we argue about. How do they look at such data? Does it serve them to plan for the best or prepare for the worst? Leave nothing to chance I think?

Something here approaches.....

https://youtu.be/IWm03wYBTbM
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 06:57:08 PM
https://youtu.be/VvQ2FUwvcqw (https://youtu.be/VvQ2FUwvcqw)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 07:07:08 PM
We used to have a poster here. They posted volumes of stuff, they searched the planet for anything new and they made Sat images easier to interpret....... they're gone now.....

We got that for free. Just think of what you could have with 3 or 5 such 'helpers' , well rewarded for their time, keeping you 'current'. Even those blessed with an IQ of 100 can be shown what is/will be important?

We heard talk of 'peak oil' back in the 60's, nobody hid that from humanity so why was that something we could bare to hear and yet AGW has been fought over tooth and claw with every direction of the global thermometer something for intense debate.

Peak oil figures were revised ad infinitum but global measures of change? Ant upgrade of the quality of data has been fought over in an apparent 'need' for the more dated data to be the accepted one?

Why?

You do not need a lot of 'Nouse' to be told what is going on and if you wield power then it is equally not as hard to promote a direction that directly favours you?

Something unseen come this way............ but some have seen a glimpse and laid plans accordingly.....
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 07:09:25 PM
https://youtu.be/VvQ2FUwvcqw (https://youtu.be/VvQ2FUwvcqw)

We have the Bullingdon Club........ you the Skull and Bones?

Since that speech 'conspiracy' has become a dirty word, the place where whakos are to be found.....
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 26, 2017, 07:22:32 PM
Wow, pretty remarkable where an open thread on ASIF leads these days!  5to10, I think you are overselling your point pretty hard.  Yes, I agree that most of the - lets call it the "global corporate hegemony" - know or at least fear the game is lost.  I think there is still a strong element that clings to the belief that a techno-fix will bail us out, up to and including geoengineering.

I don't think "they" are operating on any expectation that fear of collapse is going to sweep the population and precipitate said collapse.  I think they just want to keep the machine cranking as long and as best they can and ride it as far as it can go.  I think Arch is exactly correct and if I had to summarize the Trump agenda it is "get rid of as many brown people as possible, prevent any more from getting here, disenfranchise those that remain, roll up the drawbridges and make the best go of it for the well-off whites as we can."  I think they look out at the world and see growing climate chaos, state failure and mass migration.  They want to stay as detached from it as possible.  Wall us off from any northbound migration and what, Canada is going to stop us from migrating our bread basket north if we have to?

All-in-all I think the global economy is probably less stable than the biosphere.  If the economy does "collapse" yes the reduction of dimming will add some forcing, but a reduction of CO2 forcing will also occur as economic activity drops off.  Humans are weedy and adaptable and will colonize available livable habitats.  The only extinction level event I can possibly foresee is if 400+ reactors meltdown at once, perhaps because of a Carrington-type event (or nuclear war, but I see that as very low probability).

If I had to bet, this process will take decades.  I often tell friends and acquaintances that are dubious that the human endeavor is headed for collapse to meet me for lunch in 2030.  If they haven't come over to my side by then, lunch is on me.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on February 26, 2017, 07:42:26 PM
Whether or not any of this is true, and I realize I can't produce evidence here, it is all more than plausible at the very least. In fact all of the ideas I'm sharing here fit together to compile a very sensible hypothesis of what's been going on behind the scenes for many years perhaps: They've known about this for a long time and have been distracting/keeping us ignorant as long as possible either out of self-interest, or to save us from ourselves, or some combination of both.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to Malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Hear, hear...
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 26, 2017, 07:45:40 PM
Well I'm happy to report 5to10 is speaking my truth!

I cannot but feel I am missing a piece of the puzzle and , after long years of pondering, I have to believe that piece is being withheld ?

do I trust the world?

Nope. I was brung up to question everything and a.t.m. I'm sure I'm missing a piece!

Things ain't normal?

Too many things are appearing out of skew but then? is this what they want me to see?

Yup!, we share the world with folk dimmer than us and with those so bright we'd need blink who chose to close their eyes....... could you, given the funds and motivation, blind the planet to the truth, or at least leave it squabbling?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: oren on February 26, 2017, 07:51:04 PM
dnem, thanks for summarizing what I feel so well.
About the panic part, many people I know either say "yeah yeah heard it all before" as they fail to grasp long term processes, or they understand the problem and feel powerless to do anything about it. But everyone keeps going at their daily lives with no panic even on the horizon, regardless of what the suppposed elite might or might not tell anyone. The media is full of warnings about the future, most are bs but some are very real, people have become accustomed and grown numb. Panic will only happen when daily life is stronly disrupted. For global panic this has to happen in many locations at once. It will, but I agree it' s a long process (luckily I guess).
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on February 26, 2017, 08:08:53 PM
Who funded 'Denial'? Why would they have any issue with what is occurring/about to occur?

Tr:  Follow the Money
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 08:14:43 PM
For global panic this has to happen in many locations at once. It will, but I agree it' s a long process (luckily I guess).

Correct - so disenfranchising the news and thus available information in general is a wise decision to make NOW, in order to manage public perception later when national and global events start happening that cannot go unignored. "They're not collapsing over there, these things happen. Superstorms happen. Famine happens. Drought happens. Earth changes. Economic meltdowns happen. This is not part of a greater event."

I.e. "CNN has received word that the superstorm is a result of a climate state that will continue to worsen drastically as a result of positive feedbacks..."

"Fake news"

Now imagine if ignorance WASN'T being cultivated... A lot of the people who will now be fooled may have taken heed of the news, leading to panic, leading to probable near term collapse/pitchfork wielding mobs.

Will CNN even exist as it does in a year or two? Will any of the so-called "Fake news"? Will it be an authoritarian regime which controls news and controls INFORMATION even further (internet regulation?) and thus a hefty portion of public perception?

I don't see how this is reaching as someone else said. Any assumptions being made are rational and plausible, everything fits together to make a perfectly rational picture of what could be going on outside of our view.

Certainly other than "Well, 'common sense' and all these philosophical principles suggest you're wrong" and "They might get better information but they probably don't accept it", there ain't much for a rebuttal.

As our situation is so unbelievable that it surpasses the greatest thriller movie you could ever hope to watch or conceive, perhaps there are many unbelievable aspects. Surely there are at least some we are oblivious to.

If JFK's outright and blatant DISCLOSURE that there were secret societies running the world in the 60's, followed by his assassination weeks later doesn't strike you as strange in the context of present events and everything else I'm explaining, nothing I can say on this subject will change your mind.

Though this all seems tangential or existential, if we are truly serious about hoping to start any kind of positive change and not just giving up entirely, then this is very relevant and important, as is what newsmedia is choosing to report.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Bernard on February 26, 2017, 08:37:57 PM
This kind of discussion pushes me to come out of lurker mode.

For me, the answer is simple. As any form of life, we are overly optimistic, fighting daily to survive, with no consideration for the future, either short, middle or long term. I live in mountains where trees and other living things grow and thrive in places where no one would have given a damn of their bare survival. This blind optimism of life made it successful across billions of years and so many local and global catastrophes. So we are, at the bottom of ourselves, confident. We keep having children, although we pretty well know there are way too many of them on this planet. But what else? Surrender? Life never surrenders. Full stop.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: oren on February 26, 2017, 08:58:38 PM
Well sais. My colleague at work, anice and intelligent person who studied for a phd in physics has just had hia fourth kid. This of course drives me nuts. He agrees with me that the world is going to hell, and is even now reading Hansen's book "Storms of my grandchildren" at my urging. And still he remains the most calm person, shrugging off all real worries about the future. Psychologically he is better off I guess, and most  life have this as survival trait.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 09:16:27 PM
This kind of discussion pushes me to come out of lurker mode.

For me, the answer is simple. As any form of life, we are overly optimistic, fighting daily to survive, with no consideration for the future, either short, middle or long term. I live in mountains where trees and other living things grow and thrive in places where no one would have given a damn of their bare survival. This blind optimism of life made it successful across billions of years and so many local and global catastrophes. So we are, at the bottom of ourselves, confident. We keep having children, although we pretty well know there are way too many of them on this planet. But what else? Surrender? Life never surrenders. Full stop.

I agree wholeheartedly, and that is a great read. I must also believe that not trying by all and any means necessary to the bitter end is tantamount to bleeding to death outside a hospital door and waiting for someone else to carry you in, when there is nobody else to do so but yourself, with your last bit of strength. Perhaps you will die of the bleeding anyways in surgery, but giving up entirely is irrational if you value anything at all in this beautiful natural world, that doesn't just have to include yourself and other people (in their low state of awareness.. which can always go up..).

Perhaps we have scarred it beyond recognition. But perhaps with a united humanity that somehow, some impossible way got through this unbelievable crisis, we could continue to work towards a better future not just for ourselves, but for the natural world we live in.

What is the use in giving up? Either you give up, or you do everything you can think of right now lest you accept that you have in fact given up. If not for yourself, for your children and grandchildren, then for any fleeting chance the natural world has left.

I understand that the further we do damage, the worse chances for life to restart here become. But we already have such a complex, amazing world that is worth trying to save. It is a very difficult question of individual values at the end of the day.

I appreciate all of you here for your information, discussion, your passion and your little flame of hope that must exist somewhere. I wish all of you the best no matter how things progress. I'm not sure whether it's sadness, or the chaotic, inconceivable but horrifying beauty of it that is bringing tears to my eyes, but there they are. This is our story, our stories, no matter how you look at it, no matter if it is a horror story or not. Could we even help it?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 26, 2017, 10:00:06 PM
This kind of discussion pushes me to come out of lurker mode.

For me, the answer is simple. As any form of life, we are overly optimistic, fighting daily to survive, with no consideration for the future, either short, middle or long term. I live in mountains where trees and other living things grow and thrive in places where no one would have given a damn of their bare survival. This blind optimism of life made it successful across billions of years and so many local and global catastrophes. So we are, at the bottom of ourselves, confident. We keep having children, although we pretty well know there are way too many of them on this planet. But what else? Surrender? Life never surrenders. Full stop.

a great "standalone" statement and i love the fact that this triggered a post from you, no sarcasm, i honestly mean it just to make that clear.

as to your point, as i said, as it stands i like it but to discuss that to to bottom of all things it would make the ancient library of alexandria look tiny.

this kind of thoughts only can come to Fruitition if the reader is willing and/or able to see behind it and think the rest.

however, not easy to find the right words but this kind of statement can at times make my day, "thumbup"
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on February 26, 2017, 11:23:58 PM
5to10, Sounds like Tommowland.  If you haven't seen it, it's worth a watch for those with your mindset.  I'm totally surprised that Disney would address the end of the world so directly.

I give this movie a big thumbs up.

Sort of Technocopia meets the power of positive thinking.  Hope is the greatest of all defense mechanisms.

Not that I ascribe.  But isn't it best to meet the end with hope and go down swinging?  If you can't get to the point of acceptance, it's the next best thing.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 26, 2017, 11:54:48 PM
5to10, Sounds like Tommowland.  If you haven't seen it, it's worth a watch for those with your mindset.  I'm totally surprised that Disney would address the end of the world so directly.

I give this movie a big thumbs up.

Sort of Technocopia meets the power of positive thinking.  Hope is the greatest of all defense mechanisms.

Not that I ascribe.  But isn't it best to meet the end with hope and go down swinging?  If you can't get to the point of acceptance, it's the next best thing.

I already accepted it, and then out of accepting it actually understood that you can accept it and still keep swinging even if it looks to be totally in vain. And secondly, though it looks impossible, I cannot rule out the possibility of recovery although all logic and evidence goes against that. For such a monumental thing, I'm willing to swing longer. In fact I think that is the only rational choice. Again it all depends on an individuals beliefs and values.

I will say that I don't think recovery is impossible.. just far, far, so far beyond the realm of probable... However until I KNOW it is impossible, and despite overwhelming evidence that it's impossible.. I still admit that I cannot know for sure if it is... then giving up and not trying is just letting it happen. If there is any chance, we HAVE to try, so we might as well...

Of course I do believe if we were to get through it, we'd be a better species with more compassion and care in regard to the natural world on the other side. Else there's probably no point in saving the world or saving us, I get it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 27, 2017, 03:20:58 AM
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.

Totally absurd, maybe...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.  Properly located I imaging that volume of extra ice would help stabilize the pack, reducing mobility.  Maybe stop the garlic press or reduce Fram export, who knows.  Further, 5000hp operating 200 days can draw said 1km3 20 vertical ft.  How much distribution could be coerced from gravity, gives an idea of how many pumps would be required...  Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2.  So we need 5000 1HP pumps for this exercise.   

Or maybe the experts can agree that strategically placed 2m enhancements on 50000 km^2 can help.  You are down to 500hp and maybe 250 sites.

Its ridiculous, sure, but not more than an order of magnitude out.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on February 27, 2017, 04:38:20 AM
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.

Totally absurd, maybe...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.  Properly located I imaging that volume of extra ice would help stabilize the pack, reducing mobility.  Maybe stop the garlic press or reduce Fram export, who knows.  Further, 5000hp operating 200 days can draw said 1km3 20 vertical ft.  How much distribution could be coerced from gravity, gives an idea of how many pumps would be required...  Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2.  So we need 5000 1HP pumps for this exercise.   

Or maybe the experts can agree that strategically placed 2m enhancements on 50000 km^2 can help.  You are down to 500hp and maybe 250 sites.

Its ridiculous, sure, but not more than an order of magnitude out.

...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.

Your numbers are off, badly.  1.0KM3 of ice would add 1M thickness to only 1000 square kilometers of sea surface.

I'm going to put it this way... we are wasting our time with these arguments - including the one talking about damming the Fram - unless the folks doing it put up numbers which address the forces involved and resources required to implement the solutions being spoken of.  Without that, you are indulging in wishful thinking of the worst kind, which offers the suggestion that some sort of magical solution will cause the problem to go away.

Regarding the Fram - do you have any idea of the scale of force that would be applied to a 100 KM long barrier to prevent ice flow?  Do you have any idea of what sorts of forces materials would need to be engineered to to resist that force?  What scale of logistical support would be required to emplace that?  How long would the work take?  How would it be carried out in the dead of winter?  In the face of 960HPA cyclonic bombs churning up the straight?

A 1 HP pump flooding an area of 200KM2?!  That can't even keep my basement dry, much less build 1/5th of a KM3 of sea ice.  Let's start with how you design it, along with its power supply, and make it robust enough to operate and efficiently distribute billions of gallons of sea water such that it doesn't just get locked into its own ice cube.  Then, how do you get it there, and in a timely fashion? What do you do when it fails and requires repair? What happens *when* the ice fractures - does the sea water just flow back into the ocean?  I could go on ad nauseum, but blast it, I shouldn't *have* to because of just how immensely foolish these ideas are.

I refuse to accept any argument for these things which doesn't include numbers to address scale, reliability and emplacement of the solution.  If you do, you'd better do a lot better than what's been posted so far.

Nonsense, all of it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 27, 2017, 04:59:40 AM
Quote
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on February 27, 2017, 05:51:27 AM
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

Regarding the Fram - do you have any idea of the scale of force that would be applied to a 100 KM long barrier to prevent ice flow?  Do you have any idea of what sorts of forces materials would need to be engineered to to resist that force?  ?

I refuse to accept any argument for these things which doesn't include numbers to address scale, reliability and emplacement of the solution.  If you do, you'd better do a lot better than what's been posted so far.

Nonsense, all of it.

If the world is going to end on Tuesday, they want you showing up for work Monday morning.  Simple as that.

The average IQ is 100 regardless of social-economic status.  That is why we are witnessing Idiocracy vs Armageddon.

Maybe we could pump Brawndo onto the ice.  It has electrolytes.


Yes, it is unfortunate that between not being intelligent enough to grasp, not being educated enough to grasp, not wanting to grasp, too indoctrinated to grasp, it leaves only about 2% of the population that understands, and of those only a handful in a position to do anything about it.

So we get what we have.  Tell me, down deep, you didn't know it would eventually come to this.

You thought after high school it would be better, and yes, there were a higher concentration of you in college, which gave you hope.

Then you hit the real world.  Where morons have the right to vote, hold positions of power, have a vested interest in keeping the intelligent ones suppressed, and they outnumber you 50 to 1.  Did you really expect anything different?

       
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on February 27, 2017, 05:52:51 AM
Quote
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 27, 2017, 06:27:17 AM
Quote
The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
I can't argue with that. The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions. Still, if these original inventors were alive today, they might feel a little remorse, just the same.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Peter Ellis on February 27, 2017, 11:22:13 AM
Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2. 

Justify that statement. It seems to me that the very first thing that will happen is that the water freezes solid in the pump's pipework and stops it pumping anything.  If you get round that problem, then it freezes as soon as it exits the pump and builds up a small "ice volcano" around the pump itself covering maybe a few tens of square metres if you're lucky. 

If you want to avoid that, kindly provide reasoning for how it will work. Some simple numbers:  If each pump floods a 200 km^2 area, that means each pump thickens ice for a radius of ~8km around the pump. Explain in detail how you you expect a thin layer of running water to flow ~8 km across the surface of the ice in ~-20 degree cold without immediately freezing solid. Write on both sides of the paper.

Christ.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Peter Ellis on February 27, 2017, 11:23:19 AM
The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions.
No, physics does, and it has the casting vote.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 27, 2017, 12:55:46 PM
Yeah, I started with 1000 km3 and ended with 1km3.... 3 orders of magnitude but who's counting.  If not for that the engineering challenges would be worth the hypothetical conversation.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: be cause on February 27, 2017, 01:24:42 PM
thanks Peter for a little common sense .. perhaps adding anti-freeze might be a solution ? :)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on February 27, 2017, 01:30:29 PM
If my memory serves me right, the PIOMAS people say that average loss of sea ice volume per year has been just under 300 km3. The energy used to do this is nearly equivalent to the entire energy output of the USA ?

Reversing sea ice decline surely requires taking vast amounts of energy out of the biosphere, not throwing more energy into the system. Switching to renewable energy reduces excess heat build up by reducing build up of atmospheric CO2 ? At least a start, and the technology is proven and can be installed relatively quickly.

I cannot see any way of reducing sea ice decline without reducing atmospheric CO2 concentrations. The geo-engineering proposals I have seen reek of the arrogant assumption that we can control the biosphere and the entire web of life on this planet. Beware the law of unintended  consequences.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 27, 2017, 01:34:26 PM
This windmill pumping thing is published in the AGU open source journal Earth's Future:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full)

There are 14 authors.  I know that all sorts of worthless crap makes it through peer review and into the literature, but still, it strikes me as condescending that some of the sharpies here can dismiss it as if the authors literally never even thought of the issues they are raising.

That said, their description of how they plan to distribute liquid water across the freezing zone for each windmill is pretty thin:
"and many of the issues associated with storing and distributing liquid water during the Arctic winter are similar to the problems associated with supplying drinking water in high-arctic communities in the winter, such as the need for heated/insulated storage tanks and distribution systems (http://sciencenordic.com/arctic-town-has-running-water-just-four-months-year, (http://sciencenordic.com/arctic-town-has-running-water-just-four-months-year,) 5 Oct. 2016)."

Obviously this nutty thing will never get built, but I don't think anyone does him or herself any credit by dismissing and condescending to 14 authors published in a peer-reviewed AGU journal.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: be cause on February 27, 2017, 03:43:43 PM
surely calling nonsense what it is should be welcome on any thread , but especially on an 'open thread' ? If there is a solution to Arctic Ice loss I have not read it here .. no matter how many peers have reviewed whatever . Prayer would more likely result in the desired outcome .. bc
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 27, 2017, 03:47:37 PM
The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions.
No, physics does, and it has the casting vote.

Obviously, anything that someone dreamed up, like dams or pumps or whatever, if these did what  was expected, would only serve as a stopgap. The underlying problems would continue.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 27, 2017, 04:00:31 PM
Sure it's nonsense. And of course it wouldn't solve humanity's problems even if it could be built.  I just find it disrespectful to suggest that the authors' didn't even consider that gee, pumped water might freeze in the arctic.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Peter Ellis on February 27, 2017, 04:35:50 PM
Sure it's nonsense. And of course it wouldn't solve humanity's problems even if it could be built.  I just find it disrespectful to suggest that the authors' didn't even consider that gee, pumped water might freeze in the arctic.
Did you read the same paper I just did?  They explicitly didn't consider distribution, only the steel necessary to make a giant turbine and the buoy required to float it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on February 27, 2017, 04:57:10 PM
My job is scale up and commercialization of novel processes.  You would be surprised how many times in the early development people don't pay attention to some critical showstopper that manifest themselves upon scale up....and how many showstoppers appear not with the main process but with the auxiliary functions, with location, raw materials, and weather.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 27, 2017, 05:08:38 PM
Quote
The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
I can't argue with that. The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions. Still, if these original inventors were alive today, they might feel a little remorse, just the same.

hope i can say that right. let's take one "technical solution" as an example and i want to stress here that i'm not against that or anything that means progress (improvement), just want to grow the angle a bit, hope it's welcome :-)

let's take electricity & batteries as that example:

IMO if development continues as is now and nothing totally different and much better will come up VERY SOON
we shall end up in other but by no means less grave problems due to resources needed and several kinds of pollution that comes with the current technology that should replace ICE and other fossil fuel consuming stuff.

batteries are for now a good thing and electric is better and more efficient than burning carbon but it's not a solution, it's only a workaround that has to be followed by even better, even more efficient technologies while
the one and only real solution is on the consumer side and not on the power providing side.

this means, insulation, reduce waste (efficiency to no end) repairing things instead of throwing them away to be replaced.

a very good example would be a smart watch. just imagine, i have watches (great ones at that) that are up to 40 years old, look like new and work like new, and now the want us to throw it away after 1-3 years to be replaced with a similar or identical looking one just with more powerful innards.

best cars are not new ones but still people want a new one for gadgets noone needs and that cause trouble soon while the main driver is to show off to the public.

that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

i wrote this because one main reason why things take often such bad turns at the end, is that inventions are "glorified in an early stage" while we should learn from history that there is always a downsides and there is no perpetuum mobile, hence it would be wise to think about ALL the consequences in that early stage and not once the masses depend on or are addicted to certain things. Now would be the time to consider the consequences of all electric driving and battery powered everything, not in 50 or 100 years when they start shooting for rare earth reswources the way they did and do for oil.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 27, 2017, 05:09:11 PM
I skimmed it Peter.  This is not really even worth debating as I agree that it's a cockamamie scheme.  But you say "Justify that statement. It seems to me that the very first thing that will happen is that the water freezes solid in the pump's pipework and stops it pumping anything.  If you get round that problem, then it freezes as soon as it exits the pump and builds up a small "ice volcano" around the pump itself covering maybe a few tens of square metres if you're lucky."

As I said above, they offer (and I admit thinly) "and many of the issues associated with storing and distributing liquid water during the Arctic winter are similar to the problems associated with supplying drinking water in high-arctic communities in the winter, such as the need for heated/insulated storage tanks and distribution systems."

It's woefully underdeveloped and maybe it does not meet your definition of "explicit" but they obviously know that you need to store and move liquid water across space to make this work.  They know that a frozen up pump and a small ice volcano ain't going to cut it.  Saying that's what they are proposing is not justified IMO.  I think we can be respectful in our critiques w/o resorting to dismissive hyperbole.

Enough of this now.  No one is building this nonsense nor should they.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on February 27, 2017, 05:27:15 PM
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 27, 2017, 05:57:53 PM
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

solution is meant as to end exploitation of resources and destruction of natural systems in ways that for a relatively short period would provide subjective benefits but ultimately come with a catastrophic price tag.

as to meaningless in universal terms you're right because we are not that important after all that it would matter in the very long run but still we should do our best and replace greed and other lower instincts with ethics and wisdom, meaning less or not, because not even that we really know for sure, so better be prudent than sorry.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Forest Dweller on February 27, 2017, 07:20:14 PM
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 27, 2017, 07:24:26 PM
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

well said +1
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 27, 2017, 11:56:17 PM
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

The primary benefit of hunter/gatherer lifestyle is the de facto limit on density.  We broke from that limit with agriculture, some 6000 years ago.  Further density of human population comes from that industrial society you decry. 

Your touted primitive lifestyle is not in fact a fix for overuse of natural resources.  A good read perhaps is Jared Diamond's Collapse:  How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.  You will find examples of pre-industrial ecological catastrophes.

Of course we can solve all the problems by limiting humankind to a small percentage of our current population.  Implementation may be a bit tricky.

No.  The future is forward, not backwards, however frightening that may be.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on February 28, 2017, 12:03:49 AM
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

If heat is increasing there is no reduction in entropy. increased heat increased kinetic energy increased disorder
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 12:40:34 AM
a lot of interesting stuff (views and opinions) here lately, go on like this, every post contains information worth to consider and ponder over, even though the result for now mostly seems like ufff.... no way to get out of this apparently, but who knows :-) always stay positive until the S hits the fan
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 01:01:57 AM
For any chance of salvation, anyone aware who cares to try must make as many individual reporters/editors in newsmedia acutely aware of their position and influence in the current situation.

There is no other place we can start than a news-media paradigm shift, unity in news-media which strives for unity in global consciousness behind a clear purpose.

It is futile to discuss solutions until you figure out the issue of "How do we stop the bullshit machine from deluding and distracting, and instead have it focus on raising awareness and focusing global consciousness?"

The awareness of the individuals, the human beings who COMPOSE the untouchable, inhuman beast that is news-media must be raised now.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 01:02:50 AM
That is they must be acutely aware that *any chance of salvation* starts with them as individuals and as such a collective.

"Now that you see the truth clearly, your continued inaction shall be heretofore morally reprehensible within your own mind."

The most likely moral choice for the good (of which I think their numbers are far greater) will be to talk amongst themselves and stop reporting on that which does not matter. Mass non-compliance will lead to heightened global awareness here.

This critically wounds or kills one aspect of the beast (the current state of newsmedia) which is step 1 before any impactful change.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 28, 2017, 01:28:29 AM
Quote
Do not put your trust in princes; Nor in a son of man, who cannot offer salvation.
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                         King David
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 01:41:04 AM
Quote
Do not put your trust in princes; Nor in a son of man, who cannot offer salvation.
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                         King David

If you want to bring the bible into it, the position we are in now mirrors much of revelations from a figurative perspective, and salvation from our dire situation will come, followed by 1000 years of peace, so that quote is inapplicable.

I live with devout Christians who take the bible somewhat literally, I had the idea of reading it and seeing if there were figurative parallels to our present situation. I am also openminded and spiritual and accept parts of many religions/ideologies as being rational and perhaps truthful, just deeply figurative. I will accept and promote parts of Christianity which are sensible documentations of truth (Do unto others, for an easy example), and not the bits which are clearly man-made, self-serving (for the writer) literature.

In revelations, preceding armageddon is a thousand year period of peace, after which Satan returns to delude and deceive nations again, which is what appears to precede full on armageddon.

In the present (according to my figurative interpretation), people worship "the beast". they say "How can the beast be challenged? How powerful it is!" which is exactly what people say about government and big media.

Most are deceived. The mark of the beast on the forehead or the hand: The dim light of TV's and computer screens, the cell phones in our hands where we interact with "the beast".

In fact the figurative language of the bible would mirror the idea i have laid out: The aspect of the beast which speaks for it is critically wounded, the prostitute which rides the beast (human indulgence, at its core) burns as the beast looks on in horror and the merchants woe their inability to sell their gold, silver (indulgences) and the like. If the majority of mankind unites now, surely they will realize they must stop seeking such indulgences from "the merchants".

Someone attacks the beast with a sword from their mouth (the written or spoken word) and the beast strikes back but is felled, after which that individual leads humanity into something of a golden era of peace for 1000 years.


I thought of this "make the reporters acutely aware" idea naturally, before looking at revelations today and saw that it would seem to mirror the idea of taking on "the beast" by way of striking at news-media first, all a precursor to this supposed 1000 years of peace.

All of the "1/3rd of the seas die, 1/3rd of the land animals" etc etc. happen prior to the beast being felled, so the current state of the world somewhat mirrors that as well. Figuratively, the story within revelations is quite easily applied to our present state and the recent events preceding it, it was quite uncanny and I was honestly surprised (Other examples off the top of my head include the "horses" of the armies which shoot flame out the front but are also injurious from the rear - tanks and warships, kill with projectiles in front (the obvious) and exhaust emissions in the back [the less obvious but also injurious]. It describes "the beast" as looking like a leopard, with the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion - a leopards camoflauge is its signature, it's hard to see.. A bears feet are destructive, it levels the earth it treads. A lions roar is unmistakeable, it captures the attention.)

In any event, according to Revelations (And I can't see why self-proclaimed Christians don't get this), this cannot be armageddon because we haven't had a 1000 year period of peace. What Revelations means for the vast majority of them is pain and suffering for their blind indulgence and piety to "the beast".



