Archive for 2007

Could Warmer Oceans Make Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Rise Faster Than Expected?

Wednesday, October 24th, 2007

ScienceDaily (Oct. 24, 2007) — Could the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere rise more drastically than previously assumed? The air contains greenhouse gases such as CO2, which are now known to be responsible for global warming because their concentration has risen continuously for a number of years. In contrast to the atmosphere, the concentration of CO2 in the oceans is sixty times higher.

In the global carbon cycle the sea absorbs a proportion of the atmospheric CO2 but also releases CO2 into the atmosphere again. About half of the anthropogenic emission of CO2 is absorbed naturally by the oceans. Thus it is all the more important to understand how the exchange of CO2 between the ocean and the atmosphere functions with regard to a world that is warming up. The newly available study shows that the ocean was able to store more CO2 during the ice age than it can today.

More…

‘Unexpected growth’ in CO2 found

Wednesday, October 24th, 2007

The train is picking up speed…

=======================================

Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen 35% faster than expected since 2000, says a study.

International scientists found that inefficiency in the use of fossil fuels increased levels of CO2 by 17%.

The other 18% came from a decline in the natural ability of land and oceans to soak up CO2 from the atmosphere.

About half of emissions from human activity are absorbed by natural “sinks” but the efficiency of these sinks has fallen, the study suggests.

The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), was carried out by the Global Carbon Project, the University of East Anglia, UK, and the British Antarctic Survey.

It found that improvements in the carbon intensity of the global economy have stalled since 2000, leading to an unexpected jump in atmospheric CO2.

“In addition to the growth of global population and wealth, we now know that significant contributions to the growth of atmospheric CO2 arise from the slow-down of natural sinks and the halt to improvements in the carbon intensity of wealth production,” said the study’s lead author, Dr Pep Canadell, executive director of the Global Carbon Project.

More…

A new entry to my Blogroll

Thursday, October 18th, 2007

I’ve added Citizen Orange to my Blogroll.  It replaces an earlier site, Immigration Orange.   Both are the children of Kyle.

Kyle’s interests are focused differently than mine but I sense that we both sincerely want to help create a better world.

And there is no right or wrong about having different focuses.   There’s more than enough work for all of us to fill many lifetimes.

If immigrant issues and global migration interest you, you would be very hard pressed to find a better site than his.

Motorcycle – bye bye …

Thursday, October 18th, 2007

Longing to get back onto a steady diet of end-of-the-world stories of doom and destruction? Yearn no more! Only this last bit of the motorcycle serial saga to slog through and you’re back to the hi-grade stuff:

Armageddamite to spread all over your reality sandwiches, coming up.

But first, this:

So, I was out of bed at six. Darker than hell. Back in bed til 6:20 and then up again, regardless (still very dark). Off to Starbucks for serious inspiration and then back home as the sun’s rising.

I Bubble-wrapped stuff until I ran out of bubble-wrap and then off to the UPS store for more. Strange, sometime you’re just overrun with Bubble-wrap and then one day you need it and you have to go pay five bucks for ten feet. If I was a pack rat, I’d have died right then.

More wrapping and then outside into the light rain to pressure wash off the biological goo-goo accumulating on the machine. Serious fear of NZ biosecurity at this point.

Wah! Wah! Wah! (sirens) – “Look, there’s a leaf under the tail pipe. Grab that evil polluting Yank and call the SAS boys – we’re going to have a hanging!

There was a bit of dirt up in the deep treads of the bike’s brand new tires. Sharon saw it last night. it was, therefore, there all night and so I slept restless. “They don’t want our dirt in NZ – got to get it out, get it out….” (circular dream – ain’t they fun?).

I tightened up all the rope tie-downs again. All of that looks good. Plan #2 is a good one. Then I strapped the various bubble-wrapped packages onto the pallet gathered around the bike and, finally, we’re ready to lower the top over the whole works. And we do so and it still fits. I mean, it should, right? But after yesterday, when I looked down and saw the entire pallet warped, I trust nothing now.

