Gypsies

Christmas Letter 2011

2011-12-19T21:11:00.015+11:00

This last year has been a busy one for us, including a fair amount of travelling.

Our first trip was in February, to Norfolk Island, with twenty of our fellow residents of the Retirement Village. It was our first trip to the Island and we really enjoyed it ...

... from the attractive scenery ...

... to the dress ups for the entertainments ...

It is good to travel with friends.

In mid year we spent ten weeks in Europe. We started in England, with our grand daughter, Hayley’s, thirteenth birthday ...

... before travelling extensively in southern England ...

... which included Bath ...

... St Michael's Mount ...

... driving through attractive countryside ...

... and visiting some famous monuments ...

After England we took a tour of Spain,

... Portugal ...

... and Morocco, which was fascinating. We enjoyed the relaxed Spanish life style - siestas, late lunches and late dinners in the balmy evenings. Morocco was an entirely different experience and now we can name drop exotic cities like
... Fes ..

... Marrakesh ...

... and Casablanca.

In October we spent a week in the Borossa Valley, at the annual gathering of Probus called Rendezvous. Again we spent some time with friends, some of whom are from our local Probus clubs, others that we meet every year at Rendezvous. Stephen particularly enjoyed the wine, his highlight being blending his own version of red wine at Penfolds winery ...

... we also visited Maggie Beer's place ...

Our grand kids keep progressing. Next year we will have six of them in Secondary School - Joshua in year 12, Cameron, Hayley and Troy in middle school with Jonathan and Jeremy in year 7. That makes us start to feel old. Next year Spencer will be full time at this new school, Croxton, which will be very good for him and his parents. Amanda is growing up fast and enjoying school and sport.

Stephen’s parents have entered care, at Colton Close. Although his mother, Edna, is partially paralysed by a stroke, she is receiving very good care. His father, Eric, is really enjoying his new life. All of the worries that were weighing him down have gone and he can visit Edna every day as she is on the floor just above his. She relies on his visits.

Margaret’s mother, Joyce, had her ninety-second birthday in August. She is now starting to struggle with health issues, but she is a fighter, and is receiving good care. Hopefully she will be well enough to spend a couple of days over Christmas at our Village.

Speaking of the Village, it has taken great steps this year. Our new owners, Stockland, have spent a lot of money on our bowling green, landscaping and putting greens ...

... before and after ...

... and here is another view ...

... as well as building new Villas for future residents.

Please note that our phone number has changed: 8734 2054

We wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Love,

Margaret and Stephen

Hitchens

2011-11-26T20:11:00.002+11:00

Stunning fly-over of earth

2011-11-16T16:25:00.002+11:00

A time-lapse video produced from photographs taken from the International Space Station. For the best view click on the Full Screen button at the bottom right.

The shooting locations given by NASA, in order of appearance, are:

1. Aurora Borealis Pass over the United States at night
2. Aurora Borealis and eastern United States at night
3. Aurora Australis from Madagascar to south-west of Australia
4. Aurora Australis south of Australia
5. North-west coast of United States to Central South America at night
6. Aurora Australis from the Southern to the Northern Pacific Ocean
7. Halfway around the world
8. Night pass over Central Africa and the Middle East
9. Evening pass over the Sahara Desert and the Middle East
10. Pass over Canada and Central United States at night
11. Pass over Southern California to Hudson Bay
12. Islands in the Philippine Sea at night
13. Pass over Eastern Asia to Philippine Sea and Guam
14. Views of the Mideast at night
15. Night Pass over Mediterranean Sea
16. Aurora Borealis and the United States at night
17. Aurora Australis over Indian Ocean
18. Eastern Europe to Southeast Asia at night

How to avoid the truth about climate change

2011-11-13T13:38:00.000+11:00

The video below is a talk by Dr. Barry Bickmore about methods people use to avoid the truth about climate change.

On his blog Bickmore introduced the video as follows:

I gave a talk called “How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change” for the College of Science and Health at Utah Valley University. For those of you who aren’t familiar with me, I am a Republican and a geochemist who, until a few years ago, was quite skeptical about the idea that humans are causing significant climate change.

In the presentation, I briefly talked about how I had made the transition from being a climate change “skeptic” to being an outspoken advocate of mainstream climate science. I then discussed how it is that people like me can so effectively avoid the truth about climate change.

Killer apps of prosperity

2011-11-09T16:48:00.004+11:00

The graphic below shows that per capita income of China and India were similar with those of Britain and the US up to 1850, after which the income of US and Britain exponentially increased.

Nial Ferguson attributes the divergence between the West and the Rest to six institutions developed in the West, that using modern computer terminology, he calls, Killer Apps. The six killer apps are listed below.

The "killer apps" are:
1. Competition
2. The Scientific Revolution
3. Property Rights
4. Modern Medicine
5. The Consumer Society
6. The Work Ethic

According to Ferguson, the development of these institutions in Western Europe answers the question: “Why, beginning around 1500, did a few small polities on the western end of the Eurasian landmass come to dominate the rest of the world?”

Like the modern variety, these killer apps can be downloaded - they can be used by other societies. The developing societies are using some of them and the Great Divergence is re-converging.

The Denial Tango

2011-11-07T21:01:00.003+11:00

Earnestly pointing our the absurdity, dishonesty and nonsense of those who deny the reality of Human Caused Climate change is necessary, ( see for example here, here, here, here, here and here but sometimes the only response is to laugh.

“Denial Tango”, by Men with Day Jobs

You say the planet’s warming, but I’m convinced it’s not
Last Tuesday it was rather cool, today it’s not so hot
And if it’s getting hotter, I’m sure it’s not by much
Prob’ly due to sunspots, volcanoes or some such
Or maybe it’s the Chinese, that make more smoke than us
I know there’s many more of them, so let them catch the bus
One thing I am sure of, no need to make a fuss
Fire up those smokey chimneys and sing

Denial … I’m in denial
Don’t talk to me of independent studies or scientific trial
I’m in denial … deep in denial
And as the waters rise around me I’ll just hold my breath and say
It isn’t so

I call myself a skeptic, And I believe it’s so
I’m skeptical of anything, I just don’t wanna know
Don’t give me CSIRO or IPCC
I want some wacky viscount with an architect’s degree
He says it’ was much hotter X million years ago
I know that killed a lot of dinosaurs but they were rather slow
It’s just a lot of scientists that think they’re in the know
But I know I know better, let’s sing:

Denial … I’m in denial
When I see those eco-nazis, I raise my arm and shout Sieg Heil
I’m in denial … deep in denial
And as the waters rise around me I’ll just hold my breath and say
It isn’t so

Those fires are not raging, No floods deluge the land
Those hurricanes and tornadoes are just flashes in the pan
The animals are doing fine, No species dying out
And half the bloody climate isn’t choking in drought
The ice is not receding, from either polar cap
I’d go with Tony Abbott, It’s just a load of crap
This round-the-world disaster is an evil greedy trap
‘Cause everybody knows the world is flat

Denial … I’m in denial
Don’t talk to me of independent studies or scientific trial
I’m in denial … deep in denial
And as the waters rise around me I’ll just hold my breath and say
It isn’t so … oh no

As the waters rise around me I’ll just hold my breath and say
It isn’t so … oh no

Don’t wanna know
As the waters rise around me I’ll just hold my breath and say… glug glug glug

Climate Trends

2011-11-07T11:22:00.019+11:00

The climate deniers work hard on convincing the uninformed that the planet is cooling or at least not warming. They take advantage of the noisiness of the global temperature record. It is possible to prove almost anything if you keep to short term trends in the record.

Here is a graph that I produced to illustrate the problem of using short term periods to make conclusions about climate trends. More detail (including how I created the graph can be found in this post.

From Climate

The technique that the deniers use is eloquently illustrated by the animation below. A good name for it is Going Down the Up Escalator.

The data used is from the Berkely Earth Surface Temperature group (BEST). It was fairly difficult to produce a declining value for the last decade from the data. See the link above for an explanation.

link
The conservative U.K. newspaper the Daily Mail in London published an article Monday blasting Muller’s research, claiming that his Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures (BEST) project produces a graph that — rather than showing increased global warming — shows that warming has stalled over the last decade.

“That’s incorrect,” Muller said Monday morning. “I mean, what they have done is an old trick. It’s how to lie with statistics, right? And scientists can’t do that because 10 years from now, they’ll look back on my publications and say, ‘Was he right?’ But a journalist can lie with statistics. They can choose a little piece of the data and prove what they want, carefully cutting out the end. If I wanted to do this, I could demonstrate, for example, with the same data set that from 1980 to 1995 that it’s equally flat. You can find little realms where it’s equally flat. What that tells me is that 15 years is not enough to be able to tell whether it’s warming or not. And so when they take 13 years, and they say based on that they can reach a conclusion based on our data set, I think they’re playing that same game and the fact that we can find that back in 1980, the same effect, when we know it wasn’t warming simply shows that that method doesn’t work. But no scientist could do that because he’d be discredited for lying with statistics. Newspapers can do that because 10 years from now, nobody will remember that they showed that.”

Tamino

A magazine is a iPad that does not work

2011-10-22T15:50:00.001+11:00

This is a coda to my previous post:

Farewell Steve Jobs

2011-10-07T11:15:00.005+11:00

There have been many obituaries for Steve Jobs today (for example here) and I am not going to add my laboured prose to that list, except to note:

As a nerd I thank Steve Jobs for making nerd-dom cool.

Here are some videos, featuring Jobs and Apple.

Unveiling the Macintosh, 1984

Commencement address, Stanford, 2005.

(Although this is longer than the other vids, he discusses how he found out about the cancer that eventually took his life.)

Here's to the crazy ones.

Here is a list of the people featured in the video:

Albert Einstein, smoking a pipe
Bob Dylan, moving to his harmonica
Martin Luther King, at the end of his Washington speech
Richard Branson, shaking champagne
John Lennon and Yoko Ono singing
Buckminster Fuller demonstrating the Bucky Ball
Thomas Edison thinking
Mohammed Ali dancing for the press
Ted Turner boxing the air with a smile
Maria Callas blowing a kiss
Mahatma Gandhi smiling
Amelia Earhart arriving
Alfred Hitchcock speaking
Martha Graham dancing
Jim Henson puppeteering
Frank Lloyd Wright walking by his home
Picasso painting
A child dreaming

Rob U Blind

2011-10-02T19:46:00.001+11:00

The pokies industry is the latest of the powerful vested interests to attack sensible reform by the Federal Government.

But they are not getting it all their own way.

The advertisement below was screened during the 2011 NRL grand final.

Here and here are articles discussing the issue.

Justice

2011-09-26T13:24:00.001+10:00

These are the first two videos of a lecture series given by Michael Sandel at Harvard.

The series can be found here.

I am no expert in philosophy but these lectures seem to me to be a great introduction to some philosophical issues. Sandel's teaching technique is also interesting bring to life what might otherwise be dry academic philosophy by using carefully chosen moral dilemmas.

Episode 1

Here are links to resources for the first video:

The lifeboat case - here

Jeremy Bentham - here

Beginner discussion guide - here

Advanced discussion guide - here

Episode 2

Beginner discussion guide - here

Advanced discussion guide - here

J.S.Mill - here

To listen to the rest of the lectures (episodes) follow the link at the top of this post.

Arctic sea ice 2011

2011-09-23T14:17:00.041+10:00

Introduction

The decline in the Arctic Sea Ice continues. The Arctic Sea Ice minimum in 2011 was (depending on the research group and / or ice characteristic chosen) either the lowest or second lowest on record. While reading this post it is important to remember that the previous lowest Arctic Sea Ice level was in 2007. In fact the 2007 minimum was a complete surprise, being much lower than any one had expected for many years.

Before investigating the detail of this year's minimum here is a video giving an introduction to Arctic Sea Ice.

The second video looks at the 2011 Arctic Sea Ice minimum in more detail.

The video starts with Joe Bastardi. Bastardi continually attempts to argue that there is nothing to worry about with the Arctic Sea Ice. The video shows that his predictions are not even close.

Ice characteristics measured

There are three different ice characteristics that are measured: sea ice extent, sea ice area and sea ice volume

The satellites measure ice in grid cells measuring 25 km by 25 km. For the extent measure if the amount of ice in a cell is over a given threshold (usually 15%) then the whole cell is considered to be 100% ice. Area determines how much actual ice there is. For a more detailed description see this link.

Sea ice volume measures the amount of ice by multiplying the area by the thickness of the ice.

The results

There are five main research groups that report on Arctic sea ice: University of Bremen, IJIS, NSDIC, Piomas and Cryosphere Today.

University of Bremen

According the a research group at the University of Bremen, Arctic Ice Extent had reached "a new historic minimum". See this link for details. The researchers further add:

It seems to be clear that this is a further consequence of the man-made global warming with global consequences.

University of Bremen find the minimum 2011 about 1% lower than that of 2007.

Cryosphere Today

The Cryosphere Today Arctic Sea Ice Area reached a record minimum in 2011. The 2007 minimum value was 2.9194391 million square kilometres and the 2011 value was 2.9047398 million square kilometres. These values can be found at this link. For the 2007 value look at the row starting with 2007.6849 and for the 2011 value row 2011.6931.