While I know this is very unscientific by todays standards, let's remember here that the great minds of old were not afraid to, and in fact sought to consider spirituality along with scientific method. By doing so this morning I again was blown away by the stark parallels within an ancient book.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 28, 2017, 03:30:57 AM
In the bible, beast are used to represent kingdoms and governments. The number seven always represents completeness or perfection. Therefore six represents something that comes up short or is imperfect. Repeating the six three times for emphasis shows just how imperfect the human political system has been. The book of Daniel which goes into much detail about governments, explains at 2:44 that," In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever."
Part of Armageddon involves God "bringing to ruin those ruining the Earth." Rev. 11:18
After this war of Armageddon, the 1000 years begins, not before.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 28, 2017, 03:47:14 AM
Maybe a plague of locusts will blot out the sun...
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on February 28, 2017, 06:24:55 AM
<wry look>
Can we at least get back to the *pretense* of a discussion about the Arctic?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: epiphyte on February 28, 2017, 06:29:42 AM
Trying to be brief here...

5to10 - There is no conspiracy here beyond unenlightened self-interest. Which is to say, greed coupled with stupidity coupled with egocentricity and narcissism . The energy oligarchs aren't motivated by the prospect of watching the world burn. They just aren't wired to connect the dots between what they do now and bad things happening in their own future.

If they were born poor they would be the people setting up meth labs in their own apartments, oblivious to the fact that  the inevitable consequences range from bad (they stink up the building and end up in jail), to terminal (they blow-up themselves and everyone around them).

The only way to win with such people is to convince them that they will be getting the better of you if they do what you want them to do. E.g. If you know that they think that the sooner all the ice melts, the more money they can make, and you know (hypothetically) that smashing the ice-cover to fragments in mid-December will actually make it thicker in April, then you push for them to bomb the crap out of the whole arctic in mid-December, on the public justification that it will prevent moslem insurgents from ice-sailing into Alaska under cover of darkness, whilst whispering into their ears that the real purpose is to make it easier to move the drilling rigs in.




Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on February 28, 2017, 06:31:54 AM
I just saw a clip where a clown named Tucker Carlson on Fox news put Bill Nye through the ringer. He kept screaming that people who claim humans are responsible for climate change are closed minded and won't listen to the other side. Funny thing is Bill Nye was calm and the Fox guy was all upset and antagonistic. Everytime Bill Nye starting talking, he was interrupted. The words railroaded, buffaloed, and ambushed come to mind.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Ranman99 on February 28, 2017, 07:12:42 AM
It won't help but ... if I view the Yin Yang symbol as duality and my sense of existing/being is the edge of the circle. What is outside of the circle is true, infinite and unborn and the context for what is inside to arise in. What is inside is the play.

It does not mean "I" don't do something "I" will always do something ::) Sorry just babbling as usual.

Nothing like immanent crises to bring focus.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on February 28, 2017, 10:25:23 AM
Sometimes , as a child, I'd make something up that scared me. Occasionally I'd then begin to see things around me that appeared to confirm my fears....

The folk who name us 'catastrophists and doomsayers' appear to believe their own rants and search out any small thing that appears to support their claims?

They demand the extreme conclusions are fanciful but stay close to the most conservative conclusion they can find ( generally the IPCC report prior to the new one) and demand all new knowledge wrong because the old reports were right.

What is needed ( IMHO) is the 'slap in the face' that they cannot ignore and allows them to realise how far from the reality they have become. The Arctic is capable of delivering such a 'slap' by showing them an unequivocal 'Ice Free' ocean quickly followed by the climate discord that such extra energy in the system drives ( above and beyond what we have been seeing?).

Sadly some of the WACCy weather is now being melded into some odd 'Axial' imbalance of the PV leading to it being 'off centre' and so causing Polar Plunges across the states. They cite the limited cold plunges in the U.S. this winter V's the cold in Europe and plunges into the Med/Africa as 'proof positive'.....

With long and good data on the impacts of low sea ice hard to ignore why would you ignore it unless it was essential that nothing you say involves AGW?

Again it means the 'Lurkers' have two different reasons for what is happening and are left to chose which to believe.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Hunt on February 28, 2017, 10:59:01 AM
<wry look>
Can we at least get back to the *pretense* of a discussion about the Arctic?

This is the "Open Thread" though JD!

Snow White's very good friend Alice has been researching the psychology of denialism. Here are some of her preliminary results:

http://AFWetware.org/why-its-so-hard-to-convince-pseudo-skeptics/ (http://AFWetware.org/why-its-so-hard-to-convince-pseudo-skeptics/)

You may also be interested to read all about ongoing  "censorship" at Twitter?

https://twitter.com/AF_Wetware/status/836174559816597507 (https://twitter.com/AF_Wetware/status/836174559816597507)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on February 28, 2017, 01:52:26 PM
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

If heat is increasing there is no reduction in entropy. increased heat increased kinetic energy increased disorder

Of course there is no decrease in entropy, but that isn't what I said.  I very specifically said a local decrease in entropy.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 28, 2017, 02:12:38 PM
5to10 your passion and concern is admirable.  I think your focus on the media has some merit.  While I do not believe the corporate hegemony are all "in on it" and that they all know we are are on path to destruction, they are obviously all united to keep The Machine rolling along, the media included.  The great challenge in front of humanity is figuring out how to unwind the machine without causing catastrophic disruption along the way.  The global economy/fiscal architecture is utterly dependent on growth and, as currently structured, will become highly unstable without it, making a transition to a post-growth world highly fraught.  We need to engineer a soft landing.

Try to imagine this story running on a MSM outlet at Christmas time: "Brothers and sisters, unnecessary holiday shopping was successfully reduced by 8% this season, while national measures of health and wellness continued to increase.  We all look forward to even greater reductions in meaningless consumption in the coming year!"

Yeah, we got some work to do.



Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on February 28, 2017, 02:13:08 PM
Quote
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
Specifically, a cultural inability to act wisely. Even when we knew what the risks were, we failed to mitigate those risks, because that involves costs.

At the risk of sounding authoritarian [which I'm not] it's a problem with democracies. A benevolent and sufficiently intelligent dictatorship would be better equipped to handle long-term existential risk.

Democracies will always be at the mercy of the electoral cycle, and the political attention span of humans, whose average IQ is 100, and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 28, 2017, 02:19:16 PM

...and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.
[/quote]

Which is why we need to change the zeitgeist to recognizing that true well-being is not defined by material consumption.  Indeed there is a lot of research that shows that life satisfaction and wealth are only correlated until a person meets his or her basic needs and then excess wealth becomes uncorrelated with life satisfaction.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on February 28, 2017, 02:47:03 PM
Quote
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
Specifically, a cultural inability to act wisely. Even when we knew what the risks were, we failed to mitigate those risks, because that involves costs.

At the risk of sounding authoritarian [which I'm not] it's a problem with democracies. A benevolent and sufficiently intelligent dictatorship would be better equipped to handle long-term existential risk.

Democracies will always be at the mercy of the electoral cycle, and the political attention span of humans, whose average IQ is 100, and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on February 28, 2017, 02:49:57 PM
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Forest Dweller on February 28, 2017, 04:46:27 PM
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

The primary benefit of hunter/gatherer lifestyle is the de facto limit on density.  We broke from that limit with agriculture, some 6000 years ago.  Further density of human population comes from that industrial society you decry. 

Your touted primitive lifestyle is not in fact a fix for overuse of natural resources.  A good read perhaps is Jared Diamond's Collapse:  How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.  You will find examples of pre-industrial ecological catastrophes.

Of course we can solve all the problems by limiting humankind to a small percentage of our current population.  Implementation may be a bit tricky.

No.  The future is forward, not backwards, however frightening that may be.

Which is why i made the point of:
a:not mistaking hunter-gatherers for extinct, they are not.
b:learning by example and moving forwards by adapting to it, and not copying behaviour literally from the past or present.
c: exploding population in humans directly resulting from industrialization, not vice versa.
 just as 90% of other problems we see. Warming, greenhouse gases for example is measured from a pre-industrial baseline for that reason as well of course.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 28, 2017, 05:59:03 PM
In addition to considering the media's role in perpetuating the over-consumption economy in the developed world, you also need to realize that ~2 billion of our fellow earthlings live in complete poverty.  For them, the challenge is helping them skip over the consumption economy and move right into a balanced, post-growth and sustainable means of existence.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 06:14:24 PM
In addition to considering the media's role in perpetuating the over-consumption economy in the developed world, you also need to realize that ~2 billion of our fellow earthlings live in complete poverty.  For them, the challenge is helping them skip over the consumption economy and move right into a balanced, post-growth and sustainable means of existence.
THeir poverty is a result of inequity, which again is a result of differences in global consciousness, which are caused by newsmedia.

The main point is, news has to get their shit together
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 28, 2017, 06:31:03 PM
...
c: exploding population in humans directly resulting from industrialization, not vice versa.
 just as 90% of other problems we see. Warming, greenhouse gases for example is measured from a pre-industrial baseline for that reason as well of course.

My great-granddad travelled by horse. I travel further because I have a car that has 400 mile range on a tank of gas.  My problems:

1) I'm 400 miles from home and out of gas
2) I don't know my way around in this unfamiliar place
3) I'm hungry


It's the car's fault?  Or as my 13 yr-old would say 'Logic much, brah?'
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 28, 2017, 06:44:42 PM
It's the car's fault?  Or as my 13 yr-old would say 'Logic much, brah?'

ah from the mouths of snarky 13 year olds!
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 28, 2017, 07:02:42 PM
It's the car's fault?  Or as my 13 yr-old would say 'Logic much, brah?'

ah from the mouths of snarky 13 year olds!

Yeah,  I would never say something like that, but sometimes I want to.   ;D
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on February 28, 2017, 07:04:23 PM
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.
Unfortunately for our survival as a species, intelligent benevolent people don't seem to lust after power. There must be an evoluionary reason for that.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 07:12:10 PM
Trying to be brief here...

5to10 - There is no conspiracy here beyond unenlightened self-interest. Which is to say, greed coupled with stupidity coupled with egocentricity and narcissism . The energy oligarchs aren't motivated by the prospect of watching the world burn. They just aren't wired to connect the dots between what they do now and bad things happening in their own future.

If they were born poor they would be the people setting up meth labs in their own apartments, oblivious to the fact that  the inevitable consequences range from bad (they stink up the building and end up in jail), to terminal (they blow-up themselves and everyone around them).

The only way to win with such people is to convince them that they will be getting the better of you if they do what you want them to do. E.g. If you know that they think that the sooner all the ice melts, the more money they can make, and you know (hypothetically) that smashing the ice-cover to fragments in mid-December will actually make it thicker in April, then you push for them to bomb the crap out of the whole arctic in mid-December, on the public justification that it will prevent moslem insurgents from ice-sailing into Alaska under cover of darkness, whilst whispering into their ears that the real purpose is to make it easier to move the drilling rigs in.

hohohh.... great things to read in this thread over and over again, i love it :-) and of course your post :D ;)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 07:13:44 PM
<wry look>
Can we at least get back to the *pretense* of a discussion about the Arctic?

ok, perhaps we need some guidance here, for my understanding "open thread" meant free and open discussion, ready to stand corrected of course ;)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 07:14:18 PM
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.
Unfortunately for our survival as a species, intelligent benevolent people don't seem to lust after power. There must be an evoluionary reason for that.
Yes, intelligent benevolent people probably see that many intelligent benevolent leaders of the past were assassinated. They are ousted quickly in a machine that is mostly evil and built on deception.

Alone, an intelligent benevolent person is weak. Unity is the only way, unity unlike we've never seen. This starts with us as individuals, all of us, and we are slowly getting there despite what the media portrays.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 07:16:53 PM
In the bible, beast are used to represent kingdoms and governments. The number seven always represents completeness or perfection. Therefore six represents something that comes up short or is imperfect. Repeating the six three times for emphasis shows just how imperfect the human political system has been. The book of Daniel which goes into much detail about governments, explains at 2:44 that," In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever."
Part of Armageddon involves God "bringing to ruin those ruining the Earth." Rev. 11:18
After this war of Armageddon, the 1000 years begins, not before.

even though i do not believe in the old man with the beard i love that book and if everyone would read and follow all the wisdom in there (not every word is wisdom but almost all the wisdom is somewhere) we would be far far far better of.

from your except i guess that you did not read that up just to reply ;) interesting in many aspects (positively of coxurse)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 07:24:59 PM
In the bible, beast are used to represent kingdoms and governments. The number seven always represents completeness or perfection. Therefore six represents something that comes up short or is imperfect. Repeating the six three times for emphasis shows just how imperfect the human political system has been. The book of Daniel which goes into much detail about governments, explains at 2:44 that," In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever."
Part of Armageddon involves God "bringing to ruin those ruining the Earth." Rev. 11:18
After this war of Armageddon, the 1000 years begins, not before.

even though i do not believe in the old man with the beard i love that book and if everyone would read and follow all the wisdom in there (not every word is wisdom but almost all the wisdom is somewhere) we would be far far far better of.

from your except i guess that you did not read that up just to reply ;) interesting in many aspects (positively of coxurse)

To do that takes reading between many lines. There is certainly much wisdom in the Bible, there is certainly much self-interest driven scripture. I noticed in Revelations that the writer (John) says that if anyone takes out of the book, that much will be taken out of what's written in the book of life about them. If anyone adds lies to it, they will suffer the plagues as an individual. (The book of enoch has been removed, I think it's only rational to presume baloney was added out of self-interest many times)

Disregarding interpretations, it seems obvious to me now that the writer knew that evil individuals or groups of individuals would distort the bible and fill it with crap. Thus, of course it comes off as pure fiction from an outside perspective. However there truly is a vast abundance of wisdom within. Again, Revelations is indescribably apt for defining a "general" idea of present events using figurative/symbolic language. It is not irrational to contemplate the ideas within, even if only for a different perspective on the matter of what certainly does appear to be a looming apocalypse.

I continue to stand by the notion that we who are aware and willing to try must awaken the many individual reporters as soon as possible to their crucial positions of influence at a crucial point in time. They are human, and humans are good, but misguided! They are just unaware of their role as individuals and how that relates to the collective in the bigger picture.

A media call for unity will create and amplify unity elsewhere: in science, in industry, in humanity.

I guess I'm just hoping someone will take this idea and make it work, because I really don't want to have to write this letter I'm proposing and get the reporter mailing lists myself and try to influence a consciousness shift there. I do have a way with words when it matters, but I don't have the roadmap that we need to follow to make changes. I don't think anyone does, but you scientists are the cartologists, whether or not the map is complete.

The media would need to fully support the most monumental collaboration of scientists working together towards that map, or at least some progress, and as many people as are willing to support in any way possible. Labour, production, everything. The media needs some kind of map to show everyone, essentially, complete or not. "This is what we have to do, let's go world" and report only on progress and what we need to do, focus on communication/information.

We have to start talking together about global scale, collective solution implementation, those of us who want to try. Dig deep. You must understand that things are only so bad because we have never been unified. I cannot foresee a bleak future if we achieve the kind of unity required to weather this storm. The world would be thrust into a state of new awareness for good, unified, past these petty issues. They would be cast to the wayside thereafter.

We cannot apply current pessimistic outlooks to that possible new state. Perhaps together we could figure out our population issues and how to manage resources together such that we all have abundance and respect the natural world as it provides for us, perhaps we could see things so much clearer. Who can imagine the beautiful things a unified world with unified goals could achieve? It's beyond my imagination. Hold on to that as you work towards a solution.

The black swan may in fact be human awareness itself.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 07:42:29 PM
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.
Unfortunately for our survival as a species, intelligent benevolent people don't seem to lust after power. There must be an evoluionary reason for that.

this depends whether evolution is the goal, in my opinion, once we take away self-importance entirely, things like:

we humans, our planet, our city too much to write but hope it's understood, evolution becomes meaningless.

we should never forget that in a about 2-3 billion years, once the sun begins the "evolution" to become a "red giant" we or at least this planet will be doomed, no matter how much and into what we "evolve" and this is an undeniable fact.

i know some will jump in and say what the f... i'm talking about "billions of years in the future" but then this is a reply to "evolution" and evolution has started billions of years ago and will continue billions of years, hence it's on-topic when talking "evolution"

it's always difficult for me to remain short and to the point in such topics that all the libraries in the world cannot cover ;)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: pileus on February 28, 2017, 08:36:50 PM
The notion that the "media" can somehow be unified and evangelize a biosphere saving (and therefore humanity preserving) message is interesting but has little to no chance of success.  The media is a human construct not unlike most others:  composed of people with a multitude of perspectives, frames of reference, motivations, and missions. 

If we have observed and verified that current human societies, nations and communities are unable to move as one to recognize and mitigate existential threats to the biosphere and the future of humanity, there is no reason to believe that the "media" will achieve such a mind shift.

And these days, the media is a much broader sweep of individuals inputs due to evolution of technology and communication vehicles.  There is no central point of reference that defines media, and there is no possible way to centralize and standardize a singular message.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 08:49:30 PM
The notion that the "media" can somehow be unified and evangelize a biosphere saving (and therefore humanity preserving) message is interesting but has little to no chance of success.  The media is a human construct not unlike most others:  composed of people with a multitude of perspectives, frames of reference, motivations, and missions. 

If we have observed and verified that current human societies, nations and communities are unable to move as one to recognize and mitigate existential threats to the biosphere and the future of humanity, there is no reason to believe that the "media" will achieve such a mind shift.

And these days, the media is a much broader sweep of individuals inputs due to evolution of technology and communication vehicles.  There is no central point of reference that defines media, and there is no possible way to centralize and standardize a singular message.

Well that is our only hope to unite consciousness towards pressing matters.

Certainly newsmedia comprises of many various views and opinions. I would wager to guess that most individuals within it are rational and the rest can be lead to rationality by way of mass majority influence.

It would not be an instantaneous shift. The key is raising the awareness of the majority, in fact directing awareness to a specific place: You are the ones with the power to change this, but only together.

I realize the logistics are unimaginable. Yet we stlll can't say impossible, thus unless anyone else has a better idea as to a starting point with a higher probability of success (however low this one is)... What are we waiting for? Impactful work ASAP requires unified consciousness, media directs consciousness. The only weakness of the beast that is the media machine, is the humanity within the reporters as individuals and the epiphanic awareness waiting to be aroused within them.

Act now however we can or accept that your certainty of our inevitable demise is based on high improbability, not impossibility, and thus your inaction is irrational and tantamount to longterm suicide or the murder of future generations.

It is time to start feeling the guilt we deserve and not accepting "the inevitable". Call it the highly probable, and lay down and die then, if you must. Reporters/editors/all moral individuals within newsmedia must be made aware that they are doing the same and will thus slowly come to realize their direct, serious influence on the situation AS INDIVIDUALS, not just as a collective. They are not aware yet, they don't understand their individual role in the big picture, they are not subject to the related pangs of conscience yet or they would be facing the moral dilemma therein with every single story they publish.

Logically this must lead to something big, and we must admit that barring unknown technological, spiritual, or exo-planetary black swans that we have no more likely or optimistic way to start something here.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Ice Shieldz on February 28, 2017, 08:51:52 PM
This sums it up for me . . .
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on February 28, 2017, 08:54:12 PM
Gus Speth is my absolute hero.  I urge anyone who has not read his books to do so.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 09:13:04 PM
This sums it up for me . . .

I'm trying to tell everybody including you scientists how to do that. Awareness must first be raised in those who make up the cogs of the global awareness machine. Awareness of their role and thus perhaps guilt for their role. We have to work on how to do that ASAP coupled with real optimism on how things can progress thereafter, if we are together.

A hard, painful, psychologically devastating awareness where they are eventually faced with a clear moral choice. And most people are good, deep down, just misguided and lacking awareness. I have seen no reason to believe otherwise in my travels. Surely the majority will not psychologically be able to support "the beast" anymore with their distracting, pointless, disjointed, divisive diatribe which composes the vast majority of available news. If they are clear on what MUST be reported on, how could they do anything else if they are good and rational? Once a mass consciousness shift starts there, the current destructive state of consciousness (and any entities wishing to maintain it) will be helpless to stop it rippling outwards.

We who are for good and admit a highly improbable chance is still a chance need to attack and use the machine in the opposite way that it is being used now, and it will have the opposite effects, unity rather than division. Real change rather than stagnation, nay, acceleration of our self-destruction. Not fear, division, confusion and certain doom, but TRUE hope, focus, purpose, direction, the promise of a new, compassionate, loving future TOGETHER rather than a horrifying legacy of division and hatred.

It is your choice, all of our choice which future we accept in the present, no matter how stacked the odds are, that is certain to help fulfill it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Many an impossible poker hand was won on the river.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: pileus on February 28, 2017, 09:20:14 PM
The notion that the "media" can somehow be unified and evangelize a biosphere saving (and therefore humanity preserving) message is interesting but has little to no chance of success.  The media is a human construct not unlike most others:  composed of people with a multitude of perspectives, frames of reference, motivations, and missions. 

If we have observed and verified that current human societies, nations and communities are unable to move as one to recognize and mitigate existential threats to the biosphere and the future of humanity, there is no reason to believe that the "media" will achieve such a mind shift.

And these days, the media is a much broader sweep of individuals inputs due to evolution of technology and communication vehicles.  There is no central point of reference that defines media, and there is no possible way to centralize and standardize a singular message.

Well that is our only hope to unite consciousness towards pressing matters.

Certainly newsmedia comprises of many various views and opinions. I would wager to guess that most individuals within it are rational and the rest can be lead to rationality by way of mass majority influence.

It would not be an instantaneous shift. The key is raising the awareness of the majority, in fact directing awareness to a specific place: You are the ones with the power to change this, but only together.

I realize the logistics are unimaginable. Yet we stlll can't say impossible, thus unless anyone else has a better idea as to a starting point with a higher probability of success (however low this one is)... What are we waiting for? Impactful work ASAP requires unified consciousness, media directs consciousness. The only weakness of the beast that is the media machine, is the humanity within the reporters as individuals and the epiphanic awareness waiting to be aroused within them.

Act now however we can or accept that your certainty of our inevitable demise is based on high improbability, not impossibility, and thus your inaction is irrational and tantamount to longterm suicide or the murder of future generations.

It is time to start feeling the guilt we deserve and not accepting "the inevitable". Call it the highly probable, and lay down and die then, if you must. Reporters/editors/all moral individuals within newsmedia must be made aware that they are doing the same and will thus slowly come to realize their direct, serious influence on the situation AS INDIVIDUALS, not just as a collective. They are not aware yet, they don't understand their individual role in the big picture, they are not subject to the related pangs of conscience yet or they would be facing the moral dilemma therein with every single story they publish.

Logically this must lead to something big, and we must admit that barring unknown technological, spiritual, or exo-planetary black swans that we have no more likely or optimistic way to start something here.

Interesting thoughts, but -

> Humans are more biologically and cognitively instinctual vs rational, and the meaning of "rational" could be debated to no end.  What's rational to you may not be to me, and so forth. 

> There is no such thing as a "unified consciousness".  It's all relative, and subject to the same variables of frame of reference, motivation, meeting basic needs for self and loved ones.

What's irrational is the belief that any form of mammal is meant to persist ad infinitum.  That does not square with the biologic and fossil record.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 09:26:37 PM
Interesting thoughts, but -

> Humans are more biologically and cognitively instinctual vs rational, and the meaning of "rational" could be debated to no end.  What's rational to you may not be to me, and so forth. 

> There is no such thing as a "unified consciousness".  It's all relative, and subject to the same variables of frame of reference, motivation, meeting basic needs for self and loved ones.

What's irrational is the belief that any form of mammal is meant to persist ad infinitum.  That does not square with the biologic and fossil record.

I would argue that we have in many ways overcome many base instincts via heightened awareness. In conjunction do these things happen and this is evident throughout history and in the present.

Thus a gigantic shift in awareness is still totally rational.

It may be irrational to believe that "any form of mammal is meant to persist" but it is just as irrational to believe that life here NOW is 100%, certainly, no way out meant to disappear here.

The only rational perspective is "It's highly improbable we get out of this and save the natural world such that it can heal, but we cannot say it is impossible, thus there may be a fleeting chance we may not be aware of right now." and thus the only rational course of action is to look for that fleeting chance.

If you aren't doing that, you are long-term suicidal as well as presently and henceforth allowing the destruction of most or all living things as a result of individual and collective inaction EVEN STILL when it looks impossible (But we still can't say it is...). Perhaps you're okay with that, but that's on you and your values.

In essence, I'm doing to you as you read this and cognitive dissonance fades, what we need to do to the reporters. Everything I said is truth, despite any probabilities you can throw at me.

Now that you are acutely aware that you cannot scientifically propose that it is impossible, you have to do everything you can think of from this moment forward to help save the natural world with the rest of us who understand this, or admit you are okay with the natural world being murdered by yours and everyone elses inaction as a direct result of a lack of focused awareness on THE TRUTH in the present.

It was never inevitable. It still isn't. WE ARE, AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN MAKING IT INEVITABLE IN OUR OWN MINDS.

You will understand if you are honest and rational that as I am speaking nothing but the truth, there is no rebuttal that cannot be easily cast aside with further truth, and I don't believe one is gifted truth for any purpose other than sharing it and trying to raise awareness for the better. The truth is not mine, it has nothing to do with me as a person, and I deserve no credit for its appearance within my consciousness should it be truth.

We must all accept and cannot avoid the truth, and the moral ramifications of the truth once it is clear to us. If we do not accept it, it is still as yet unclear.

It is our choice what to do with it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 09:40:13 PM
The notion that the "media" can somehow be unified and evangelize a biosphere saving (and therefore humanity preserving) message is interesting but has little to no chance of success.  The media is a human construct not unlike most others:  composed of people with a multitude of perspectives, frames of reference, motivations, and missions. 

If we have observed and verified that current human societies, nations and communities are unable to move as one to recognize and mitigate existential threats to the biosphere and the future of humanity, there is no reason to believe that the "media" will achieve such a mind shift.

And these days, the media is a much broader sweep of individuals inputs due to evolution of technology and communication vehicles.  There is no central point of reference that defines media, and there is no possible way to centralize and standardize a singular message.

agree 100%

and a bit more bluntly said:

a) they sell advertising

b) they do it for money

nothing wrong with that but then it's part of the problem and certainly prevents any sound moves that go against the advertisers and those they live from are not the small ones who place tiny ads for a few bucks, it's those who do "Public Relation" more than advertising and in the millions, or did anyone ever fuel his car because of an exxon or british petroleum "AD" certainly no-one i know about. :-)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 10:01:55 PM
The notion that the "media" can somehow be unified and evangelize a biosphere saving (and therefore humanity preserving) message is interesting but has little to no chance of success.  The media is a human construct not unlike most others:  composed of people with a multitude of perspectives, frames of reference, motivations, and missions. 

If we have observed and verified that current human societies, nations and communities are unable to move as one to recognize and mitigate existential threats to the biosphere and the future of humanity, there is no reason to believe that the "media" will achieve such a mind shift.

And these days, the media is a much broader sweep of individuals inputs due to evolution of technology and communication vehicles.  There is no central point of reference that defines media, and there is no possible way to centralize and standardize a singular message.

agree 100%

and a bit more bluntly said:

a) they sell advertising

b) they do it for money

nothing wrong with that but then it's part of the problem and certainly prevents any sound moves that go against the advertisers and those they live from are not the small ones who place tiny ads for a few bucks, it's those who do "Public Relation" more than advertising and in the millions, or did anyone ever fuel his car because of an exxon or british petroleum "AD" certainly no-one i know about. :-)

Irrelevant. What we are talking about is an abrupt shift not in climate, but in consciousness.

You cannot apply the evils of the inhuman media to the human reporters who compose it without taking into account their lack of awareness and understanding. The present state is not what the future paradigm shift would be. The effects of its influence and destruction would be reversed.

Whether or not that is enough, we cannot say right now. Whether or not you think fighting for that fleeting chance is the proper course of action is your own decision based on your own morals and values. But that is the truth and there is no avoiding it. It is not necessarily impossible, so stop acting like it is.

Presenting improbability as impossibility is fundamentally unscientific and deceptive.

Admit the possibility and that we must try everything now to seek that glimmer of hope, or admit that you are okay with it and through your inaction and your admission are directly helping it happen despite knowing if it's a certainty or not in the present.

Feel the cognitive dissonance melt away, friend. I don't doubt some people will spite me for making them acutely aware of the fundamental truths of their position and the decision they now have to make. This is already evident through the "Well its just unlikely. It just couldn't happen. The news sucks, how could we ever change it?" pushback given that I have presented a route to do that: Raise the awareness of the good, moral human beings which the newsmedia deceives into deceiving the rest of us.

We are good, just blind.

Though I feel for any of you reading who now carry the extra weight of these recognitions, it is for the better of you and all of us.

Improbable does not necessarily mean impossible. You know that is true. If any of this makes you feel any hope at all, feel any guilt at all, gain any understanding at all or any amount of desire to work together at all, consider the effects on a much wider audience.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on February 28, 2017, 10:17:22 PM
I will have some of what 5to10 is smoking.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: pileus on February 28, 2017, 10:24:36 PM
Interesting thoughts, but -

> Humans are more biologically and cognitively instinctual vs rational, and the meaning of "rational" could be debated to no end.  What's rational to you may not be to me, and so forth. 