At this point it is 11:30 and the truck’s due at two to four PM. I’m feeling pretty on-top-of-it – on-schedule, don’t you know? This is until Sharon says, “Look, a big truck’s pulling in.” And it says Global on the side of the truck. Global is the name of the shipping company – this is bad news!

The driver backs up so the lift gate is facing the crate (still open) and basically his truck takes over the entire parking lot (we are open for business whilst all this is transpiring). He comes over and I have deja-vu. His voice is exactly like Sawyer’s voice on the show Lost. But, I manage to get by that and say, “You were not suppost to be here until 2 PM.” “Nobody told me anything about that.“, he replies, in Sawyer’s voice.

Furious brain activity ensues behind my shifting eyes. Shifting as they dart from the crate to the truck to the parking lot to everyone looking at me. Yow! We’ve got a problem, Huston.

A few minutes later, I’ve talked him into exploring the possibilities of a fast food lunch in Monroe and sent him off for an hour.

But, while he was here, we managed to establish that the lift gate on his truck is EXACTLY 8 feet wide – as is the crate. That’s a close but no cigar sort of a deal. His idea was that with four of us, we could man-handle the crate around and drag it onto his lift gate length-wise rather than sideways. The idea being that when unfolded, the lift gate extends out 5 feet from the back of the truck and with an 8 foot crate, it should balance on the gate as he lifts it.

The dragging and man-handling part is not appealing to me. The crate weighs a lot and forcing and stressing it around over gravel and rocks doesn’t sound like a good start to me. Especially when the NZ biosecurity folks are going to be looking at whatever gets embedded in it during the process.

So he leaves and I franticaly finish assembling the crate and screw everything down top and bottom and it’s done and sealed and then Jesus and Dino bring up big large tractor (rear wheels five foot tall) and they proceed to run straps under the crate and they lift it under the bucket.

The truck driver returns, still sounding like Sawyer. I mention this to him and he smiles. He knows Lost and he like Sawyer.

He lets the lift gate down and Jesus gingerly manuvers the crate onto it length wise and then disconnects. The driver pulls the lever and it rises and you can see the lift gate visibly sagging. He says, “That’s a lot heaveier than 500 pounds.” Exactly my thought. We find out later, when it’s arrived in Seattle and been offically weighed, that it’s 842 pounds.

But the gate does rise and now it ready to be pushed into the truck. The tractor approaches and carefully it is pushed inside.

Yahoo! I can see daylight now now. A few papers signed and he’s off and I’m blessing the truck as it departs and breathing a sigh of relief.

It’s a pirate’s life for me…

Of course, I have no idea what will happen from now until I see the beast on the docks in Littleton, New Zealand, on the South Island but … that’s fun for another day. I’ve got it all insured from here to there so it’s all out of my hands. I can only hope I’ve remembered to pack everything necessary into the crate.

There were tools to reassemble the bike there, There were helmets and gloves. There was even a heavy box of books I tossed in at the last moment. Since I know the shippers are charging me on volume and not weight, it seemed like a good idea.

It’s shipped!  Now look what New Zealanders have to look forward to:

Here I come.

Motorcycle on the brain

Tuesday, October 16th, 2007

All day today I’ve worked flat out getting the motorcycle ready to ship. The truck’s coming tomorrow on Wednesday between two and four in the afternoon.

Yaaaaaaaaa!!

Everything always takes longer than you think. I pressure washed the bike and then I began to remove the parts that had to be taken off and placed into the shipping crate separately because they’d have made it too long or too tall.

Then, there was the matter of draining the gasoline. Easily said but tougher to do. I finally had to take the tank off and empty it and then put it back on. An hour or more shot.

The battery had to come out and I discovered that the cells were low on water so that took time to deal with.

Then there was the headlight assembly to remove. It makes the m/c two inches too tall for the crate. And, it didn’t come easy. Finally, after a lot of stressing and head scratching and resisting the urge to just give it a damn good yank, I sorted it out. Another hour vanished.

I received news from the shipping folks that I had to overnight FedX the bike’s title to them. And that took some time.

All the time, I’m watching the clock and pushing and pushing.

Finally, the bike’s ready and I roll it out to where I’ve got the pallet strategically placed for the truck’s lift gate. Once the bike’s on the pallet, we won’t be able to move it much, if at all.