Below is a graphical representation of the Cryosphere Today data:

Another method of displaying Arctic Ice Area is by a 365 day rolling average as illustrated below:

Both graphics clearly show the decline since satellite measurements started in 1979. Note also the dramatic declines since 2007.

PIOMAS

Imagine two years with the same sea ice extent but year 1 has an average ice depth of 1 metre and year 2 has an average ice depth of 2 metres. Even though extent will measure the two year as identical year 2 will have twice the amount - volume - of ice as year 1. PIOMAS attempts to measure the volume of ice in the Arctic. It uses an ice model but has been carefully validated. See this link for details.

Here is a graph showing the current year (up to the time of writing this post) compared with 2007. It is clear that according to PIOMAS 2011 ice volume has been below that of 2007 for the whole year and reached a new ice minimum this year.

For all of the yearly PIOMAS curves since 2002 see this link.

The chart below shows the PIOMAS ice volume trend since 1980.

NSIDC

In 2011 the NSIDC reported the second lowest ice extent, after 2007.

The minima from 2007 according go NSDIC are:

Year	Millions of square km
2007	4.17
2008	4.55
2009	5.10
2010	4.78
2011	4.33
1979 to 2010 Average	6.29

The NSIDC long term trend is like all of the others that I have displayed in this post - the trend is down. See the diagram below:

IJIS

IJIS also reported the second lowest Arctic sea ice extent for 2011, as shown in the diagram below:

Ice Trend

In the previous section I have displayed charts from Cryosphere Today, PIOMAS and NSIDC that clearly show a declining trend in Arctic Sea Ice since satellite measurements began in 1979.

Some people have made the claim that 30 years is too short a period of time to make such a judgement and that the Arctic Sea Ice was also at low levels during the 1930s, therefore there is nothing surprising in the current measurements.

It is possible to determine the levels of Arctic Sea Ice for the era before the direct satellite measurement. Two scientists Walsh and Chapman have developed such a data set. They used reports compiled by MET Offices and Glaciology Institutes in the UK, Canada, Denmark and Norway.

Statistical blogger, Tamino, has used the Walsh and Chapman data to produce the chart below source:

That data shows that the sea ice was quite stable from 1880 to 1960. After 1960 the sea ice level began to decline and that the decline since 2000 has been very dramatic.

Causes of the decline

The University of Bremen group discussed near the beginning of this post stated clearly that the decline in Arctic Sea Ice resulted from man-made global warming.

The GISS temperature anomaly map below shows clearly that the polar regions are warming more rapidly than the rest of the planet. (Most of the polar regions are between 1 degree and 4 degrees warmer than the 1951 to 1980 time period.) Simple intuition indicates that such warming will help to melt ice.

In the second video above, Dr Julienne Stroeve, presents a more detailed argument supporting the view that the decline in Arctic ice is largely the result of global warming:

the global climate models all show ice decline (though less than is actually occurring)
if the climate models are run without the carbon dioxide that has been added to the atmosphere (by human activities) then they don't show any ice decline.

Why is the level of Arctic sea ice important?

As the first video demonstrates the Arctic sea ice has:

an important role in the managing of planetary temperature, less ice means higher temperatures globally
an important role in maintaining global ocean currents, which have important influences on climate all over the planet.

What about Antarctica and global sea ice?

Antarctic sea ice has increased by 1% per decade during the satellite era. The causes of this are debated amongst scientists. If you look at the temperature anomaly chart above it is clear that the Antarctic sea ice has not increased because of cooling in the Antarctic region. It is clear that Antarctica is warming very quickly. The most likely reason for the small increase in Antarctic sea ice relates to stronger winds due to increased ozone. Other possible causes are increased precipitation and increased glacial run off, both caused by the warming process. See this link for some discussion of this issue. There is evidence that Antarctic sea ice was at a much higher level before the satellite era. See this link for details.

Some people make the claim that there has been little change in Global Sea Ice in the last 30 years. This claim is easily falsifiable as shown in this post.

One Athiest's Creed

2011-09-20T19:58:00.002+10:00

Here is a video by Peter Hadfield, who runs the Potholer54 and Potholer54debunks YouTube channels.

Some Christians are of the belief that it is impossible for non-believers to be moral.

Here is Hadfield's comprehensive response to that claim:

In the video below Hadfield describes his moral beliefs which he calls An Athiest's Creed:

This makes incredible sense to me.

Did Julia Gillard Lie?

2011-09-19T14:13:00.004+10:00

It is often claimed that Julia Gillard is a liar on the basis that she said before the last election that she would not introduce a Carbon Tax. The argument continues that as she is now introducing a Carbon Tax she lied. Some people have taken to calling her JuLIAR.

There are two issues to consider here:

1. What did Gillard actually say before the last election?

2. What is the nature of the legislation that is currently before the parliament?

The day before the election the Australian published an article on Gillard that can be found at this link.

Here is the direct quote from Gillard from that article:

"I don't rule out the possibility of legislating a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, a market-based mechanism," she said of the next parliament. "I rule out a carbon tax."

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme mentioned in the quote is the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) that was negotiated between the Rudd Government and the then Opposition led by Malcolm Turnbull. (The Opposition kicked out Turnbull, but only by one vote, the then reneged on the agreed ETS.)

So she ruled out a Carbon Tax but not an Emissions Trading Scheme.

See this post and this post for analyses of the differences between a Carbon Tax and an Emissions Trading Scheme.

So what is the Government introducing a Carbon Tax or an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)?

The clear answer is that it is an ETS.

There is an interesting wrinkle though. For the first few years of the scheme it will operate somewhat like a Carbon Tax as the price per tonne of carbon released will be charged at a fixed price ($23 per tonne). There are differences though as the permits can be traded.

The reason why there will be an initial price placed on carbon emissions is to facilitate the transition to a full ETS and avoid the problems of excess permits that occurred in the early years of the European ETS.

So the simple answer to the question: did Gillard Lie, is clearly no.

She did not rule out an ETS before the election and she is now introducing an ETS to the parliament.

It is significant that the quote from Gillard came from the Australian newspaper. This is not some left of centre paper. The Australian has made its life work to destroy the Gillard Government.

Here is a link with comments by Gillard on how the price mechanism would work.

The best speech in the Federal Parliament given on the topic of Carbon Pricing was by Malcolm Turnbull. The speech can be found here.

This post emphasises the importance of checking original sources. For an interesting take on this issue see this post.

The climate policy worked out by the Multi-party committee - Government, Independents and Greens - is based on the Garnaut review, the summary of which can be found here.

How do you know?

2011-09-11T15:47:00.005+10:00

Recently a very good friend of mine claimed that the recent volcano in South America put out more carbon dioxide that humans did in a year. I tried to explain to him that this claim was not true and that my source was the United States Geological Union who were experts on geological issues. Here is a link to the source that I quoted. (Note that the web page gives a link to a recent article on this issue).

This conversation highlighted to me the issue of sources of information. There is an enormous amount of misinformation currently in circulation. How does the sort of misinformation claimed by my friend get so widely disseminated? I think the reason is that when people hear ideas that they agree with they don't bother to check out the validity of the idea of the reliability of the source.

The video below by Peter Harfield, who produces the potholer54 channel of on YouTube discusses the importance of checking sources of claims that are made in the media.

I first became aware of this issue of sources when reading an online article by Andrew Bolt in 2006. the article was on Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth. The article can be found here.

The article was online so I started researching using Google. I fairly quickly started to have doubts about Bolt's claims.

Bolt's first objection was this one:

1: Gore claims that a survey of 928 scientific articles on global warming showed not one disputed that man's gasses were mostly to blame for rising global temperatures. Only dumb journalists and bad scientists in the pay of Big Oil pretended there was any genuine debate.

In fact, as Dr Benny Peiser, from Liverpool John Moores University has demonstrated, Gore relies on a bungled survey reported in Science.

The first article that I found was here.

It appeared that Peiser was finding difficulty maintaining the claims that Bolt relied on.

I then came across this email communication. In it Peiser seems to retract his major claim and at the finish notes:

I do not think anyone is questioning that we are in a period of global warming. Neither do I doubt that the overwhelming majority of climatologists is agreed that the current warming period is mostly due to human impact.

That, of cause is not the sort of message that Andrew Bolt tries to give on his site.

I then checked out Bolt's third criticism:

3: Gore says ice cores from Antarctica, that go back 650,000 years, show the world got warmer each time there was more carbon dioxide in the air.

In fact, as the University of California's Professor Jeff Severinghaus and others note, at least three studies of ice cores show the earth first warmed and only then came more carbon dioxide, many hundreds of years later. So does extra carbon dioxide cause a warming world, or vice versa?

I Googled Severinghaus and first I found articles about rapid warming in Greenland. I eventually found articles that discussed the last deglaciation, including this one. In these articles and in an email reply to me Seveinghaus emphasised that carbon dioxide was very important in the last deglaciation, providing between 35% and 50% of the warming. I later found this article where Severinghaus cries foul on Bolt's reporting.

When I returned to Bolt's article and re-read his point 3 I realised that Bolt had not directly stated that Severinghaus agreed with Bolt's interpretation, so technically Bolt had not mislead his readers. But most people who read the article would expect that the expert that he referenced would agree with Bolt's argument - and the expert clearly does not agree with Bolt's argument.

After that experience, I realised that it was very important to check the sources of claims that are made in the media, which is the point that Peter Harfield is making in his video.

Expert opinion on climate change

2011-09-09T12:54:00.030+10:00

I regularly receive emails attacking basic Climate Science. Such attacks also appear frequently in some media publications.

It is possible to spend a great deal of time checking these claims, but this is not a viable option for most people.

A quicker method is to check the opinions of acknowledged experts, which would include our premier science organisations.

This post looks at the views of eight major science organisations and demonstrates that they all support the view that humans are warming the planet dangerously. It finishes with link to fifty more science organisations with similar views.

The UK MET Office

This post will reference many documents, which would require a great deal of time to fully read so I will start with a brief video from the UK MET Office:

The UK MET Office view is clear:

The current changes are very unusual and can not be explained simply as part of any natural cycle, such as El Nino and La Nina, which cause the warming and cooling of the tropical Pacific Ocean, which affects world temperature. Natural cycles can lead to periods with little or no warming and other periods with rapid warming. However, what is important is looking at the longer term trends in temperature,which are rising, and which scientists believe is almost certainly caused by human activity.

When studying climate change, scientists draw their evicence from many sources. Are humans contributing to the warming we are observing? Or could it be natural causes and changes to theclimate? Scientists, such as those at the Met Office Hadley Centre, are continuing to look at all the possible effects, both man-made and natural. However, it is widely understood that our emissions of greenhouse gases are causing changes to our climate.

At the MET Office FAQ site the following is given in answer to the question: "Can anything be done about Climate Change?"

On present evidence, global warming could be slowed if emissions of methane and carbon dioxide were reduced. The main artificial sources of these gases are (a) for methane - agriculture, emissions from landfill sites and natural gas and (b) for carbon dioxide - the burning of fossil fuels, cutting down and burning trees. This may seem to be something that only governments or large organisations can tackle, but the individual can also contribute significantly by, for example, not using a car unnecessarily and recycling.

For more information about the MET Office's view of Climate Change follow this link.

The Australian Academy of Science

The Australian academy of Science is Australia's foremost science organisation. In 2010 it released a report on climate science. The report can be found here.

The report begins with the following paragraph:

The Earth's climate has changed. The global average surface temperature has increased over the last century and many other associated changes have been observed. The available evidence implies that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities are the main cause. It is expected that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at business-as-usual rates, global temperatures will further increase significantly over the coming century and beyond.

The rest of the 24 page report provides the evidence to substantiate the claims in the first paragraph.

The CSIRO

The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) is Australia's premier science research organisation.

In 2011 CSIRO published a booklet called Climate Change: Science and Solutions for Australia. The document can be downloaded here.

The opening paragraph of the document states:

Climate change is one of the greatest ecological, economic, and social challenges facing us today.The scientific evidence that human activities are contributing to climate change is compelling, but society is increasingly seeking information about the nature of the evidence and what can be done in response to a changing climate. This book provides some of that much-needed information from some of Australia’s leading climate scientists.

Chapter 2 notes the following Key Messages

Greenhouse gases (GHGs) influence the Earth’s climate because they interact with flows of heat energy in the atmosphere.

The main GHGs influenced directly by human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide,ozone, and synthetic gases. Water vapour, although an important GHG, is not influenced directly byhuman activities.

The amount of warming produced by a given rise in GHG concentrations depends on ‘feedback’ processes in the climate system, which can either amplify or dampen a change. The net effect of all climate feedbacks is to amplify the warming caused by increasing CO2 and other GHGs of human origin.

The atmospheric level of CO2 (the most important GHG influenced by human activities) rose from about280 ppm in 1800 to 386 ppm in 2009, and is currently increasing at nearly 2 ppm per year.

CO2 levels are rising mainly because of the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. Over half of thisCO2 input to the atmosphere is offset by natural CO2 ‘sinks’ in the land and oceans, which constitute a massive natural ecosystem service helping to mitigate humanity’s emissions.

To have a 50:50 chance of keeping human-induced average global warming below 2ºC, it will be necessary to stop almost all CO2 emissions before cumulative emissions reach one trillion tonnes of carbon. The world has already emitted more than half of this quota since the industrial revolution, and (at current growth rates for CO2 emissions) the rest will be emitted by the middle of this century.