> There is no such thing as a "unified consciousness".  It's all relative, and subject to the same variables of frame of reference, motivation, meeting basic needs for self and loved ones.

What's irrational is the belief that any form of mammal is meant to persist ad infinitum.  That does not square with the biologic and fossil record.

I would argue that we have in many ways overcome many base instincts via heightened awareness. In conjunction do these things happen and this is evident throughout history and in the present.

Thus a gigantic shift in awareness is still totally rational.

It may be irrational to believe that "any form of mammal is meant to persist" but it is just as irrational to believe that life here NOW is 100%, certainly, no way out meant to disappear here.

The only rational perspective is "It's highly improbable we get out of this and save the natural world such that it can heal, but we cannot say it is impossible, thus there may be a fleeting chance we may not be aware of right now." and thus the only rational course of action is to look for that fleeting chance.

If you aren't doing that, you are long-term suicidal as well as presently and henceforth allowing the destruction of most or all living things as a result of individual and collective inaction EVEN STILL when it looks impossible (But we still can't say it is...). Perhaps you're okay with that, but that's on you and your values.

In essence, I'm doing to you as you read this and cognitive dissonance fades, what we need to do to the reporters. Everything I said is truth, despite any probabilities you can throw at me.

Now that you are acutely aware that you cannot scientifically propose that it is impossible, you have to do everything you can think of from this moment forward to help save the natural world with the rest of us who understand this, or admit you are okay with the natural world being murdered by yours and everyone elses inaction in the present.

It was never inevitable. It still isn't. WE ARE, AND HAVE ALWAYS BEEN MAKING IT INEVITABLE IN OUR OWN MINDS.

You will understand if you are honest and rational that as I am speaking nothing but the truth, there is no rebuttal that cannot be easily cast aside with further truth, and I don't believe one is gifted truth for any purpose other than sharing it and trying to raise awareness for the better. The truth is not mine, it has nothing to do with me as a person, and I deserve no credit for its appearance within my consciousness should it be truth.

We must all accept and cannot avoid the truth, and the moral ramifications of the truth once it is clear to us. If we do not accept it, it is still as yet unclear.

It is our choice what to do with it.

Although it's an interesting rhetorical strategy to cast others as suicidal and murderers whilst trying to educate and influence towards a "unified consciousness", may I suggest that's it really not an effective consensus building strategy and is more likely to cause a negative response to your perspective and end goals.

But to entertain the concept, the reality is that this "murdering" has always been and will always be a central characteristic of humanity.  Humans have either transformed, subjugated, or murdered every form of flora and fauna that we've encountered in our brief tenure as a species.  The only forms of life to escape this intentional fate are the undiscovered, and even so we indirectly do the same things to them via our collective human activities within the biosphere.

Of course efforts should continue and need to ramp up considerably to shift energy consumption away from fossil fuels, and to repair and preserve what remains of the natural world for today and future generations.  Harnessing the media and other entities to assist with that is a perfectly reasonable and rational approach.  But the observational record of human behavior, and what we appear to understand about the physical forces we've unleashed, would strongly suggest that we are time limited as a species.  There is nothing murderous or suicidal about reaching that conclusion.

Your thoughts and intent are admirable, though likely Quixotic.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 10:32:16 PM
Although it's an interesting rhetorical strategy to cast others as suicidal and murderers whilst trying to educate and influence towards a "unified consciousness", may I suggest that's it really not an effective consensus building strategy and is more likely to cause a negative response to your perspective and end goals.

But to entertain the concept, the reality is that this "murdering" has always been and will always be a central characteristic of humanity.  Humans have either transformed, subjugated, or murdered every form of flora and fauna that we've encountered in our brief tenure as a species.  The only forms of life to escape this intentional fate are the undiscovered, and even so we indirectly do the same things to them via our collective human activities within the biosphere.

Of course efforts should continue and need to ramp up considerably to shift energy consumption away from fossil fuels, and to repair and preserve what remains of the natural world for today and future generations.  Harnessing the media and other entities to assist with that is a perfectly reasonable and rational approach.  But the observational record of human behavior, and what we appear to understand about the physical forces we've unleashed, would strongly suggest that we are time limited as a species.  There is nothing murderous or suicidal about reaching that conclusion.

Your thoughts and intent are admirable, though likely Quixotic.

How do we reach consensus without relative unity in consciousness?

Certainly once the acute, real awareness is there not only of how impending the risk is but also of a legitimate albeit difficult hope, which by and large is nonexistent, there immediately becomes something murderous or suicidal about inaction within our minds. Why not follow that hope? It was awakened within me after I gave up and said "We're done for" and I'm sure it exists in others. I cannot come to another rational conclusion. Negative reaction is expected but also should be expected to fade quickly with understanding and replaced with optimism and a new purpose for many, a new being, we will be transformed.

If we try and succeed, if we heal the earth, the world thereafter will likely be glorious and unlike anything we can conceive in the present context. We would be together, working together to heal the world and each other. If we try and fail anyways, at least we go down together. If we do not try yet we know we could have, along with our uncertainty of destruction, we are simply suicidal and murderous at the same time. The only variable is if it IS impossible, which we cannot say for sure. So there is only one rational solution.

Again that is a difficult recognition but it is true.

We cannot say what the results of a global consciousness shift would be, so to say "It might end in chaos and panic and destruction anyways" is still not an out here. The results are also the same, so the risk is calculated, and not doing it is a worse choice as there doesn't appear to be any other option.

Rational beings who value the natural world which exists here now and could potentially be healed for the future must try. Rational beings who value the natural world but think it is better that we don't try so that "life has a better chance of restarting here after everything is gone" or anything else must accept that they are putting their stamp of approval on present destruction. But they must also admit, they do not know whether or not we could succeed in a true effort at recovery and future abundance, especially once you understand possible solutions exist like this idea I have presented, which is "unlikely but rational". That does make one somewhat murderous and suicidal.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: be cause on February 28, 2017, 10:59:16 PM
 I smoke ... and drink Ayahuasca . These interactions have shown me how pliable this world is . Our thoughts .. all of them .. are the creative forces that make this world what it is . However the only thoughts we can truely change are our own .
Ayahuasca visions have shown me that this world is an illusion where the sleeping children of the Creator are given endless opportunity to awaken . As the bible says .. Adam slept. There is no reference to him (us) awakening . As Jesus says .. ye are all Gods !
  He also said 'judge not' .. but we always are , denying ourselves experience of our Divinity. When we allow ourselves , we too will see the 'New Jerusalem' and a world of love and light will embrace even the Donald Trumps  :)
  Where then our fears and worries about Climate change ?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on February 28, 2017, 11:05:19 PM
I smoke ... and drink Ayahuasca . These interactions have shown me how pliable this world is . Our thoughts .. all of them .. are the creative forces that make this world what it is . However the only thoughts we can truely change are our own .
Ayahuasca visions have shown me that this world is an illusion where the sleeping children of the Creator are given endless opportunity to awaken . As the bible says .. Adam slept. There is no reference to him (us) awakening . As Jesus says .. ye are all Gods !
  He also said 'judge not' .. but we always are , denying ourselves experience of our Divinity. When we allow ourselves , we too will see the 'New Jerusalem' and a world of love and light will embrace even the Donald Trumps  :)
  Where then our fears and worries about Climate change ?

I think they are there, just silenced by our indulgence, effective even in the subconscious. I do understand the sentiment. I'd also have to say that our fears and awareness on climate change are increasing and the effects are also speeding up/increasing, so this would agree with the idea that it is all from within.

It's all very heady stuff yet the truth seems to force its way through the murk if you are looking for it. We beat this from within, together.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on February 28, 2017, 11:46:20 PM
it's recommended to not begin replies with "irrelevant" and continue with "you cannot" because:

- it's kind of rude

- even if does not exactly fit your (a bit far fetched but that's ok) thoughts it is relevant, very much so even.
. it's not only just part of the problem, it's key, at least one of the key underlaying reasons for bias and lying.

- i just did it hence one can do it

- the topic is about all contributions combined, there is no "the discussion is about" because for someone
. else the discussions perhaps seems to be or is about something more or perhaps less holistic or whatever.

it's a pity that so many interesting topics end with someone claiming the entire truth and making the rules alone.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: josh-j on March 01, 2017, 01:07:58 AM
Nevertheless 5to10 is right; giving up on the assumption that nothing will work misses the potential we humans have to act differently.

Collective action won't come about through data alone. People need to grasp the issue emotionally and also be able to see a way forward so as to be moved to action rather than denial or despair. It's something I expect many posters here have experienced; the feeling of knowing what is coming while also continuing 'normal' life.

But if 'our' knowledge was more widely understood, this despair aspect would drop away and be replaced with hope. Even if we couldn't ultimately succeed, we would be part of a heroic effort, and I think that is a common trait that could be awoken in most people.

As to how this could be done... I wonder how constrained reporters are by their rich media-mogul bosses?

This is a great discussion - and 5to10, you certainly woke me up just now (right before bed  ;D )
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on March 01, 2017, 05:04:12 AM
When there is nothing that can be done, that which cannot be done will be grasped at, rather than admit it is beyond us.

By the time we knew there was a problem, we were far past solutions.  Sometimes you just don't realize until it's too late.

Irrigation, dams and agriculture put us outside the envelope, beyond the environment governing our numbers and impact.

Which puts us thousands of years late in grasping the consequences.  Shit happens.

We had a good run.


I just felt that this had to be brought to the head of the list again.


Our problems aren't new, and the solutions are unlikely to be found in new technology.
I don't think our species is staring the grim reaper in the eye, but almost all humans need to be gone before things can begin to right themselves.
Civilization created the problem, and civilization needs to go gently into the night lest it take all of us along.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: epiphyte on March 01, 2017, 07:54:44 AM
...
c: exploding population in humans directly resulting from industrialization, not vice versa.
 just as 90% of other problems we see. Warming, greenhouse gases for example is measured from a pre-industrial baseline for that reason as well of course.

My great-granddad travelled by horse. I travel further because I have a car that has 400 mile range on a tank of gas.  My problems:

1) I'm 400 miles from home and out of gas
2) I don't know my way around in this unfamiliar place
3) I'm hungry


It's the car's fault?  Or as my 13 yr-old would say 'Logic much, brah?'

My Dad was connected daily to the people in his office, the people in his home, and (one way only) to the newsreaders on  on TV, and the journalists who wrote the articles in the London Evening Standard and the Sunday Telegraph.

In pursuit of maintaining personal and business connections, I crossed the Atlantic more than a hundred times, and ran up more than a million air-miles - enough to go to the moon and back four times - to meet people who's names I couldn't pronounce, living in places I'd never heard of. I inadvertently generated thousands of tonnes of CO2 doing it.

Now I'm at home and I don't know my way around in this unfamiliar place.

My 16 year-old daughter converses daily with people all over the planet, as a matter of course, courtesy of an information infrastructure that is increasingly powered by renewable energy. What do they talk about?  - things that are increasingly detached from the physical world.

In one way, it's progress of the kind that will be needed, if humanity is to avoid the same fate as a yeast culture growing in a brewing carboy. In another, it's problematic - because all of us are closer than most realize to being (in cognitivebias' words) 400 miles from home, out of gas, and hungry.

Objectively, our civilization is more fragile than any in history, for no other reason than that it is utterly ephemeral - millions of people must show up for tens of thousands of highly specialized jobs every day just to keep it running - and there's no backup.

The sum-total of human knowledge - not just technology but government, business and personal records, social connections, diaries, photographs, even memories, is now vested in a context which requires that knowledge to be continuously available in order to sustain itself. The single printed copy of the 1990 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica at your local library just isn't going to cut it.

The average person living in the USA or much of Europe couldn't light a fire if their lives depended on it, far less generate electricity, or go get the groceries at the local Wal-mart, which is long day's walk away.

Heck, even the average farmer probably couldn't grow enough food to feed his own family without Round-Up-Ready genetically-modified seed-corn, which includes a built-in terminator gene to ensure that if you keep some of your crop back to plant next year, nothing will grow.

Is it the internet's fault? Or as my 12 year-old would say, "Dad, was there a point to all that? - I stopped listening about a month ago."



Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Neven on March 01, 2017, 08:04:04 AM
Welcome to the ASIF, Ranman99. Your profile has been released.

It won't help but ... if I view the Yin Yang symbol as duality and my sense of existing/being is the edge of the circle. What is outside of the circle is true, infinite and unborn and the context for what is inside to arise in. What is inside is the play.

It does not mean "I" don't do something "I" will always do something ::) Sorry just babbling as usual.

Nothing like immanent crises to bring focus.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 01, 2017, 05:12:27 PM
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.
Unfortunately for our survival as a species, intelligent benevolent people don't seem to lust after power. There must be an evoluionary reason for that.

this depends whether evolution is the goal
I agree it's a mistake to think of evolution as a goal: evolution is purely a process, but it undoubtedly is responsible for [almost] everything we are as animals.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on March 01, 2017, 06:26:10 PM
Civilization created the problem, and civilization needs to go gently into the night lest it take all of us along.


Terry

+1

unfortunately for the 98% but that's how it is :(
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on March 01, 2017, 06:26:14 PM
>I agree it's a mistake to think of evolution as a goal: evolution is purely a process, but it undoubtedly is responsible for [almost] everything we are as animals.

Although CRISPR has the potential to change all that!
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on March 01, 2017, 06:50:07 PM
>I agree it's a mistake to think of evolution as a goal: evolution is purely a process, but it undoubtedly is responsible for [almost] everything we are as animals.

Although CRISPR has the potential to change all that!

we came on terms, all clear :-) thanks for feedback

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: OrganicSu on March 01, 2017, 07:39:31 PM
I hear you 5to10 like you are in my own head.
If the media miraculously get it and want to get us all onto the right road, do you know what they need to say?

If I was elected dictator of the world tomorrow with a magical wand to make everyone follow me rules, I would decree, with immediate effect:
Shut down all nuclear power and store the toxic wastes as best as possible.
Stop all production.
Stop all transportation.
No more ff generated electricity. Electricity exists only from existing renewable until it breaks.
Eat whatever you can find.
Everyone must plant trees and dig swales.
No cutting down of trees.
There are enough hand tools and clothes and housing etc needed for the foreseeable future.

Even then  there is no guarantee that AGW is reversible and that homo sapiens get to exist longer than the foreseeable future.
So I would kindly ask everyone to pray.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on March 01, 2017, 10:37:33 PM
I hear you 5to10 like you are in my own head.
If the media miraculously get it and want to get us all onto the right road, do you know what they need to say?

If I was elected dictator of the world tomorrow with a magical wand to make everyone follow me rules, I would decree, with immediate effect:
Shut down all nuclear power and store the toxic wastes as best as possible.
Stop all production.
Stop all transportation.
No more ff generated electricity. Electricity exists only from existing renewable until it breaks.
Eat whatever you can find.
Everyone must plant trees and dig swales.
No cutting down of trees.
There are enough hand tools and clothes and housing etc needed for the foreseeable future.

Even then  there is no guarantee that AGW is reversible and that homo sapiens get to exist longer than the foreseeable future.
So I would kindly ask everyone to pray.
Ooof! And three billion people promptly die from starvation, exposure, disease and fighting. There is a difference between lowering a basket of eggs  to the floor, and simply knocking it off the shelf.  We have the means and time to do the former.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 01, 2017, 10:46:35 PM
Quote
No cutting down of trees
.
I humbly request, your majesty.
Would it be ok if someone cut down the thousands and thousands of dead ones that died last year across the street from my home? I mean, they are dead already.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on March 01, 2017, 11:32:38 PM
Quote
No cutting down of trees
.
I humbly request, your majesty.
Would it be ok if someone cut down the thousands and thousands of dead ones that died last year across the street from my home? I mean, they are dead already.

we have to change the thread title into: "Totally Open" hehe....

it seems that the two found each other LOL

like with all dictatorships decrees only cause people to suffer and let everything rot to unusable state and in the process poison the earth. whoever has been in eastern europe during "cold war times" knows exactly what that means.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Bruce Steele on March 01, 2017, 11:37:27 PM
For a slightly longer list some of you may choose to read a current" Doomstead Diner" piece. What you shouldn't say in public.

http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/ (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/blog/)

It ends . " Such is the nature of a cull "
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: wili on March 02, 2017, 12:28:19 AM
Since everything else seems to be on this thread:

Will Cherry Blossom Blooms Set Record For Earliest Ever This Year?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cherry-blossom-peak-bloom-prediction-will-be-announced-wednesday/2017/02/28/2a2e6ce8-fdda-11e6-8ebe-6e0dbe4f2bca_story.html?utm_term=.11e2884240b7 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/cherry-blossom-peak-bloom-prediction-will-be-announced-wednesday/2017/02/28/2a2e6ce8-fdda-11e6-8ebe-6e0dbe4f2bca_story.html?utm_term=.11e2884240b7)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 02, 2017, 12:29:50 AM
I said what I did about the dead trees in a lighthearted manner, but the point is still valid. We are a little further along in this deal than most people realize, although I think they will soon have to.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cate on March 02, 2017, 01:26:31 AM
I miss A-Team. I reeaaaallly miss A-Team.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Archimid on March 02, 2017, 01:37:37 AM
If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the A-Team.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Pmt111500 on March 02, 2017, 03:24:13 AM
I thought to participate in this thread by taking the last frame of ADS/Jaxa sea ice thickness map for February by Wipneus and giving it 2 meters of melt all around Arctic. Hey, Ho! (these always look pretty bad early in the spring, but some thickness growth wo-ould be nice, thank you) Better do this  again after solstice  ::) :P :o ??? The highly inaccurate calculation out of this image would say that is somewhere around 1,1 Mkm2. (a bit more sensible number would be 1,8M (right to changes reserved))
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 02, 2017, 03:53:54 AM
This is a very interesting thread. I thought I would participate with a rant! I would like to offer my views on the emerging moral debate about our collective and individual responsibilities and efforts to alter the predicted course and consequences of climate change. Sorry it's so long.

On the one hand, some of us think we all must vigorously proselytize to spread the word that AGW is real and consequential, while attempting to limiting our own impact. On the other hand, some of us feel that this will be insufficient to affect any real change, and have transitioned to trying to accept our collective doom. Many of us are probably waffling between these poles. I know I am, in my efforts to find enduring hope for humanity. I am greedy for more information, ideas and insights. I also miss A-Team!

As the data collected here on ASIF and elsewhere continue to add up—sea ice extent and volume decline, glacier retreat, atmospheric and surface temperature shifts and warming, CO2 levels, methane levels, sea level rise—it becomes increasingly difficult to imagine realistic solutions.

I don't see much reason for hope in any of the current speculative technical solutions to AGW in general, many of which are impossible from an engineering perspective, and none of which have political or economic viability at the moment. Technical stopgaps exist and are necessary, such as higher sea walls, fresh water collection, transportation and storage for people and agriculture, drought-resistant crops, emissions reductions in industry and transportation, and renewable power generation, etc. But damming Fram Strait to prevent export, or pumping seawater into the CAB to build volume, is fantasy.

International political and policy solutions are probably the only humane and effective ones in the long term, but it remains to be seen how this might be accomplished, especially with the current global political upheaval. The United Nations is the closest humans have to an institution capable of mediating between the various interests involved, but there are some 200 nations, each with its own diverse interests and capacities. It appears to be difficult enough to find consensus among the Arctic nations.

The most significant obstacle to hope, in my opinion, lies in our individual and collective reluctance to leave behind the security and seeming stability of the status quo. Even when we see the failures of the carbon age, we must acknowledge that the energy it provides enables the survival of billions of humans. Some of us even thrive on that energy: our jobs, homes, cars, cities, medicine and technology, and the internet connecting us here, are all possible because of carbon fuels. I require a car to get to my job, for example, and my house is heated and cooled by coal fired electricity and natural gas. My place of employment uses the electrical equivalent of a small town and would not (does not) function without it. Renewables have a long way to go before they can replace all that energy. Renewables are the only solution in the long term, but the political will to make the transition right now is absent.

Climate change will continue to disrupt regions and systems—both natural and human—and as it does, people will attempt to adapt through migration, economic exchange and accrual, political involvement, education, and technology. Societies will and do attempt to adapt through stronger political and social controls on individuals and institutions, through economic and political isolationism, increased exploitation of natural 'resources', and nationalism and war.

Arguably, this is happening now with the rise of the far right in the USA and Europe. Totalitarianism—the attempted total control of society by the state and it agents—offers some hope for the most fearful and under-informed of us in the shape of security for the in-group. Think Trump's wall, for example. Such nationalism begets an 'us vs. them' attitude and ideology. It promotes the belief that "I and my kin are good, everyone else is a threat to our survival, so keep them away or kill them." Unfortunately for the believers, however, such a position is belied by the material interconnectedness of all natural and human systems. Real isolationism will come at great human cost, as the United States may discover if Trump's foreign policy drifts even more to the extreme right.

Urban North Americans, Europeans, Africans, Asians and Australians and New Zealanders rely entirely on global food networks, the global flow of oil and coal, metals, minerals, capital investments, international loans and trade negotiations. Without these global systems of fuel, capital, and food and water distribution, many places on the planet are already uninhabitable. Consider, for example, the energy it takes to condition the air in the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, where summer temperatures average 41C (~106F), with spikes into the upper 40s (>110F). Or Ski Dubai, an indoor ski slope at the Mall of the Emirates, cooled to below 0C continuously. Dubai desalinates more than a millions cubic meters of water a day.

Fossil fuels and agriculture seem to have driven human expansion (population) significantly beyond the sustainable carrying capacity of regional ecosystems, if not of the whole Earth. Consider the rapidly rising rates of species extinction that are by now well-documented and scientifically incontrovertible. Those extinctions are a result of human exploitation of the ecosystems we shared with those creatures, and in some cases we ate them all. In ecology, an organism that disrupts the local ecology is considered to have exceeded the ecosystem's carrying capacity. We humans have.

As regional climates change, human systems are disrupted. North and West African migration to the Mediterranean, as an example, is arguably driven by desertification and water scarcity and the political and economic turmoil that ensues. We can't live in a place with no water. Migration, in turn, places new pressures on new ecosystems and new social, political and economic circumstances, which are often themselves stressed by climate change and population pressures. The South and Midwest in the USA is another example of already maxed out ecosystems and economies that are experiencing stress and pressure from migration from Latin America. In US agriculture there is a double irony, since it relies on—but will not integrate—an international migrant labor force. As ineffective and morally objectionable as Trump's border wall may be, it is—quite literally—a technical solution to the human problems of climate change.

I have yet to see a persuasive picture of how climate and social equilibrium might be achieved. Prognostication and prediction are beyond the capacity of any one person, but the principle of parsimony would suggest that the evidence of AGW and the resulting changes in climate and weather that we here on ASIF are witness to will overwhelm the carbon economy and the 'civilization' it sustains.

We need more data before we can even know with any certainty what is happening and what will happen. Can anyone make more than an informed guess at when, if ever, the arctic will be ice free? Can anyone claim with scientific certainty to know what will happen to the weather in the Northern Hemisphere when/if it does? Can anyone say for sure that desertification and extreme weather won't become more urgent problems for humans than sea level rise? The IPCC's timeline for climate change seems unrealistically long, but what is the realistic timeline?

When Spring is 20 days early, as it is in the southeastern United States currently, how will agricultural production be affected? Will next spring be the same, or different? How will farmers know when to plant? When to harvest? Will there be annual surplus due to multiple crops, or famine from multiple crop failures?

Until we can answer questions such as these, we humans need to keep careful records of our scientific observations. It may be a bonfire of human vanity to attempt to understand and control our impact on the ecology of the planet, but it may also be the salvation of the species.

As I said, I waffle. I desperately want to be optimistic, and I cling to any glimmer of hope. Nevertheless, I am terribly afraid of what may come.

A final note: a sudden end of the carbon age will be catastrophic for the vast majority of humans. To do so by decree would be genocide.


Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 04:12:33 AM
Great post Oddmonk.

The situation at hand strikes me with awe, confusion, fascination, frustration, but at least not fear.

Optimism is our only chance.

If everyone could make a choice based on this fundamental truth in their own minds...

Can we say that it is impossible to unify and work towards impactful solutions, and the possibility of a better, brighter future should we weather the literal and figurative storms? No? Then we must try by all means to do what we can to save this living world we are destroying.

Do we admit that it may be possible, but refuse to try? Then we are beyond the shadow of a doubt ENSURING it is impossible in the end (Even though we cannot say for certain that it is right now). Thus we are voting for ensured destruction in an uncertain situation, through inaction.

This is an individual and collective truth.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: wili on March 02, 2017, 04:52:22 AM
It's rather hard these days to be both well informed and completely optimistic.

But if you mean, with Antonio Gramsci: Optimismo de la voluntad y pesimismo de la razón, then I can perhaps follow you, at least on some days.  :) :(
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: OrganicSu on March 02, 2017, 06:19:48 AM
Sorry about the '3billion' immediate deaths due to my decree. Oops, should have thought it through a bit more??
Today, what everyone involved in emitting CO2 is doing is committing genocide. You just need to bend your head to a different time frame. 1 week = x years.

We have way more than enough information to know this is a genocidal path. To stay on it is to commit genocide. You are culpable even if you prefer to feel like you are not.

As for dead trees, yes, cut them down and bury them.

If 350 ppm CO2 is the manageable level how do you think we are going to get there, very fast?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 02, 2017, 06:51:47 AM
If 350 ppm CO2 is the manageable level how do you think we are going to get there, very fast?
Like I pointed out in another thread a while back, if you look at surface concentrations around the world, these are 30 to 40 ppm's higher than they are near the mountain peak in Mauna Loa. So that's a long ways from 350 ppm, with 280 being ideal.

At the moment, we are probably more or less looking at these going up, not down. We are loosing sinks that for so long had been reliable. Trees that are dead and dying, not to mention deforestation. Phytoplankton numbers are going down and the  rest are absorbing less CO2. Permafrost is melting and giving up CO2 and methane. Add all that to industrial sources. I could go on and I am sure you all can add to that. It is not just a matter of stopping a speeding freight train, but turning it completely around. I don't think anyone is going to start a movement on here to do that.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: OrganicSu on March 02, 2017, 07:12:06 AM
I would love if humanity got it and turned this freight train around. If it doesn't happen genocide is guaranteed. We are all culpable. Breathe deep, make the choice and carry on if you want to.
Chou chou...
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 08:05:54 AM
I would love if humanity got it and turned this freight train around. If it doesn't happen genocide is guaranteed. We are all culpable. Breathe deep, make the choice and carry on if you want to.
Chou chou...

I will go down trying everything I can for what feels right.

I know most people would do the same, if they TRULY understood the fundamental choice we have, and the imminent risk. Both are widely hidden still.

The fear, the disillusion.. Do not let it win.


I had a thought today - Picture our ability to find and implement solutions, and our awareness itself as affected by a system that has some manner of feedbacks much like climate.

Simplify it. At this point we are somewhat around a slightly positive overall trend towards heightened awareness. Slowly, we learn. Slowly, we unlock the answers and see the solutions. Many negative feedbacks exist (Media, lying politicians etc)

What if we ramped up the positive feedbacks and removed the negatives (all that divides and confuses)?

Is it not fair to say that we could be making WAY faster, way more impactful progress TOGETHER? Who knows how fast the answers will come if we can accomplish this.

Have hope, please! Keep trying. We have a chance to right this.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on March 02, 2017, 10:28:27 AM
It's rather hard these days to be both well informed and completely at all optimistic.

But if you mean, with Antonio Gramsci: Optimismo de la voluntad y pesimismo de la razón, then I can perhaps follow you, at least on some days.  :) :(


"Optimism of the will and pessimism of reason"


The duality of thought that I've often tried to find the words for.


My intellect screams that there is no hope. The rest of me says that 'this too shall pass', that 'every problem has a solution', and that 'it's always darkest near the dawn'.


Intelligence at war with cliches.
Intellect vs. life experience.
Knowledge against instinct.


Different mental processes produce divergent answers even though the data is equivalent. A single mind accepts the inevitable, yet it fights & struggles as though change might somehow prevail.
 
I can't believe there is any glimmer of hope, yet to do nothing, even with certainty that nothing  can possibility prevail, seems monstrous.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 10:46:50 AM
It's rather hard these days to be both well informed and completely at all optimistic.

But if you mean, with Antonio Gramsci: Optimismo de la voluntad y pesimismo de la razón, then I can perhaps follow you, at least on some days.  :) :(


"Optimism of the will and pessimism of reason"


The duality of thought that I've often tried to find the words for.


My intellect screams that there is no hope. The rest of me says that 'this too shall pass', that 'every problem has a solution', and that 'it's always darkest near the dawn'.


Intelligence at war with cliches.
Intellect vs. life experience.
Knowledge against instinct.


Different mental processes produce divergent answers even though the data is equivalent. A single mind accepts the inevitable, yet it fights & struggles as though change might somehow prevail.
 