I roll it up on the pallet and position it. It’s raining and a bit windy. No matter – got to press on.

Meanwhile, Sharon, my wife, is in the garage painting the crate’s top and sides with all the various things that need to be there like the destination address, this side up and that sort of thing.

I’m outside tying the m/c down to the pallet according to the plan I worked out a day or so ago. Tying and tightening. Tying and tightening. I get done – at least I think I’m done with that part – and I look at the pallet from a distance – and it is bowed – way bowed – impossibly bowed. I know, just by looking at it, that the crate’s top will never mate with the pallet correctly with that much bowing.

I’m bummed and tired so I go in and eat the second half of my lunch and have a bit of coffee. Sheron and I talk and it’s looking like I’ll need to contact the shipping folks first thing in the AM and wave off the truck for another week while I sort all of this out. But, I’m not sure yet.

After sitting and thinking for a bit about why the pallet’s bowed, I work it out and I see that I can strap the m/c down a different way and avoid stressing and bowing the pallet. Of course, a good question at this point is, if I undo the pre-stress on the pallet, will it rebound to it’s former shape? It’s 5:30 PM and the light willbe going soon. I decide that since I can’t contact the shipping people until morning anyway, I might as well wade in again and see what, if anything can be done.

I untie everything and start in again and I can see immeditely, that this is a much better plan. Less rope, better tensioning.

It is amazing. You try to think something out and then you implement it. And it is rarely as good as you’d imagined. But, having dented your ego, you go in again and redo things with the input of what you learned was wrong the first time and, with this empirical (and not so mental) approach, you end up with a better solution.

So it is here. The bike is more secure, the ropes are tighter and there’s no obvious reason what any of the tie-down stress applied should be bowing the pallet.

But, the pallet’s still bowed. I get Sharon to come and help me and we run some 2×4’s under the middle of the pallet so that the ends are suspended and then I stand on one of the ends. The pallet is now mostly straight. Yahoo! if it sits this way overnight, I think it will be good.

With this encouragement, I press on tying the remaining ropes. But, I have to stop as the light’s basically gone so I setup an outside light and continue. The rain comes and goes.

Finally, it’s all tied down according to plan #2 and the pallet’s looking good.

Still, I can’t stop. I’ll have to either call and cancel in the morning right away or let the truck come on. And, if it comes and I’m not ready, it’s a wasted trip, some pissed off shippers and probably a bill for not less that $165 for the truck’s time to ride out here and back.

I’d like to know if I’m close enough or not to pull this off. I’m worried because as I get down to the last minute under pressure, the chances of me forgetting to do something or pack something essential into the crate or whatever are growing with the pressure and the late hour. And, of course, if there’s biological debris in the crate because I was in too much of a hurry to keep it all clean for NZ BiSecurity, then all the cleaning was wasted and they’ll sterilize it all and charge me for the pleasure.

It’s 7:30 PM and cold and I’m down to the next step which I’m afraid is a big one. All of the small stuff like the bike’s luggage carrier, the front headlight assembly, the front fender, the battery, the tools I’m sending, the helmet, gloves and goggles and all such need to be placed on the pallet. I’ve been envisioning making custom wooden mounting brackets to hold and support these things and I know that will be a lot of small, detailed, slow and fussy work.

I carry the luggage carrier out and place it on the pallet behind the front wheel and the engine’s pipes. It just fits and nicely. Suddenly, I have an epiphany. Why not bubble wrap the hell out of all such pieces and simply wedge them into spots around the botton of the bike on the pallet. At worse, I’ll have to put a strap over a piece and attach the strap with a small nail which is quick and easy.

So, I bring all of the pieces out and lay them out on the pallet. All of them are easy except for the battery which does need specific support. But, this is WAY better than I’d been imagining.

I definitely have the kind of engineer’s brain that makes simple stuff way too hard sometimes. <sound of my hand slapping my face>

At 8 PM, I call Sharon out and show her the progress and the plan and tell her I’m thinking I am not going to wave off the truck. I can pressure wash the bike and pallet combo in the morning early to reclean it and buy a length of bubble wrap from the postal store up the road and pack all the stuff that’s going and have the top of the crate on the pallet by noon – so long as no more big problems come up. I decide to go for it.