Climate change is a risk management issue – the longer we take to act and the weaker our actions, the greater the risk of dangerous outcomes.

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has produced a document called State of the Climate 2010

The report can be found here.

The report concludes with the following observations:

Australia will be hotter in coming decades

Australian average temperatures are projected to rise by 0.6 to 1.5 ºC by 2030. If global greenhouse gas emissions continue to grow at rates consistent with past trends, warming is projected to be in the range of 2.2 to

5.0 ºC by 2070. Warming is projected to be lower near the coast and in Tasmania and higher in central and north-western Australia. These changes will be felt through an increase in the number of hot days.

Much of Australia will be drier in coming decades

In Australia compared to the period 1981-2000, decreases in rainfall are likely in the decades to come in southern areas of Australia during winter, in southern and eastern areas during spring, and in south-west Western Australia during autumn. An increase in the number of dry days is expected across the country, but it is likely that there will be an increase in intense rainfall events in many areas.

It is very likely that human activities have caused most of the global warming observed since 1950

There is greater than 90% certainty that increases in greenhouse gas emissions have caused most of the global warming since the mid-20th century. International research shows that it is extremely unlikely that the observed warming could be explained by natural causes alone. Evidence of human influence has been detected in ocean warming, sea-level rise, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns. CSIRO research has shown that higher greenhouse gas levels are likely to have caused about half of the winter rainfall reduction in south-west Western Australia.

Climate change is real

Our observations clearly demonstrate that climate change is real. CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology will continue to provide observations and research so that Australia’s responses are underpinned by science of the highest quality.

US Academy of Science

The US Academy of Science (the peak Science body of the US) has also produced a report on climate science which can be accessed here.

The first conclusion of the report (found on page 3) is:

Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for—and in many cases is already affecting—a broad range of human and natural systems

That conclusion is supported by the following dot points:

Earth is warming. Detailed observations of surface temperature assembled
and analyzed by several different research groups show that the planet’s average surface temperature was 1.4ºF (0.8ºC) warmer during the first decade of the 21st century than during the first decade of the 20th century, with the most pronounced warming over the past three decades. These data are corroborated by a variety of independent observations that indicate warming in other parts of the Earth system, including the cryosphere (snow- and ice covered regions), the lower atmosphere, and the oceans.

Most of the warming over the last several decades can be attributed to human activities that release carbon dioxide (CO2) and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere. The burning of fossil fuels—coal, oil, and natural gas—for energy is the single largest human driver of climate change, but agriculture, forest clearing, and certain industrial activities also make significant contributions.

Natural climate variability leads to year-to-year and decade-to-decade fluctuations in temperature and other climate variables, as well as substantial regional differences, but cannot explain or offset the long-term warming trend.

Global warming is closely associated with a broad spectrum of other changes, such as increases in the frequency of intense rainfall, decreases in Northern Hemisphere snow cover and Arctic sea ice, warmer and more frequent hot days and nights, rising sea levels, and widespread ocean acidification.

Joint Academies Statement

Thirteen Academies of Science have regularly made a statement on climate change. The academies are those of: the US, UK. France, Germany, Japan, Canada, Italy, China, India, Brazil, Mexico, Russia and South Africa, the G8 plus 5 group.

In their most recent statement (found here) they give the following recommendations:

Recognizing the vital role that low carbon energy systems must play in facilitating a sustainable global economy, the G8+5 nations need to seize all
opportunities to coordinate our simultaneous work on the climate and economic agendas, and to build global collaboration.

We call on all governments to:

agree at the UNFCCC negotiations in Copenhagen to adopt a long-term global goal and near-term emission reduction targets that will deliver an approximately 50% reduction in global emissions from 1990 levels by 2050;

significantly increase fundamental international research on the earth’s climate, on low carbon and climate resilient technologies, and on ways to protect and enhance the resilience of natural systems to climate change;

identify the common strategic priorities for developing and implementing environmentally sustainable technologies for adaptation and mitigation;

collaborate in the implementation of low carbon and climate-resilient infrastructure and technologies, and in the implementation of innovative incentives,
through the use of economic and regulatory instruments, to accelerate adoption of clean “green” technologies;

support and enable developing countries’ access to and use of the technologies needed to deliver a sustainable low carbon energy future;

pursue the development, demonstration and deployment of economically efficient and technologically safe CCS, and explore the establishment of standards for CCS;

pursue international cooperation on safe and secure nuclear power capacity, the safe disposal of nuclear waste, and the reduction of the risk of proliferation;

substantially increase investment into the development and deployment of technologies for adaptation, and increase funding specifically for the most vulnerable countries.

Education and public awareness programmes will be essential as we pursue this agenda. We must build on the current enthusiasm and engagement of a younger generation.

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

NOAA is one of the major oceanic and atmospheric research and reporting organisations. Each year NOAA produces a document called State of the Climate. The full report for 2010 can be downloaded here and the summary here.

Page 6 of the summary:

The World Continues to Warm

Multiple indicators, same bottom line conclusion

Consistent and unmistakable signal from the top of the atmosphere to the bottom of the oceans

The conclusion makes the following points:

2010 global average surface temperature among the two warmest on record

2010 report tracks 41 climate indicators. Long-term trends continue to show the world is warming

The Royal Society

The Royal Society is the most prestigious science organisation in the world. It is Britain's National Academy of Science.

The Royal Society produced a document on Climate Science in 2010, which can be downloaded here.

The report begins as follows:

Changes in climate have significant implications for present lives, for future generations and for ecosystems on which humanity depends. Consequently, climate change has been and continues to be the subject of intensive scientific research and public debate.

There is strong evidence that the warming of the Earth over the last half-century has

been caused largely by human activity, such as the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, including agriculture and deforestation. The size of future temperature increases and other aspects of climate change, especially at the regional scale, are still subject to uncertainty. Nevertheless, the risks associated with some of these changes are substantial. It is important that decision makers have access to climate science of the highest quality, and can take account of its findings in formulating appropriate responses.

I could keep discussing the views of more science organisations, but this post is already quite long.

For information on another fifty science organisations that support the climate consensus position follow this link.

How agriculture is changing the face of our planet

2011-09-04T16:34:00.002+10:00

I have sometimes came across claims that human activities are too puny to change the planet. You only have to open you eyes and look around to see that the claim is not true.

In this talk Jon Foley discusses the impact that agriculture is having on the planet, and puts that in context with the huge challenges of the next few decades when global population will increase by at least 2 billion people!

Gymnist with a ball

2011-09-04T16:14:00.000+10:00

I like the title given to this video:

Someone Should Have Told This Girl That This Can't Be Done

Ozymandias

2011-08-30T11:40:00.007+10:00

The poem describes the quintessence of hubris.

See here and here for analysis of the poem

The Ship Song

2011-08-26T13:55:00.009+10:00

The Ship Song is an iconic and beautiful ballad sung by Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds.

In 2010 the Sydney Opera House sought Nick Cave's permission to record a version of the song, and he agreed.

Many musicians and dancers were involved in the production of the song:

Neil Finn, Kev Carmody and The Australian Ballet, Sarah Blasko, John Bell, Angus and Julia Stone, Paul Kelly and Bangarra Dance Theatre, Teddy Tahu Rhodes and Opera Australia, Martha Wainwright, Katie Noonan and The Sydney Symphony, The Temper Trap, Daniel Johns and the Australian Chamber Orchestra.

Sydney Opera House CEO Richard Evans:

“We set out to create a tribute to the House’s role in the global creative community – a love song to creativity if you wish.”

“We wanted to give people everywhere the opportunity to experience the creative genius that makes this place tick, to get a taste of the artists, venues and other spaces that power the heart that beats beneath our soaring white sails.”

The result was the wonderful evocation of the song below:

Here is Nick Cave's view of the lyrics:

I wrote the song because Anita and I would argue at a constant pace and I would always tell her to unleash the dogs and burn the bridges as a way of saying you can say what you feel but forget the past and let's move forward. In an argument one always has to stand down until the other quits. This cleans off the slate. The first verse contemplates arguing all night long until one gives in and they embrace each other and start over. This was not one of my "dark" songs. I write what I feel and I was not feeling "dark". If you want "dark" then immerse yourself into murder ballads.

The comment can be found here.

Lyrics

Come sail your ships around me
And burn your bridges down.
We make a little history baby
Every time you come around.
Come loose your dogs upon me
And let your hair hang down.
You are a little mystery to me
Every time you come around.

We talk about it all night long
We define our moral ground.
But when I crawl into your arms
Everything comes tumbling down.

Come sail your ships around me
And burn your bridges down.
We make a little history baby
Every time you come around.

Your face has fallen sad now
For you know the time is nigh
When I must remove your wings
And you, you must try to fly.

Come sail your ships around me
And burn your bridges down.
We make a little history baby
Every time you come around.
Come loose your dogs upon me
And let your hair hang down.
You are a little mystery to me
Every time you come around

J P Steffensen

2011-08-24T08:43:00.000+10:00

We live in cold times from climateclips on Vimeo.

The Colour of Magic: The Film

2011-08-13T20:22:00.002+10:00

This is the first episode of the film version of Terry Pratchett's book, The colour of Magic.

The story continues here.

Sir Terry Pratchett

2011-08-13T19:35:00.003+10:00

For those who have not read any of the Discworld Novels this is how Terry Pratchett opened the first one, The Colour of Magic :

In a distant and second-hand set of dimensions, in an astral plane that was never meant to fly, the curling star-mists waver and part ...

For those aficionados of the Discworld series (and I know that there is at least one amongst my Facebook Friends) this conversation with Terry Pratchett includes a reading from his next book, Snuff.

Although the books might be described as fantasy (a description that Pratchett rejects) the interview shows he has a great sense of the realities of this world.

For the first episode of the film version of The Colour of Magic follow this link.

A requiem for newspapers

2011-08-11T18:50:00.002+10:00

This is a talk that Bruce Guthrie gave at the Wheeler Centre.

Guthrie has been editor of The Sunday Age, The Age, Who Weekly, the Weekend Australian Magazine, the Herald-Sun Wish.

In this talk he discusses the newspaper business, the changes brought about by the Internet, the threat posed by the decline of the very lucrative advertising pages and particularly his experience with the Murdoch Media Empire. He also discusses his book Man Bites Murdoch.

Thomas Friedman

2011-08-09T21:34:00.001+10:00

This is a talk that Thomas Friedman gave at the Melbourne Town Hall. the video comes from the Wheeler Centre.

Freidman notes four major issues:

1. Adapting to the IT revolution
2. Adapting to globalisation
3. Managing our whole entitlement, deficit and debt issue
4. Energy and climate

The first two merge into one issue as globalisation drives more IT revolution and more IT revolution drives more globalisation. Together they are hyper flattening the world. By flat Freidman means the inter-connectedness of the world.

He wrote The World is Flat in 2004. What particularly took my attention was the following:

If you pick up a first edition of that book and look in the index under “F” you will notice that Facebook isn’t in it. So when I wrote The World is Flat, Facebook didn’t exist, Twitter was a sound, the Cloud was in the sky … applications were what you sent to college, Linked In was a prison and Slype for most people was a typo”. All of that has happened in six years.

Maths lessons can be fun

2011-08-06T10:58:00.003+10:00

Australia and carbon emissions cuts

2011-07-31T21:30:00.015+10:00

Recently I received an email from a friend making an argument against Australia cutting its emissions.

The email started promisingly enough when it pointed out, with a pie graph, that Australia was the world's largest per capita carbon emitter.

The next graph showed total carbon emissions, and Australia appeared in the chart but was not one of the major emitters.

The email went on to note:

I doubt you need me to explain the significance of this........but just in case, it says that even if Australia reduced its emissions to zero, the planet’s atmosphere would hardly notice.

From 2008 – 2009 Australia’s carbon emissions reduced 1.8% without a carbon tax China’s increased by 13.3% and India’s by 8.7%.

No-one denies the climate is changing, it has been doing so throughout its existence. What causes it – who knows, where was the carbon dioxide coming from in previous warm periods between the ice ages?

Trying to stop the change is probably futile. We need to take steps to mitigate the changes.

If you meet Julia or Ross, have a question or two ready!

I don't know exactly what Julia or Ross would say but my response is as follows:

There are 8 basic problems with the thrust of the arguments in this email.

1. It is welcome that the email acknowledged that Australia is a major carbon emitter per person. Unfortunately the email did not consider the implications of this state of affairs. The fact that we are one of the major per capita emitters puts us in the international spot light. This is a point that Malcolm Turnbull, an important conservative politician made in a recent speech:

Australia generates most of its electricity from burning coal – much of it very emissions intensive brown coal in Victoria or South Australia. That is why our carbon dioxide emissions are among the highest in the world on a per capita basis – a reason why the Chinese (whose emissions are about one-fifth of ours) and the Indians (whose are less than one-tenth of ours) find our regular references to their emissions – and why should we do anything until the Chinese or Indians do something – why they find those references incredibly galling. Those of us, and David’s a member of this club with me, who have represented Australia at international conferences on this, know how incredibly embarrassing statements like that are when you actually confront the representatives of those countries.

2. Although Australia does not emit the huge amounts of carbon that China and the US do, we are still a significant emitter, ranking at number 16 out of 216 countries in the world.