I can't believe there is any glimmer of hope, yet to do nothing, even with certainty that nothing  can possibility prevail, seems monstrous.


Optimismo de la voluntad y pesimismo de la razón
[/size]
[/size]Terry

And perhaps doing what you can is good enough. Maybe that is the whole point.

It certainly seems better than doing nothing at all. You can get into arguments about "It would take x amount of years longer for life to restart, if at all, if we fuck things up worse trying to stop it", but I would have to counter with "There is already an incredibly diverse, living world here, with an incredible sea of consciousness. Why not fight to preserve it, to improve it, if we cannot say it is impossible yet?"

Global unity has never occurred. We have no idea what we could accomplish if the majority of us came together, I imagine they would be great things. I am absolutely beyond the shadow of a doubt certain (Even if partially through optimistic faith) that this is part of our only chance. Nothing will come of this perpetual state of division.



Beyond a shift in consciousness, what about quantum computing? A focused effort on a specialized rig that can offer us solutions based on the vast amount of data?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 11:31:19 AM
History is rife with examples of when it would have been best if nothing was done, and they had just kept their hands off.

Your urge to do something, anything, is not reason enough to suffer the unintended consequences that come with any action.

Good intentions are not enough.  And all you would be doing would be trying to satisfy some personal primitive instinct arising out of fear.

Action should only occur When there is a thoroughly examined plan, with a high probability of success.

Script writers often include characters that act out of fear, even when they were told not to, that messes everything up.  The rest of the play is then about trying to clean up the unintended consequences of the actions of that character.

Don't be that person.

 

   

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 02, 2017, 11:36:19 AM
>I agree it's a mistake to think of evolution as a goal: evolution is purely a process, but it undoubtedly is responsible for [almost] everything we are as animals.

Although CRISPR has the potential to change all that!
I had to Google that. That's pretty cool. Except in the hands of politicians.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 02, 2017, 11:39:34 AM
Beyond a shift in consciousness, what about quantum computing? A focused effort on a specialized rig that can offer us solutions based on the vast amount of data?
Unfortunately, realty is a far more powerful processor then even quantum computers. There's no point at which a sufficiently detailed model of a tree becomes a tree. Thus, the tree will always have the potential to surprise us. Large, dynamic, natural systems commensurately more so.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: OrganicSu on March 02, 2017, 12:03:08 PM
Dearest 5to10 - if you think you know what actions are needed on the global level to fix AGW and planetary destruction then it's time to live those changes. Be the change you want to see.
I'd also love to hear your ideas as I want to include more actions on my personal side.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 12:38:22 PM
Dearest 5to10 - if you think you know what actions are needed on the global level to fix AGW and planetary destruction then it's time to live those changes. Be the change you want to see.
I'd also love to hear your ideas as I want to include more actions on my personal side.

I feel a bit like a broken record saying it, but it will never stop ringing true until a feasible alternative is presented:

The only truth I can see is that media must have a paradigm shift for us to have any chance of recovery, such that overall unity in global consciousness towards clear positive purpose is possible, and that the most realistic way to do that is by communicating with the individual reporters/journalists, make them acutely aware of their influence on the situation and present them the clear moral choice. No, I do not know how exactly to do this, that's why I'm here talking with people. We can figure this out together, much like we must figure out the big problem together.

However I know they must collaborate with scientists as this happens to put together some kind of rough roadmap, such that they can eventually tell the world "Here it is, our best shot at reversing the damage we've done and a hopeful future. Everyone is asked to help in any way they can, here are the locations you can sign up to help and for what and when. Let us fight for our lives together, for all living things on Earth." etc.. Basically, media, as the eyes/ears/mouth of humanity and directors of global consciousness, must serve that purpose honorably and truthfully and abruptly raise global awareness in a positive, hopeful manner. Scientists must work together as well to provide the plans. I truly believe once unity occurs, our progress towards recovery will speed up immensely. Solutions will appear with much greater ease, implementation will obviously be a breeze in comparison, especially manpower related doubts.

You must realize, when we look at problems like the 10 million pumps in the arctic to refreeze it solution, we view them in the context of a divided world. Regardless of if it's a worthwhile endeavour, one of the issues with implementation was always manpower. Well, if we have the vast majority of humanity, the issues of manpower and as such time begin to disappear.

Ultimately one of the biggest difficulties will be reaching a consensus on what ideas to use, where to start.. But I believe a worthy consensus can be reached together if we aim for it.

I do think one of the best things we can do right now is spread this optimistic awareness to people who can understand, and will not freak out about it. The idea of global unity towards fixing this, and a better future. Getting people on the same page is the goal, and we can be doing that right now in many ways. Educate people, but always stay optimistic.



As for my idea "arising out of fear", it's not. I have no fear of facing this down, I don't fear death and I'm content with my life in almost every way these days, and I live a very simple, frugal life.

My idea arises out of hopeful optimism, and understanding that recognizing the fundamentals that need to be taken care of are crucial. Media paradigm shift is, in my mind, one of the fundamental first steps, a necessity.

I get that we can't just say "We are doomed soon unless we work together on a fleeting chance. Here are no solutions for you to work with. Figure it out." We must have clear focus in our plan, this is true. But perhaps we need to be unified for clear focus to find that plan.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 01:04:39 PM
I think a lot of people who have read any of what I've written here understand that it is a real glimmer of hope. I know some must based on responses, and also because as far as I can tell it is rational truth, and the mind of a scientist cannot deny rational truth.

Unity is our only hope, in fact, we surely understand this is true when we think about it.

So we must work towards it, we have to keep talking and throwing ideas out there. Any and all ideas, not all must be used but in contemplating all of them we may lead ourselves to further new ideas, and eventually a real solution. Then we can progress to the second daunting task: Using our newfound unity to fix what we've broken, or die trying.

I don't care if that unity comes by way of the idea I've presented. This is my best effort, these are my best thoughts. I HOPE someone can think of a better, easier solution, if not I humbly request anyone willing to consider this idea as optimistic will help discuss it and figure out how it can work. How do we achieve unity? This is a critical question.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 01:17:03 PM
If only we had unity...  You might as well wish for aliens to save us.  It's all just wishful thinking.

And even if you had everyone on the same page, what would you do exactly?  It's already far beyond the point of being able to do anything.

Jim White had an excellent example.  An explorer is paddling his canoe down the river, he sees the river becomes a waterfall, but by this time it's too late to get to the shore.

Sometimes you just don't realize until it's too late. 

 
   
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: OrganicSu on March 02, 2017, 01:35:20 PM
if we have the vast majority of humanity, the issues of manpower and as such time begin to disappear.

Getting people on the same page is the goal, and we can be doing that right now in many ways. Educate people, but always stay optimistic.

As for my idea "arising out of fear", it's not.

Media paradigm shift is, in my mind, one of the fundamental first steps, a necessity.
If we get humanity working on AGW with total focus I totally believe we can solve this. Explain to someone in a hospital who is on life support the new focus on solving AGW and if he/she has enough energy to plant 1 tree before he/she dies and I am sure they will get out of bed to plant it and die happier.

I personally do not read or see fear in any of your messages. Real desire to fix a serious problem usually comes after fear has subsided.

My uncle was an environmental journalist for 40 years. Eventually let go as he wouldn't toe the line and write that the problem isn't so bad. However, even he believes it is ok if I fly to see my mother. Airlines are responsible only around 3% of humanity's yearly emissions... 2 people look at the same thing and get different answers. I believe we need to stop every single plane immediately. Unfortunately that only reduces our emissions by 3%, so we need to cut back way way more. Relying on nature to be a net carbon sink is not guaranteed going forward. She is burning, defreezing and burping methane.

I'm still optimistic. I am. Glimpses of the distant future seem to include humans in it. How? Don't know. But I want to live the way that would best increase our and nature's beings' chances.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on March 02, 2017, 01:39:30 PM
Building on what 5to10 is saying, there is a pretty deep literature on how social movements begin and build.  It is a highly non-linear process.  Ideas do sweep through populations in a dramatic way and it's not well understood exactly how it happens (and it may not really be fully understandable).  Sometimes it has it roots in self-preservation.  Think the change in public attitudes about smoking in this country.

But there are lots of examples of huge shifts in the public zeitgeist: slavery, gay marriage and LGBT rights, drunk driving, seatbelt use, etc. The media play a role but they are not the be all and end all of how these changes arise.

Obviously the shift we need is far vaster and more universal than any that has ever occurred on the planet.  It will come, if it does, after it is "too late" in many ways, but it may yet come.  Like many here, I think some irrefutable weather disasters will probably be needed to catalyze it.  So far, what seems irrefutable to us is still roundly ignored by most.  We shall see...
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 01:55:13 PM
A man falls off the top of the Sears Tower.  So far he's fine.  But there is NOTHING that will keep him from going splat on the pavement below.

Optimism won't help.  Flapping his arms like a bird won't help.  Aiming for a soft place to land won't help.

Sometimes it's just too late, and anything else is just wishful thinking.

We have crossed the threshold. (actually, several of them)  There is no going back.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 02, 2017, 02:00:15 PM
It seems that China has "shifted" in view and action, spending billions to do so. And with this willingness and strong drive, note this excerpt,"As part of commitments made in the global Paris Climate agreement, China will introduce a cap on coal and seek to peak its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030."  Incredible, how anyone thinks you can pump out CO2 that much longer until it peaks, and then gradually reduce emissions. If the whole world turned around in their view and goals, they couldn't act any faster.
www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-02/china-coal-cuts-and-renewables-transform-climate-change-leader/8316660 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-02/china-coal-cuts-and-renewables-transform-climate-change-leader/8316660)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on March 02, 2017, 02:08:25 PM
So what's your point Cid?  Why do you even post here?

The other day I offered a tongue-in-cheek fictitious news report celebrating a drop in holiday shopping.  Another future vision that will indicate that a shift is afoot: Imagine, if you can, a candidate running for office on a platform the explicitly states that a conventional view of "prosperity" is NOT what he or she is promoting.  In the US, even the far left wing of the democratic party - Warren and Sanders - are still promoting a vision of "good jobs" and traditional prosperity for all. 

We need a public vision based on communality, cooperation, healing, less work, less consumption, more meaning.  Again, not holding my breath, but I know that what we need is so, so much better than what we have.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 02:29:18 PM
My point is the time we have left.  Wasting it or using it.

Now is the time to live as it is the only time you will have.  Think quality instead of quantity.  Leave that job you hate.  Stop planning for a future that will never be.

Make peace with yourself. Love your family.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOuXJUNu3Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOuXJUNu3Q)

     
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 02, 2017, 02:43:53 PM
This thread has gone off in a spiritual/metaphysical direction.  It's open so it goes wherever...  I just don't see much point.  Thanks to dnem for some grounded posts.  I am somewhat of an anti-consumerist myself.   One main issue I have here is with the presumption of catastrophic consequences.  Difficult and disruptive, sure.  But the earth will not suddenly become a barren rock because a blanket of anthropogenic ghg causes 2 or 5 or 10 degrees warming in the next 100 years.


The degree of action will match the degree of inconvenience.  It will not be 'too late'.  It will be at the time of our (the collective) choosing. 

Some side effects:

1) Humankind will learn about a lot geoengineering, both inadvertent and practical
2) Seed colonies (of humans) with that knowledge will emigrate 1st to other parts of our solar system and then beyond
3) Those that remain on the overheated earth will undertake to mitigate the damage, including perhaps some far-fetched attempts to rebuild the ice cap.  This discussion is far more practical and interesting than what's been landing on this thread lately, imo.

For those who think its a horrible idea that the 'nasty' human germ spreads to other places to wreak havoc:

1) Perhaps we have learned a good lesson here, and will do better in the future
2) What do you think the universe is good for, if not the conquest of those best suited.  Which, btw, to the best of our collective current knowledge, is us.


There is another thread where the discussion focuses on population reduction and sustainable living.  That intersection has always existed.  Turmoil and upheaval follows directly from unsustainable population density.  Self-correcting.  Technology allows for increased production and therefore population density.  Denying technology does not in any way address the underlying issue.  Only when the true costs of human all human activity is accounted for will we get back in balance.  That does not limit population density at all.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: josh-j on March 02, 2017, 02:49:04 PM
Cid, I will choose to live my life in such a way that I can die with the satisfaction of knowing I tried all I could to prevent or limit a terrible catastrophe and with hope for the goodness of human nature.

If we fail then so be it. But to go to the grave having done sod all to attempt to limit such a disaster as we are facing is a terrible thought to my mind. Even if it were clear that this is inevitable (I do not think it is really even possible to know that at this point, even though the prospects aren't great), I would still gain far more satisfaction in my life from actually trying to do something about it anyway, and die happier knowing I represented the final burning flame of human optimism for all that we love.

I do not wish to go quietly into the night
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 03:01:52 PM
To each his own.  May your path bring you joy.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 02, 2017, 03:34:09 PM
Building on what 5to10 is saying, there is a pretty deep literature on how social movements begin and build.  It is a highly non-linear process.  Ideas do sweep through populations in a dramatic way and it's not well understood exactly how it happens (and it may not really be fully understandable).  Sometimes it has it roots in self-preservation.  Think the change in public attitudes about smoking in this country.

But there are lots of examples of huge shifts in the public zeitgeist: slavery, gay marriage and LGBT rights, drunk driving, seatbelt use, etc. The media play a role but they are not the be all and end all of how these changes arise.

Obviously the shift we need is far vaster and more universal than any that has ever occurred on the planet.  It will come, if it does, after it is "too late" in many ways, but it may yet come.  Like many here, I think some irrefutable weather disasters will probably be needed to catalyze it.  So far, what seems irrefutable to us is still roundly ignored by most.  We shall see...
One problem is that there's a powerful shift already underway, and its towards nativism and nationalism. It could be argued that this is a misguided response to politics, but if it takes hold then it'll be as hard to stop as other populist movements.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on March 02, 2017, 03:41:12 PM
Cid, I will choose to live my life in such a way that I can die with the satisfaction of knowing I tried all I could to prevent or limit a terrible catastrophe and with hope for the goodness of human nature.

If we fail then so be it. But to go to the grave having done sod all to attempt to limit such a disaster as we are facing is a terrible thought to my mind. Even if it were clear that this is inevitable (I do not think it is really even possible to know that at this point, even though the prospects aren't great), I would still gain far more satisfaction in my life from actually trying to do something about it anyway, and die happier knowing I represented the final burning flame of human optimism for all that we love.

I do not wish to go quietly into the night

"Do not go gentle into that good night,
 Old age should burn and rage at close of day;
  Rage, rage against the dying of the light. "

Dylan Thomas




Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: nicibiene on March 02, 2017, 04:13:47 PM
Want to put my marmelade on that baking bread here too.  8)

I totally agree to Josh-I´m also willing to do my best-despite I know somehow it will be useless-I will try to do all I could as a single human being.

I simply need it, to continue my life as a mother. Maybe it is selfish&naive-but what would be the alternative? I told my kids about the mess a little, I told them about our tries to make it better (our energy efficient home, our electric car, our garden with eatable stuff and the plan of a own PV powerplant...)

It is hard to keep the balance, not to get depressed about the entire desaster.

But I have to put my energy together, to build the piece of world I wish to live in.

I just ask myself: How would kids feel if you tell them to live a joyful YOLO-life and they get aware about the true mess one day?! I wouldn´t be blamed as a thoughtless liar. My way is to face the truth and to try my best.  ;D
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 02, 2017, 04:35:38 PM
I respect and admire your optimism, 5to10 and OrganicSu, dnem, CognitiveBias, josh-j, others. I'm glad we can share our collective knowledge and wisdoms, hopes, fears and moral kinship.

Keep writing, keep talking to people, spread the word. Start a blog, take photos, plant trees, share food with your neighbors, save rainwater, plant gardens, feed the birds and butterflies, build a pond, teach children to care for themselves and the planet. Make the place you live a refuge for wild and feral animals, embrace the changing natural order, learn to live humbly, learn to die with love and grace. This is a good life, make it yours.

Expect nearly everything to change, though. When we are born, as we become aware of the world around us, we imagine it to be eternal and unchanging. As we grow we begin to realize that everything seems to change: our bodies change and are marked by exposure to our surroundings. Injuries, both physical and psychological, teach us about emotion and pain. We learn that every person is born and lives and dies, and we see the landscape change through the seasons, we watch our caregivers and realize they too are changeable and mortal.

The older we get the more we encounter the limits of being a human animal in an ever changing world. I have spent my life testing and pushing those limits, crossing borders, turning over leaf and stone in search of meaning, substance, awareness. I have stared at the brightest lights and peered into some of the darkest places. My mind and body carry the record of this life. I am not afraid for myself. I have had a life rich with experiences, and I've already cheated death many times. I am afraid for my daughter and the world she inherits. The rapid changes we are seeing now are disrupting the world in ways no one can predict.

My hope is for a thousand years from now. I hope the trees and grasses spread across the landscape; I hope the birds and amphibians and invertebrates find refuge and thrive and adapt; I hope extinction will slow and speciation will blossom; I hope the raccoons and otters and foxes and wolves and hedgehogs and deer and snakes and big cats and fish and alligators and crocodiles and manatees and dolphins survive; I hope there are some humans left to see it, to find it beautiful and worth singing songs about.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 02, 2017, 05:09:47 PM

I simply need it, to continue my life as a mother. Maybe it is selfish&naive-but what would be the alternative? I told my kids about the mess a little, I told them about our tries to make it better (our energy efficient home, our electric car, our garden with eatable stuff and the plan of a own PV powerplant...)


It is not selfish or naive to raise your children with truth and hope. On the contrary, it is this capacity for selflessness and wisdom that gives us humans a fighting chance. It is an essential ingredient, your marmelade, nicibiene.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on March 02, 2017, 06:01:27 PM
One problem is that there's a powerful shift already underway, and its towards nativism and nationalism. It could be argued that this is a misguided response to politics, but if it takes hold then it'll be as hard to stop as other populist movements.

I totally agree 6roucho.  I think a lot of the current turn toward insularity and xenophobia is in fact a response to a looming sense of resource scarcity and competition.  Naomi Klein has characterized the future as a battle between "disaster capitalism" and communalism.  It appears for now that the battle lines are being drawn and our better angels are losing. 

I find myself coming back to a sort of old-fashioned word for what I think we need: "conviviality". We need a rise in neighbors working with neighbors within a relocalized and vastly constrained economic model.  To do that, we need to learn to get along and appreciate one another.  While I try and surround myself with people that appreciate that view, I find the world around me increasingly hostile to it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 02, 2017, 06:10:26 PM
I think a lot of the current turn toward insularity and xenophobia is in fact a response to a looming sense of resource scarcity and competition.  Naomi Klein has characterized the future as a battle between "disaster capitalism" and communalism.  It appears for now that the battle lines are being drawn and our better angels are losing. 

I find myself coming back to a sort of old-fashioned word for what I think we need: "conviviality". We need a rise in neighbors working with neighbors within a relocalized and vastly constrained economic model.  To do that, we need to learn to get along and appreciate one another.  While I try and surround myself with people that appreciate that view, I find the world around me increasingly hostile to it.
A very intelligent comment.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 06:19:12 PM
I think a lot of the current turn toward insularity and xenophobia is in fact a response to a looming sense of resource scarcity and competition.  Naomi Klein has characterized the future as a battle between "disaster capitalism" and communalism.  It appears for now that the battle lines are being drawn and our better angels are losing. 

I find myself coming back to a sort of old-fashioned word for what I think we need: "conviviality". We need a rise in neighbors working with neighbors within a relocalized and vastly constrained economic model.  To do that, we need to learn to get along and appreciate one another.  While I try and surround myself with people that appreciate that view, I find the world around me increasingly hostile to it.

Is it though? Or are we just being told that it is, lead there, when in reality, the majority of us would still opt for the alternative deep down?

Remember that news-media distracts, divides, and confuses. Would this even be an issue had they not focused on Trump and the other endless streams of social fear? Probably not. They foster this mindset like so many others they foster. And it is super effective. So the reverse may also be super effective, just in the opposite, positive way.

We need to reverse the effect of that machine from almost totally negative and divisive to almost totally positive and uniting. We should realize that while we can't conceive of just how monumental the shift would be, or the results of it, certainly it feels very promising deep down.



I guess I see it like this: The vast majority of people would actually be on the same page if we cut through the rhetoric: Live, let live, do good for your neighbours, don't cause harm.

Almost all of our fears stem from some notion that some intangible threat from a generalized group will take those things away from us. These fears are so crippling and go so far in our minds that we FORGET these original principles, we lose awareness of them, and actually contradict them with our actions. Be that hateful speech, thought or physical attack. All stem from confused fear.

I guess I believe that the majority of people can and would change, with proper awareness. If they aren't there yet, the information has not been presented in the right way yet. In fact despite the wide variety of fears and irrational hatred, much of them could be wiped away in most people, if they were all to understand the same simple truths. That is, while we may think "There are many forms of fear and hate, we would have to tackle each in a different manner to solve each" but perhaps there is a single solution to most, so most irrational hate must crumble to this truth should one really grasp the truth.

The truth in fact wins EVERY battle of rationality, if it is allowed to enter the arena, because it is the truth. Not many are really letting it into their consciousness yet, it's there in fragments but it's not understood.


As someone else said, these shifts are non-linear. It just takes the right push in the right direction is really what this comes down to. Keep pushing everything that makes sense and is right, and it may happen.


I have to say, after reading some responses here and elsewhere, I am very optimistic, where I had given up all hope days before. I actually see that this shift we are describing is slowly happening - we are a part of it right here. It is happening, and we ARE in for unbelievable things together. There is much to see. Real impactful change and a future full of love and compassion beyond that could happen, together. We are so close to trying. That's why "they" are discrediting the news and information now, in advance - They know that this is humanity's chance. They have chosen inaction, destruction, unless they have proven to be truthful and productive in what THEY choose to talk about as politicians. It is high time we discard their opinions unless they are wiling to be honest.

There is, and has been for many decades, an active campaign within those entities that comprise government and those who mingle with it intimately, to stifle our awareness by way of newsmedia. They are trying to see this destruction through to certainty. Maybe they even have the fucking answers on how to fix this already, expecting to wipe most of us out and then "Flip the switch" back to a habitable state for themselves. I cannot say of the latter for certain, but it IS certain that they seek to destroy and thus must be destroyed, through non-compliance, through NON-AWARENESS. We must pay these kinds of people no mind, and surely they would have no power like this in the new united world we are visualizing.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 06:40:23 PM
Look here at a vision of the future: Out of fundamental awareness, even more optimism and cooperation. Let us see ourselves for what we are, a microcosm of the whole, and recognize that if it is possible here without too much effort, only recognizing the fundamental truth through the neverending sea of confusion.. it is possible everywhere.

We are working towards this right here with these discussions as others are likely doing the same on forums we may not visit. Truth and awareness ripples outward, but it also pops up in different, disconnected places at the same time. History has many examples of this. I believe it must be happening elsewhere right now, what we are doing right here. It will have great effect soon.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 6roucho on March 02, 2017, 06:57:04 PM
I have to say, after reading some responses here and elsewhere, I am very optimistic, where I had given up all hope days before. I actually see that this shift we are describing is slowly happening - we are a part of it right here. It is happening, and we ARE in for unbelievable things together. There is much to see. Real impactful change and a future full of love and compassion beyond that could happen, together. We are so close to trying. That's why "they" are discrediting the news and information now, in advance - They know that this is humanity's chance. They have chosen inaction, destruction, unless they have proven to be truthful and productive in what THEY choose to talk about as politicians. It is high time we discard their opinions unless they are wiling to be honest.
These are fine sentiments, and I hope you're right, but the good people you describe are such a small minority. Even the upwelling of rational, liberal sentiment in the United States now is the work of a small minority. It looks big, because it's loud, but the voting majority don't want to know about it. They'll be convinced by some proof of something that interests them, such as personal financial loss, or a challenge to their national pride.

The best hope for the world may be that Russia really did collude with the Trump campaign, because then a cache of progressive issues might enter the mainstream on the coattails of dissent.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 02, 2017, 07:10:34 PM
These are fine sentiments, and I hope you're right, but the good people you describe are such a small minority. Even the upwelling of rational, liberal sentiment in the United States now is the work of a small minority. It looks big, because it's loud, but the voting majority don't want to know about it. They'll be convinced by some proof of something that interests them, such as personal financial loss, or a challenge to their national pride.

The best hope for the world may be that Russia really did collude with the Trump campaign, because then a cache of progressive issues might enter the mainstream on the coattails of dissent.

And then you have people like me.  I used to be a member of Greenpeace, but back in 2000 when A greenpeace campaigner accosted me my reply was "too late, leave me alone."
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 07:20:20 PM
These are fine sentiments, and I hope you're right, but the good people you describe are such a small minority. Even the upwelling of rational, liberal sentiment in the United States now is the work of a small minority. It looks big, because it's loud, but the voting majority don't want to know about it. They'll be convinced by some proof of something that interests them, such as personal financial loss, or a challenge to their national pride.

The best hope for the world may be that Russia really did collude with the Trump campaign, because then a cache of progressive issues might enter the mainstream on the coattails of dissent.

And then you have people like me.  I used to be a member of Greenpeace, but back in 2000 when A greenpeace campaigner accosted me my reply was "too late, leave me alone."

Sure. That is why people with a perspective like you (pessimism) and anyone similar must be reminded, acutely, by people with a perspective like me (optimism) of what your position means at its very simplest:

If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

If you do not seek that chance by all means necessary after this realization, you are approving and pushing towards CERTAIN destruction of most or all living things and people, through your inaction, while it is as yet uncertain.

Whether or not you care about that truth is dependent on your morals and values. Despite them, it is true. I hope you change sides here because you are directly affecting mine and everyone elses ability to find that chance by not looking for it harder than ever with us.

Do not seek to ensure destruction through your inaction, in an uncertain situation.

I will continue to drive this fundamental truth home to anyone who has given up. I believe most people are good, moral, and will recognize that there is really only one reasonable choice to make here unless you want us to fail, you revel in this downward spiral, or you believe it's impossible. You cannot know if it's impossible, so which is it?

At the end of the day, it seems to equate to "Well I admit it's possible, but I'm lazy, and i enjoy my life the way it is,.... and i don't actually care that much to change it because it will disrupt what i'm used to."
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: nicibiene on March 02, 2017, 07:30:53 PM
I think a lot of the current turn toward insularity and xenophobia is in fact a response to a looming sense of resource scarcity and competition.  Naomi Klein has characterized the future as a battle between "disaster capitalism" and communalism.  It appears for now that the battle lines are being drawn and our better angels are losing. 

I find myself coming back to a sort of old-fashioned word for what I think we need: "conviviality". We need a rise in neighbors working with neighbors within a relocalized and vastly constrained economic model.  To do that, we need to learn to get along and appreciate one another.  While I try and surround myself with people that appreciate that view, I find the world around me increasingly hostile to it.
A very intelligent comment.

So TRUE! Sometimes I hope that "oldfashioned" kind of conviviality would revive here. We had it here in Eastern Germany. People were inventive, there was an exchange of neighbors help. Things I still remember - there was exactly that kind of happy cooperation before the new brutal capitalistic way started.

Not to say that GDR had been perfect - but there WAS what we would need soon. I know, it is possible.  :) (And somehow it´s the reason for my love to challenges) And as I recently read about Naomi Kleins "Shock strategy", I would say-that is exactly the kind of (gentle form of) desaster happened here.

Now we live here in a state of splitted, jealous communities, with strange xenophobia (Saxony, you know Pegida?)- out of any cooperation, full of hate, we have lost a lot of young people during that process-they all went to western Germany, where wages are so much higher.

Thanks you all for your thoughts. Really hopeful thoughts!  8)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 02, 2017, 08:22:35 PM
My point is the time we have left.  Wasting it or using it.

Now is the time to live as it is the only time you will have.  Think quality instead of quantity.  Leave that job you hate.  Stop planning for a future that will never be.

Make peace with yourself. Love your family.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOuXJUNu3Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOuXJUNu3Q)

   

Yes, live and love today. Tomorrow will bring what it may.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on March 02, 2017, 10:02:53 PM
I miss A-Team. I reeaaaallly miss A-Team.

then you have never been the victim of one of those rude outbrakes, lucky you ;)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 02, 2017, 10:22:34 PM
5to10, what I see is you attacking those that don't agree with you and your unrealistic desire for a worldwide kumbaya moment based on your wishful thinking.

It's not going to happen.

Your vision is not based on reality. 

You can smell your desperation, but you have gone too far when you attack others for not ascribing to your fantasy.  Get a grip.

Surely you can see that any plan that requires everyone to agree with you AND participate is beyond unrealistic.

It's insane if you think it could in any way be possible.