I really want the m/c gone tomorrow. I’ve got several other big projects screaming for time before I leave for New Zealand on November 7th and time is a pressing me. If the m/c doesn’t go, it will continue to eat my brain and time. If it goes, I can change to the next project.

So, 7 AM tomorrow. Mr.Optimism is going out there again to slay the beast. Wish me luck.

Oh, and here’s the crate after Sharon’s painting improvements:

Beautiful crateMost glorious crate

Ps. for those of you obsessed with the impending end-of-the-world (crash-blogging and all that), I haven’t forgotten. I’m just saving it all up. Though it may not be until I arrive in the southern hemisphere that I gain sufficent time back to do that small matter the justice it deserves. I’m just steering this little paper-boat life of mine here along between the falling dollar and the rising insanity hoping it’ll all stay stable for a bit more. And, check air fares to NZ round-trip. They are running $2000+ and I don’t think they are ever going to get much better with fuel prices rising. It’s going to be damned difficult to make it down there in another few years. Boating, anyone?

Motorcycle shipping to New Zealand

Wednesday, October 10th, 2007

Shipping a motorcycle to New Zealand is not for the faint hearted. I’ve spent weeks of time, on and off, getting clear about what’s required to be able to do this. At the moment, I’m deep into building my shipping crate as you can see in the following photographs.

dscn0075.JPGdscn0076.JPG

 

dscn0097.JPGdscn0098.JPG

 

dscn0148.JPGdscn0149.JPG

I’ve had to deal with New Zealand Biosecurity which is why the entire crate is made from plywood to prevent the possible entry of pests into New Zealand.

I’ve had to deal with New Zealand customs to get clear about import duties.

I’ve had to determine how a vehicle which is new to New Zealand, is registered and inspected for compliance with NZ laws. Bring proof of ownership.

This last, in turn, led me to have to get a letter from Honda USA stating that this motorcycle was originally sold in the US and there are no outstanding recalls against it. That was not easy getting a vast corporation like Honda to deign to send me such an obscure letter on their letterhead.

And, finally, I’ve had to located a shipper here in the US who was willing to ship the crate with my motorcycle in it without charging an arm and a leg. We finally settled for a single leg which seemed to be valued at about $1200 – from my home to the dock in Littleton.

Most folks have told me I’m basically daft for doing this. “Why don’t you buy one there?”

I guess some folks just don’t appreciate genius – it’s the only explanation I can think of <smile>.

And, never one to let an opportunity for doing something techo-whizzie get by me, I’ve managed to build my crate with a bit of Titanium. Note the gray plate that the motorcycle’s stand rests upon. Boeing surplus Titanium, don’t you know. Just think how nice that’s going to look out on the coffee table to impress all my friends in New Zealand?

The Nature of the New World

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007

– I first read Lester R. Brown’s Plan B – rescuing a planet under stress and a Civilization in Trouble in 2002 along with four or five other books of a similar ilk.

– A year of two later, I also read his next book, Plan B 2.0 – rescuing a planet under stress and a Civilization in Trouble

– It was the same information in more detail and updated to reflect changing conditions and better data.

– These were sobering books and essentially changed the course of my personal life as they convinced me more than anything else I’d ever read that mankind and our civilization are in deep trouble and that most of humanity hasn’t recognized the gravity of the situation yet.

– Below, is an excerpt from Plan B 2.0 which has been adapted from Chapter 1 of the book.

– Read this and then reflect that this information has been out on the table in plain sight for years – and still we, our civilization, our governments and all of us in aggregate, advance into the future much as we always have. We are bound for a global disaster and largely ignorant or in deep denial of the fact.

– This isn’t just some interesting intellectual stuff, folks. This is your future bearing down on you and those you love. You should begin to think about what you can do about it to (1) get those you love out of harm’s way and (2) join in the efforts many of us are making to wake others up to what’s going on around us.