3. The argument that we have only a small influence in the world at large is not one that is used by responsible people in other contexts. For example, should we cut out our International Aid because we can afford only a tiny fraction of the total aid donated by other countries? Australia ranks 16^th in foreign aid by Gross National Income but I don't hear anyone claiming that Australia should not give any foreign aid because it is tiny compared to the world total and that of other countries.

For people who are not convinced by the previous paragraph, because they object to Australia's participation in foreign aid, the same argument could be made about Australia's participation in wars such as WWI, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

4. Just because other countries are misbehaving, does not justify our misbehavior.

Here is an analogy from normal life. I live in a retirement village where we have a communal pool. Imagine a circumstance where I take my grandchildren to the pool, and they misbehave. I call them over and point out that they should stop their misbehaviour and they reply that other children are also behaving badly. As an adult how should I respond? I expect most adults would tell them that the misbehavour of other children does not justify their misbehaviour. The next step would be to have a talk to the adults supervising the other children and ask them to keep their kids in order.

That is a simple moral point that we make to children and it applies also on the International Stage. Just because other countries are misbehaving does not justify our misbehaviour and when we have got our house in order we can join the other responsible countries in putting pressure on the countries dragging their feet. As the Conservative British Prime Minister said the Australian Government's plans to place a price on carbon emissions: "will add momentum to those, in both the developed and developing world, who are serious about dealing with this urgent threat".

5. The argument that our emissions are so small that they don't make any difference to global temperatures could be used by almost every other country. If every country took this attitude then no progress would be made. Even China could mount a variant of the argument, claiming correctly that over 75 percent of emissions is caused by other countries, and that the vast majority of the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was caused by the developed countries. We have a classic Tragedy of the Commons problem.

6. The attack on China in the email implies that China is doing nothing to reduce its carbon emissions - this is not true. China is taking active steps to reduce the carbon intensity of its economy. Its carbon intensity target reduction for 2020 is 40 to 45%. It has published plans to reduce its carbon intensity by 2015 by 16%. It is also planning to trial an emissions trading system in 2015 - the current proposal by the Australian Government is often called a "Carbon Tax" but it is actually an emissions trading scheme. The reason why Chinese emissions are expected to continue growing even though carbon intensity is declining is because of the dramatic growth of the Chinese economy. See here and here for details. China is taking these steps in part because of the dangers of excessive carbon dioxide in the atmosphere but also as a method of modernising her economy see here and here for details.

7. Although there has been climate change in the past, it does not automatically follow (as implied in the email) that our current activities are safe. The very people (climate scientists) who investigate past climate variations are the very people who are telling us that our current activities are very dangerous.

The video below describes the findings of climate scientists over the past 20 years regarding past climate changes. It also indicates the sorts of mistakes made by climate deniers (like Bob Carter).

For a very detailed look at past climates and the processes that change climate see this post, which provides a great deal of evidence that carbon dioxide is the biggest control knob in determining climate.

The argument that our current activities are unsafe is grounded on climate sensitivity - ie the sensitivity of the climate to changes in carbon dioxide. If the climate is quite sensitive then our current activities are very dangerous leading to a significant increase of global temperature. One of the major methods of determining climate sensitivity is by studying past climates. To make the point as simply as possible: scientists studying past climate variations have determined a level of climate sensitivity that means continued increases in carbon dioxide will be very dangerous for our descendents.

For more information about climate sensitivity see this link.

7. The argument that we can't do anything about our current climate problem might turn out to be right. According to James Hanson (at this link) we are well beyond safe levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. If Hanson is right, not only do we have to stop carbon emissions very quickly but we also have to find ways of taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

One solution to our current dilemma is renewable energy systems, but some writers argue that while we have to get off fossil fuels renewable energy will not provide a enough energy to power growth in the future. See this link for a series of posts discussing this issue.

The argument that we can't do anything about climate change appearing in a denialist email is ironic. We would have had a much better chance of dealing with the problems we face if we had started working on the problem 10 years ago. A major reason why little has been done in some major developed countries (Australia, USA and Canada) is because of the unremitting campaign to find arguments (any arguments) against action that is being run by vested interests and ideologues.

8. The comment in the email, We need to take steps to mitigate the changes is quite strange. Mitigate means to make or become milder, less severe, less rigorous, or less painful; moderate. It seems to me that the process proposed by the government is all about mitigation.

I expect what the author of the email meant was adaption rather than mitigation. Given the pickle we have created, mitigation (reducing carbon emissions) and adaption (taking steps to reduce the vulnerability of natural and human systems to climate change) are both necessary.

The IPCC working group 2 report is largely concerned with adaption. See this link for examples.

9. The comment: What causes it (climate change) who knows? can be easily answered. Climate scientists have determined that the cause of the current warming is excessive carbon dioxide emitted by humanity. Here is an article that presents ten lines of evidence supporting the view that the primary cause of the current warming is human activities. The article references fourteen peer reviewed articles to support its argument. Here is another readable article.

10. The question where was the carbon dioxide coming from in previous warm periods between the ice ages? has also been effectively answered by Climate Scientists.

Norwegian terror attack

2011-07-28T21:50:00.001+10:00

It will take some time to sort out all of the facts and implications of the terror attacks in Norway.

As always Stephen Colbert has an entertaining and accurate take on the issue.

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Here is an excellent article from the Guardian on this issue.

Fifty renowned academics speaking about god

2011-07-27T20:10:00.001+10:00

I find it difficult to argue against the claims of any these 50 brilliant people.

As always the wonderful Carl Sagan puts it beautifully:

"What is faith? It is belief in the absence of evidence. Now I don't propose to tell anybody what to believe, but for me, believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake. The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence. And if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, OK then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the Universe really is."

To slightly change Darwin's quote: there is a grandeur in this view of the Universe, but I would only add one thought to those of those in the video. Although reason and evidence compels us to a non-religious world view there is still a sense of loss when we reject religious belief. Consequently my feelings are most closely aligned to the great 19^th century poet, Matthew Arnold when he wrote in Dover Beach:

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Europe Holiday 2011

2011-05-12T16:23:00.000+10:00

Here is an outline of our holiday itinerary

Date	Activity
13^th May	Fly our from Melbourne Airport 2235 QR 31 via Doha to Manchester QR 45
14^th May	Arrive in Manchester 1325
14^th May to 22^nd May	Preston including Hayley’s birthday 21st May
22^nd May to 4^th June	Self-organised touring of Sommerset and Cornwall
4^th June to 11th June	Devoncourt Resort, Exmouth Devon. +44(0)1395 272277 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +44(0)1395 272277 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
11^th June	Overnight stay between Exmouth and London
12^th June to 19^th June	London. Barkston Gardens Hotel. +44 20 7581 2322 (34-44 Barkston Gardens)
19^th June to 24^th June	Travel to Preston and stay in Preston for Bronwyn’s birthday 23^rd June
24^th June	Fly from Manchester to Madrid SN2174 via Brussels SN3727
24^th June to 25^th June	Our own time in Madrid
26^th June to 10^th July	Tour of Spain, Portugal and Morocco
10^th July to 13^th July	Stay with friends of Philip in Madrid
13^th July	Fly from Madrid to Paris LA 722
13^th July to 20^th July	Paris. Holiday Villa LaFayette. +33 1 4770 6707 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +33 1 4770 6707 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
20^th July	Leave Paris. QR 20 via Doha QR 30
21^st July	Arrive Melbourne 21:30

Laughing at the deniers

2011-05-12T12:08:00.000+10:00

It is important to continue to point out the absurdity of the climate deniers, but sometimes all we can do is laugh at them.

The video below is the Hungry Beast's take on climate denier stupidity.

In a similar vein here is a post laughing at the Muslim Haters.

Here are the lytics:

In the media landscape there are climate change deniers and believers, but rarely are those speaking about climate change actual climate scientists...

yo....we're climate scientists.. and there's no denying this Climate Change Is REEEEALL..

Who's a climate scientist..

I'm a climate scientist..

Not a cleo finalist

No a climate scientist

Droppin facts all over this wax

While bitches be crying about a carbon tax

Climate change is caused by people

Earth Unlike Alien Has no sequel

We gotta move fast or we'll be forsaken,

Cause we were too busy suckin dick Copenhagen: (Politician)

I said Burn! it's hot in here..

32% more carbon in the atmosphere.

Oh Eee Ohh Eee oh wee ice ice ice

Raisin' sea levels twice by twice

We're scientists, what we speak is True.

Unlike Andrew Bolt our work is Peer Reviewed... ooohhh

Who's a climate scientist..

I'm a climate scientist..

An Anglican revivalist

No a climate scientist

Feedback is like climate change on crack

The permafrosts subtracts: feedback

Methane release wack : feedback..

Write a letter then burn it: feedback

Denialists deny this in your dreams

Coz climate change means greater extremes,

Shit won't be the norm

Heatwaves bigger badder storms

The Green house effect is just a theory sucker (Alan Jones)

Yeah so is gravity float away muther f**cker

Who's a climate scientist..

I'm a climate scientist..

I'm not a climate Scientist

Who's Climate Scientists

A Penny Farthing Cyclist

A Lebanese typist

A Paleontologist

A Sebaceous Cyst

No! a climate scientist! Yo! PREACH~!

Written and performed by Climate Scientists, Dan Ilic, Duncan Elms and production by Brendan Woithe at Colony NoFi.

The new Australian complacency

2011-05-08T21:05:00.002+10:00

The video below is of a talk that Robert Manne gave at the Wheeler Centre.

Mann describes a historical culture of Australian self criticism and a sense of “hoping to reinvent the nation”, which came to an end with the Howard Era.

A very important part of the change of attitude involves Climate Change. His comment that Climate Change is “in some ways the simplest public issue I’ve ever had to think about”, whilst also one of the most complex from a political and international relations perspective, is telling.

See this post for an explanation of the obviousness of the public policy issue - ie the science, and this post for a take on the politics.

He closes with the comment:
“For the rest of my life — and for the rest of my children’s lives — the issue will be whether humans have the capacity to act on climate change, it seems to me. I don’t think any other issue is even remotely as significant now.”

Here is the Wheeler Centre summary of the talk.

In his first Lunchbox/Soapbox, public intellectual Robert Manne speaks of his disappointment in observing the arrival of a cultural and especially political complacency in contemporary Australia.

Manne applauds the manner in which Australia’s shift to a non-discriminatory migration policy was “not really a contentious matter”, but argues that we are yet to come to terms with the racism inherent in the (White Australia) policy that preceded the era of multiculturalism.

Referring to a quarter century of cultural nationalism and quirky, exciting and unique popular artworks which came to a close around the time of the Sydney Olympic Games, Manne contends that the values which made this period creatively robust — namely a culture of self criticism and a sense of “hoping to reinvent the nation” — are, in the present, painfully absent.

Instead, he argues, the Howard epoch saw Australia taking membership in the “triumphalism” of the anglophone West. Militarised nationalism grew alongside the rise of a “right-wing commentariat” (in which he includes Bolt, Akerman and Albrechtson and others) who backed the common sense of ordinary people.

Manne laments our failure to act despite our knowledge that climate change exists; a challenge he describes as “in some ways the simplest public issue I’ve ever had to think about”, whilst also one of the most complex from a political and international relations perspective.

In fact, Manne believes that climate change will not be solved on an international level, but rather by individual nation states taking independent steps to ensure their own longevity, creating a “benign domino effect” of shaming the largest carbon producers into action.

In closing, he offers the following as a testament to the importance of the challenge at hand:

“For the rest of my life — and for the rest of my children’s lives — the issue will be whether humans have the capacity to act on climate change, it seems to me. I don’t think any other issue is even remotely as significant now.”

A quotation from Martin Luther King Jr

2011-05-07T13:48:00.000+10:00

A quote from Martin Luther Kink Jr has been doing the rounds lately. The quote has been slightly mangled.

Here is the accurate quotation:

“Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction.”

See this link for more discussion of the quotation.

Pop-up paper sculptures

2011-05-07T13:01:00.001+10:00

The video below demonstrates the technique for making a pop-up sculpture:

You can download the template for the demonstration sculpture here .

Post-truth politics

2011-05-02T14:14:00.014+10:00

Climate science going back almost two hundred years makes it clear that:

the planet is warming
the major cause of the warming is very likely (better than 90%) human activities, and,
the warming is dangerous.

This is Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). There are multiple lines of evidence supporting AGW. See this post for examples of this evidence.

Consequently it is not a surprise that virtually all scientific organizations support the AGW view. See this post for the evidence of the AGW consensus.

The only response for those who are desperate to cast doubt on the science is conspiracy theorizing. Recently I came across an example of this while in conversation with an acquaintance. I made the point that the Australian Academy of Science, Australia's peak science organiaation supports AGW; that the CSIRO, Australia's peak science research body, supports AGW; and, that the Bureau of Meteorology, Australia's main atmospheric research body, supports AGW. The immediate answer that I received was "but those are corrupt organizations."

It is hardly a surprise then that when emails were stolen from the Climate Research Unit, at the University of East Anglia, the contents of the emails were scrutinized for anything that could be distorted to indicate mendacity on the part of the scientists.

The video below describes some of the deceit by those who would cast doubt on the science. (Although there are many examples like this video that debunks the "skeptic" arguments, this one is interesting as it included Dr Muller, of Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project.)