   
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on March 02, 2017, 10:30:51 PM
5to10. It is not black and gray and it is not "with us" or against us.  We are bound by nature and physical phenomena.  Mass balances, heat and mass transfer, materials.  Some things are going to be physically impossible and we just have to accept it and spend our resources to what is possible even if it's very hard to do.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 02, 2017, 10:33:49 PM
I miss A-Team. I reeaaaallly miss A-Team.

then you have never been the victim of one of those rude outbrakes, lucky you ;)
Off topic. Ban magnamentis from the forum.  ;)       ( I assume something like that is what you mean)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on March 02, 2017, 10:36:17 PM
You 'be been the victim too ??
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 02, 2017, 10:48:56 PM
I saw a couple posts where he was over harsh, but his content is surely missed.  He's also not the only one ever.  I took him as coming from an angle of perceived entitlement based on his contribution level. 

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 11:13:05 PM
5to10. It is not black and gray and it is not "with us" or against us.  We are bound by nature and physical phenomena.  Mass balances, heat and mass transfer, materials.  Some things are going to be physically impossible and we just have to accept it and spend our resources to what is possible even if it's very hard to do.

We are bound by our own minds, individually and collectively.

It is black and white. You have yet to disprove the fundamental truth, no rebuttal has yet. Either you don't understand it, or you seek to avoid recognizing its personal ramifications.

We choose to try everything when we recognize the fundamental truth, or we choose to continue doing less than everything we possibly can, and give up.

"This is highly unlikely" is not a rebuttal to my comments. Highly unlikely means there may be a way we can find.

Prove beyond any uncertainty that fixing what we've done is impossible, prove that if we unite we could not possibly find better solutions or especially have the means to implement them much easier when we're on the same page.

You can't? Then I don't care what you say. You will revel in the pleasures you are used to until the end, and if there was any fleeting chance that you could have helped to find, but consciously chose not to, you are choosing those pleasures and your personal status quo over the living world and humanity itself.

Prove otherwise logically, or accept it.

No more "Yes but, this is highly unlikely.. how could we ever.. it would just be so hard.. Surely we can't..". That is your crutch. That is your mental free ticket to doing the same bullshit we've always done and not something better. I will expose it for what it is.

Prove otherwise or accept what you now must recognize is the fundamental truth.

I am not acting out of ego, I am not being an asshole, I'm sharing the truth anonymously because truth should be shared, no matter how hard it is.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 02, 2017, 11:26:48 PM
5to10,

Your premise of imminent existential threat is not accepted as a fundamental truth.  You build a personal philosophy around it, as is your right.  You project it on others at risk of being called out as a charlatan.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 02, 2017, 11:37:59 PM
5to10,

Your premise of imminent existential threat is not accepted as a fundamental truth.  You build a personal philosophy around it, as is your right.  You project it on others at risk of being called out as a charlatan.

I understand that, I will rephrase, you're right in that I should not claim something to be true that is not certain.

External events seem to vividly support a description of imminent existential threat that is compounding and speeding up with time as a result of our activities. The vast majority of data supports this. Data would support the notion that barring unseen, external solutions that nobody can possibly foresee, we have little time and few options. But data does not PROVE the notion that it is impossible to change the apparent trajectory and conclusion of that course.

I cannot say that it will continue til destruction, no. However, I would argue that one should not and most would not just keep driving a car full speed towards what appears to be a solid brick wall ahead, on the premise that it might be an illusion.

The data is clear.

So, your problem is that the majority do not recognize and understand what the data implies? That we lack the unity we need to cause any real positive changes to happen? Both?

Then newsmedia and scientists need to start working together eventually as directors of global consciousness and creators of solutions respectively, towards what the data implies and what decision we want to make regarding it. Do we want to carry on, or try something new, something unlike we've ever tried before? Something hopeful for all of us?

We must decide. And unity will come out of it, through an extraordinary global effort unlike we can begin to conceive in our state of disarray. The will to survive is strong. The will to live and let live exists, but is hindered by fear and confusion. Unity can exist in this connected world.

I project nothing, I present difficult logical truths that I was forced to consider myself recently. There is a fundamental. There is a black and white. This is a world of duality.

And the truth is the truth.

If we, but also if YOU do not work towards every single rational solution, the data supports the idea that an imminent destruction of more, if not all of the living world will be a CERTAINTY. We cannot say it is impossible to REVERSE that, and proceed united towards a glorious re-imagination TOGETHER.

You can choose that option if you want. You go forth with full awareness of the ramifications of your choice now.

This type of discussion is crucial in our position. This truth will one day be apparent to all, regardless of what I say here anymore or what any of us think about it. We are headed for an incredible battle of, frankly, good vs evil, or however else you choose to word it. Personal accountability vs laziness. Optimism vs pessimism.

The result of human progress will be our painful self-awareness, and out of that awareness will come two choices. Try together or give up divided, in the most dire of situations. We who understand this have a bit of a head start.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 12:15:27 AM
I can explain it any which way you want me to. Until you are able to clearly and rationally refute the truths I am sharing, or reinterpret the personal ramifications of your awareness of these truths should you not be able to refute them. As well as the hopeful impact of an acute, collective awareness of the above. Perhaps the sense of duty this appears to awaken is what we need.

Forget the semantics. Admit that global unity is the only hopeful way forward if there is any chance at all. Admit and accept within your own mind that your unwillingness to do everything possible towards real change is tantamount to ensuring the living world will find no way out of what appears to be near total destruction. Can you?

If not, but you carry on anyways, then your values and morals are not hinged on a respect for the present living world, consciousness and a desire to preserve it or advance it, or your present and future influence on the situation according to the data which seems all but certain.

Perhaps you must become a denier to avoid it.

Perhaps you rationalize it by saying "Well, t might take longer for life to restart here if it IS impossible and our efforts make it worse". I would argue that there is already, despite the downhill spiral, a beautiful, awe-inspiring, conscious and living world here that is worth trying to save, and could be even more beautiful and awe-inspiring in the future, with a united humanity that weathers this storm.

The decision is your own, and judgement on that decision is not mine or anyone elses to make.

While I don't judge, because I understand the decision and why people take it, I can still recognize the destructive nature of that choice, and so in choosing the opposite I must seek to spread awareness such that less people choose it, now and in the future.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: be cause on March 03, 2017, 01:39:14 AM
hi.. 5to10 .. little problems .. scientists waiting on peer review and the newsmedia bypass that are twatter and farcebook .. Then there is the antagonizing of the like minded .. result .. a Voice inthe Wilderness (what's left of it ) .
You need to find a different level of consciousness in which , as cause , you can effect change .. remember this is quantum world .. every sub atomic particle is waiting to do your bidding ..
 
 
 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 01:59:12 AM
hi.. 5to10 .. little problems .. scientists waiting on peer review and the newsmedia bypass that are twatter and farcebook .. Then there is the antagonizing of the like minded .. result .. a Voice inthe Wilderness (what's left of it ) .
You need to find a different level of consciousness in which , as cause , you can effect change .. remember this is quantum world .. every sub atomic particle is waiting to do your bidding ..
 
 
 

It is an interesting observation that certain things I have done to my own body throughout my life are paralleled in the external world. Smoking, for example, I must sacrifice my enjoyment now and quit, it goes against life. The internal creates the external in ourselves and everyone, it appears.

If this is what you are getting at, I have thought about it for sure and thanks for reminding and affirming it.

Beyond this alternative way to look at it, which does deserve credit but is somewhat unknowable.. I still don't see your rebuttal as enough to change my thoughts on the rest. You are describing the difficulties, I recognize them for sure. I still believe it is possible. Radical change means forget everything as it works in the present, to a degree.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Ninebelowzero on March 03, 2017, 02:15:18 AM
...Forget the semantics. Admit that global unity is the only hopeful way forward if there is any chance at all. Admit and accept within your own mind that your unwillingness to do everything possible towards real change is tantamount to ensuring the living world will find no way out of what appears to be near total destruction. Can you? ...

As regards climate things might be happening a bit fast for many creatures to adapt but that won't be a first time for the Earth (which is a global unity) I'm sure.  As regards survival of humanity or any other individual species there are no guarantees over the next 10 thousand years.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Glenn Tamblyn on March 03, 2017, 10:09:50 AM
"If 350 ppm CO2 is the manageable level how do you think we are going to get there, very fast?"

Well obviously, we are going to have to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere. And to do it fast? Technologies we don't have yet. Bioenergy Carbon Capture & Storage. No way that can do it at the scale we need. Crushing olivine rock to accelerate weathering and move carbon into the oceans. I'm not convinced they understand the ocean chemistry well enough.

Currently I think we are stuck in a mental rut, trying to imagine answers that fit existing chemical processes in the natural world. Ultimately I think it will take a technology that we haven't even dreamed of yet. New chemistry that doesn't occur in the natural world.

Can we invent some technology to do this? Yep, some smart chemists and engineers can eventually do that. So long as they have a viable, stable society to work in while they are doing it. That is the problem.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Hyperion on March 03, 2017, 12:17:46 PM
Quite simply by going Pyrolysis to biofuel and biochar and biochem for construction, energy and soil restoration. Energy Canes, and Kelp as number one weapons for core ecology primary producers as they are super producers, but maximising biodiversity will maximise carbon uptake in your ecologies.

The above can achieve 10x carbon negative energy and construction with ongoing carbon sequestration and topsoil growth from the Terra Preta.

Increasing economic activity tenfold with 10x current levels of construction and energy consumption would then draw down 100 years of current CO2e emissions in one year.

Easy huh? all at least 100 year old Tech. So the problem is no patents or monopolies for the big boys. They unfortunately have been conned by accountants to believe they can hoard technology with patents so have been desperately looking for some new gimmick they can slap one on to do the job, which is ridiculous at the pace at which knowledge is advancing anyway. Lets get on with it. All together now. YAYHAAA!!!!  ;) Lets get gardening!!! on the land and in the sea!!!!
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: dnem on March 03, 2017, 01:22:10 PM
5to10, surely you can agree that between the current highly fractious and corporate controlled status quo and the unified world you desire, all working harmoniously together to solve our existential threats, lies a continuum?  It was not-so-intelligent me  ::) who suggested that the trajectory between the now and the goal will likely be non-linear.

But between the two points lies a ton of hard work.  I think most of us here are working toward that goal in the ways that make sense to us personally.  Could we all do more?  I'm sure we could.  I know I could.  But I try to live a simple life and I try and spread the gospel best I can.  Is there something more you want of me? Of the ASIF?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 03, 2017, 02:02:04 PM
If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

The world will be just fine, and I don't see why we need "saving."  This is simply another abrupt climate change, and even Homo Sapiens has survived several so far.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: misanthroptimist on March 03, 2017, 02:31:57 PM
I agree that Homo sapiens will survive in all likelihood. However, vast numbers of that species will die premature and probably miserable deaths. In addition to disliking such outcomes in a general way, there are several dozen individuals of that species for whom I feel great affection that will probably perish. Therefore, I hope you'll forgive a certain amount of hand-wringing on my part.

Of course, those who feel no connection to their fellow humans will have a different outlook.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on March 03, 2017, 02:32:24 PM
If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

The world will be just fine, and I don't see why we need "saving."  This is simply another abrupt climate change, and even Homo Sapiens has survived several so far.

Can't let that go, Jiim, having been involved in cleaning up the aftermath of societal collapse here and there. Being a reluctant father-confessor to both the victims and perpetrators of atrocities teaches one not to regard the very possible future of humanity with equanimity.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 04:26:24 PM
If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

The world will be just fine, and I don't see why we need "saving."  This is simply another abrupt climate change, and even Homo Sapiens has survived several so far.

Can't let that go, Jiim, having been involved in cleaning up the aftermath of societal collapse here and there. Being a reluctant father-confessor to both the victims and perpetrators of atrocities teaches one not to regard the very possible future of humanity with equanimity.

Seriously. Jim: This is now a 7.5 billion person, global, exponentially more complex civilization that was built and hinged on relative consistency in planetary phenomena. You cannot begin to propose that the situation is the same simply based on population and scarcity alone.

It is ludicrous to propose that because changes happened before (And these are nowhere near the same changes either, which is yet another deceptive allusion in Jims comment) that this monumental civilization we have built can just magically survive it when all the variables that differ in your comparison suggest that it will not, given our trajectory.

So Jim, if you aren't willing to admit that all data seems to indicate we are on a death spiral and bringing the rest of the living world into it, I suppose nobody will be able to convince you. The evidence is clear, and probabilities can be fairly assigned here.

Unless you can refute that and then come up with a rational reason as to why you think doing little to nothing gives us a better chance than doing everything you can possibly think of, you must do everything now or accept the built-in ramifications of doing nothing.

I mean you don't have to, but if you don't do everything you can, right now,.... well we've already been over what the personal ramifications of that are. You are aiding and abetting in CERTIFYING we have no chance, when a chance may exist (This is barring unseen/unknowable external forces to which we would have to wait to see anyways, a risky and irrational proposition)

SO TRY EVERYTHING, DAMMIT. Or be a destroyer in your desire to maintain a personal status quo that meets your selfish personal WANTS, not the NEEDS of yourself and everything else, such that the collective status quo will mirror that way of life and those personal values to its self-destructive end.

Try to rationalize your way out of the truth all you want. Doesn't work.

All you have left to cling to is going against everything data reports to be likely, and the likely predictions we can make from that data, also irrational. This is where the vast majority are at right now. Let's fix that so we can fix this.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 03, 2017, 04:36:53 PM
If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

The world will be just fine, and I don't see why we need "saving."  This is simply another abrupt climate change, and even Homo Sapiens has survived several so far.

Can't let that go, Jiim, having been involved in cleaning up the aftermath of societal collapse here and there. Being a reluctant father-confessor to both the victims and perpetrators of atrocities teaches one not to regard the very possible future of humanity with equanimity.

It isn't "the very possible" future.  It is, by far, part of the most likely future.  However, I think the development of Computer Science is progressing even faster than Climate Change, and that Mankind will not even notice when Homo Sapiens goes extinct.  (In fact, even the last of the species might not notice.)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 04:40:27 PM
If you cannot say for certain it is impossible, then you must say there may be a chance that we aren't seeing to literally save the world and ourselves.

The world will be just fine, and I don't see why we need "saving."  This is simply another abrupt climate change, and even Homo Sapiens has survived several so far.

Can't let that go, Jiim, having been involved in cleaning up the aftermath of societal collapse here and there. Being a reluctant father-confessor to both the victims and perpetrators of atrocities teaches one not to regard the very possible future of humanity with equanimity.

It isn't "the very possible" future.  It is, by far, part of the most likely future.  However, I think the development of Computer Science is progressing even faster than Climate Change, and that Mankind will not even notice when Homo Sapiens goes extinct.  (In fact, even the last of the species might not notice.)

If this 'reality' is even real to begin with...

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/elon-musk-simulated-universe-hypothesis
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 04:44:05 PM
Quote
If this 'reality' is even real to begin with...

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/elon-musk-simulated-universe-hypothesis

Just another way to rationalize your way out of doing something so you can continue being lazy in selfishness.

You are certainly here commenting and doing many other things day to day in a reality which at least appears real, with real consequences. I for one will base my ideas and decisions on the premise that "This is some kind of reality, and I'm part of it" and that my actions have an effect on it.

Saying "Well this might be a sim so it doesn't matter if i do anything" is akin to a religious ideal.

"Well God will heal my sons cancer so I won't treat him or feed him. Oh how strange, he died."

Lets work in the present circumstances with what we can be reasonably sure is "real" based on experience.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 04:58:52 PM
Look, I will never let anybody rationalize OUR responsibility away again unless someone explains a more rational outlook on the grand situation. Nobody has even come close yet.

You must see by now that it's nigh impossible, because what I am saying is almost certainly true.

So either admit you are a destroyer in your unwillingness to try everything to avoid the very highly probable, or provide some kind of evidence that refutes what I'm saying. Else, I see no reason why you reply other than a futile personal effort to avoid the truth and the difficult personal ramifications of recognizing it.

We are selfish, we are ignorant, we did and we are still doing this. You did this, and you are still doing this. I did this, and I am trying my best from now on to stop doing this, and I hope many others will too.

You are totally able to go down doing nothing, I see that it is the probable conclusion. It doesn't mean I will continue to march with the army of destruction upon realizing my role, just because "Who cares? We probably got no outs!"
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 05:03:19 PM
Quote
If this 'reality' is even real to begin with...

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/elon-musk-simulated-universe-hypothesis

Just another way to rationalize your way out of doing something so you can continue being lazy in selfishness.

...

Just my way of saying that you have beat your point to death. 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:10:08 PM
Quote
If this 'reality' is even real to begin with...

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/elon-musk-simulated-universe-hypothesis

Just another way to rationalize your way out of doing something so you can continue being lazy in selfishness.

...

Just my way of saying that you have beat your point to death.

Well it's gotta be done when it's being responded to with something other than the truth. It's not like we're arguing over the best song of the 90's, this is the bloody end of the world we're discussing. "beating your point to death" doesn't really apply in the same way as most internet debates, time is of the essence here. I can see that mass awareness and real understanding is one of the key parts of any chance we may have. I am morally obligated to make sure the truth is known and heard, not buried by deceptive "rebuttals".

People here still trying to avoid their roles. Only way we make any progress is if more people accept their roles. More than willing to engage in discussion, and people keep trying to refute (albeit poorly), so I don't have much of a choice but to re-word what I'm saying in response, or sit here forever asking for a real rebuttal with real talking points to consider that don't just melt away with minimal effort. Nobody is presenting that in opposition of what I'm saying.

As time progresses with no real rebuttal to speak of, it becomes more difficult to avoid within your own mind: This responsibility is yours too. Do everything you can now, or live with the guilt, or reorganize your belief system so that you can accept that you are partially responsible, but it doesn't make you feel bad or try to stop it.

Surely this inspires a response like mine in many: Unfaltering truth even in the face of annoyed opposition.

That is the very start of the solution to our dilemma, if there is one at all. Time to stop lying to ourselves and each other. Hence, I respond.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on March 03, 2017, 05:21:26 PM
5to10


As I understand your argument you're saying that if we all come together as a unity, something magical may happen, and this may save us all.


You then attack everyone with a different perspective, thereby proving not only that unity doesn't exist at present, but that anyone dividing the world into those that believe (in unity), and those that don't believe, will forever preclude a unity of thought, and that your magical moment will never occur.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 05:27:00 PM
5to10


As I understand your argument you're saying that if we all come together as a unity, something magical may happen, and this may save us all.


You then attack everyone with a different perspective, thereby proving not only that unity doesn't exist at present, but that anyone dividing the world into those that believe (in unity), and those that don't believe, will forever preclude a unity of thought, and that your magical moment will never occur.


Terry

I'll take that as a very eloquent seconding of my point.   8)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 03, 2017, 05:30:14 PM
5to10


As I understand your argument you're saying that if we all come together as a unity, something magical may happen, and this may save us all.


You then attack everyone with a different perspective, thereby proving not only that unity doesn't exist at present, but that anyone dividing the world into those that believe (in unity), and those that don't believe, will forever preclude a unity of thought, and that your magical moment will never occur.


Terry

First completely meaningful statement I have read on this thread -- thank you.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:30:44 PM
5to10


As I understand your argument you're saying that if we all come together as a unity, something magical may happen, and this may save us all.


You then attack everyone with a different perspective, thereby proving not only that unity doesn't exist at present, but that anyone dividing the world into those that believe (in unity), and those that don't believe, will forever preclude a unity of thought, and that your magical moment will never occur.


Terry

This is not an eloquent point, he is merely reflecting the problem from which I have proposed a solution. The truth is the truth. There is no alternative to an irrefutable statement, so refute it or accept it. NOBODY has come close to refuting it, evident by the ease in which your statements collapse under minor scrutiny.

I would say that Terry is incorrect based on an assumption I am more than willing to make based on personal experience: The vast majority of people are moral, good, and just want to live and let live. Most, if not all hatred and fear stems from ignorance. We have overwhelming ignorance, thus we have overwhelming hatred and division. Most will want to change when they understand, much like people want to change any negative habit when they recognize its destructive influence. This is the main problem we face in starting to make impactful changes together.

Should we have overwhelming understanding of the FUNDAMENTAL truths of our predicament, that hatred and division has little to rest its laurels on anymore.

You are still just presenting symptoms of the disease as evidence that we can't cure it, not a rebuttal to what I'm proposing we do. You literally just said "We can't be united because we're divided" in different words, again avoiding the point:

Seek to create that unity, surely it is possible with understanding (We have foregone many instinctual urges riding the waves of awareness and understanding through time, thus we can surely do the same here. Those in opposition to widely understood truth fall to the wayside as history has proven), or be a destroyer.

Maybe there cannot be "total unity", however "more than unified enough to do something" seems entirely possible to me, and ANY amount of unity more than what we have at present is positive in respect to solving these problems.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 03, 2017, 05:35:34 PM
You must see by now that it's nigh impossible, because what I am saying is almost certainly true.

I am a Primitive Buddhist.  I believe:  No essence.  No permanence.  No perfection.

Simply by asserting that something is True you have completely lost any possible support from me and people who think like me.  I do not believe in Truth.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:37:07 PM
You must see by now that it's nigh impossible, because what I am saying is almost certainly true.

I am a Primitive Buddhist.  I believe:  No essence.  No permanence.  No perfection.

Simply by asserting that something is True you have completely lost any possible support from me and people who think like me.  I do not believe in Truth.

So you believe it's true that there is no truth? That's ironic.

Openly contradicting yourself in such a small comment is not a good way to support your argument.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 05:40:03 PM
5to10


As I understand your argument you're saying that if we all come together as a unity, something magical may happen, and this may save us all.


You then attack everyone with a different perspective, thereby proving not only that unity doesn't exist at present, but that anyone dividing the world into those that believe (in unity), and those that don't believe, will forever preclude a unity of thought, and that your magical moment will never occur.


Terry

First completely meaningful statement I have read on this thread -- thank you.

Thanks Jim... I find your commentary to be always of the highest quality as well.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:42:58 PM
Thanks Jim... I find your commentary to be always of the highest quality as well.

Unfortunate that his statement was again easily refuted by the truth.

Still waiting on one of you 3-5 people to present some kind of rational statement in contradiction to what I'm explaining.

You'd think there would be strength in numbers here as usual, but the truth doesn't lose to the deception of the majority.

Refute it or accept it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 05:44:53 PM
Thanks Jim... I find your commentary to be always of the highest quality as well.

Unfortunate that his statement was again easily refuted by the truth.

Still waiting on one of you 3-5 people to present some kind of rational statement in contradiction to what I'm explaining.

You'd think there would be strength in numbers here as usual, but the truth doesn't lose to the deception of the majority.

Refute it or accept it.

Yours are the ramblings of a madman.  They cannot be refuted, as they are not framed in a common belief system.  We would have to begin with the meaning of truth... who has the time. 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:45:41 PM
Thanks Jim... I find your commentary to be always of the highest quality as well.

Unfortunate that his statement was again easily refuted by the truth.

Still waiting on one of you 3-5 people to present some kind of rational statement in contradiction to what I'm explaining.

You'd think there would be strength in numbers here as usual, but the truth doesn't lose to the deception of the majority.

Refute it or accept it.

Yours are the ramblings of a madman.  They cannot be refuted, as they are not framed in a common belief system.  We would have to begin with the meaning of truth... who has the time.

A madman in the context of a terribly mad world, whose ideals have proven destructive failures perhaps. The truth cannot be refuted, hence why you are all, as a team (against the truth itself, not me as a human being relating it), having a real problem trying to do so in total vain.

Maybe I am the sane one.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 03, 2017, 05:49:36 PM
You must see by now that it's nigh impossible, because what I am saying is almost certainly true.

I am a Primitive Buddhist.  I believe:  No essence.  No permanence.  No perfection.

Simply by asserting that something is True you have completely lost any possible support from me and people who think like me.  I do not believe in Truth.

So you believe it's true that there is no truth? That's ironic.

Openly contradicting yourself in such a small comment is not a good way to support your argument.
I hope you get banned.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 05:55:06 PM
You must see by now that it's nigh impossible, because what I am saying is almost certainly true.

I am a Primitive Buddhist.  I believe:  No essence.  No permanence.  No perfection.

Simply by asserting that something is True you have completely lost any possible support from me and people who think like me.  I do not believe in Truth.

So you believe it's true that there is no truth? That's ironic.

Openly contradicting yourself in such a small comment is not a good way to support your argument.
I hope you get banned.
Ahh, a direct personal attack.

Out of irrational rebuttals that are easily shut down then?

Accept the truth yet, and your logically established role as a destroyer of a beautiful future we could work towards (Not an ad-hominem but also a truth, not putting all effort towards unity as an individual and so as a collective seems to lead to certain destruction based on all data. Unity seems to lead to a better future, based on simple logic), or will you just end your tirade of false dispute with this blatant attack?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on March 03, 2017, 05:55:20 PM
Well that all went horrible fast didn't it?

I'm sure we all would wish to help heal our world and see Society evolve into a saner collective but we're not quite ready yet IMHO?

I know thing are looking ever bleaker out there but we must remain hopeful? Even if just to stave off reactive depression!!!

I am left thinking that we are fast approaching escape velocity as Social media unifies more and more of us and allows the type of self education that we see in here each day?

I'm sure we all take a bit of this place away with us each time we log off. I'm sure our 'learning' is then further distributed.

Where in the history of mankind has this been able to be before?

We might need to suffer a big climate shock before we are all ( to all intents and purposes) on the same page with the same demands of our world but we will do so.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 06:04:11 PM
Where in the history of mankind has this been able to be before?

You nailed it.

Because of the internet, We are able to do what I am suggesting, unify. The potential is there. We are connected.

We have never had an opportunity to unify to this degree before the internet. Now we CAN try, and succeed. We just haven't made a decent effort yet.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 06:16:52 PM
GrayWolf - What you are seeing in the dissent is an individual struggle with an effectively inescapable truth they had as yet not seen. If it is not, I have yet to see logical opposition. Show me some, or accept it once you recognize it.

They are doing everything they can to refute what I'm saying within their own minds, clinging to any fading thread they can see. The truth is brutal sometimes.

I should hope the struggle it creates within them will help to understand how powerful of a motivator this fundamental truth could be towards unity if it was widespread, if we cut away the sea of information that keeps it hidden.

It is so powerful that it is not only easily maintained as irrefutable through debate, but once one accepts it they are immediately forced within themselves to make a clear decision based on its ramifications.

Thus, it really does come down to one thing: Are we really mostly good? Would we mostly choose to TRY to save the world? Are we just hateful and divisive out of fear and ignorance and confusion?

These are the things our future depends on.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 03, 2017, 06:19:38 PM
The United Nations has failed, but not by lack of effort. How can you organize something greater than it on here and expect to outdo it. First of all, if you don't work your goals through the U.N., it will not allow you to do so outside of it. Billions of dollars have been poured into it and no lack of effort. It would take a lifetime to build up any organization to come even close to it in scope and magnitude. Furthermore, it can't ever accomplish what it has been made out to be and do.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Gray-Wolf on March 03, 2017, 06:21:28 PM
5to10

I think it is just the medium that is failing us but you had started to become the very thing that I believe you would wish to be avoid becoming?

I think we must trust others to do what they believe is correct for them to do and exploit the 'overlaps in intent' that occur.

Brow beating and shaming are not good motivators.

We need be brave and allow others time that we might feel we do not have? No point throwing baby out with the water though! :)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 06:38:01 PM
The United Nations has failed, but not by lack of effort. How can you organize something greater than it on here and expect to outdo it. First of all, if you don't work your goals through the U.N., it will not allow you to do so outside of it. Billions of dollars have been poured into it and no lack of effort. It would take a lifetime to build up any organization to come even close to it in scope and magnitude. Furthermore, it can't ever accomplish what it has been made out to be and do.

The UN does not direct us towards an exactly clear purpose and is not backed by a mostly united humanity. Sticking to fundamentals and a clear purpose rather than trying to sort out a path based on a nigh infinite set of information points is somewhat important. Together, scientists and the media and all other useful entities can achieve this clear optimistic purpose and assist in communicating the logistics in our united efforts. The only reason that doesn't happen already is because the human beings who compose those entities lack the fundamental awareness I am trying to spread or think it is impossible too.

If you can at least understand where I've been going with this.. That it is in fact possible to thrust a clear moral choice on somebody that they weren't aware they had before, and it doesn't take much effort (Even if they try to refute it for a while... cognitive dissonance is a thing). This moral choice will only exist based on their personal value systems, but those have to stand up to the fundamental truth within their own minds as well.

Certainly, there are other possible irrefutable truths that one can go with, I don't deny that. For example "I don't need to do anything because aliens will save us eventually", well I can't refute that, but it leaves me helpless to do anything. The irrefutable truth I am presenting allows us to do something: Just spread it, it has a great effect just doing that. Thrust this awareness on people. Keep it fundamental. It MIGHT be able to turn the tide for us. Unless you can think of a more viable option to START turning things around than unifying as many people and resources as we can ASAP, then just do it already!

The problem we have is that few humans have been faced with the difficult concept I am trying to explain. They lack the awareness of our individual impacts.

Truth is a powerful weapon against the instinctual, fear-driven, and selfish urges we have as individuals literally as easy as making someone aware of it.