– What Brown writes about so eloquently, below, is indeed the Perfect Storm I have been describing for some time now. If you have not been persuaded by my description – read his, please.

——————————————————–

Lester R. Brown

We recently entered a new century, but we are also entering a new world, one where the collisions between our demands and the earth’s capacity to satisfy them are becoming daily events. It may be another crop-withering heat wave, another village abandoned because of invading sand dunes, or another aquifer pumped dry. If we do not act quickly to reverse the trends, these seemingly isolated events will occur more and more frequently, accumulating and combining to determine our future.

Resources that accumulated over eons of geological time are being consumed in a single human lifespan. We are crossing natural thresholds that we cannot see and violating deadlines that we do not recognize. These deadlines, determined by nature, are not politically negotiable.

Nature has many thresholds that we discover only when it is too late. In our fast-forward world, we learn that we have crossed them only after the fact, leaving little time to adjust. For example, when we exceed the sustainable catch of a fishery, the stocks begin to shrink. Once this threshold is crossed, we have a limited time in which to back off and lighten the catch. If we fail to meet this deadline, breeding populations shrink to where the fishery is no longer viable, and it collapses.

We know from earlier civilizations that the lead indicators of economic decline were environmental, not economic. The trees went first, then the soil, and finally the civilization itself. To archeologists, the sequence is all too familiar.

Our situation today is far more challenging because in addition to shrinking forests and eroding soils, we must deal with falling water tables, more frequent crop-withering heat waves, collapsing fisheries, expanding deserts, deteriorating rangelands, dying coral reefs, melting glaciers, rising seas, more-powerful storms, disappearing species, and, soon, shrinking oil supplies. Although these ecologically destructive trends have been evident for some time, and some have been reversed at the national level, not one has been reversed at the global level.

The bottom line is that the world is in what ecologists call an “overshoot-and-collapse” mode. Demand has exceeded the sustainable yield of natural systems at the local level countless times in the past. Now, for the first time, it is doing so at the global level. Forests are shrinking for the world as a whole. Fishery collapses are widespread. Grasslands are deteriorating on every continent. Water tables are falling in many countries. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions exceed CO2 sequestration.

In 2002, a team of scientists led by Mathis Wackernagel, who now heads the Global Footprint Network, concluded that humanity’s collective demands first surpassed the earth’s regenerative capacity around 1980. Their study, published by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, estimated that global demands in 1999 exceeded that capacity by 20 percent. The gap, growing by 1 percent or so a year, is now much wider. We are meeting current demands by consuming the earth’s natural assets, setting the stage for decline and collapse.

In a rather ingenious approach to calculating the human physical presence on the planet, Paul MacCready, the founder and Chairman of AeroVironment and designer of the first solar-powered aircraft, has calculated the weight of all vertebrates on the land and in the air. He notes that when agriculture began, humans, their livestock, and pets together accounted for less than 0.1 percent of the total. Today, he estimates, this group accounts for 98 percent of the earth’s total vertebrate biomass, leaving only 2 percent for the wild portion, the latter including all the deer, wildebeests, elephants, great cats, birds, small mammals, and so forth.

Ecologists are intimately familiar with the overshoot-and-collapse phenomenon. One of their favorite examples began in 1944, when the Coast Guard introduced 29 reindeer on remote St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea to serve as the backup food source for the 19 men operating a station there. After World War II ended a year later, the base was closed and the men left the island. When U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist David Kline visited St. Matthew in 1957, he discovered a thriving population of 1,350 reindeer feeding on the thick mat of lichen that covered the 332-square-kilometer (128-square-mile) island. In the absence of any predators, the population was exploding. By 1963, it had reached 6,000. He returned to St. Matthew in 1966 and discovered an island strewn with reindeer skeletons and not much lichen. Only 42 of the reindeer survived: 41 females and 1 not entirely healthy male. There were no fawns. By 1980 or so, the remaining reindeer had died off.