When five official inquiries demonstrated that the claims of the "skeptics" were baseless, the "skeptics" did not reconsider their positions, instead they just enlarged the conspiracy to include "the inquiries" as well as "the scientists". Here is an example of this conspiracies wrapped up in conspiracies thinking from Australia's premier climate denier.

This conspiracy theorizing is evident in more areas than climate science. Another example are the claims of "birthers" in the US. The video below provides some interesting discussion of conspiracy theories, emphasising that those who hold such views are impervious to truth.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

How has modern politics came to this amazing pass where large sections of the electorates in advanced countries believe demonstrable nonsense. David Roberts has investigated this issue in an article called, Policy in the Age of Post Truth Politics. His conclusion is:

But the crucial fact of post-truth politics is that there are no more referees. There are only players.

Roberts agrees with Jonathan Kay (in the video above) that thanks to the Internet people can intellectually live in a bubble of like minded people, who reinforce their beliefs. In this environment crazy, un-factual ideas are not challenged.

There are problems in the main stream media as well, involving the way journalists describe the political process. Most people receive their information about issues and current events from journalists, but it seems that journalists are more interested in describing politics - the day to day machinations of politicians - rather explaining and discussing policy. Lindsay Tanner, Australia's Finance Minister before his retirement, has written a book that discusses these issues. The book has not been formally released yet but here is a post covers the issues well.

If the crazies are immune to reason and evidence then maybe all we can do is laugh at them. President Obama did this brilliantly at the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner recently:

Earth's Energy Imbalance and Its Implications

2011-04-24T10:37:00.006+10:00

The video below is from the GISS Wednesday Lunch Seminar Series.

The talk is about the Earth's Energy Imbalance and it contains a great deal of interesting ideas, given by James Hansen.

The section that particularly grabbed my attention started at the 27 minute mark where Hansen discusses the rapidity with which the planet approaches equilibrium energy balance with increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

This has been an item of discussion in Australia's debate on reducing carbon emissions recently. Here is a link to a discussion of the confusion (deliberate or otherwise) in the political debate on this issue.

I had thought that energy balance would be achieved after a few decades, but Hansed indicates that maybe only 60% of the energy imbalance has been redressed in that time period.

The whole talk and question session takes over an hour so I have also proveded a copy of the abstract of the talk after the video.

Abstract:

Improving observations of ocean temperature confirm that Earth is absorbing

more energy from the sun than it is radiating to space as heat, even during the

recent solar minimum. This energy imbalance provides fundamental verification

of the dominant role of the human-made greenhouse effect in driving global

climate change. Observed surface temperature change and ocean heat gain

constrain the net climate forcing and ocean mixing rates. We conclude that

most climate models mix heat too efficiently into the deep ocean and as a

result underestimate the negative forcing by human-made aerosols. Aerosol

climate forcing today is inferred to be -1.6 +/- 0.3 Wm2 implying substantial

aerosol indirect climate forcing via cloud changes. Continued failure to

quantify the specific origins of this large forcing is untenable, as knowledge

of changing aerosol effects is needed to understand future climate change.

A recent decrease in ocean heat uptake was caused by a delayed rebound effect from Mount Pinatubo aerosols and a deep prolonged solar minimum. Observed sea level rise during the Argo float era can readily be accounted for by thermal expansion of the ocean and ice melt, but the ascendency of ice melt leads us to anticipate a near-term acceleration in the rate of sea level rise.

Is Australian Democracy Broken?

2011-04-19T17:13:00.000+10:00

Edna's 84th Birthday

2011-04-17T16:13:00.003+10:00

Both of my parents are now living at Colton Close.

Last Wednesday, 13^th April, Edna, my mother turned 84.

We had a party for her in the colton Close recreation room.

Many members of her family attended inclucing her husband (Eric) and her brother (Bill).

After eating Cameron played a cornet solo ...

... ane then we were regailed by a family ensemble playing some of mum's favourite hymn tunes.

Dad gave her a timbrel, so she played it while the ensemble played some tunes.

(The point of the timbrel is that one of the many activities at Colton Close is band practice where residents play percussion instruments while one of the staff plays the piano. Mum now has her own timbrel for band practice.)

Mum certainly enjoyed her party.

Here is a link to the photos.

The scariest path in the world

2011-04-09T12:05:00.000+10:00

I get vertigo just watching this video.

The pathway is called Caminito del Rey, which means the King's Little Pathway. The king in question is Alfonso XIII of Spain, who walked the path in 1921.

The path was finished in 1905, to be used by workers who were building a hydroelectric plant.

For more details of the pathway see here , here and here

Hideaway

2011-03-30T19:23:00.004+11:00

The image below is truly stunning.

I received it via an email with the following text:

This is the sunset at the North Pole with the moon at its closest point,

a scene you will probably never get to see in person.

And, you also see the sun below the moon, an amazing photo and not one easily duplicated.

You may want to pass it on to others so they can enjoy it.

The Chinese have a saying that goes something like this:

'When someone shares with you something of value,

you have an obligation to share it with others!'

I just did.. Your turn

Before reading my comments below the photograph, think about your reaction to the graphic.

When I saw it I thought that it was a beautiful image but was immediately aware that it was not a photograph.

The give away is that the crescent of the moon is very much larger than the sun. This is physically impossible as the sun and the moon appear the same size from the vantage point of the Earth. Solar eclipses show this similarity in apparent size clearly.

In reality this beautiful piece of art was produced by Inga Nielsen at the Gate to Nowhere site. (Unfortunately for mono-lingual people like me the site is in German.) The name of the work is Hideaway.

Hideaway can be found here on Neilsen's site. Note that is is found in a directory called Terragen. Terragen is software which "is a powerful solution for rendering and animating realistic natural environments". The software can be downloaded from this site.

A star

2011-03-25T22:48:00.002+11:00

Here is another great cartoon from the XKCD site.

Astronomy and the Lord of the Rings combined in one story! Love it.

The source can be found here.

For more information on the astronomy, follow this link.

Aurora

2011-03-25T12:17:00.002+11:00

Hear is a beautiful video of the aurora, photographed by Terje Sorgjerd.

As Sorgjerd noted:

I spent a week capturing one of the biggest aurora borealis shows in recent years.

Shot in and around Kirkenes and Pas National Park bordering Russia, at 70 degree north and 30 degrees east. Temperatures around -25 Celsius. Good fun.

(As with all videos, if this one stops and starts, then let it run through and then replay it.)

The Aurora from Terje Sorgjerd on Vimeo.

The decoy muslim threat

2011-03-14T16:01:00.005+11:00

The Onion is a wonderful satirical website. It is easy to became VERY ANGRY with all of the nonsense that we hear today, but maybe the best solution is to laugh at the loons:

Al Qaeda Populating U.S. With Peaceful 'Decoy Muslims'

Here is an Australian approach to laughing at the Islamophobics:

Design Vs Chance

2011-03-14T11:22:00.000+11:00

A Universe From Nothing

2011-03-13T19:12:00.000+11:00

Fermat's Last Theorem

2011-03-09T19:44:00.000+11:00

the statement of Fermat's Last Theorem is so simple that a middle secondary school student would understand it, but the solution is formidably difficult, as shown by the videos below.

Pricing Carbon

2011-03-04T11:17:00.002+11:00

Some politicians and journalists are spreading confusion about the Government's Carbon Pricing Mechanism. In her appearance on QANDA the Prime Minister was asked the following question:

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Prime Minister, isn’t the whole point of having a carbon tax to affect the prices that consumers pay? If there’s no change in consumer behaviour, you’re not going to achieve what you’re trying to achieve to reduce carbon pollution. So if it’s compensating households, aren’t you simply undermining the effect that your tax is going to have and ultimately make no change?

She gave a brief but clear explanation:

JULIA GILLARD: That’s a very perceptive question and I think a lot of people are thinking about his, about how does it work? If I’m getting compensation, what’s actually changing? Let me just explain that. The carbon price affects the big polluters. Yes, they will cause some price impacts for consumers. That’s true. We will then assist consumers and I can understand why people then intuitively go, well, how does all of this work? Isn’t, you know, sort of money going in and money going out? What’s the effect? Well, the effect is that in the shops when you come to buy things, products that are made with relatively less carbon pollution will be cheaper than products that are made with more carbon pollution. So you’re standing there with your household assistance in your hand. You could still keep buying the high carbon pollution products if you want to or what you’re far more likely to do is to buy the cheaper, lower carbon pollution products. That means that the people who make those things will get the consumer signal, gee, we will sell more, we will make more money if we make lower pollution products. That drives the innovation. So I want you to have that household assistance in your hand but I also want you to see price effects which make cleaner, greener things cheaper than high pollution commodities. That’s why it works.

In parliament she gave a longer and more politically charged answer:

Let me explain in detail our mechanism for pricing carbon. The first proposition is an incredibly simple one. At the moment carbon pollution can be released into the atmosphere for free. There is no disincentive for doing that. We will put a price on carbon, a price on every unit of carbon pollution. It will be paid for by businesses and as a result, because our business community is smart and adaptable and innovative, they will work out ways of pursuing their business and generating less carbon pollution. They will work out ways of making sure they pay less of a price when carbon is priced. Then they will enter into contracts, they will make investments on the basis of understanding the rules and understanding that carbon will be priced. And as they go about making those transitions, innovating, making the new investments of the future, we will work with those businesses in transition to a clean economy.

Having priced carbon and seen that innovation, yes, there will be pricing impacts; that is absolutely right. That is the whole point: to make goods that are generated with more carbon pollution relatively more expensive than goods that are generated with less carbon pollution. But because we are a Labor government this will be done in a fair way. We will assist households as we transition with this new carbon price. What that means is that people will walk into a shop with money in their pocket, the government having provided them with assistance. They will see the price signals on the shelves in front of them—things with less pollution, less expensive; things with more pollution, more expensive—and they too will adapt and change. They will choose the lower pollution products, which is exactly what we want them to do. Between the business investment and innovation, between households who have been assisted in a fair way by a Labor government responding to price signals, we will see a transition to a cleaner economy, to a clean energy economy, to a low-pollution economy.

What does that mean? Put very simply, it means jobs. It means that our economy will keep pace with a transition that is happening around the world. Our economy will keep pace and we will have the jobs of the future. What is the alternative? The alternative is to keep emitting carbon pollution. It is to see Australia left behind the tide of history with a high-pollution economy. It is exporting jobs to the rest of the world—jobs that Australian kids could have to build a future on. It is leaving households to deal with escalating electricity prices, which are going up because of a lack of investment certainty, and without household assistance in their pockets. And, of course, if we follow the Leader of the Opposition’s plan, it is also about ripping $30 billion off taxpayers. The efficient way to transform our economy is to price carbon and that is what we will do.

Source here

Gillard is to be congratulated in noting that there would be price rises. As she explains, a large amount of the money raised will go to people to compensate for the price increases. It is important to notice though that people will still choose the cheaper, low carbon, alternatives.

Although this was a clear explanation from Julia Gillard, the prize for the best speach on pricing carbon in the Australian Parliament still goes to Malcolm Turnbull, which can be found at this post.

Seven billion

2011-02-14T16:11:00.001+11:00

Royal Institution Christmas Lectures 2010

2011-02-11T20:05:00.001+11:00

The Royal Institution (see website at this link) is an organization devoted to scientific education and research. It was founded in 1799. Since 1825 it has been presenting lectures at christmas.

In 2010 the lecture was given by Mark Miodownik a materials scientist (see his website here). The topic was Size Matters.

Why does size matters in animal behaviour?

How can a hamster survive falling from the top of a skyscraper, ants carry over 100 times their own body weight and geckos climb across the ceiling?

In the first of this year's Christmas lectures, Dr Mark Miodownik investigates . He reveals how the science of materials - the stuff from which everything is made - can explain some of the most extraordinary and surprising feats in the animal kingdom.

By the end, you will understand why you will never see an elephant dance

Climate change impacts on ocean ecosystems

2011-02-09T19:12:00.001+11:00

The video is of a talk by Ove Hoegh-Guldberg one of Australia's foremost Oceanographers, who specialises in coral reaf ecosystems. The talk was part of a symposium on Oceans and Living Marine Ecosystems.

The symposium was summarised as follows:

Rapidly rising greenhouse gas concentrations are driving ocean systems toward conditions not seen for millions of years, with an associated risk of fundamental and irreversible ecological transformation. Changes in biological function in the ocean caused by anthropogenic climate change go far beyond death, extinctions and habitat loss: fundamental processes are being altered, community assemblages are being reorganized and ecological surprises are likely. This session will bring together experts from around the world to outline the most up to date science on how anthropogenic climate change is altering the structure and functioning of marine ecosystems.

Primary Messages:

1. There is a large body of empirical evidence indicating that anthropogenic climate change is substantially impacting ocean ecosystems. The evidence comes from many taxa, locations and habitats.

2. Changes in biological function in the ocean caused by anthropogenic climate change go far beyond death, extinctions and habitat loss: fundamental processes are being altered, community assemblages are being reorganized and ecological surprises are likely.

3. These changes will have significant consequences for people.

Ove Hoegh-Guldberg NCSE talk from John Bruno on Vimeo.