In a way, it has a feedback effect built in. Once you realize that spreading this truth and awareness of our personal responsibility appears to be our only chance to avoid total destruction, that unifying is the only way, you kind of have to spread the truth or accept that you are part of the destruction if you don't. Thus I can already see its potential to absolutely transform our global consciousness as it slowly pervades.

What I mean is, most people must be on this page before existent entities can make any impactful change either. You can comment on the present state all you like, I keep saying those things will change as we change. I have noted what you're saying, I'm proposing the solution. You're making an effort to avoid the choice you have, within your own mind.

Again, truth makes anyone who doesn't accept it fall to the wayside in the end. Nobody believes the sun revolves around the Earth anymore. Those who fail to accept this truth that unity is the way forward will disappear in the end too.

It is so easy to have optimism when you start thinking about what I'm trying to explain.

All I can say is that truth has a powerful "feedback" mechanism built in that kind of makes it spread itself as it goes until it overwhelms the bullshit.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 03, 2017, 06:52:28 PM
Quote
The UN does not direct us towards an exactly clear purpose.

The main goals of the U.N. are to achieve peace and security. Averting climate disaster would fall under the security part. It is hard to focus on the security part, without assuming first that you don't have war, having achieved peace. I wouldn't assume that by the way.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 03, 2017, 06:54:47 PM
5to10, you're trolling the thread, man.

You have no idea how much any of the people here work to educate people about, and to mitigate, climate change. For 35 years I've been active in conservation, ecology, and natural history. Your arrogant, messianic rantings are alienating, not unifying.

Get a grip. We are all in this together, and we all know it here.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Peter Ellis on March 03, 2017, 06:57:55 PM
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 07:01:26 PM
Quote
The UN does not direct us towards an exactly clear purpose.

The main goals of the U.N. are to achieve peace and security. Averting climate disaster would fall under the security part. It is hard to focus on the security part, without assuming first that you don't have war, having achieved peace. I wouldn't assume that by the way.

The UN does not have the influence that news-media does.

Journalists are still the key. Human beings who can do something if they were to be aware of the choice. You are not exactly making a choice until you're aware you have one.

Make them aware they have a choice so that they can work together to make us aware we have a choice.

How? Just by doing what you can to spread all of these concepts. Regardless of your thoughts on how possible any of this is, it's still rational. And it still boils down to clear recognition that you are choosing either try everything we can together and find any chance there is, or submit to your selfish wants and needs and seek to ensure destruction of the living world.

I have great faith that there is a distinct, massively positive difference between a humanity that mostly recognizes that they have a decision, and our present state of affairs where very few people are aware of the decision as it exists fundamentally.


I'm disappointed that people say I'm trolling the thread, when I have proposed a simple solution to which we can all perhaps make a difference: Spread the fundamental choice. To which I might add, nobody has been able to refute. All people can say is "A united humanity isn't possible because humanity isn't united right now", that's a ludicrous argument. If they throw that out, they seek a way to avoid boiling all the information down to this fundamental choice and spreading awareness of THAT first, rather than sharing all the details of the situation (Which clearly hasn't ever worked, try something new) or any of the rest of the incoherent mess that exists in the media today.

Seems cognitive dissonance will continue to get the best of most.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: SteveMDFP on March 03, 2017, 07:06:37 PM
GrayWolf - What you are seeing in the dissent is an individual struggle with an effectively inescapable truth they had as yet not seen. If it is not, I have yet to see logical opposition. Show me some, or accept it once you recognize it.

No, the problem isn't that anyone is unwilling to consider your vision and plan.  Some see the human problem differently, but these are smart, open-minded folks here.

The problem is that the vigorous proponent of unity has been repetitive, long-winded, dogmatic, and dismissive of others.

If such proponents of unity can only sow discord, then this may portend a bad outcome for humanity.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: rboyd on March 03, 2017, 07:08:54 PM
Every new communications technology has been touted as facilitating a new democratic moment, from radio to the internet. In each case, the hopeful beginnings have been squashed by the corporations and powerful that wished to control it for their own interests. For example, the great hopes for local and citizen-controlled radio were crushed in the 1920s/1930s when the spectrum was given away to the commercial broadcasters and the requirements of the advertisers.

A great book on this is "The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires" by Tim Wu. Another is "Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism Is Turning The Internet Against Democracy" by Robert McChesney. As long as advertising pays for the media, it will be the advertisers that control the message. An oldy, but still a great one is "Manufacturing Consent" by Herman and Chomsky.

One of my biggest worries is that people become more connected with others that are hundreds or thousands of miles away rather than with their physical neighbours - greatly reducing the growth of local activist groups. The other is that the proliferation of fake news and paid-for trolls makes it impossible for the average person to know what is really true (from this perspective many thanks to Neven and Robert Scribbler for filtering out such noise).
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 07:10:41 PM
GrayWolf - What you are seeing in the dissent is an individual struggle with an effectively inescapable truth they had as yet not seen. If it is not, I have yet to see logical opposition. Show me some, or accept it once you recognize it.

No, the problem isn't that anyone is unwilling to consider your vision and plan.  Some see the human problem differently, but these are smart, open-minded folks here.

The problem is that the vigorous proponent of unity has been repetitive, long-winded, dogmatic, and dismissive of others.

If such proponents of unity can only sow discord, then this may portend a bad outcome for humanity.

I will certainly dismiss irrational arguments, don't you? Where are the rational arguments? And since I believe my perspective, I must of course be vigorous in defending and promoting it. So until you provide a reasonable alternative, here I will be.

Part of me would much rather be playing guitar, or video games, or skimming pointless diatribe on the internet right now, but I ain't. I have devoted myself to what I believe here and elsewhere and I am disappointed people say I'm trolling when I'm clearly not. I'm walking my talk, because I truly have not seen a rational alternative, certainly not here. I put the same weight on myself when I recognized there might be a way out, now I am aiming for it because I feel like it is right. Perhaps I should just digress here.

One more thing.. discord is often a precursor to higher understanding. I would have to say history proves this as well.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Red on March 03, 2017, 07:15:04 PM
5to10

"All I can say is that truth has a powerful "feedback" mechanism built in that kind of makes it spread itself as it goes until it overwhelms the bullshit."

The truth is abstract. I think? While I agree with your line of reasoning I think, coming to a unified truth is like looking for the singularity. It most likely exists, but if found, most will not likely be able to wrap their heads around it.
 For any situation there are as many truths as there are observers. Each holding that their version of the truth is the correct one. Getting an agreement between observers increases in difficulty with the increase in their number. Having a consensus  between 76 people on how anything should function is an amazing feat. Getting 7.6 billion to agree well now that's optimism. So long as there is power and profit to be made from corrupting any such truth it will be nye impossible to pull it off.

The temptation to deceive is as old as the human race,
and so is the inclination to succumb to deception,
which is credulity.
Joseph Jastrow
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 03, 2017, 07:16:46 PM
Quote
The UN does not have the influence that news-media does.

All the media talks about anymore are political leaders and the only solutions the media points to are political solutions. If they did make everyone aware of the what is happening with the climate, and the people united and protested in the streets for their leaders to find a solution, it would only go full circle to the one institution the world leaders have in common and at their disposal, the U.N..
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 07:19:50 PM
5to10

"All I can say is that truth has a powerful "feedback" mechanism built in that kind of makes it spread itself as it goes until it overwhelms the bullshit."

The truth is abstract. I think? While I agree with your line of reasoning I think, coming to a unified truth is like looking for the singularity. It most likely exists, but if found, most will not likely be able to wrap their heads around it.
 For any situation there are as many truths as there are observers. Each holding that their version of the truth is the correct one. Getting an agreement between observers increases in difficulty with the increase in their number. Having a consensus  between 76 people on how anything should function is an amazing feat. Getting 7.6 billion to agree well now that's optimism. So long as there is power and profit to be made from corrupting any such truth it will be nye impossible to pull it off.

The temptation to deceive is as old as the human race,
and so is the inclination to succumb to deception,
which is credulity.
Joseph Jastrow

I really do understand all this, and I absolutely love the concept of the singularity here. That is exactly what I'm working for, a perfect description, some manner of singularity of consciousness.

Perhaps this does exist. Perhaps the key is a fundamental truth which no mind is able to avoid should it be presented.

Perhaps though, the time it takes to stop avoiding it will be too long in most, I do understand that notion as well.

I would apologize to all for "being vigorous" here if it was not out of the purest intentions. I will digress though, as my point has been well made.

I am by no means implying any of you are "bad people who aren't doing anything" - on the contrary, I think you are some of the greatest quality we have, that is why I'm here. Many influential eyes and minds are on the arctic right now.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on March 03, 2017, 07:20:28 PM
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?


Ramen !!
Very little here relates to ice.


Cid  Yama
Any chance you attend RGs & Ags?


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 07:21:35 PM
Quote
The UN does not have the influence that news-media does.

All the media talks about anymore are political leaders and the only solutions the media points to are political solutions. If they did make everyone aware of the what is happening with the climate, and the people united and protested in the streets for their leaders to find a solution, it would only go full circle to the one institution the world leaders have in common and at their disposal, the U.N..

Ahh, now we're getting somewhere, when your argument proves my point. Humanity would be united behind a clear purpose and willing to try. Now we could start at the important work. Now the U.N. could actually do something. Now scientists would be listened to. So many great things could start from here.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 03, 2017, 07:29:10 PM
This thread was about ice before it was hijacked.

I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?


Ramen !!
Very little here relates to ice.


Cid  Yama
Any chance you attend RGs & Ags?


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 03, 2017, 07:29:33 PM
Quote
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?

It didn't really start out that way. I think johnm33 meant for it to be directly about the Arctic, but irrelevant of season or such, so as to not go off topic easily.

Opening comment.
If it's about the Arctic and 2017 with no obvious home here's where it belongs.
This paper outlines the area l've been thinking about http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505 (http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505) illustrated here.
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505/figures/1 (http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2505/figures/1)
 Whenever i thought tides and turbulence were running high in Baffin/Labrador there'd be streamers emerging from the ocean, there must be a more technical name for them but illustrated here. http://go.nasa.gov/2lpzqDm (http://go.nasa.gov/2lpzqDm) just by Hudson strait last full moon. So now when i see streamers i suspect vortices, this implies that angular momentum is carried through phase transition, is that possible? c+d in fig 4 from the paper illustrate the current across the north barents sea slope, it's my contention that this is a tidally driven current that is increasing as the resistance of the ice in the Arctic weakens. The weakening has two immediate causes the first is the reduction in the amount of kinetic energy needed to forge a path through the ice, that is when there was thick ice the underside caused huge amounts of turbulence dissipating any coherent stream, like a baffle, the second is that the ice has less mass and moves more readily. This second means that given the right/wrong wind conditions the current will be accelerated or slowed by mass ice movement.   The only analogy that springs to mind is where every turn of a roundabout you add a little to the momentum,and when the current reaches some threshold the fractions within it become organised and an overturning c/w current evolves, so as the tidal forcing continues and the resistance fails the current increases and we may have some way to go before both its flow and vorticity peaks.
In the first image below, despite being long after the full moon some streamers are showing, and possibly some ice is being accelerated away from the front. The second shows some streamers a little closer to Svalbard.
Food for thought.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 03, 2017, 07:44:23 PM
Quote
The UN does not have the influence that news-media does.

All the media talks about anymore are political leaders and the only solutions the media points to are political solutions. If they did make everyone aware of the what is happening with the climate, and the people united and protested in the streets for their leaders to find a solution, it would only go full circle to the one institution the world leaders have in common and at their disposal, the U.N..

Ahh, now we're getting somewhere, when your argument proves my point. Humanity would be united behind a clear purpose and willing to try. Now we could start at the important work. Now the U.N. could actually do something. Now scientists would be listened to. So many great things could start from here.
Someone mentioned praying earlier. I would suggest praying intently and more reading your Bible before putting you trust in any political organisation(s). Bible prophecy does not point to the outcome you may expect. (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

A couple people have pointed out the original intention of this thread and that it has derailed. I will let that be my closing comment on the matter on this thread.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 07:53:51 PM
You mentioned praying earlier. I would suggest praying intently and more reading your Bible before putting you trust in any political organisation(s). Bible prophecy does not point to the outcome you may expect. (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

A couple people have pointed out the original intention of this thread and that it has derailed. I will let that be my closing comment on the matter on this thread.

I don't think I suggested praying. I'm not a devout Christian in the traditional sense at least. I accept that, as I have read and contemplated the symbolic message, all of what Jesus said in the bible seems logical and is truthful. I do not believe a bearded guy in the sky is gonna send me to burn in a literal pit of fire.

I do not actually expect the U.N. as it exists presently to do anything in the end, but I sort of had to frame it that way.

Also remember.. "death" does not have to be physical, material.. "death" (or "the locking away of the beasts for 1000 years" as Revelations proposes symbolically) of "the beast" could simply mean that a consciousness shift caused "the beast within the minds and actions of people" to be destroyed. Thus, those entities could no longer operate out of evil intent, as they do not have minds to make moral decisions with, the people that compose them do and as such the work of the entities is hinged on that.

"The Beast" cannot not exist anywhere but within each and every one of us, we give "it' power. However "it" naturally acts and speaks best through government and media.

In other words, the government/the U.N./the media, all of these entities would be forced to transform along with our consciousness. They could never exist as they are now afterwards if the majority of the cogs in the machine stopped turning in that direction. Those entities are totally reliant on how WE human beings think and operate within them. I believe only a small sect of those entities are truly "evil", thus things can (and likely will) truly change.

People here are acting as if they are separate, conscious entities. They're not. They do what we make them do. If we all (the vast majority) choose to do and believe something different, so will they have to.

We don't burn "witches" at the stake anymore, because we progressed past a distorted state of awareness that provoked fear-driven responses and ultimately, division. We aren't just going to go back to calling people witches and burning them anytime soon because we understand the truth now. There's no such thing, they burned people alive for no reason, we could never consider "burning witches" anymore because we understand the truth. Would we continue to burn the world? I don't think so. So the truth and our choices are not widely understood.

We can do this here. We can make a change. We can beat division.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cate on March 03, 2017, 09:10:20 PM
^  ^   ^   ^   ^

And all that is why I miss A-Team.

 8)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on March 03, 2017, 10:22:01 PM
^  ^   ^   ^   ^

And all that is why I miss A-Team.

 8)

Twas stuff like this drove him off.

Glad it's quaranteened here.

Jim Williams - I believe in Physics, which is slightly off from your "no Truth" but close enough for us to get along fine, I'd wager.

5to10 - You're arguing a losing battle here, and semantic philosophical argument about "Truth" and "Unity" are unlikely to get traction, and in fact highlight in part why we need robust political structures in place to deal with dissent.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on March 03, 2017, 10:28:33 PM
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?
I can't help but agree.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 03, 2017, 10:39:00 PM
^  ^   ^   ^   ^

And all that is why I miss A-Team.

 8)

Twas stuff like this drove him off.

Glad it's quaranteened here.

Jim Williams - I believe in Physics, which is slightly off from your "no Truth" but close enough for us to get along fine, I'd wager.

5to10 - You're arguing a losing battle here, and semantic philosophical argument about "Truth" and "Unity" are unlikely to get traction, and in fact highlight in part why we need robust political structures in place to deal with dissent.

It's not semantic. It is the only way forward for us. The fundamental choice and these truths will be vividly apparent to all eventually, whether you believe me or like what I'm saying here or not. I am morally obligated to share it and expose deception against it, especially given the circumstances.

Fundamental truth becomes more obvious with time, and that is already starting to become apparent here or people wouldn't be making personal changes in a (potentially futile) effort to stop it. We are becoming more aware of our situation and our individual influence.

Maybe it will take even more serious displacement and destruction for most to understand. I guess the biggest thing in the way of our full awareness is time itself, for these truths are already floating around out there and gaining traction. We ARE recognizing our influence, more and more. We ARE feeling remorseful and making changes, albeit slowly. Events to come will provide more evidence of our roles if trajectory continues.

I suppose this will all happen whether I make these efforts or not, so perhaps this is pointless indeed. As to why I'm here rather than other forums.. Because if you're reading this forum, you're already aware of much, but may feel helpless to enact impactful change. I have presented a huge pre-requisite (unity backed by optimism, clear purpose and truth) and a possible solution to it: Uniting journalism/media with the help of science towards a clear, simple purpose that humanity can stand behind - for goodness, for optimism, by raising fundamental awareness of the fundamental moral decision.

If you can't think of a way around the pre-requisite, why are you even bothering to work on the details beyond it, should you intend to use the knowledge gleaned to change things? It is all futile without tackling the issue of division, so your energy is well spent helping to figure that problem out ASAP as well. The logistics of such an endeavour will require most on the same page, surely. The solutions to all external problems are, in the end, purely internal to begin with. It is the internal that got us here, not the external. It is that which gets us somewhere else too.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on March 04, 2017, 02:21:09 AM
You will not have unity until you have equality.

You will not have equality until human needs are addressed.

As long as human need fails to be addressed, those in need, and those who obstruct addressing it, will have little interest in any sort of metaphysical truth.

Your arguments smack of the conceit of privilege which neither feels need, nor has the experience of inequality.

Your prideful continuing insistence in repeating them is become tiresome.

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 02:44:24 AM
You will not have unity until you have equality.

You will not have equality until human needs are addressed.

As long as human need fails to be addressed, those in need, and those who obstruct addressing it, will have little interest in any sort of metaphysical truth.

Your arguments smack of the conceit of privilege which neither feels need, nor has the experience of inequality.

Your prideful continuing insistence in repeating them is become tiresome.

More borderline ad-hominems? Have I attacked anyone here? Stop this.

Your assumptions are false. I have sacrificed a normal life and many relationships in the search for truth. I have given up almost everything and I make only enough to pay for what I need, plus a couple vices I need to give up. Between 600-800 a month CAD, to be exact, depending on how many days I work. I am content with everything I have and desire nothing more than to find truth, above all else. I am for many years now, and will continue to be, single and abstinent, not for religious purposes but out of my search for truth I have lost the desire to have a physical relationship or a traditional one for that matter, not by thinking about solitude and aiming for it, but simply as a side effect. I embrace and cherish all my relationships otherwise.

I am well aware of the causes and effects of inequality.

This "metaphysical truth" will continue to prove itself true until the majority are aware of it. The events of the day support the ideas. The blissfully ignorant public will wield their pitchforks quickly when reality finally set in, of that we can be sure. From there they will understand the options: Try everything, or give up. I am certainly not the only person realizing these obscure irrefutable truths - am I?

I'm not prideful. I'm obligated to share and defend the truth. Especially in relation to our circumstances. Since you nor anyone else can logically refute it, and continue to focus mainly on symptoms on the disease rather than the cure, as well as spread deceptive information and commentary on the truth, I feel an obligation to respond.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: jdallen on March 04, 2017, 03:02:05 AM
You will not have unity until you have equality.

You will not have equality until human needs are addressed.

As long as human need fails to be addressed, those in need, and those who obstruct addressing it, will have little interest in any sort of metaphysical truth.

Your arguments smack of the conceit of privilege which neither feels need, nor has the experience of inequality.

Your prideful continuing insistence in repeating them is become tiresome.

Your assumptions are false. I have sacrificed a normal life and many relationships in the search for truth. I have given up almost everything and I make only enough to pay for what I need, plus a couple vices I need to give up. Between 600-800 a month CAD, to be exact, depending on how many days I work.

I am well aware of the causes and effects of inequality.

This "metaphysical truth" will continue to prove itself true until the majority are aware of it. I am certainly not the only person realizing these obscure irrefutable truths - am I?

I'm not prideful. I'm obligated to share and defend the truth. Especially in relation to our circumstances. Since you nor anyone else can logically refute it, and continue to focus mainly on symptoms on the disease rather than the cure, as well as spread deceptive information and commentary on the truth, I feel an obligation to respond.
You had the privilege to choose.
You have the luxury of a first world nation to live in which supports that choice.
You are obligated by nothing.
You have the smug irrefutable certainty of rectitude appropriate for a zealot. That is the epitome of pride.

As I said, you may argue ad nauseum, but will gain no traction.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 03:08:23 AM
You had the privilege to choose.
You have the luxury of a first world nation to live in which supports that choice.
You are obligated by nothing.
You have the smug irrefutable certainty of rectitude appropriate for a zealot. That is the epitome of pride.

As I said, you may argue ad nauseum, but will gain no traction.

I'm sorry, did I choose that privilege?
I'm sorry, did I choose the nation I was born in?
I'm sorry, are you the master and commander of my beliefs and my personal obligations based on them?
I'm sorry, have you refuted any of my ideas or merely attacked the messenger?

I'm sorry, do you think I will allow malicious commentary lacking substance to dissuade me?

Will you add anything of value to this discussion, or continue to attack me and continue to prove yourself malicious and deceptive?

Does anything you've said here have any relation to what we're talking about? You are awfully focused on me and not the ideas.

My "privilege" has no bearing on the merit of the ideas. You hide from the truth I am presenting behind logical fallacies and personal attacks.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Williams on March 04, 2017, 03:12:45 AM
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?

Yes Please.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Anne on March 04, 2017, 08:08:47 AM
I'm not sure an "open thread" like this really belongs in the Cryosphere subforum - worth moving it to "The Rest" subforum with the rest of the general threads?

Yes Please.
+1
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: binntho on March 04, 2017, 08:25:49 AM
"Truth" and "unity" are words that send shivers up my back - the rallying cries of ayatollahs of every creed.

"Unitiy" can only be achieved with violence, and "truth" is a man-made construct that has little to do with reality. "Facts" are only what we make them. In our current political climate, the term "post-truth" has been bandied about, but in reality "truth" has never been anything other than the statements that best fit the belief system and emotional status of the receiver.

My belief system presupposes me to accept that global warming is a very large danger to our current society - but it also precludes me from accepting calls for "unity" and "truth". There are no magic solutions to the dire future that many rightly fear, but semi-religious delusional ramblings on "unity" and "truth" are never going to solve anything.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 09:14:00 AM
"Truth" and "unity" are words that send shivers up my back - the rallying cries of ayatollahs of every creed.
Ayatollahs who distort the truth into deceit towards impure causes, and present a distorted version of the true unity I speak of, which will not be an option until the fundamental truth is understood by all. This is not the same. I speak of a fundamental unity born out of love.

Quote
"Unitiy" can only be achieved with violence, and "truth" is a man-made construct that has little to do with reality. "Facts" are only what we make them. In our current political climate, the term "post-truth" has been bandied about, but in reality "truth" has never been anything other than the statements that best fit the belief system and emotional status of the receiver.

Unity is achieved from within our minds. There do exist irrefutable truths which are beyond the constructs of man, such as the irrefutable truth I have presented throughout this thread. Which has yet to be refuted, obviously, despite its abstract nature.

Quote
My belief system presupposes me to accept that global warming is a very large danger to our current society - but it also precludes me from accepting calls for "unity" and "truth". There are no magic solutions to the dire future that many rightly fear, but semi-religious delusional ramblings on "unity" and "truth" are never going to solve anything.

It matters not - unity is on the horizon and you will soon understand all of this, despite its "improbability". It is not magical. The unity I speak of is unlike any we have known, a force many magnitudes greater than the divided humanity we are familiar with. In fact, our arrival there is inevitable. It defies our present logic, for it has never been, and so it cannot yet be fully understood. A glimmer in the distance, it has been, that humanity has forever been drawn towards. The light grows brighter until we are fully illuminated.

I have presented nothing but IRREFUTABLE truths about our situation and about our fundamental choice here. What you do with it is, well, your choice.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 04, 2017, 09:17:34 AM
I compiled this last year regarding Franz Josef Land. An open thread about the Arctic seems a good place to post a link for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Avalonian on March 04, 2017, 10:03:09 AM
(Firstly, please do move this to a different section of the forum - it doesn't belong here!)

"Truth" and "unity" are words that send shivers up my back - the rallying cries of ayatollahs of every creed.
Ayatollahs who distort the truth into deceit towards impure causes, and present a distorted version of the true unity I speak of, which will not be an option until the fundamental truth is understood by all. This is not the same. I speak of a fundamental unity born out of love.

I have presented nothing but IRREFUTABLE truths about our situation and about our fundamental choice here. What you do with it is, well, your choice.

Unfortunately, those are the words of all the above-mentioned ayatollahs of every creed.

Look, 5to10, the problem is that what you have is a beautiful dream, which has been dreamed many times before, and which has never turned out to be anything other than a dream. Is it possible, in the distant future, for everyone to think in the same way? Possibly, but we're talking about a distant future; first we have to homogenise the cultures, languages and religions of the world, and I for one would be very sad to see that happen. It would also be far too late.

Even given that, is it possible for all humans to act selflessly, and not for personal, familial or national gain, when the pressure on resources increases? No matter what your dream, I don't believe this is even close to being viable.

What it comes down to is that you are asking a lot of very talented, energetic and intelligent people to drop what they're doing and adopt your strategy of persuading journalists of the Truth. There are some major problems with this.

1. Few people here believe that humans have the technological ability, at present, to stop catastrophic climate change. A dream of some technology in the future doesn't help.
2. No-one here (I think) is persuaded that all journalists are persuadable; and unless they speak with one voice then it's pointless. Given that the media thrives on controversy, it's probably not possible to have an open media that speaks with one voice. That point is surely decades away, if it's even possible.
3. Energy spent on your project takes energy away from other things, such as monitoring Arctic ice, trying to understand it, planning for the skills needed after potential societal collapse, etc. People who are extremely good at those aspects are not necessarily good at persuading reluctant journalists that what they are reporting on is more important than their livelihoods. What you are suggesting is a waste of skills that are likely to be essential for the well-being of society when the collapse starts to kick in.
4. By arguing for your dream of putting all our energy into planning for what is probably an impossible pre-emptive solution, you are taking energy away from a detailed understanding of what is happening, how it will progress, and how we can best survive in a post-overpopulation world.

Telling people that they are selfish and lazy because they do not see the situation in the same way that you do, even when some of them have done an enormous amount towards reducing their carbon footprints and/or making their communities self-supporting, is arrogant and insulting. Personally, I think you are well-intentioned but misguided, and your 'solution' will set back our ability to cope with the crisis. I hope I've covered everything, because I don't have time to get sucked into this debate - I'm too busy helping the local community to become more sustainable, while attempting to earn enough to get by.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 12:18:10 PM
(Firstly, please do move this to a different section of the forum - it doesn't belong here!)

"Truth" and "unity" are words that send shivers up my back - the rallying cries of ayatollahs of every creed.
Ayatollahs who distort the truth into deceit towards impure causes, and present a distorted version of the true unity I speak of, which will not be an option until the fundamental truth is understood by all. This is not the same. I speak of a fundamental unity born out of love.

I have presented nothing but IRREFUTABLE truths about our situation and about our fundamental choice here. What you do with it is, well, your choice.
Quote
Unfortunately, those are the words of all the above-mentioned ayatollahs of every creed.
Thank you for a great response. I recognize the similarities, but stand by the statement that I only provided irrefutable truth and the only path to our salvation. Awareness of truth, of the fundamental moral choice in the most difficult crisis, leading to unity by way of our collective good will, which is hidden beneath our ignorance and confusion. The understanding will destroy those barriers and awaken that goodwill.

Quote
Look, 5to10, the problem is that what you have is a beautiful dream, which has been dreamed many times before, and which has never turned out to be anything other than a dream. Is it possible, in the distant future, for everyone to think in the same way? Possibly, but we're talking about a distant future; first we have to homogenise the cultures, languages and religions of the world, and I for one would be very sad to see that happen. It would also be far too late.


Correct. It is a beautiful dream which has never happened.. because there has never been a time wherein we've needed to dream it so desperately. Should events unfold that make abrupt climate change and imminent, large-scale collapse or total destruction patently obvious, unavoidable to the vast majority (not even close yet), said dream will suddenly become a possibility. It will become a necessity, indeed, to succeed in any efforts. This will be widely understood, and very quickly - it is obvious even now.

So I do believe that this dire situation, should it unfold (And it sure looks that way more and more) will be unlike any other humanity has experienced in a big way, thus our thoughts and choices will change rapidly to focus on and suit the situation. People have children. People love the natural world. People appreciate consciousness. People don't want to die. There are MANY strong motivators to work together. Combine that with the internet, we are all instantly connected. Things are instantly translated. This world is ripe for that dream to become a reality, in the not too distant future even. Through this coming awareness of our position and recognition of our fundamental choice, we will seek and find togetherness. And out of togetherness, we will seek and find awareness and truth.

Quote
Even given that, is it possible for all humans to act selflessly, and not for personal, familial or national gain, when the pressure on resources increases? No matter what your dream, I don't believe this is even close to being viable.

Again, and this is a hard one to speak about because I have no way to prove it with evidence. All I can say is "It just makes sense"... A unity this strong would no doubt be much more powerful to influence positive change as we progressed in the future beyond crises. Think of it this way... We are always progressing a little bit more towards awareness and understanding individually and collectively.. and right now we are still slowed down greatly by rampant division. Imagine the speed of our progress if it did not exist. I am proposing that though we cannot see the solutions in the context of our divided world now, that once unified behind making the positive choice, after we recognize the fundamental truth of our position, division disappears.