Like the deer on St. Matthew Island, we too are overconsuming our natural resources. Overshoot leads sometimes to decline and sometimes to a complete collapse. It is not always clear which it will be. In the former, a remnant of the population or economic activity survives in a resource-depleted environment. For example, as the environmental resource base of Easter Island in the South Pacific deteriorated, its population declined from a peak of 20,000 several centuries ago to today’s population of fewer than 4,000. In contrast, the 500-year-old Norse settlement in Greenland collapsed during the 1400s, disappearing entirely in the face of environmental adversity.

Even as the global population is climbing and the economy’s environmental support systems are deteriorating, the world is pumping oil with reckless abandon. Leading geologists now think oil production may soon peak and turn downward. Although no one knows exactly when oil production will peak, supply is already lagging behind demand, driving prices upward.

Faced with a seemingly insatiable demand for automotive fuel, farmers will want to clear more and more of the remaining tropical forests to produce sugarcane, oil palms, and other high-yielding biofuel crops. Already, billions of dollars of private capital are moving into this effort. In effect, the rising price of oil is generating a massive new threat to the earth’s biological diversity.

As the demand for farm commodities climbs, it is shifting the focus of international trade concerns from the traditional goal of assured access to markets to one of assured access to supplies. Countries heavily dependent on imported grain for food are beginning to worry that buyers for fuel distilleries may outbid them for supplies. As oil security deteriorates, so, too, will food security.

As the role of oil recedes, the process of globalization will be reversed in fundamental ways. As the world turned to oil during the last century, the energy economy became increasingly globalized, with the world depending heavily on a handful of countries in the Middle East for energy supplies. Now as the world turns to wind, solar cells, and geothermal energy in this century, we are witnessing the localization of the world energy economy.

The world is facing the emergence of a geopolitics of scarcity, which is already highly visible in the efforts by China, India, and other developing countries to ensure their access to oil supplies. In the future, the issue will be who gets access to not only Middle Eastern oil but also Brazilian ethanol and North American grain. Pressures on land and water resources, already excessive in most of the world, will intensify further as the demand for biofuels climbs. This geopolitics of scarcity is an early manifestation of civilization in an overshoot-and-collapse mode, much like the one that emerged among the Mayan cities competing for food in that civilization’s waning years.

You do not need to be an ecologist to see that if recent environmental trends continue, the global economy eventually will come crashing down. It is not knowledge that we lack. At issue is whether national governments can stabilize population and restructure the economy before time runs out.

# # # # #

Adapted from Chapter 1, “Entering a New World,” in Lester R. Brown, Plan B 2.0: Rescuing a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006), available on-line at www.earthpolicy.org/Books/PB2/index.htm

Additional information at www.earthpolicy.org

Media & Permissions to Reprint Contact:
Reah Janise Kauffman
Tel: (202) 496-9290 x 12
E-mail: rjk (at) earthpolicy.org

Research Contact:
Janet Larsen
Tel: (202) 496-9290 x 14
E-mail: jlarsen (at) earthpolicy.org

Earth Policy Institute
1350 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 403
Washington, DC 20036
Web: www.earthpolicy.org

————————–

– As an interesting and indicative postscript: I bought 25 copies of Brown’s second book, Plan B 2.0, and handed them out to our Mayor, to everyone on our city’s City Council, to everyone on the City’s Planning Commission and to several of the city’s senior planning staff. In the end, I think I got a ‘thank you;’ from two or three of these folks. As for the rest, I might as well have thrown a stone into a lake on a moonless night. My wife said that most folks don’t really like to have ideas pushed at them in the form of books. Apparently, that’s true – and unfortunate. Because these ideas are far bigger than any of our small egos and preconceptions.

Scientific Literacy and the Habit of Discourse

Monday, October 1st, 2007

– The First Prize Winner of the Second Annual Seed Science Writing Contest answers the question: What does it mean to be scientifically literate in the 21st Century

– This article seems very timely given what we were discussing yesterday here. To me, it’s all about how we work our way towards a more accurate picture of how existence works. And it’s also about the many pitfalls along the way.

– I’ve heard a number of good definitions of what science and/or the scientific method are. Martin, the author of this piece, offers yet another one that I really like:

Science works because its core dynamics—not its methods or techniques per se—are rooted in pitting intellects against one another. Science eventually yields impressive answers because it compels smart people to incessantly try to disprove the ideas generated by other smart people.