2010: a very hot year

2011-02-05T13:40:00.030+11:00

The year 2010 was a very hot one globally. Probably the best description is that it was effectively a dead heat with the previoous warmest year. Certainly Roy Spencer (a global warming skeptic) and James Hansen (a global warming proponent) seem to agree on that point.

As Spencer notes:

As far as the race for warmest year goes, 1998 (+0.424 deg. C) barely edged out 2010 (+0.411 deg. C), but the difference (0.01 deg. C) is nowhere near statistically significant. So feel free to use or misuse those statistics to your heart’s content.

And according to Hanson:

NASA’s announcement this year – that 2010 ties 2005 as the warmest year in the 131-year instrumental record – made headlines. But, how much does the ranking of a single year matter?

Not all that much, emphasizes James Hansen, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York City. In the GISS analysis, for example, 2010 differed from 2005 by less than 0.01°C (0.018 °F), a difference so small that the temperatures of these two years are indistinguishable, given the uncertainty of the calculation.

It is interesting that both point to the same difference between the preivously warmest year (0.01⁰ C), though Spencer's is cooler that the previously warm year and Hansen's is warmer. Those who are not familiar with the different temperature data sets may be surprised that Hansen and Spencer name two different years as the "previous warmest". For a discussion of the different temperature sets see the Hansen link above. For my take on the different temperature records see this post.

Below are charts showing data and trends for the five main temperature records. I charted from 1979 because UAH and RSS start from that date. As always click on the graphics for larger and clearer versions. (For a description of the method that I used to produce these charts see the appendix at the end of this post.)

All of the data sets show a strong warming trend since 1979. Some people argue that global warming has stopped sometime in the last 12 years, either 1998, 2001 or 2002. I have discussed this issue at this post, and concluded:

There are three major reasons that disprove the claims that global temperatures are not increasing:

1. their reliance on short time preiods to produce trends - which is statistically absurd

2. their use of the complex concept of statistical significance to give a false impression to those who don't understand any statistics

3. their reliance on just one of the many indicators of warming temperatures.

For the reasoning that led to those conclusions check the post.

Even if we ignore basic statistics and fall for the skeptics' trick of using short term time spans the argument still does not hold water. The chart below shows the years that have a negative trend to the end of 2010:

GISS	2005
HadCRU	2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
NOAA	2002 2003 2004
RSS	2002
UAH	-----

So bending over backwards to make the skeptic argument (and breaking some basis statistical rules in the process) we have only ¹/₅ of the trends from 2001 that are negative. Note also that half of the negative trends come from one data set - HadCRU. There is an enoumous irony here as climate skeptics try to discredit climate science by claiming (on the basis of stolen emails) that HadCRU distort the climate record to show excessive warming!

Appendix

To produce these charts I followed the steps below:

1. I downloaded the data for each of the data sets. To do this I used programming procedures (RClimate.txt) developed by Kelly O'Day. The program that I wrote used O'Day's procedures to download each of the five data sets to a separate file. This is an easy way to ensure that data is accurate and up to date, as the producers of the data sometimes revise the values of earlier months.

The section of code below references O'Day's functions to download the data. I did not include the functions as they are quite long - they can be found in the RClimate.txt file. The major change that I made to Kelly O'Day's code was an output_link that was appropriate to my directory structure.

## The functions require the packages ggplot2 and reshape to operate so make sure that the packages are loaded
library(ggplot2)
library(reshape)

##Get and store GISS data
m <- func_GISS() head(m) output_link <- "C://Learn_R/data_GISS.csv" write.csv(m, output_link, quote=FALSE, row.names = F) ##Get and store Hadley Data m <- func_HAD() head(m) output_link <- "C://Learn_R/data_HAD.csv" write.csv(m, output_link, quote=FALSE, row.names = F) ##Get and store NOAA data m <- func_NOAA() head(m) output_link <- "C://Learn_R/data_NOAA.csv" write.csv(m, output_link, quote=FALSE, row.names = F) ##Get and store RSS data m <- func_RSS() head(m) output_link <- "C://Learn_R/data_RSS.csv" write.csv(m, output_link, quote=FALSE, row.names = F) ##Get and store UAH data m <- func_UAH() head(m) output_link <- "C://Learn_R/data_UAH.csv" write.csv(m, output_link, quote=FALSE, row.names = F)

2. I used programs that I wrote to chart the data. The code for producing the NOAA chart can be seen below. The only difference in the files to chart the other data sets is the name of the .csv file in the link line. These programs will chart data from any time in the data set up to the latest data. The date to start should be entered in the yearfrom = line.

########### NOAA data and trend analysis ##############
## STEP 1: SETUP - Source File Link
par(las=1)
link <- "C:\\Learn_R\\data_NOAA.csv"

## STEP 2: READ DATA
my_data <- read.table(link, sep = ",", dec=".", skip = 0, row.names = NULL, header = T, colClasses = rep("numeric", 2), na.strings = c("", "*", "-", -99.99,99.9, 999.9), col.names = c("yr","yr_frac", "temperature"))

## STEP 3: MANIPULATE DATA ## Change the year in the next line to the year that # you want to plot data and trends from, not before 1880!! yearfrom = 1979 Title <- c("NOAA data and trend from", yearfrom) newdata <-(subset(my_data, yr>=yearfrom))

## STEP 4:CREATE PLOT AND TREND LINE
plot(temperature ~ yr, data = newdata, type="l", col = "red", xlab = "year", ylab = "temp", main = Title)
abline(lm(temperature ~ yr, data = newdata), col = "blue")

The Cigar Song

2011-02-03T19:24:00.007+11:00

Here is an entertaining song by Brad Paisley about an insurance scam.

I became aware of this story when I received the email below from a friend:

You couldn't make this up!

BEST LAWYER / INSURANCE STORY OF THE YEAR,
DECADE, AND POSSIBLY THE CENTURY.

This took place in Charlotte, North Carolina. A lawyer purchased a box of very rare and expensive cigars, then insured them against, among other things, fire.

Within a month, having smoked his entire stockpile of these great cigars, the lawyer filed a claim against the insurance company.

In his claim, the lawyer stated the cigars were lost 'in a series of small fires' ... The insurance company refused to pay, citing the obvious reason, that the man had consumed the cigars in the normal fashion.

The lawyer sued and WON! ( Stay with me. )

Delivering the ruling, the judge agreed with the insurance company that the claim was frivolous. The judge stated nevertheless, that the lawyer held a policy from the company, in which it had warranted that the cigars were insurable and also guaranteed that it would insure them against fire, without defining what is considered to be unacceptable 'fire' and was obligated to pay the claim.

Rather than endure lengthy and costly appeal process, the insurance company accepted the ruling and paid $15,000 to the lawyer for his loss of the cigars that perished in the 'fires'.

NOW FOR THE BEST PART...

After the lawyer cashed the cheque, the insurance company had him arrested on 24 counts of ARSON!!!

With his own insurance claim and testimony from the previous case being used against him, the lawyer was convicted of intentionally burning his insured property and was sentenced to 24 months in jail and a $24,000 fine. This true story won First Place in last year's Criminal Lawyers Award contest..

ONLY IN AMERICA .... NO WONDER THE REST OF THE WORLD THINKS THEY'RE NUTS!

The heading of this email is somewhat ironic as the story was made up, as shown here, here and here .

For more information on email hoaxes see this post.

Tropical cyclones in a warming world

2011-02-02T19:27:00.007+11:00

What will be the effect on Tropical Cyclones (Hurricanes) as the world warms?

It is likely that extreme weather events will occur more frequently , but the effect on Tropical Cyclones is a complex one and open to misunderstanding.

The first half of the video below outlines the scientific evidence which can be summarised as follows:

1. There will be fewer tropical cyclones because of global warming ...
2. ... but those storms that do make landfall will be more powerful. So there will be more strong storms.
3. We are currently in a phase of heightened hurrican activity becasuse of a natural 60 to 80 year cycle that began in 1995 (in the Atlantic).
4. There is evidence to suggest that recent hurricanes may have become stronger because of global warming, but this isn't conclusive.

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has posted an article on tropical cyclones at this link which agrees with the information presented in the video, as the following quotation shows:

There have been three recent studies producing projections for tropical cyclone changes in the Australian region. Two suggest that there will be no significant change in tropical cyclone numbers off the east coast of Australia to the middle of the 21st century. The third study, based on the CSIRO simulations, shows a significant decrease in tropical cyclone numbers for the Australian region especially off the coastline of Western Australia. The simulations also show more long-lived eastern Australian tropical cyclones although one study showed a decrease in long-lived cyclones off the Western Australian coast.

Each of the above studies finds a marked increase in the severe Category 3 - 5 storms. Some also reported a poleward extension of tropical cyclone tracks.

The second half of the video discusses the issue of sea level rise and low lying islands. Again the evidence is interesting and complex. Even if low lying islands will not be drowned, storm surges, coral bleaching and ocean acidification are a definite threat.

Appendix

Below are the sources that the creator of the video used:
1) NBC news report: "Hurricanes and Global Warming Connection" on YouTube

2) "Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment"
Webster et al, Science 2005

3) Half-degree increase in temp leads to approx 40% increase in hurricanes:
"Large contribution of sea surface warming to recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity"
-- Saunders and Lea, Nature 2008

4) 60- to 80- year hurricane cycle responsible for hurricane activity:
"The Recent Increase in Atlantic Hurricane Activity: Causes and Implications."
Goldenberg et al, Science 2001

5) Photo of Hurrican Igor showing temperature difference:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD...

6) Increased wind shear decreases hurricane activity:
"The Recent Increase in Atlantic Hurricane Activity: Causes and Implications." -- Goldenberg et al, Science 2001
and "Increased tropical Atlantic wind shear
in model projections of global warming" -- G. Vecchi, B. Soden, Geophysical Research Letters, 2007

7) paper postulating fewer tropical storms:

"Tropical Cyclones and Global Climate Change: A Post-IPCC Assessment"
-- Henderson-Sellers et al, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 1998

8) Papers confirming fewer storms:

"Increased tropical Atlantic wind shear
in model projections of global warming" -- G. Vecchi, B. Soden, Geophysical Research Letters, 2007

"Simulated reduction in Atlantic
hurricane frequency under 21st century
warming conditions."
-- Tom Knutson, Nature Geoscience 2008

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number
Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
-- Wang et al, Geophysical Research Letters 2008

9) Expert panel paper:
"Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change"
-- Knutson et al, Nature Geoscience 2010

10) 10% increase in wind speed translates to a roughly 60% increase in damage:
"Climate and tropical cyclone activity: A new model"

11) Increase in number and proportion of category 4 and 5 hurricanes:
"Changes in Tropical Cyclone Number, Duration, and Intensity in a Warming Environment"
-- Webster, Science 2005

12) Nature paper that reached the same conclusion:
"Increasing destructiveness of tropical cyclones over the past 30 years"
-- K. Emanuel, Nature 2005

13) Global warming a factor in increased sea surface temperatures:
"Global Warming Surpassed Natural Cycles In Fueling 2005 Hurricane"
-- Trenberth and Shea, Geophysical Research Letters 2006

14) Boston Globe story "Katrina's Real Name" (Boston Globe August 30, 2005) at:
http://www.boston.com/news/weather/ar...

15) Fox news report on hurricane inactivity:
"Global Warming No Hurricanes" on YouTube

16) Global Warming = More Hurricanes at:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/22...

17) Discovery channel report on rising sea levels "Global warming -- what you need to know" found at:
"Kiribati - Global warming" on YouTube.

18) BBC report on Tuvalu found at "Tuvalu Island in the South Pacific" on YouTube.

19) Studies on accretion of coral atolls:
"Tropical cyclone creates a new land
formation on Funafuti atoll" -- J.E. Maragos et al, Science 1973.

"The nature and origin of coral reef
islands." -- Stoddart and Steers, Biology and Geology of
Coral Reefs 1977.

"Reef-island accretion and soil
development on Makin, Kiribati...."
-- Woodroffe and Morrison, CATENA, 2001

"The morphological response of atoll
islands to sea-level rise" -- Cowell and Kench. Journal of Coastal
Research 2001
Below are the rest of my sources for the last video (they wouldn't all fit on the original video description)

"New model of reef-island evolution...."
-- Kench et al, Geology 2005

20) Study showing 23 of 27 Pacific atolls stable or increasing in size:
"The dynamic response of reef islands to sea-level rise: Evidence from multi-decadal
analysis of island change in the Central Pacific"
-- Webb and Kench, Global and Planetary Change 2010-11-23

21) "Coral Reefs - Feeling the Heat with Jeff Corwin" on YouTube, produced by Defenders of Wildlife.

22) Explanation of bleaching:

"Bleaching Patterns of Four Species of Carribean Reef Corals" -- Fitt and Warner, Biology Bulletin 1995

"Coral bleaching: causes and consequences"
-- B. E. Brown, Coral Reefs, 1997

23) Most coral unable to change algae:
"Most corals may not change their symbionts."
-- TL Goulet, Marine Ecology Progress 2006

24) Refutation of Goulet:
"Multiple symbiotic partnerships are common in scleractinian corals, but not in octocorals:
Comment on Goulet"
-- Baker and Romanski, Marine Ecology Progress 2007

25) Coral thrived in northern latitudes during warm past:
"Correlations between sea surface temperature, circulation patterns and the distribution of hermatypic
corals of Japan"
-- Jen Veron, Continental Shelf Research, 1992

26) Coral may have difficulty migrating due to human activity:
"Coral reefs and Global Climate Change"
-- The Pew Center 2004

27) Potential acidification of oceans:
"Anthropogenic Decline in High-Latitude Ocean Carbonate by 2100"
-- JC Orr et al, nature 2005

Crazy action scene

2011-02-02T16:57:00.003+11:00

Endhiran is an Indian Science Fiction movie. To find out more details of the film see this link.