To weather the storm together, is to do it out of unified goodwill, labour, and optimism. How could we be expected to fall back into this fog after doing that? With the awareness we will gain... It is literally like the singularity, as someone else said. I can't even conceive the potential of a truly united, totally connected humanity that respects the natural world deeply. Problems would just start to disappear, we would be working as a well oiled machine instead of a rust bucket. This must be a very optimistic future.

Quote
What it comes down to is that you are asking a lot of very talented, energetic and intelligent people to drop what they're doing and adopt your strategy of persuading journalists of the Truth. There are some major problems with this. 

1. Few people here believe that humans have the technological ability, at present, to stop catastrophic climate change. A dream of some technology in the future doesn't help.

Again. viewing the situation in the context of an extremely divided humanity. Our overall potential greatly increases in unity backed by truth and open honest communication, in every way. There would be no more deception clogging up the flow of information, this is again nigh inconceivable.

This is all possible with the internet and modern media.

Quote
2. No-one here (I think) is persuaded that all journalists are persuadable; and unless they speak with one voice then it's pointless. Given that the media thrives on controversy, it's probably not possible to have an open media that speaks with one voice. That point is surely decades away, if it's even possible.
It will be sparked by sudden global awareness that yes, in fact, the end IS nigh. Be that 2 years from now or decades away, as you say. This will unify the focus of the media naturally, once the truth of the situation can no longer be avoided in the minds of the vast majority. Many events could lead to this awareness and the weather is predicted to be more violent and unpredictable. Unless it all comes crashing down and kills us all at once, people will be asking questions. Journalists included. This is already happening.

Quote
3. Energy spent on your project takes energy away from other things, such as monitoring Arctic ice, trying to understand it, planning for the skills needed after potential societal collapse, etc. People who are extremely good at those aspects are not necessarily good at persuading reluctant journalists that what they are reporting on is more important than their livelihoods. What you are suggesting is a waste of skills that are likely to be essential for the well-being of society when the collapse starts to kick in.
Aside from "preparing for societal collapse" (I truly believe we are headed for an amazing future beyond this present despair, that energy is spent towards the wrong cause. There is a solution in unity, we should spend energy on that) I accept much of this as true in relation to the communication issues that may arise there.

I believe some people gleaned valuable insight from my posts, or optimism, hope, positivity, and for that reason it's been worthwhile. Moreso, scientists are so rational that who better an audience to refute a hypothesis? I believe in what I say, I must subject it to scrutiny as well as use my time wisely in doing so. I believe you all can and will eventually do something with this understanding or I wouldn't be here in the first place.

Quote
4. By arguing for your dream of putting all our energy into planning for what is probably an impossible pre-emptive solution, you are taking energy away from a detailed understanding of what is happening, how it will progress, and how we can best survive in a post-overpopulation world.
I would say that creating a detailed understanding is what has been done for quite some time now, yet the situation continues to worsen, and faster as time progresses. You have the understanding of the fundamental physical situation. Now gain the understanding of the fundamental moral, spiritual situation. Some people have one or the other, few fathom both. All will understand both intimately when events unfold. Most people are moral but misguided, confused. When understanding arrives, we will unite behind our general desire to live and let live (when we aren't irrationally afraid of ethereal threats. These threats will fall to the wayside for all in comparison to the threat we will all soon see and understand together)

Quote
Telling people that they are selfish and lazy because they do not see the situation in the same way that you do, even when some of them have done an enormous amount towards reducing their carbon footprints and/or making their communities self-supporting, is arrogant and insulting. Personally, I think you are well-intentioned but misguided, and your 'solution' will set back our ability to cope with the crisis. I hope I've covered everything, because I don't have time to get sucked into this debate - I'm too busy helping the local community to become more sustainable, while attempting to earn enough to get by.
Reducing our carbon footprints and recycling is not enough. We will have to sacrifice so much more first in the name of what is right. We will have to give up almost the whole world we are used to for goodness or be a part of the destruction. Our supermarkets. Our oil addiction. Our differences. Our jobs. This is the difficulty of the fundamental choice we will all soon be faced with. We must sacrifice our wants for the needs of everything and everyone else, and ourselves.

Perhaps it is not to evoke a sense of duty in you scientists to do more, but to hope to set your mind at ease for the future and prepare you to jump at the opportunity for your efforts to culminate into beautiful fruition.

I only meant to show the power of the fundamental truth and the fundamental choice all will be faced with soon. If you take nothing else from my messages, let it be that.

I truly thank you for your response. It is rational, it is focused, it is without malicious intent. Thank you for that. I will leave you all alone now unless I'm asked to respond again or deceptive attacks on the truth persist.

Have faith for the future, it is a bright one. Most of us are good, deep down, just very confused, and thus irrational. I believe that.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Bernard on March 04, 2017, 01:16:05 PM
@all except 5to10
Don't you feel like I do, that this thread is a waste of time/energy?

@5to10
Just a few personal questions

- How old are you?
- Do you have children?
- If not, do you intend to have some?

Just bare answers, w/o comments, please. Those answers seem important to understand where you speak from.

(I am 63, 3 children, 3 grandchildren)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 01:28:49 PM
@all except 5to10
Don't you feel like I do, that this thread is a waste of time/energy?

@5to10
Just a few personal questions

- How old are you?
- Do you have children?
- If not, do you intend to have some?

Just bare answers, w/o comments, please. Those answers seem important to understand where you speak from.

(I am 63, 3 children, 3 grandchildren)

You are never wasting your time and energy in pursuit of the truth.

I am not the messages I relate, and they are not mine to claim ownership. I am merely a vehicle for the truth to be shared.

Discussing my personal life is purposeless. Focus on the message. You will find unfaltering peace of mind in the truth therein.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 04, 2017, 01:33:19 PM
@all except 5to10
Don't you feel like I do, that this thread is a waste of time/energy?

@5to10
Just a few personal questions

- How old are you?
- Do you have children?
- If not, do you intend to have some?

Just bare answers, w/o comments, please. Those answers seem important to understand where you speak from.

(I am 63, 3 children, 3 grandchildren)


 The thread is fine, much of the recent content is a waste of time and energy.   Certain posts/posters can be read or ignored, as with every thread.  Most that have been reading this thread from the beginning would probably not have done what you just did.  DFTT

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 01:38:51 PM
The thread is fine, much of the recent content is a waste of time and energy.   Certain posts/posters can be read or ignored, as with every thread.  Most that have been reading this thread from the beginning would probably not have done what you just did.  DFTT
Another false representation.

A troll seeks discord through deceit. I seek unity through understanding. You do not believe in unity. Who is the troll?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Jim Pettit on March 04, 2017, 02:26:48 PM
FWIW, I have him (her?) on ignore. There's a place somewhere on the ASIF, I suppose, for bashing and berating those who refute, or just simply disagree with, your profound thoughts on how we'll all, I don't know, gather together at the base of The Tree of Souls and use a tsaheylu to tap our neuroconductive antennae into the spirit of Eywa to help save us from our self-made climate catastrophe.

But this thread probably isn't that place.

I suppose the term "open thread" can mean different things to different people. But to me it simply means this particular forum is for discussing things associated with Arctic sea ice that aren't easily categorized. This isn't where we should discuss fried chicken recipes, or association football, or stock prices--or, you know, comparative religions.

So: as many others have suggested, can we *please* move this conversation elsewhere?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Pmt111500 on March 04, 2017, 03:02:02 PM
Maybe a joke from finland (early 1980s)

what's more annoying than a drunken believer of free-market economy?
* a drunken believer of communism.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 04, 2017, 03:11:25 PM
Here's an interesting pair of images...

I've been tracking for 3 week via Polar View some large blocks turning the NE corner of Greenland into the Fram, but they are kind just sitting there.  Hoping to make an animation at some point.  Images are from 2/13 and 3/4.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Oddmonk on March 04, 2017, 03:26:15 PM
I compiled this last year regarding Franz Josef Land. An open thread about the Arctic seems a good place to post a link for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s)

Wow! Thank you for sharing, Tigertown. That's an inspiring and beautiful collection of images.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: 5to10 on March 04, 2017, 04:46:35 PM
FWIW, I have him (her?) on ignore. There's a place somewhere on the ASIF, I suppose, for bashing and berating those who refute, or just simply disagree with, your profound thoughts on how we'll all, I don't know, gather together at the base of The Tree of Souls and use a tsaheylu to tap our neuroconductive antennae into the spirit of Eywa to help save us from our self-made climate catastrophe.

But this thread probably isn't that place.

I suppose the term "open thread" can mean different things to different people. But to me it simply means this particular forum is for discussing things associated with Arctic sea ice that aren't easily categorized. This isn't where we should discuss fried chicken recipes, or association football, or stock prices--or, you know, comparative religions.

So: as many others have suggested, can we *please* move this conversation elsewhere?

You're right - figuring out a way to usefully convey and ultimately have your wealth of information widely recognized and understood such that it is used is totally not related to what you're working on here. You just want to reveal truth amongst yourselves, while complaining together that not enough people get it, I understand now.

You should just carry on doing what you've all been doing for the past umpteen years then - knowing all the details, while pining for ears that can hear you or a mouth that can properly translate towards understanding.

Keep plodding along this same old course, and find the same old results, or revolutionize the process to find new ones.

The fundamental prediction is obvious: We are in deep trouble and need to work on this ASAP.

The issue now is CONVEYING it so that everybody gets it we can choose to work on it or not, not seeking to add more percentiles to the overall probability of it happening, by way of looking for more supporting data or otherwise wasting time.

The time is now.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 04, 2017, 05:09:17 PM
Here's an interesting pair of images...

I've been tracking for 3 week via Polar View some large blocks turning the NE corner of Greenland into the Fram, but they are kind just sitting there.  Hoping to make an animation at some point.  Images are from 2/13 and 3/4.

The Fram has really been surprising lately. It looked liked it was going to take off like a rocket, but then it just kind of slowed down. I guess it's probably a good thing it did so as to allow the volume to get a little higher. The shape the ice is in and all, I am thinking the Fram will flow freely once insolation gets to the CAB.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Bernard on March 04, 2017, 06:41:53 PM
@CognitiveBias

Re. images of Fram. Even if there is not as much move as one could expect, OTOH there seems to be very few fast ice. I wonder if the presence/absence of fast ice along the coast is an important parameter in slowing down the export. Any hints about that point?

And BTW thank you for the DFTT reminder. That was my last piece of bait, promised ;-)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Andre on March 04, 2017, 06:51:37 PM
I compiled this last year regarding Franz Josef Land. An open thread about the Arctic seems a good place to post a link for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpw2QVWnw6E&t=1s)

Thanks for that TT. I really enjoyed it and it is nice to see what a stunning and beautiful landscape and scenery they have up there. Much appreciated!
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 04, 2017, 07:12:09 PM
@Bernard, 

  I think of it as a turbulent flow.  Depends on size/structure of blocks and pressure toward the coast.  Of course fast ice is reducing the size of the flow, like a buildup in a constricted artery.  Those big chunks were broken free, iirc, in February when the last big Atlantic storm swept thru.  I expected them to sweep right on out, but conditions caused them to stall and drive back toward the coast.  here's a few intermediate images from 2/18, 2/24, and 2/28.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 04, 2017, 07:20:11 PM
FWIW,  Here's the series where those big blocks reconnected to the coast... Feb 21 to 22.  Pretty dramatic 1 day change.  And the Hycom drift for that day...

https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticicespddrf/nowcast/icespddrf2017022318_2017022100_046_arcticicespddrf.001.gif
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Neven on March 04, 2017, 09:05:26 PM
As you all can see, I have moved the thread. I never liked it to begin with, because there's no need for open threads on a forum, but I try to take a laissez-faire attitude and accept it if others really want it (and stop spamming the freezing/melting threads).

I didn't the long screeds in this thread, so sorry for not intervening earlier.

I have asked 5to10 to tone it down, even though I believe he would be happier and more productive in another venue.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 05, 2017, 04:16:57 PM
Watch these large blocks accelerate into the main Fram export stream... 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Bernard on March 05, 2017, 04:37:30 PM
Are those big blocks MYI?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 05, 2017, 05:03:28 PM
Almost certainly..

https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/arcticictn_nowcast_anim365d.gif
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Cid_Yama on March 06, 2017, 12:00:33 AM
Looks like busted up formerly Fast Ice.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: CognitiveBias on March 06, 2017, 12:19:02 AM
Cid,
   I agree it was fast...stuck to the coast.  What can you say about age/thickness, if anything?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Ninebelowzero on March 08, 2017, 04:41:59 PM
......I have asked 5to10 to tone it down, even though I believe he would be happier and more productive in another venue.


As icefree Summers approach expect an increase of such outbursts. Continuing to post pictures and data in such an environment would be like constantly checking your altitude after both shutes have failed.


"Truth" and "unity" are words that send shivers up my back.....

How about "Ice free Winters!"  :D

Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on March 10, 2017, 12:24:39 PM
Going back to my earlier speculation where i expected tidal surges to rip apart the ice across the north Barents sea, i'm thinking the high pressure system that held steady over the arctic suppressed the ingress of water by pumping out deeper saline waters through the lower reaches of Fram, and that the patterns of huge vortiices down the east coast of Greenland were indicators of this flow. Even though it's early in the season there was some movement in the glaciers which may have been a consequence, it'll be interesting to see the data from the sensors A.M. placed on the north side of 79N. The situation is now reversed and in the place of the 1040+high we have a 978 low predicted, locally that would produce a 60cm+/- difference in tidal sea height, over the vast stretches of the arctic maybe 10-15cm. so any tidal surges will help to fill that void. If the prediction materialises then I expect to see the weakness of the ice exposed and warm water and 'streamers' all the way to Laptev. Again IF this happens there should also be an acceleration of surface flow out of Fram, and the 'arc' north of Nares should 'lift' north then break. We'll see
The first is a link to Worldveiw, the second shows the low forecast, the third the high on 'nullschool', the image is from nsidc,
http://go.nasa.gov/2mqlcQw (http://go.nasa.gov/2mqlcQw)
http://cci-reanalyzer.org/wxmaps/#ARC-LEA.T2 (http://cci-reanalyzer.org/wxmaps/#ARC-LEA.T2)
https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/02/27/0000Z/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-0.48,86.69,493/loc=160.513,78.139 (https://earth.nullschool.net/#2017/02/27/0000Z/wind/surface/level/overlay=mean_sea_level_pressure/orthographic=-0.48,86.69,493/loc=160.513,78.139)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnsidc.org%2Farcticseaicenews%2Ffiles%2F1999%2F12%2Ffig4b.png&hash=98ca1f357c3e71c3fc9c6230719d099e)
If you go back over the days on worldveiw it appears that very little water passed north of Svalbard allowing the ice to reform to some extent, to the south it was a different story, there were bursts of activity when streamers emerges from the ocean, the ocean grew filthy, and ice was accelerated from the south side, sometimes reaching the current flowing by N.Z.
If you wonder why the water here is so active / energetic, from the coast of Norway to Svalbard halves the distance to the axis of rotation, and consequently the speed of rotation at the Earths surface, to shed this speed the water 'tries' to get further away from the axis of rotation [up] and further south
mostly this shows up as turbulence but once a certain threshold of flow is reached rotating [and scouring] currents form, which I'm guessing shed some of their energy into evaporation.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on March 10, 2017, 03:42:44 PM
The first link is self explanatory, the second is an image of the turbulence off of the coast of Norway where the Atlantic waters have to climb the shelf or head north, [i'm guessing the locals have some special words for this type of seascape], neither of which are they energetically comfortable with.
 What I think is happening in the 2 images is the deep arctic waters are forcing their way into the deeper reaches of the glacier fjords, displacing the fresher water already there, this is forced out through the returning atlantic waters and ice causing the 'paisley' vortices and melt.
http://www.smhi.se/en/theme/air-pressure-and-sea-level-1.12266 (http://www.smhi.se/en/theme/air-pressure-and-sea-level-1.12266)
http://www.polarview.aq/images/106_S1jpgsmall/201703/S1A_IW_GRDH_1SDV_20170306T051125_B87D_N_1.jpg (http://www.polarview.aq/images/106_S1jpgsmall/201703/S1A_IW_GRDH_1SDV_20170306T051125_B87D_N_1.jpg)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201703%2FS1A_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170303T080314_B48C_N_1.jpg&hash=41436ecb83025ae59436c3c0e7decd67)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201703%2FS1A_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170303T080414_0FA8_N_1.jpg&hash=64174bda539462c639ea33178bc0701d)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on March 20, 2017, 09:33:29 PM
LRC1962
Quote
One note of caution. Even if the melt season turns out that there is not a great melt off and therefore a conclusion could be reached that the melt season was too cold or not right for melting, the ice is still in very bad shape. On top of that the winter months are getting so much warmer and stormier that what ice hangs around and actually grows is not in very good condition. In conclusion, the Arctic ice that is there is on life support and unless we humans get our act together, the rest of the earths systems are going to change so much that the normal will not be as it was even 20 years ago.
There is certainly a teleconnection between the Arctic and the rest of the Earth. Where I live, the trees have always been a rich green for my whole life til now, a place where everything could thrive with little effort. Now the trees are dead or dying with pale Autumn-ish looking leaves. Heatwaves, wildfires, floods, and droughts are happening all over the place. Don't be fooled by the TV media because they won't report everything at one time, so as to give you the big picture. The heat energy has built to a point that the Earth can longer hold it back from being harmful, even with the help of the vast oceans.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Aikimox on March 26, 2017, 09:11:01 PM
LRC1962
Quote
One note of caution. Even if the melt season turns out that there is not a great melt off and therefore a conclusion could be reached that the melt season was too cold or not right for melting, the ice is still in very bad shape. On top of that the winter months are getting so much warmer and stormier that what ice hangs around and actually grows is not in very good condition. In conclusion, the Arctic ice that is there is on life support and unless we humans get our act together, the rest of the earths systems are going to change so much that the normal will not be as it was even 20 years ago.
There is certainly a teleconnection between the Arctic and the rest of the Earth. Where I live, the trees have always been a rich green for my whole life til now, a place where everything could thrive with little effort. Now the trees are dead or dying with pale Autumn-ish looking leaves. Heatwaves, wildfires, floods, and droughts are happening all over the place. Don't be fooled by the TV media because they won't report everything at one time, so as to give you the big picture. The heat energy has built to a point that the Earth can longer hold it back from being harmful, even with the help of the vast oceans.

Yes, the changes are pretty much happening everywhere. It's the rate of change, the severity of extreme events / their frequency, what is driving us into the unknown. Check this site - https://watchers.news/ - get a glimpse of what is to come. I've noticed an interesting trend lately, volcanic activity is picking up. You know what that means. A big enough eruption could effectively cool down the planet. Strange times
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on March 28, 2017, 05:17:39 PM
I've been following the action on the east coast of Greenland using settings by AndreasT
https://go.nasa.gov/2neWQc3 zoomed once so the 200K is showing. Although i've run it from the 10th [til present] it gets interesting on the 16th when the ice shears from the coast, except for the area of Z.+79N., where it seems the more or less permanent[?] outflow of fresher water has glued the ice to the local islands and sea mounts. We've had 'streamers emerging the whole time which, I think, indicates the Atlantic waters are being forced south by the accelerated outflow through Fram, and with  the tides coming to their fullest range in the next few days  there should be some action in these east coast glaciers. Not so sure about Zachariae though, last year i expected it to break out from any time around now onwards, and eventually in sept. it did, a little, for a few days.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: NotAllIceIsFrozen on April 07, 2017, 12:00:09 AM
Can anyone elaborate on how El Nino affects weather patterns in the arctic? I live in Los Angeles and know about its effects on NA and SA, but less so on the arctic. We are still in the spring predictability barrier, so it is hard to know if another El Nino is coming... However models are showing it could be big. A return to El Nino is frightening for aquatic life but how will it affect the ice?

I know El Nino releases its heat into the atmosphere so that will have some impact, but I'm more curious about the overall weather patterns. Any insights are appreciated! Long time lurker here and this is my first post.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Neven on April 07, 2017, 08:41:39 AM
Your profile has been released, NotAllIceIsFrozen, so you can post freely now.

As far as I know, statistically speaking, there is no direct correlation between ENSO and what happens in the Arctic.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: oren on April 08, 2017, 04:42:10 PM
Thank you to all who have helped bring this thread back to sanity and usefulness. Have given up on it, entered again by mistake.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on April 08, 2017, 08:02:43 PM
The link shows some of the vortices between Norway and Svalbard, check out the temperature difference between the cold cores and their periphery. https://go.nasa.gov/2oNuXMJ
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: theoldinsane on April 09, 2017, 06:45:23 PM
More than 20,000 people stood united against terrorism Sunday at a "Lovefest" vigil in Stockholm, two days after a truck attack on a busy pedestrian street killed four people.



"Stockholm is our city, a city we are proud of, where we like to be. Fear shall not reign. Terror cannot win," Stockholm mayor Karin Wanngard said.

https://www.thelocal.se/20170409/thousands-at-stockholm-lovefest-vigil-against-terror (https://www.thelocal.se/20170409/thousands-at-stockholm-lovefest-vigil-against-terror)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on April 11, 2017, 10:17:37 AM
Looking at what the extreme tidal range around the full moon, expecting drops in Kara or possibly across the north Barents continental shelf or even a further assault on NE Greenland, so far all three are showing signs. https://go.nasa.gov/2nXY6zK clicking through 9/10 we might have an interesting few days ahead.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on April 13, 2017, 11:54:36 AM
Same link as above but the 11th it looks like the Atlantic intrusion has climbed the shelf and is creating turmoil in Barents, IF that's right Kara should crash in the next two days, followed by some melt in Laptev. Looking at the high pressure building over Beaufort, if it can't drive enough water through the archipelago it'll accelerate the flow through Fram and n/e Greenland is already looking vulnerable, if that high grows and persists as predicted the fast ice could be gone in weeks rather than months. https://go.nasa.gov/2p9A3Td (https://go.nasa.gov/2p9A3Td)
http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/?model=gfs&region=nhem&pkg=z500_mslp&runtime=2017041300&fh=0 (http://www.tropicaltidbits.com/analysis/models/?model=gfs&region=nhem&pkg=z500_mslp&runtime=2017041300&fh=0)
It's difficult to have any confidence in what the images seem to be portraying but this one looks to me  like a turbulent front of a tidal surge passing northern Norway
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201704%2FS1B_IW_GRDH_1SDV_20170412T050217_0DB9_N_1.jpg&hash=3a37db802c00abbf45a3bbf04b6ed14e)
https://www.tide-forecast.com/locations/Hammerfest-Norway/tides/latest (https://www.tide-forecast.com/locations/Hammerfest-Norway/tides/latest)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on April 14, 2017, 11:18:01 PM
prokaryotes,
Quote
Will there be impact on the Greenland surface melt, like we had in 2012? So far not much? (tick 2017 to compare 2012 with 2017 in NSIDC interactive graph)
http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/greenland-surface-melt-extent-interactive-chart (http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/greenland-surface-melt-extent-interactive-chart)

Notice NSIDC stated April 3, 2017
Daily updates have resumed for the 2017 melt season. Bit puzzling, according to the data not a single melt day so far?

Quote
In recent decades, the Greenland ice sheet has experienced increased surface melt. However, the underlying cause of this increased surface melting and how it relates to cryospheric changes across the Arctic remain unclear. Here it is shown that an important contributing factor is the decreasing Arctic sea ice. Reduced summer sea ice favors stronger and more frequent occurrences of blocking-high pressure events over Greenland. Blocking highs enhance the transport of warm, moist air over Greenland, which increases downwelling infrared radiation, contributes to increased extreme heat events, and accounts for the majority of the observed warming trends. These findings are supported by analyses of observations and reanalysis data, as well as by independent atmospheric model simulations using a state-of-the-art atmospheric model that is forced by varying only the sea ice conditions. Reduced sea ice conditions in the model favor more extensive Greenland surface melting. The authors find a positive feedback between the variability in the extent of summer Arctic sea ice and melt area of the summer Greenland ice sheet, which affects the Greenland ice sheet mass balance. This linkage may improve the projections of changes in the global sea level and thermohaline circulation.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0391.1 (http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0391.1)
I was curious about this conversation in PIOMAS, and was hoping you all would continue it here.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on April 15, 2017, 12:02:45 PM
Looking at this image posted by AndrewB, and thinking about how chaos seems to be unfolding, it's possible that 2017 ends up outside [below] 95% confidence limits, not even unprecedented.
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.arctic-sea-ice.net%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D119.0%3Battach%3D43954%3Bimage&hash=fdaa890375eb1361e2bc6fff2a2c79e7)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: prokaryotes on April 15, 2017, 02:24:38 PM
I was curious about this conversation in PIOMAS, and was hoping you all would continue it here.
Ofc, would be nice to get some expert opinions on this years projected melt rates and the data.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on April 19, 2017, 07:14:59 PM
Thought this might be a sign of fresh water break-out at Z/79N
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201704%2FS1A_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170419T072129_CD0F_N_1.jpg&hash=45bd14193e6d6f77ffcf8e4242a3195b)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: DrTskoul on April 19, 2017, 08:39:36 PM
Thought this might be a sign of fresh water break-out at Z/79N
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.polarview.aq%2Fimages%2F106_S1jpgsmall%2F201704%2FS1A_EW_GRDM_1SDH_20170419T072129_CD0F_N_1.jpg&hash=45bd14193e6d6f77ffcf8e4242a3195b)

Neat picture...
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on April 27, 2017, 04:55:52 AM
This is so far off topic that I decided to post it here. Nothing to do with the Arctic, ice, weather, politics, or the climate.


https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22065.epdf?referrer_access_token=K7YEITbJ8uC_NrvJbk7xt9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Odq55Wqltd4FPUqYwCTOB2IrOnkHrOr5WzFT30V6_TbRCnSa_T-wd68zU4WCQ8LwAJBpgHBZM-5uUPYwAexL19U9y6Op-4yiTaoWW1C780uooP_8lrf3O3lrf2Q82N_qS4-Ir5i6wCpR_7KfAHqci4Hxx5-eQwFtUmsP6kVlm4_GCJ_XAv2qUGuy4zmvOYEOESUd9XUPC--hiSKvbZkQwn&tracking_referrer=www.cbc.ca (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22065.epdf?referrer_access_token=K7YEITbJ8uC_NrvJbk7xt9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Odq55Wqltd4FPUqYwCTOB2IrOnkHrOr5WzFT30V6_TbRCnSa_T-wd68zU4WCQ8LwAJBpgHBZM-5uUPYwAexL19U9y6Op-4yiTaoWW1C780uooP_8lrf3O3lrf2Q82N_qS4-Ir5i6wCpR_7KfAHqci4Hxx5-eQwFtUmsP6kVlm4_GCJ_XAv2qUGuy4zmvOYEOESUd9XUPC--hiSKvbZkQwn&tracking_referrer=www.cbc.ca)


The above link is to a Nature article describing the discovery of a Mastodon in San Diego, along with stone tools used to work some of the bone, that dates back to 130 K years ago. While artifacts of this age may not shock our European readers, the Americas were assumed to have been settled less than 30,000 years ago, and less than half of that age by those who still believe that the Clovis were Americas first residents.


To say this is huge understates the importance of this find.


It's only in recent years that any finds below the Clovis horizon were taken seriously. This blows previous studies of the earliest peopling of the America's totally out of the water.
Who were these people. Did any of their offspring survive. If not, why not?
There is a site north of me that has been claimed to contain stone tools from before the ice age. It has not been accepted because of it's supposed age - this now needs to be looked at afresh.
In California the "Early Man Site" has claimed tools of this age.
I've been to both of these sites, at the Ontario site I was accompanied by the son of the chief researcher. At the Early Man site I've sat beside a fire pit that was over 80K old.


North American Archaeology is my other hobby and I felt I had to share this news.
Thanks for your forbearance.
Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: wili on April 27, 2017, 05:49:15 AM
Thanks for sharing this, Terry. That is indeed stunning!
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on April 27, 2017, 06:11:40 AM
Thanks for sharing this, Terry. That is indeed stunning!


I'm so relieved that you're not berating me for being so far OT.
It really is a stunning discovery and I'm glad you found it interesting.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: mati on April 27, 2017, 07:19:29 AM
i love science, but i do hate amazing announcements without peer review nor corroborations

https://www.amazon.ca/Summer-Leprechauns-Story-Tanis-Helliwell/dp/1577330013 (https://www.amazon.ca/Summer-Leprechauns-Story-Tanis-Helliwell/dp/1577330013)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on April 27, 2017, 09:18:07 AM
i love science, but i do hate amazing announcements without peer review nor corroborations

https://www.amazon.ca/Summer-Leprechauns-Story-Tanis-Helliwell/dp/1577330013 (https://www.amazon.ca/Summer-Leprechauns-Story-Tanis-Helliwell/dp/1577330013)


Your leprechaun seems to have global warming down pat.   :)  The new discovery was of course peer reviewed before Nature would touch the story.
Just like the pre-Clovis discoveries and continental drift, it may take decades before it's accepted. Even with the Clovis point found stuck firmly in a mammoth's rib, it took that long before the die hards accepted that mammoth and man lived together.