– Enjoy.

—————————————————-

Over the past few decades, growing evidence from cognitive science has revealed significant limits on the ability of individuals to criticize their own viewpoints. Even the most analytically gifted and experienced among us are susceptible to bias and self-deception to an extent that we (ironically enough) generally fail to appreciate. As psychologist Daniel Gilbert puts it in his book Stumbling on Happiness, “Each of us is trapped in a place, a time, and a circumstance, and our attempts to use our minds to transcend those boundaries are, more often than not, ineffective.” The reason science does manage to be astonishingly effective is not because large groups are automatically wiser or less prone to self-deception than individuals. History adequately demonstrates that, if anything, the opposite is more nearly the case. Science works because its core dynamics—not its methods or techniques per se—are rooted in pitting intellects against one another. Science eventually yields impressive answers because it compels smart people to incessantly try to disprove the ideas generated by other smart people.

The goal of science is to find those ideas that can withstand the long and hard barrage of evidence-based argument. That lesson must be experienced anew by the members of each generation, irrespective of their careers. Mastery of scientific concepts and theories is a necessary starting point, but it serves only as a prerequisite to joining the never-ending dialogue. Students must learn first-hand how to both imaginatively create new hypotheses and to dispassionately critique them. Many commentators have rightly implored us to make certain that young people encounter the “thrill” of discovery. While this is undeniably desirable, it is arguably even more crucial that they experience the agony (if only on a modest scale) of having a pet hypothesis demolished by facts.

More…

Gleanings

Sunday, September 30th, 2007

Back on September 11th I wrote a piece here, Letters passing in the night as Rome burns, that provoked a long series of follow-on comments (32) that ran on until September 21st. Without a doubt, it was the longest chain of comments on anything I’ve written so far.

I’ve been extremely busy of late but I haven’t forgotten all the various things that were discussed in that series of comments. Some excellent points were made in reaction to some very deep questions.

I think each one of the folks who participated (or even those who just read along) could summarize what they thought were the pivotal points and we would likely each come up with a different list and for different reasons.

Not withstanding that, I’d like to attempt to summarize the discussion and note the points that I felt were key.

The issues

We opened with a discussion of whether or not it made sense for a person to rail against the way the world is (full of environmental problems and injustices and getting worse by the day) when there was and is very little likelihood of changing things.

This advanced into a discussion of where people find purpose and meaning (P&M) it their lives. Some (like myself) felt that P&M arise from our spiritual beliefs and that these same beliefs call us to try to ‘fix’ the world regardless of whether of not there seems to be any possible chance of succeeding. I also asserted that I failed to see where and how folks without any spiritual basis to their lives could find P&M in their lives.

This last point was roundly and well opposed and I’ve come around now to believing that we all, regardless of our spiritual beliefs, create our own P&Ms and that everyone’s P&M’s are equally persuasive and valid.

A lot of the discussion also focused on whether there was any reason to believe there is, in fact, a spiritual underpinning to our existence.

The rationalists among us asserted that rationally there was none.

And those who believed (like myself) that some sort of spiritual intelligence pervades existence, acknowledged the a-priori nature of their beliefs – while asserting that the beliefs of the rationalists were equally a-priori – since nothing can be proved either way about the existence or non-existence of Spirit (or God or whatever one wants to call it).

I also believe, if I understood the points Fergus Brown was making at this point, that there’s also a middle ground in which the issue need not be decided because the individual understands that he himself creates his or her own P&M by choosing to.

“In other words, if we feel as if we want to be responsible and to care about others, we have already created the grounds of a purposeful life which aspires to goodness, and which is founded on goodness.”

The conversation continued on into a discussion of why someone would act to do good if they believed that Spirit underlies reality. I.e., Does someone who believes in Spirit acts to do good from fear of Spirit or because they recognize that the very definition of right is inseparable from what they believe Spirit wants?

From one POV, the individual is driven against their own natural urges to do good by fear of the Deity. From the other POV, the individual freely embraces what they believe Spirit wants as the good and acts in accordance with this. In one view, one is the oppressed slave of Spirit driven by fear and in the other one is the child of Spirit driven by Spirit’s apparent example.