Here is a summary of the film's plot:

The film's story revolves around a scientist's struggle to control his creation, an android robot whose programme was upgraded to give it the ability to comprehend and generate human emotions. The plan backfires as the robot falls in love with the scientist's fiancée and is further manipulated to bring destruction to the world when it lands in the hands of a rival scientist. How the robot is stopped from further destruction forms the rest of the plot.

The final action sequence (below) is truly amazing.

Wind and Mr Ug

2011-01-31T09:14:00.018+11:00

This is a lovely video story, from Vi Hart's Site . How quickly do you get the point, or do you have to wait for the end?

It is fun to play with moebius strips, but if you haven't got the time to make one and test what happens when you cut it in two (as happens at the end of the story) then the video below provides the answer, along with some other interesting properties of moebius strips.

So will Wind see her dog again? The answer is a bit tricky! Answers in the comments.

Escher used the idea of Moebius Strips in some of his designs; the one below is one of his most famous pieces.

This video is another great variation of a Möbius Strip theme.

Vi Hart is obviously a Harry Potter fan. She composed a seven movement musical tribute the the Harry Potter Series, called the Harry Potter Septet. Here is a video, from the Septet, of a of a song that uses Ginny Weasley's singing valentine from the Chamber of Secrets.

Here is more of Vi's Harry Potter music.

The New York Times printed an article on Vi Hart which can be found at this link.

Science under attack

2011-01-30T11:37:00.003+11:00

Gvien that the evidence that the planet is warming and that the primary cause involves human activities, a view that is supported by the vast majority of people who are expert in this issue, why do we hear so much denial of reality.

Nobel Prize winner Sir Paul Nurse, who is also President of the Royal Society, investigates this issue in the horizon documentary below.

This is a fairly gentle response which comes to the conclusion that scientists have to be more active in explaining and defending their work from those who would attack it. This is fair enough, though I wonder if Nurse would be so calm and measured if the likes of Singer and Delingpole came after his work in the dishonest and deceitful way that they attack the climate scientists. My suspicion is that he would take the sort of strong defense shown by Ben Santer in this post.

Jared Diamond: Guns, Germs and Steel

2011-01-23T17:45:00.004+11:00

The Videos in this post constitute a documentary based on Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs and Steel. I recommend that anyone interested in World History read the 450 pages of the book - these videos give an excellent introduction to the main themes of the book.

Episode One : Out of Eden

Jared Diamond's journey of discovery began on the island of Papua New Guinea. There, in 1974, a local named Yali asked Diamond a deceptively simple question:

"Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo, but we black people had little cargo of our own?"

Diamond realized that Yali's question penetrated the heart of a great mystery of human history -- the roots of global inequality.

Why were Europeans the ones with all the cargo? Why had they taken over so much of the world, instead of the native people of New Guinea? How did Europeans end up with what Diamond terms the agents of conquest: guns, germs and steel? It was these agents of conquest that allowed 168 Spanish conquistadors to defeat an Imperial Inca army of 80,000 in 1532, and set a pattern of European conquest which would continue right up to the present day.

Diamond knew that the answer had little to do with ingenuity or individual skill. From his own experience in the jungles of New Guinea, he had observed that native hunter-gatherers were just as intelligent as people of European descent -- and far more resourceful. Their lives were tough, and it seemed a terrible paradox of history that these extraordinary people should be the conquered, and not the conquerors.

To examine the reasons for European success, Jared realized he had to peel back the layers of history and begin his search at a time of equality -- a time when all the peoples of the world lived in exactly the same way.

Episode Two : Conquest

On November 15th 1532, 168 Spanish conquistadors arrive in the holy city of Cajamarca, at the heart of the Inca Empire, in Peru.

They are exhausted, outnumbered and terrified -- ahead of them are camped 80,000 Inca troops and the entourage of the Emperor himself.

Yet, within just 24 hours, more than 7,000 Inca warriors lie slaughtered; the Emperor languishes in chains; and the victorious Europeans begin a reign of colonial terror which will sweep through the entire American continent.

Why was the balance of power so unequal between the Old World, and the New?

Episode Three : Into the Tropics

So far, Jared Diamond has demonstrated how geography favoured one group of people -- Europeans -- endowing them with agents of conquest ahead of their rivals around the world. Guns, germs and steel allowed Europeans to colonize vast tracts of the globe -- but what happened when this all-conquering package arrived in Africa, the birthplace of humanity?

Can Jared Diamond's theories explain how a continent so rich in natural resources, could have ended up the poorest continent on earth?

Can Jared Diamond explain how America fell to guns, germs and steel?

Jared Diamond: Collapse

2011-01-23T11:21:00.004+11:00

In the video below, Jared Diamond discusses the findings of his book Collapse.

The point of the book is best described by its subtitle: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive.

It would take days or even weeks to read the 560 pages of the book, but in only an hour, Diamond provides an effective summary in the video below.

Diamond developed a five point framework for considering the fate of societies. The following paragraph, taken from page 11 of the book, briefly describes the factors:

... I don't know of any case in which a societie's collapse can be attributed solely to environmental damage: there are always other contributing factors. When I began to plan this book, I didn't appreciate those complications, and I naively thought that the book would just be about enviromental damage. Eventually, I arrived at a five-point framework of possible contributing factors that I now consider in trying to understand any putative environmental collapse. Four of those sets of factors - environmental damage, climate change, hostile neighbors, and friendly trade partners - may or may not prove significant for a particular society. The fifth set of factors - the society's response to its environmental problems - always proves significant.

Why the West Rules - For Now

2011-01-22T17:06:00.003+11:00

This is a talk by Ian Morris about the thesis of his book Why the West Rules--for Now: The Patterns of History, and What They Reveal About the Future

Here are my thoughts and summary of the talk. The video can be found at the bottom of the post.

Morris starts with an apposite quote from Winston Churchill: "The farther backward you can look the farther forward you are likely to see."

Three kinds of things to know before answering the question, "Why the West Rules - For Now:

1. Biology - the study of what we are. Human Beings are all much the same, where ever you find them.
2. Sociology - similarities and differences between societies: why societies innovate and respond effectively to crises and why they sometimes don't.

These two issues help to provide a general theory of human history, about all people in all times and all places. But it is not enough to tell us why the West Rules for that you need:

3. Geography - but it gives an answer in complicated ways. Geography drives the development of societies but on the other hand, the development of societies drives what geography means. Simply put, geography drives the current distribution of wealtha and power. Agriculture (which was essential to civilisation) could only develop initially where there existed concentrations of domesticable plants and animals - ie a geographical effect. The place where these creatures were most densely concentrated was in the Fertile Crescent (in the current Middle East) so that is where agriculture first appeared, followed a few thousand years later by East Asia (China), the Indus Valley (Pakistan) and the Americas. As societies developed, based on agriculture, the meaning of geography changed, initially access to great rivers was very important which led to the great civilisations on Mesopotamia, and then access to seas - the classical European civilisations developed around the Mediterranean.

So far this is fairly familiar to readers of Jarred Diamond's books, Guns, Germs and Steel and Collapse which is why I find the presentation compelling. The section of Diamond's Guns ... was his explanation of why Western Europe develped much more quickly than it main competitor, China, after about 1400. Ian Morris provides an interesting explanation, embedded in his geographical theme - that European development was driven by the discovery of the Americas, and that the Americas were twice as close to Europe as to East Asia. Before Europeans had ships that could safely traverse the Atlantic Ocean, this fact of geography was not important, but once they has such ships the meaning of geography had been changed by the new technology. This change of technology set up a cascade of new effects - in the fields of economics, the natural sciences, technology and mathematics.

So what about the future?

Great trends can help us predict future developments, but historical analysis also shows that the great trends of history have steadily developed forces that undermine them.

Projecting forward: the East will catch up the West early after 2100, assuming that rates of change will occur at 20th century changes. If changes occur more quickly (as is likely) then the East will castch up during the second half of this century. Morris predicts extremely rapid change in Social Development. Morris's description of a utipian future left me somewhat disturbed until he started discussing the counter point: that trends constantly generate the trends that undermine them. The same set of problems come up when civilizations collapse are familiar today: uncontrolled migration, failure of state organisatins, famine, epidemic disease, and climate change.

One of the most disappointing aspects of popular discussion of current events is the lack of a historical context, talks like this put our current predicament in a broad context - 15,000 years!

Global Sea Ice

2011-01-19T19:55:00.010+11:00

One of the many indicators that the planet is warming dangerously is the state of the sea ice. Here and here are two of my articles on the Arctic Sea Ice. The argument can be made that just because there are problems with sea ice in one part of the world that doesn't mean that there is a global problem.

Lord Monckton tries to make that point in the graphic below, which is taken from a power point presentation found here.

Monckton claims that "Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years". The graph to notice is the red line at the bottom, the Sea Ice Anomaly. (An anomaly is a variation from average values, which is useful in determining trends in data.) A casual perusal of that line might indicate only a small amount of change. Those who are familiar with Monckton might expect that he has manipulated the graph in some way to make it look as if there has been little change, after all Monckton has form in misrepresenting climate science. In reality the graph is taken directly from The Cryosphere Today site at this link. The problem is with the format of the graph. The Y-axis has a range of 27, while the data has a range of about 3. Formatting the chart this way has the effect of squashing the graph, and so making any trends less obvious. (Incidentally, Cryosphere Today did not attempt to manipulate the presentation of the data, they chose that format so that the anomaly and the area values could be shown on the same graph.)

If we are going to get a clear view of the the changes in the anomaly then we should plot the data with y-axis values that are similar to the range of the data. I have done that in the chart reproduced below.

From Gypsies

Before discussing this graph, I will describe how I produced it. The source for the data, which I saved as global_sea_ice.csv is found here at The Cryosphere Today site. My program, written in R, to plot the data can be found in the appendix.

The red line in the chart is the anomaly data, the black line is the linear trend line. The data is quite noisy (variable) and although the anomaly at the moment is below zero (ie is less than the 30 year average) sometime in the next few years it will climb above zero and then some crazy will claim that Global Sea Ice is not declining. The one thing that is eminently clear is that the trend Global Sea Ice is declining, and the trend is the most important issue, not the current value of the anomaly.

It is amazing that Monckton's nonsense can be so easily taken to pieces, after all he has a huge public profile.

I decided to check the data and perform my own analysis after reading this post at Tamino's Site. I did not do this analysis because I thought Tamino might be wrong, that was not likely, but because Tamino invited his readers to do their own analysis. I was pleased to see that my result was the same as Tamino's.

Appendix

#################### Global Sea Ice Anomaly #################
##### Written by Stephen Spencer 19/01/2011 ##########

## STEP 1: SETUP - Source File
par(las=1)
link <- "C:\\Learn_R\\global_sea_ice.csv"

## STEP 2: READ DATA
my_data <- read.table(link,
sep = ",", dec=".", skip = 0,
row.names = NULL, header = T,
colClasses = rep("numeric", 2),
na.strings = c("", "*", "-", -99.99,99.9, 999.9),
col.names = c("Year","Anom","",""))

## STEP 3: MANIPULATE DATA
Title <- " Global Sea Ice Anomaly"

## Ceate Plot
plot(Anom ~ Year, data = my_data, type="l", col = "red", xlab = "Year", ylab = "Anomaly", main = Title)
abline(lm(Anom ~ Year, data = my_data), col = "black")

The Lunatic Fringe

2011-01-18T19:07:00.004+11:00

From the title of this post you might expect that I will be discussing Sarah Palin or Andrew Bolt, but this is not the case.

At this link you will find a very interesting article, written by Akim Reinhardt, which includes the following:

I study the past. It’s what I do for a living. Like any historian, I strive to understand the past in a historical context and on its own terms. But as a human being, I inevitably use my own presentist sense of morality and ethics when passing judgment on it. And here’s the thing. Slavery and genocides, those are easy for us now. Yeah, super wrong, we get it. But who would you have been back then, in the moment? We all want to believe that we would have been the person working to free slaves through the underground railroad, or living peaceably with Indians, or smuggling Jews out of Europe. But guess what? You wouldn’t have. Or at least, it’s not very likely. No, odds are, you would’ve been some douche bag who justified it with mealy mouthed excuses, or laid low and avoided talking about such unpleasantness. Why? I’ll tell you why.

Because when crazy shit is the norm, the lunatic fringe are the ones who embrace the right choice. If crazy is normal, then the right answer seems crazy. I’ll say it again. If crazy is the norm, then opposing it seems crazy.

Are you crazy? Are you John Brown on the fringe? I mean really on the fringe.

Reinhardt in discussing slavery makes the point that from the perspective of our current morality such an institution is outrageous, that is, we are all abolitionists. But, that does not mean that the historical abolitionists had views that were similar to us. We reject slavery because it is racist, but 19^th century abolitionists accepted the view then current that the slaves were inferior, their objections were on religious grounds.