This still could be disproven, but with the early man site in California and the Sheguiandah site on Manitoulin island, the evidence keeps piling up.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 06, 2017, 03:23:52 PM
More speculation i'm afraid. Looking at the following animations [how to embed these as they are right now escapes me] I'm thinkg the first shows a compression wave passing through the ice driven by the high pressure system emerging from over the CAA, top right. As the pressure wave passes it produces some internal waves which are more or less parallel to the source, then a surge of water follows, at depth, flooding into Amundsen and MClure, forcing the surface ice out. The second shows the movement of the surface ice driven by the same forces.
(https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/beaufortstrength_nowcast_anim30d.gif)
(https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/hycomARC/navo/beaufortictn_nowcast_anim30d.gif)
Terry if that kind of thing interests you treat yourself to a copy of forbidden archeology cremo-thompson, stuffed with inconvenient facts, and nonsense.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 08, 2017, 07:18:16 PM
Tigertown posted this animation, i'm curious atm about mslp and ice movement so with new/full/new moons on the 7nth22nd and 6th
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.arctic-sea-ice.net%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D1834.0%3Battach%3D45015%3Bimage&hash=1ddd664946d093ae6a64bd043dfcffed)
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcci-reanalyzer.org%2Freanalysis%2Fmonthly_maps%2Foutput%2Fmap_8867.png&hash=3b0302281659d7d75f12e5ccc30331c1)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: oren on May 08, 2017, 07:45:12 PM
John did you notice the animation is of 2016?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 08, 2017, 07:55:22 PM
John
Very nice animation.
My experience from years past is that ~2 days past high tide fast ice is liable to slip away from shore, and begin it's trek. I've assumed that the high tide breaks the ice, then it takes a short period of jostling before it gains it's freedom.


The death of the ice shelves fascinates me, but whenever the tides tear things up it makes for great viewing.


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 08, 2017, 09:56:42 PM
Oren Yes as is the mslp chart  :)
It takes a while for reanalysis to put this years up.
Terry Agreed, wish i could do them. I used to think it was the high tides but now think it's the tidal range that matters, very low and very high tides, and just a little bias to breaking at low, here because it's a persistent high pressure system I think low water [not that the tides up there are very big] and am thinking water moves away from the center of the high, then there's the wind.
All too fascinating, a great distraction from political lunacy though.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 08, 2017, 10:15:51 PM
Oren Yes as is the mslp chart  :)
It takes a while for reanalysis to put this years up.
Terry Agreed, wish i could do them. I used to think it was the high tides but now think it's the tidal range that matters, very low and very high tides, and just a little bias to breaking at low, here because it's a persistent high pressure system I think low water [not that the tides up there are very big] and am thinking water moves away from the center of the high, then there's the wind.
All too fascinating, a great distraction from political lunacy though.
Ramen  8)


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 12, 2017, 12:17:08 PM
Has anyone else here considered catastrophism and what it might help explain? Is a reconsideration of the uniformitarian/catastrophism debate worth a thread?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 15, 2017, 06:36:35 AM
John
If you're willing to accept the black mat as catastrophism I have some data that you might find interesting.
Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 15, 2017, 11:08:34 AM
Terry I'm not familiar with the term 'black mat' so assuming it's not a pejoritive and refers to this http://www.pnas.org/content/105/18/6520.full (http://www.pnas.org/content/105/18/6520.full) sort of thing, which coincides precisely with events that catatstrophism has alternative and sometimes almost unimaginable explanations for, I'm interested.
john
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 15, 2017, 01:24:26 PM
John - Neven
Perhaps we could start here, then move to a more appropriate thread if any interest builds.


John
That's the stuff I refer to. I've samples from Murray Springs AZ, Naco Site AZ, Clovis Site NM, Gilcrease Ranch Site NV, Tule Springs Site NV, - Many unreported locals in CA, NV, AZ, & ONT.CA. It's ubiquitous in the Mojave Desert & at least the Northern Sonora Desert.
If you've in the SouthWest & you come across Clovis tools or Ice Age Animal remains, the Black Mat is nearby.
Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 15, 2017, 06:40:41 PM
Terry, this is well off piste as far as scientists are concerned, but then looking back at the uniformitarianism/catastrophism [C/U] debate it's hard to see choosing U. as a scientific decision, but since then everything has been seen through that prism, so to speak, and if anything didn't fit that paradigm it was set aside, then ignored. I've no great wish to upset their applecart but some things are better explained by C. and should they be closer to the truth the impacts on how this impending disaster unfolds are profound. So before we go any further this http://bearfabrique.org/History/floods/mfloods.html (http://bearfabrique.org/History/floods/mfloods.html)  is a fairly concise outline, including some of the ignored facts. I try to keep this seperate, in my mind, and it took about 15 years of serendipitously coming across abandoned facts before my old more conventional worldveiw began to crack.
john
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 15, 2017, 11:04:23 PM
John
I'm sorry - That's a bridge too far for me. Let me apologize for not reading all of your linked. I did read enough to get a clear picture of where it was headed, and recognized that I'd been there in the past and had rejected the arguments that were coming.


I read Velikovsky a teen and was intrigued, but - many of the events he ascribes to extraterrestrial intervention are convincingly explained by the volcanic explosion of Thera near Santorini.


I've seen the K-T line and I'm convinced - primarily because of the iridium content, that we were hit.
I've seen the Black Mat and I'm convinced, partially because of the iridium content, that we were hit.


These events certainly were catastrophic for whatever animals that lived in their vicinity. The K-T event almost certainly affected the globe, the BM (Black Mat) almost certainly affected the North American Continent. A smaller event affecting a smaller region, but still hugely important to the history of life on our planet.


The burden of proof needed to dissuade me of the notion that the K-T line or the BM strata were not extraterrestrial in origin would be massive. To convince me that the K-T impact was not the primary event responsible for the eventual demise of dinosaurs would take a lot of new facts, and to convince me that the BM event wasn't the primary driver for ending the Rancholabrean complex would require a similar amount of new data.


I'm feel conflicted because I'm rejecting your presently unpopular prehistoric read while simultaneously advocating for my cause celebre. I hope the above offers some light on my stance.


Apologetically
Terry







Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: mati on May 16, 2017, 01:06:40 AM
JOY  ;D

i'm back to loving this site again :)

once i figured out how to turn on ignore :O

blood pressure you know  :o
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 16, 2017, 12:14:00 PM
Terry, that's fine, it took me years to get round to reading Velikovsky and, from my casual enquiry, was surprised how much I agreed with his veiws, at least about the consistency of ancient accounts of events. The planetary stuff was all new to me, and his prescient predictions of Venus' spin and surface temperature certainly got my attention. His historical stuff is interesting too, 'seven gated thebes' refers to the time when greek mercenary 'kings' ruled the 7 cities on the nile entrances to Egypt as vassals of the Assyrians.
But clearly there has to be some sensible explanation for all the stranded whale carcasses and the presence of arctic fauna in the black and caspian seas and lake baikal. I'd agree that some sort of impact took place around the black mat event, also something took place that affected carbon dating and I suspect it may not have been a single event some far more serious than others.  KT is too remote an event to have any current implications.   
That said i thought it best to jump in the deep end since there's no accounting for all these things with current mainstream theories. So no apology needed.
john
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 16, 2017, 01:45:06 PM
Johnm33
Too start things off on a positive note, I'd like to introduce some evidence(?) for the BM, (Black Mat) theory that ASAIK hasn't been published to date, although my "to date" may lag the today's calendar by >5 years.


The BM is so extensive near Las Vegas, NV that in the 1960's when work was being done near the Tule Springs Site, someone assumed they had dug down to a Paleo fire pit. With trowels and toothbrushes they went about documenting the site properly. As the find got larger and larger, they began sinking test pits out in all directions and found the dark ash at the same depth wherever they looked.


My future landlord was in charge of an apprentice training program for the local Heavy Equipment Operators Union and was able to lend the dig the use of a large bulldozer, with operator(s). The question was of course whether all the locations where the ash layer was found were in fact a single entity, or whether they had stumbled onto an area where many discrete bonfires had been lit close together spatially and chronologically.


The way he told the story was that they stripped out a blade width of overburden between half a dozen pits, linking them to each other & back to the initial dig. One of the operator trainees inquired whether it would help if he could dig an inch or two into the BM, then run out in a straight line until the came to the end of the "burn". They apparently ran ~1 mile on each of the compass points, dropped a few holes even further out - then buried everything they'd done that day.


Whatever they had found was determined not to be the work of man, and therefore of no interest to the Anthropology Department. The strata that followed modern surface contours so closely was of little interest to the Geology Department, who preferred rocks and minerals anyway. And the Heavy Equipment Operator who held his class there that day was the only one left who spoke of the event. Fortunately, he evolved into a gabby sort who told tales I relished decades later.


As far as being on topic, the BM theory is tied to the wild thermal gyrations that accompanied the Younger Dryas. Hope this tenuous linkage makes the subject acceptable.
Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on May 20, 2017, 06:31:37 PM
Terry, I've been reading up a little on black mats, curiously there's a layer on the beach where we walk the dogs that may be one, http://www.cornishcoastphotos.co.uk/_photo_14526457.html (http://www.cornishcoastphotos.co.uk/_photo_14526457.html)
What would best fit my 'scenario' is algae on ice, but a short lived saltmarsh would fit too. I found this which suggests algae but not ice, directly above it should be fine wind blown sediment from an ecosystem in transition, without established ground cover.
 https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=a401dLh_JkgC&pg=PA242&lpg=PA242&dq=black+mat+organic+content&source=bl&ots=2J3OkVo7xi&sig=8ImBbYsuCR37KQ0-njL7AhYUsPg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjXj5udjP7TAhUJ1RoKHbnCC3IQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=black%20mat%20organic%20content&f=false (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=a401dLh_JkgC&pg=PA242&lpg=PA242&dq=black+mat+organic+content&source=bl&ots=2J3OkVo7xi&sig=8ImBbYsuCR37KQ0-njL7AhYUsPg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjXj5udjP7TAhUJ1RoKHbnCC3IQ6AEILzAB#v=onepage&q=black%20mat%20organic%20content&f=false)
john
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on May 21, 2017, 05:58:51 AM
For some reason your book won't allow me in.
I'm very familiar with the Murray Springs Site having Black Mat samples, a marvelous Clovis hammer stone rescued from a flash flood & some crumbs that are all that remain when mammoth bone is exposed to the environment.
IIRC Vance finally came out against the BM theory and I had read his thoughts on the subject some time ago. BTW the Murray Springs dig was finally written up, ~40 yrs after work was completed.


The dating on your beach mat is ~10Kyr too young, but I have read that finds have been made in Northern Europe, possibly England? One of the easy ways to eliminate false finds is a strong magnet - the BM contains magnetic particles. Enclosing the magnet in a condom will allow the particles to be removed easily.
Not aware if you have any ice age bones lying about in your region, but if the black mat is there, it will drape them, but never be found under them.
That is one beautiful beach - I'm envious!


We used the strata as a marker to know when we were close to ice age or Clovis goodies decades before anyone had any idea of what it was it why it was there.


Goodyear and Firestone are still the authorities when it comes to the BM, although a very well thought of anthropologist at ROM (Royal Ontario Museum) in Toronto has told me that after finding magnetic particles embedded the upper portions of most of the Mammoth and Mastodon tusks in their collection, he's become a true believer.
He gave a wonderful lecture a few years back for the OAS (Ontario Archaeologist Society) with samples, tusks and a magnet, ever brought a ball thrower for his dog as an example of a modern atlatl  :)  - I provided some samples from further afield.[size=78%] [/size]


Terry
BTW If I'm drifting into the pedantic please, gently, make me aware of it.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on June 07, 2017, 07:23:41 PM
Meltponds anyone?
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on June 15, 2017, 09:14:59 PM
From IJIS,
I expect there will eventually come a time where the number of climate change deniers will dwindle to the point where they're essentially irrelevant, like the flat earthers. I would love to think that we could reach that point earlier rather than later, maybe because some event like an ice-free North Pole some year soon would convince certain prominent voices among them to change their minds.

It's a thin hope, but I think it's behind why some part of me roots for a record low extent each year.

If it makes you feel better, this is actually the case literally everywhere besides the US. Parties that deny the reality of climate change have been continually eviscerated; UKIP was the latest example. Insofar as that reflects the views of the electorate, it does seem to indicate that most people in the world accept that climate change is happening and caused by humans.

Edit: Sorry, realized this is probably too off topic. Won't respond any further.
For one thing in the U.S. most people have enjoyed the changes rather than being harmed by them. I hear people all the time saying how much they like the warmer winter. People go around in shorts and t-shirts, happy and care free, when it should be snowing and cold.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on June 26, 2017, 04:51:29 AM
From the Latest PIOMAS Update thread;
Quote
thickness vs area curves is that this year the very thick ice is almost gone, the thick ice that will make it through the summer will be very thin, and there's lots of thin ice that will melt out.
Right. It would seem a given volume spread out over a large extent -- eg Oren's Inner Basin chart for the end of the month -- favors heat access modes and so collective top and bottom melt. Wind over long fetches then mixes warm water from depth and disperses weak ice over it.

Preconditioning from the extraordinary conditions last fall is easy to forget with the freeze forum split off but certain to manifest itself. Throw in unfavorable (or even unremarkable) weather and we will have quite a few weeks of extensive open water in late season exposing vulnerable residual ice to further risk and putting the dampers on the fall 2017 refreeze. There's no turning back.
It seems the natural thing to ask next is:
What will it be like going into the 2018 melt season without any multi-year thick ice? If there is any at all it will be scarce. What is left from this year will be meager two-year ice by that point.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on June 26, 2017, 02:43:35 PM
For some years in my simplistic analyses I have thought that it would be when big impacts on winter ice happened that a tipping point could happen. I don't  think it will be this year. But if winter 17-18 replicates last winter and the ice-cap enters winter in an already enfeebled state....

It is just a case of when, not if.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on June 26, 2017, 04:28:25 PM
Quote
But if winter 17-18 replicates last winter and the ice-cap enters winter in an already enfeebled state....
Too much open water late in the season is one thing that will cause another rough winter for the Arctic, along with the oceans' warmth all over.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on July 24, 2017, 03:40:11 PM
I know that I sound like a broke record, but I keep reading arguments over extent as a gauge for the melt season and the year overall. I reiterate that we use extent daily because it is available daily not because it is the best metric that we have.

From IJIS,
Quote

Quote
The mistake you and others make is the assumption that this year's ice is anything like previous years.  Or that this year's climate is anything like previous years.   Or that atmospheric circulation or ocean currents and temperatures are anything like previous years.

You can crunch numbers all you want, but if circumstances in the past in no way resemble current circumstances, then it's just GIGO.

You can't treat a transforming system as if it's a static one and derive anything useful.

We have variations on this post LITERALLY EVERY YEAR.  One year they will be right, much like a stopped clock. When that year comes, don't delude yourself that you deserve credit for your foresight.

Where did THAT come from?  You may be fighting some personal demon, but it's not me.
Personal attacks are out of place here, especially when they are based on nothing but your own issues

One response to this;
Ned W,
Quote
You told other people that they're wrong.  Peter Ellis told you that you're wrong.  His language was perhaps slightly more pointed than yours, but not that much.

He is right that every year people say "conditions this year are totally different from any other previous year" and then most of the time the season proceeds more or less as it did the year before and the year before that. 

We're about six weeks away from the minimum.  Over the past six weeks, extent has decreased by 3.51 million km2.  For the previous decade, the average was 3.59.  Seems pretty typical to me.


I agree with Cid that the system is dynamic, but I think that an extent based thread is not where this discussion belongs. The Arctic Sea Ice extent is about as meaningless right this moment as it will ever be. It doesn't even have the usual value in regard to albedo because so much is so thin that the sun's rays pass right through it.

Anyway, extent has been used so much everyday of every year, it has become a stumbling block. We need to look at the overall picture, and on a large enough high res. screen, not a tiny phone.


Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on July 24, 2017, 06:29:54 PM
I agree with Cid that the system is dynamic, but I think that an extent based thread is not where this discussion belongs. The Arctic Sea Ice extent is about as meaningless right this moment as it will ever be. It doesn't even have the usual value in regard to albedo because so much is so thin that the sun's rays pass right through it.

Anyway, extent has been used so much everyday of every year, it has become a stumbling block. We need to look at the overall picture, and on a large enough high res. screen, not a tiny phone.

once more you nailed it down. unfortunately it's not wise to discus the flaws of a widely adopted or only available method in a forum/thread/group that is dedicated to exactly that method. emotional "head-wind" is unavoidable and as we all know i regularly fall into such traps because my way of thinking is simply to straight forward to consider typical human reactions at any given moment.

of course i'm of the opinion that the shortcomings of a method should be discussed exactly there because the audience is right, but as history and experience show, that simply does never lead to anything positive but a lot of back and forth bickering, hence it's "not wise" to go there.

recent events once more showed me that and once ones voice is not listened to anymore, one could know who god is and remain unheard ;) which finally is to no-ones benefit. many enough were/are killed simply for telling to truth or a believe that is not convenient to the establishment or that's against the actual main stream. the subconscious mind is a huge force.
 
since this is the open thread i hope that's within range, your post just inspired me :-)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Mozi on July 24, 2017, 06:51:43 PM
They are actually looking at data, with all the caveats required.

You have made up your mind as to the outcome and seem to have no goal but to remind people of that.

Which is not to say you will not be correct eventually, but only one of those discussions is in any way interesting.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on July 24, 2017, 06:59:06 PM
At which point I scuttled back to threads where data is still considered of value.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on July 24, 2017, 07:13:03 PM
They are actually looking at data, with all the caveats required.

You have made up your mind as to the outcome and seem to have no goal but to remind people of that.

Which is not to say you will not be correct eventually, but only one of those discussions is in any way interesting.

if you mean me i can tell that the motive (goal) you assume is exactly NOT my goal and is jumping to conclusions if i may say so.

my goal is to remind people to look at the whole picture instead of jumping to conclusions based on a flawed but available method and at the same time adapt their statements to something like daily moves of that graph. those two things combined, following ever little change and making up a september outcome of it and then considering the fact that the value of that method at this time of the year is at least limited (nicely said) leads to a lot of non-sense about a serious topic and most people when getting aware feel .........  while that was never the intention.

there is written a lot of literature about that and as i said, i will further restrain because as stated above it's neither target leading nor wise to do so.

my key point however is that some individuals simply, as it's very common, in case of doubt assume a bad/negative motivation because that's a lot easier and at the same time lessens the value of a statement in favour of their own while i believe to base an analysis on best possible data (foundation) is key to get the most accurate result and even more importantly avoid totally wrong results that would only help those who deny the entire thing.

i'm not sure but i do not want to go beyond certain limits again, hence i think all is said, should you be genuinely interested to find out more don't hesitate to PM, i'm always open to honest and constructive input of any kind

enjoy further
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on July 24, 2017, 07:35:20 PM
I certainly don't know the exact outcome of the season. I know that it may end with extent fairly high, but how does anyone consider that a good thing if all the ice that is left is thin. If they do so, then they were the ones looking for a victory in numbers, and that is the only kind of win they will have. There will be troubles and consequences that will carry over into the freezing season and next year.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Ned W on July 24, 2017, 10:14:06 PM
I know that I sound like a broke record, but I keep reading arguments over extent as a gauge for the melt season and the year overall. I reiterate that we use extent daily because it is available daily not because it is the best metric that we have.
I don't think there is a "best" metric. They each have their advantages and disadvantages.

It wouldn't matter if the available extent and volume were telling the same story. The problem is that they sure seem to be dropping at different rates:

(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Ft1bsTLt.png&hash=f76a4f188a2a13a5ab8de309bfbbd812)

Note that in that graph, both PIOMAS volume and NSIDC extent [both are September monthly means] have been scaled such that their 1980-1989 averages are set to 1.00 -- so the graph is showing the fraction of ice remaining, relative to that 1980-1989 baseline.

Ultimately, they both have to converge, but that could happen in various ways.  Extent could speed up to match volume; volume could slow down to match extent; they could converge on some intermediate date; etc.

This is a big forum with lots of threads and lots of people participating.  I think we can manage to follow both extent and volume simultaneously.  I also don't see any need to declare one or the other to be "best" or to criticize people for paying too much attention to whatever we think isn't "best".
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on July 24, 2017, 11:19:59 PM
Ned W,
Thank you for your professionalism in your reply.  I am always using and referencing extent. I just don't necessarily think that every time it pauses, it means melt has stopped and the season is saved and this no longer is more than an ordinary year. Not that any one person is championing that theme, but I keep getting the feeling that some are grasping for straws due to the extent not nose diving. One thing your chart would seem to indicate is that the ice will probably get thinner each year, which would be the only way for extent to lag volume, other than concentration# dropping. All until, like you said, the two merge. I believe the shape the ice will be in going into winter will be a problem in and of itself. Whether it prolongs the melt season or not*, it will interfere with re-freezing and will actually draw storms rather than just allowing them during the winter.

# Area has dropped many days this season more than extent
*Late season export that does not easily halt, for example.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on August 03, 2017, 05:59:48 AM
Houston; We have a problem!
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F&hash=35d7d5d7526c9897dfb55501e320295a)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on August 03, 2017, 02:48:24 PM
Houston; We have a problem!

Antarctic sea ice extent is the culprit.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1759.msg123514.html#msg123514
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on August 03, 2017, 04:56:43 PM

Antarctic sea ice extent is the culprit.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1759.msg123514.html#msg123514

And how! It continues another day.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on August 03, 2017, 05:05:38 PM
Houston; We have a problem!
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F&hash=35d7d5d7526c9897dfb55501e320295a)

when it comes to the topic of global warming of which sea-ice loss is a result and indicator it's global sea-ice the draws the real picutre ice-wise and as we can see (thanks for posting it, i follow that daily) we are "BELOW" 2016 and of course any other year and that is extent, taking volume it looks even much worse, especially if we convert those observation values into mega-joules and the likes, the surplus energy needed to get rid of that volume.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on August 11, 2017, 05:57:38 PM
The world's sea ice reaches new lows for the days of the year.
(https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F&hash=35d7d5d7526c9897dfb55501e320295a)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: magnamentis on August 11, 2017, 09:49:37 PM
you're right but why reaches ? it has been like that for most of the year or do i translate the word "reach" wrongly. until now i thought reaching is to get to a point/state/place where one has not been the moment before? would gladly make sure that i'm not mistaken or learn.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on August 11, 2017, 11:49:26 PM
you're right but why reaches ? it has been like that for most of the year or do i translate the word "reach" wrongly. until now i thought reaching is to get to a point/state/place where one has not been the moment before? would gladly make sure that i'm not mistaken or learn.
If you can make a vertical line for this date or rather yesterday's on the graph, you can see how far below we are to the lowest per date or day of year. For example, yesterday it is the lowest for the 10th day of August compared to equivalent past days of the year in satellite history. So it reached a new low. Yes it has been low, but not this low. It looks to have beat the record by a few hundred thousand km2.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on August 12, 2017, 01:26:21 AM
I've been searching for the appropriate tread.


A warning to anyone with savings in the State of Maryland, or possibly with Hartford Funds.


I recently was sent two warnings that my accounts would be transferred to "State abandoned property" because i hadn't been in contact with them for >3 years.


This was not the case of a $5.00 account I'd overlooked but each account was in excess of 6 figures.


I'd had no immediate need of the money and (falsely) assumed it was in safe hands until a need or want of the funds became obvious.


Apparently no action on my part is required, other than to let them know of my interest, but I will be looking for other places to stash my ill gotten gains.


If I'd been on an extended vacation this could have been a real upset.


Just a word to the wise
Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: iamlsd on August 12, 2017, 02:58:24 PM
Hey TerryM I'll happily store your ill gotten gains as SolarCoin if you like.  I've only got 20 coins so far which at about 15 US cents is not going to make me rich. But perhaps they'll be like bitcoins and sky rocket in value. Then I can repay your funds and keep the interest :)

Curious if any one else has come across SolarCoin and if it will drive investment in renewables which is the aim of the crypto currency.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tigertown on August 12, 2017, 03:02:01 PM
Global NSIDC sea ice extent is down another 88k.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Tor Bejnar on August 12, 2017, 04:34:43 PM
...I recently was sent two warnings that my accounts would be transferred to "State abandoned property" because i hadn't been in contact with them for >3 years. ...
This has been the 'law of the land' (in the USA) for decades (for bank accounts).  About 25 years ago the social service agency I worked for (as financial manager) managed (on behalf of a community focus group from a decade earlier) a special 'passbook savings account' that held funds for a very rarely needed purpose.  When I got the job, I dutifully took the passbook in to get interest updated (a couple years worth of monthly additions!) and then got it updated 2 or 3 times a year.  We then got the notice that it was about to be considered an 'abandoned account' as there had been no deposit or withdrawal in X years (bringing in the passbook didn't count, obviously) (from when some law was enacted, actually).  I promptly 'donated' $1 to the enterprise to reset the clock.  The two remaining-in-the-community members of the original focus group then decided to 'donate' the several hundred (thousand? - I don't recall) dollars to my agency.  (The account required two signatures, and the two happened to both be among the five authorized signatures!)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on August 12, 2017, 06:16:48 PM
Thanks Tor
My warning is apparently unneeded, but this really came out of the blue.


These weren't bank accounts but investment accounts that I've held for decades. If I wanted to buy of sell a piece of real estate I'd pull from or deposit to one of these & hadn't touched either since 2008. Apparently accruing earnings isn't considered "activity".


iamlsd
I missed my shot at becoming a Bit Coin Billionaire when I drove past a newly installed Bit Coin ATM on the way to a meeting in Toronto. I'd have bought some if I hadn't been running late. :-\


Terry
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: Neven on August 12, 2017, 10:56:28 PM
Back in 2011 or 2012 someone offered to donate some BitCoins for the blog. I said I would look into it, but was too busy.  :-\ ;D
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on August 17, 2017, 12:59:37 PM
Interesting paper on how the sun works, from an electric universe perspective, may give some insight into variability. http://www.journalcra.com/sites/default/files/23817.pdf (http://www.journalcra.com/sites/default/files/23817.pdf)
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on December 30, 2017, 10:16:49 PM
Just another variable to think about, http://oap.onu.edu.ua/article/download/114695/113096&hl=it&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm2nQKAN8wmkGCzhjfIgNbZjQp2lHw&nossl=1&oi=scholaralrt
Periodic vulcanism/cooling caused by barycentric motion of sun, 4 pages. Coming soon.
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: gerontocrat on January 03, 2018, 04:27:23 PM
I occasionally (e.g. when JAXA has gone off-line - again) look for articles that improve my knowledge on climate stuff but don't strain my brain too much.

Here are two articles by Mark Maslin, Professor of Palaeoclimatology, UCL, and doesn't he write well, all about ice age cycles.

https://theconversation.com/ice-ages-have-been-linked-to-the-earths-wobbly-orbit-but-when-is-the-next-one-70069,
https://www.nature.com/articles/540208a  (Forty years of linking orbits to ice ages )
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: TerryM on January 04, 2018, 07:16:47 AM
I don't know where else to put this - so


Intel and all the other chip makers have a built in flaw that makes every computer built in the last 10 years? susceptible to easy hacks.


There are 2 separate flaws, one can be fixed by software, at a terrible cost in speed, another that needs a replacement chip that hasn't been designed yet.


This apparently affects every chip in computers, phones, or whatever.


https://twitter.com/nicoleperlroth/status/948684376249962496

Sleep well - and close down your e-banking accounts
Terry
 
Title: Re: 2017 open thread
Post by: johnm33 on January 04, 2018, 11:39:22 AM
Given what he had to work with i think Milankovitch did a great job, but until someone falsifies the apparent fact of Sirius' refusal to comply with precession i don't allow myself to believe he was right. http://binaryresearchinstitute.com/bri/4.0/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Sirius-Transit-Data-1988-to-2007-Comparison-to-Precession-1024x530.jpg
(https://puu.sh/yU5CQ/a4b9b75fef.jpg)
Since it seems to maintain station the only way i can imagine that to be possible is if both the sun and Sirius follow a similar spiralling orbit around the galactic center; for instance as it would be on the [imaginary] surface of one of a twisted pair http://etacar.put.poznan.pl/piotr.pieranski/IdealTwistedPair.html
 So a 13ky+/- 1/2 orbit would be something like
(https://puu.sh/yU1Dd/895882434b.png)
Assuming the solar system maintains a 26ky orbit perpendicular to the center of such an imaginary curved spiralling cylinder the other periodic alterations may be accounted for by, for instance, crossing the galactic plane, meeting the other imaginary pairs surface, or nearest/furthest approach to the galactic center. It would also go some way to explaining the synchronicity of variability of the two stars. [though that assumes some energetic flow from galaxy central].
added images