The Global Warming Thread

This has become something of a thread about the oncoming ecological collapse in addition to global warming, but I'm frickin' terrified of what's coming. A recent paper looked at nature preserves all over Germany for the past 27 years and has witnessed a 75% reduction in insect biomass.

More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

This is bad. Really, really bad. At this point we're starting to test the resiliency of ecosystems, both in part and as a worldwide whole, at a certain point things will start to come crashing down. It's starting to look like that point is not 100 years in the future, but closer to 25-30. One wonders what it was like living through the KT extinction - I can't help but think that it couldn't have been as rapid or dramatic.

 

Ask any British gardener and they'll make a similar comment - there are certain palms that were kept in greenhouses a decade ago can now grow openly.

Do yanks get taught about climate change in school - we get taught it at the age of 5 (but darwin is also on our money because we care about science)

 

Depends on the state - where I teach it's a requirement that everyone learn it. I don't think public education is doing a good enough job emphasizing just how big of an abyss we're looking at though.

 

Citing The Bible, The EPA Just Blew Up Its Science Advisory Boards

So this happened today, insane, the environmental protection agency now has banned those who are the experts from being its committee, so who's left, just the scientists of have industry funding.

If you want to know why industry funding is a bad idea, The Secret History of Lead

 

More news on the oncoming ecological collapse!

 

Now with pictures!

 

wow, I knew there was a lot, but not that much in ratio to human biomass!!

 

Is Botswana a good example of the average old biomass percentages?

It seems a strange choice?

Was it from here:

Human vs Livestock vs Wild mammal biomass on Earth - Kalahari Lion Research

??

 

It was from there! I think the biologist is just a specialist in that area, but could be wrong.

 

Trump administration releases report finding ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change


So this is interesting,

 

I didn't expect that!!

 

Trump administration releases report finding ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change


Context, it legally had to be published even though it contradicts the trump administration.

It's also our current best thinking on the matter.

 

Syria and Nicaragua have joined the Paris agreement, leaving the US as the sole nation on the planet to not join.

 

Donald Trump accused of obstructing satellite research into climate change

There's really only one reason to block scientific research, and that's if you're worried about what they're going to find out.

 

One other reason springs to mind: Believing that the research is useless/not worth the cost. People who don't accept scientific results "because it feels incorrect to them" or whatever, are probably pretty good at convincing themselves that not only is the current science wrong/fake/whatever, but any future science on the issue not worth pursuing.

 

So it's a toss up between
1) evil or
2) stupid then!

 

or 3) both (the worst kind).

How long before flat earth becomes more of a thing than it should with this anti scientific research attitude?

 

I think that the anti science research attitudes people have are to do with a rejection of the idea of experts that know better than you or I do. There’s a lazy conflation of opinion and evidence, with how we feel having equal or more weight than research, evidence and analysis. A distrust of “the establishment” fuels a rejection of received wisdom or conventional thinking.

I have become increasingly cynical about the influential role played by internet content produced by anonymous sources esp on Twitter, YouTube and Facebook. For many people all content is of equal value and algorithms stick you in a bubble where you just get more of what you like and don’t get balanced arguments. Also there is no authentication of who is posting content (or if it is actually being done by an actual person) and more to the point whether they have an agenda.

I haven’t read all 30 pages of this thread but just wanted to share my frustration on this issue.

.

 

I have difficulty imagining someone so ignorant and certain, but yeah, you're right. There are other reasons. I'm specifically referring more to the people who are actively trying to hinder scientific research though. It's hard for me to imagine someone like Pruitt, say, actively thinking that the scientific process is that bankrupt, but hey, I could be wrong.

 

Bush senior used to screen all his "independent" advisers before he appointed them thus making sure he was given the independent advice he wanted to hear.