I don’t think there can be any resolution to a discussion like this. In the end, I think it will be for each of us, however we believe it to be.

Again, I think Fergus summed it all up the best. He said:

This discussion could go on forever… let me leave you with this proposal:

The meaning (and sense of purpose) of our existence is determined by us, our relation to the world, and the relation between our meanings for ourselves and the meanings others posit for us. This holds true whether there is an ordering force external to us or not. But inasmuch as the meaning of our being exists in our own narratives (stories) and those of others, it is we who are the ordering force behind them; we make our own meanings, both individually and ‘in the world’. we cannot know whether our interpretation of our meaning as grounded in spirit is true or not, so we must accept that it can have no more status than that of any narrative; in the end, the meaning is subjective and relative, even if the truth behind the meaning exists, because this is opaque to our perception.

I think at this point, I should have let the entire discussion come to a graceful stop of its own weight. And I regret that I did not. I brought forth Pascal’s Wager as if it would help folks see my POV when, in fact, I’d already agreed with Fergus that there’s not likely to be anything that will decide these matters and they are all just as we believe them to be.

So, I do apologize to all for continuing to press the argument when I already knew it to be pointless. I can offer (tongue in cheek) an explanation on how and why folks continue to beat a dead horse here – but I don’t imagine this excuses me.

The significant points for me

I was convinced by good arguments that purpose and meaning belong equally to all of us; atheists or spiritualists.

Michael Tobis contributed the idea that

“We should not be so foolish as to expect that our efforts will turn the tide, but we must hope so and act as if the possibility exists. If we don’t act as if the possibility of a better world exists, the possibility vanishes instantly.”

which I think stands as a great indictment against the notion that we should give up acting if we cannot see winning in our cards.

I still believe that the issue of God or Spirit’s existence cannot be decided logically and that we each must make our own choice on this (including to make no choice) and that the choice we make is unavoidably arbitrary and a-priori.

As Fergus pointed out, any decision we make and try to justify that involves pre-existing human-derived values is going to lead us into circular reasoning:

“But what criteria should we use to make such judgements? If we make use of a set of values which already belong to one of the world-views already posited (in our cases, it is often Judaeo-Christian), then we are inevitably going to end up with a circular argument at some point.”

If human-centric justifications are necessarily suspect, then can we find deeper justifications? I suggested one based on the universal interplay between Entropy (Second Law of Thermodynamics) and Complexity. The thought went something like the following:

In our universe, the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the amount of energy in a system will either stay the same or decrease. This is true in all places save those which are fortunate enough to have an excess of energy in the local area (example: planets orbiting suns). In these places, matter can store the excess energy that bathes it as organization and increasing complexity. And once these storage processes have advanced to the point of creating self-replicating entities, we call the process evolution and its product, life.

As complexity increases in evolved life forms, it may eventually result in consciousness of the type we possess.

And it is here that I think I see purpose. It is here that I choose one side of the game (Entropy vs. Complexity) over the other because I am necessarily prejudice and biased – because I am life.   So I chose for my purpose to aid the progress of complexity and increasing awareness and intelligence and to oppose all that which would pull it down. I can see no higher purpose in existence.

Personally, I like this formulation. It stands alone without recourse to anything human-centric or spiritual.

———

Well, from my POV, it was a great discussion.

As life, I think we need to support life or, as Dylan Thomas famously once said, “To rage against the dying of the light.”

We can be atheists or spiritualists. We each have an equal place at the table. We each decide our values and live by them or not and none of us can really know the implications of any of it.

Fears of dollar collapse ?

Thursday, September 20th, 2007

– I’ve believed for sometime that the US is in dangerous territory with our enormous balance of trade deficit and the fact that we’re sending our jobs overseas which is essentially leaving this country as a cardboard storefront within which money comes and goes (and mostly goes) and very little of substance actually happens.

– I’m no financial expert  by anyone’s measure but there are some very saavy people out there that are beginning to get the willies at how things have been shaping up recently.   Read the this piece ➡ and see what you think.