Reinhardt then discusses the immorality of meat eating. His claim is that just as we judge those in the past for their support for or acquiescence in slavery, so descendents, possibly centuries in the future, will be judging us on our barbaric practice of meat eating. Maybe ... anyway read the article, it is a good read.

What concerns me that in a few decades (not centuries) my generation will be judged by our grand children or great grand children. I expect the question, sometimes in the 2030s, "Grandpa, it was obvious more than 20 years ago that we were heading to the end of the fossil fuel era, and yet your generation did nothing to prepare for it."

Believing that we are likely heading into very difficult times seems lunatic to many people, but there is a great deal of evidence that this is the case.

As one of the commentors to the article noted:

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."

- Jiddu Krishnamurti

Proof for the Non-existance of God

2011-01-18T16:45:00.004+11:00

These posts discuss the issue of the existence of God ...

.. but my favourite writing on this topic is from Douglas Adams in his wonderful book, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galexy ...

Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change

2011-01-04T20:07:00.037+11:00

Introduction

During the last year there have been many extreme weather events, including the Moscow heatwave, and flooding in the US, Pakistan, Australia, Brazil, and Sri Lanka. That 2010 was a very hot year and that the planet is warming and that human activities are a major cause of the warming are undeniable. The question is often asked whether the cause of the the extreme events listed above is global warming.

Before considering the views of Climate Scientists the following video from the US ABC is a useful introduction:

Summary of Expert Opinion

This is a complex issue, so what do climate experts have to say about it?

Here is my summary of the points made by the experts.

1. The probability of the occurrance of extreme events will change most as they are in the tail of the probability distribution.

The diagram below helps to make this important concept clear. The diagram is referring to temperature events, but could just as easily involve hydrological events, such as droughts or floods. The probabilities of many events can be described in terms of the bell shaped normal curve. The diagram shows two normal curves, which have different means (averages). Note with the left (cooler) curve the very hot temperatures (marked in dark red) are very unlikely but if the mean temperature is increased (the right curve) the very hot temperatures become much more likely.

2. the extra warming increases the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere which invigorates storms, and generally makes the hydrological (water) cycle more active.

3. the extra warming also leads to hotter weather.

4. although it is often stated that it is impossible to attribute individual weather events to global warming, scientists are developing methods of determining the degree to which global warming caused specific events (“fractional attributable risk”). One such study Stott et al that can be read at this link, concluded:

Using a threshold for mean summer temperature that was exceeded in 2003, but in no other year since the start of the instrumental record in 1851, we estimate it is very likely (confidence level >90%)that human influence has at least doubled the risk of a heatwave exceeding this threshold magnitude.

The complexity of these issues, and the degree to which they can be easily misrepresented is illustrated in this post on Tropical Cyclomes.

If the scientists are right and our warming of the planet is partly to blame for increased extreme weather, of particular concern is that we have only had ³/₄ ⁰C of warming so far. What will the world be like when we have had 2⁰C of warming?

The Experts Speak for Themselves

The UK MET Office and the Royal Society released a joint statement in 2009, which can be found at this link. The whole report is worth reading, but here is the section that refers to extreme weather events:

We expect some of the most significant impacts of climate change to occur when natural variability is exacerbated by long-term global warming, so that even small changes in global temperatures can produce damaging local and regional effects. Year on year the evidence is growing that damaging climate and weather events - potentially intensified by global warming - are already happening and beginning to affect society and ecosystems. This includes:

* In the UK, heavier daily rainfall leading to local flooding such as in the summer of 2007;

* Increased risk of summer heat waves such as the summers of 2003 across the UK and Europe;

* Around the world, increasing incidence of extreme weather events with unprecedented levels of damage to society and infrastructure. This year's unusually destructive typhoon season in South East Asia, while not easy to attribute directly to climate change, illustrates the vulnerabilities to such events;

* Sea level rises leading to dangerous exposure of populations in, for example, Bangladesh, the Maldives and other island states;

* Persistent droughts, leading to pressures on water and food resources, and the increasing incidence of forest fires in regions where future projections indicate long term reductions in rainfall, such as South West Australia and the Mediterranean.

These emerging signals are consistent with what we expect from our projections, giving us confidence in the science and models that underpin them. In the absence of action to mitigate climate change, we can expect much larger changes in the coming decades than have been seen so

Here are the views of three prominent climate scientists in their own words.

According to James Hanson at this link, the language used by experts is often confusing to the general public:

Was global warming the cause of the 2010 heat wave in Moscow, the 2003 heat wave in Europe, the all-time record high temperatures reached in many Asian nations in 2010, the incredible Pakistan flood in 2010? The standard scientist answer is “you cannot blame a specific weather/climate event on global warming.” That answer, to the public, translates as “no”.

However, if the question were posed as “would these events have occurred if atmospheric carbon dioxide had remained at its pre-industrial level of 280 ppm?”, an appropriate answer in that case is “almost certainly not.” That answer, to the public, translates as “yes”, i.e., humans probably bear a responsibility for the extreme event.

In either case, the scientist usually goes on to say something about probabilities and how those are changing because of global warming. But the extended discussion, to much of the public, is chatter. The initial answer is all important.

Although either answer can be defended as “correct”, we suggest that leading with the standard caveat “you cannot blame…” is misleading and allows a misinterpretation about the danger of increasing extreme events. Extreme events, by definition, are on the tail of the probability distribution. Events in the tail of the distribution are the ones that change most in frequency of occurrence as the distribution shifts due to global warming.

For example, the “hundred year flood” was once something that you had better be aware of, but it was not very likely soon and you could get reasonably priced insurance. But the probability distribution function does not need to shift very far for the 100-year event to be occurring several times a century, along with a good chance of at least one 500-year event.

Kevin Trenberth (KT) in an inteview with Joe Rohmm (JR) at this link, gave the following opinion:

JR: It seems to me the media hasn’t figured out a way to talk about this so they often just don’t talk about it at all.

KT: That’s correct.

JR: And as a result the public never learns the connection to climate change. I’m just wondering if you have any comments about that and what you would suggest is the right way to talk about it and the like.

KT: I find it systematically tends to get underplayed and it often gets underplayed by my fellow scientists. Because one of the opening statements, which I’m sure you’ve probably heard is “Well you can’t attribute a single event to climate change.” But there is a systematic influence on all of these weather events now-a-days because of the fact that there is this extra water vapor lurking around in the atmosphere than there used to be say 30 years ago. It’s about a 4% extra amount, it invigorates the storms, it provides plenty of moisture for these storms and it’s unfortunate that the public is not associating these with the fact that this is one manifestation of climate change. And the prospects are that these kinds of things will only get bigger and worse in the future.

Also in the interview Trenberth discusses hard evidence that extreme events were increasing:

... there was a study a few years ago now, that only went through 2002 but it was looking at the 20th century and at that point the average rainfall over the 48 contiguous states had gone up 7% but the heavy rainfall events had gone up 20%. And so the heavy rainfall events have been documented as increasing across the United States.

... There was a more recent study that looked at somewhat different statistics and showed that the really heavy rainfall events — the top 1% and the top 0.3% — had gone up at even more alarming levels something like 27% as I recall over the last 30 or 40 years [actually 1967 to 2006]. And indeed most of those changes have occurred since about 1970.

There was a more recent study that looked at somewhat different statistics and showed that the really heavy rainfall events — the top 1% and the top 0.3% — had gone up at even more alarming levels something like 27% as I recall over the last 30 or 40 years [actually 1967 to 2006]. And indeed most of those changes have occurred since about 1970.

In the video below, Ben Santer makes some of the points already introduced by Hansen and Trenberth, but also discusses some new work on determining the liklehood of extreme events using the fractional attributable risk method found in other disciplines. His final point is also important: it is not surprising that we are getting extreme weather events as we warm up the planet.

In written testomony presented to the US Congress, Santer described the attribution of extreme climate events to global warming in the following terms:

We are now capable of making informed scientific statements regarding the influence of human activities on the likelihood of extreme events (75, 76, 77).

As noted previously, computer models can be used to perform the control experiment (no human effects on climate) that we cannot perform in the real world. Using the “unforced” climate variability from a multi-century control run, it is possible to determine how many times an extreme event of a given magnitude should have been observed in the absence of human interference. The probability of obtaining the same extreme event is then calculated in a perturbed climate – for example, in a model experiment with historical or future increases in greenhouse gases, or under some specified change in mean climate (78). Comparison of the frequencies of extremes in the control and perturbed experiments allows climate scientists to make probabilistic statements about how human-induced climate change may have altered the likelihood of the extreme event (53, 78, 79). This is sometimes referred to as an assessment of “fractional attributable risk” (78).

Recently, a “fractional attributable risk” study of the 2003 European summer heat wave concluded that “there is a greater than 90% chance that over half the risk of European summer temperatures exceeding a threshold of 1.6 K is attributable to human influence on climate” (78).

This study (and related work) illustrates that the “D&A” [detection and attribution] community has moved beyond analysis of changes in the mean state of the climate. We now apply rigorous statistical methods to the problem of estimating how human activities may alter the probability of occurrence extreme events. The demonstration of human culpability in changing these risks is likely to have significant implications for the debate on policy responses to climate change.

(Note that the numbers in brackets refer to peer reviewed publications. The details of the publications can be found in the document at the link above.)

Will Steffen is one of Australia's premier climate scientists. That he agrees that global warming will increase the probability of extreme events can be found at this link.

Here is one final link that contains plenty of valuable information: A wave that could drown the world

Recent studies linking warming and extreme weather:
Greenhouse gasses and British flooding
Two new studies , here

Cassini's Pale Dot

2010-12-26T19:45:00.008+11:00

In 1990 Voyager 1 took the original Pale Blue Dot photograph. See details at this post.

Here is Cassini's version of the Pale Blue Dot. If you look carefully the dot can be seen above the centre of the photo, just outside Saturn's main rings.

That dot is Earth.

Here is a link to a larger and clearer version of the photograph.

The explanation for Saturn's unusual colouring in the photograph is that the photo was created from 165 photos taken by Cassini when it was in the shadow of Saturn (ie Saturn was blocking out the glare of the sun).

Details can be found here and here.

As noted at the second link:

With giant Saturn hanging in the blackness and sheltering Cassini from the sun's blinding glare, the spacecraft viewed the rings as never before, revealing previously unknown faint rings and even glimpsing its home world.

This marvelous panoramic view was created by combining a total of 165 images taken by the Cassini wide-angle camera over nearly three hours on Sept. 15, 2006. The full mosaic consists of three rows of nine wide-angle camera footprints; only a portion of the full mosaic is shown here. Color in the view was created by digitally compositing ultraviolet, infrared and clear filter images and was then adjusted to resemble natural color.

Saturn shelters the sun, creating a view that illuminates planet and its ringsThe mosaic images were acquired as the spacecraft drifted in the darkness of Saturn's shadow for about 12 hours, allowing a multitude of unique observations of the microscopic particles that compose Saturn's faint rings.

Voyager 1

2010-12-26T11:42:00.008+11:00

Voyager 1 was launched 33 years ago on September 5, 1977. Voyager 1 flew past Jupiter and Saturn producing many photographs and observations. Some or the photographs can be seen at this link. (Voyager 2 used the alignment of the planets to also visit Uranus and Neptune.)

Voyager 1's tasks were not complete after its groundbreaking observations at Jupiter and Saturn. When it was beyond the Saturn system, Voyager 1 was turned around and took pictures of all of the planets, including the iconic Pale Blue Dot photo of Earth - for details see this post.

Voyager 1 is still making important contributions to our understanding of the Solar System, as it maps the details of its large scale structure. The graphic below shows the major elements of the Sun's System. For details on the Helioshpere, Heliopause, Termination Shock, Heliosheath and Bow Shock see this link.

The notes below are from this source. Reference to the graphic above will assist in understanding the description.

PASADENA, Calif. – The 33-year odyssey of NASA's Voyager 1 spacecraft has reached a distant point at the edge of our solar system where there is no outward motion of solar wind.

Now hurtling toward interstellar space some 17.4 billion kilometers (10.8 billion miles) from the sun, Voyager 1 has crossed into an area where the velocity of the hot ionized gas, or plasma, emanating directly outward from the sun has slowed to zero. Scientists suspect the solar wind has been turned sideways by the pressure from the interstellar wind in the region between stars.

The event is a major milestone in Voyager 1's passage through the heliosheath, the turbulent outer shell of the sun's sphere of influence, and the spacecraft's upcoming departure from our solar system.

"The solar wind has turned the corner," said Ed Stone, Voyager project scientist based at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif. "Voyager 1 is getting close to interstellar space."

Our sun gives off a stream of charged particles that form a bubble known as the heliosphere around our solar system. The solar wind travels at supersonic speed until it crosses a shockwave called the termination shock. At this point, the solar wind dramatically slows down and heats up in the heliosheath.

Launched on Sept. 5, 1977, Voyager 1 crossed the termination shock in December 2004 into the heliosheath. Scientists have used data from Voyager 1's Low-Energy Charged Particle Instrument to deduce the solar wind's velocity. When the speed of the charged particles hitting the outward face of Voyager 1 matched the spacecraft's speed, researchers knew that the net outward speed of the solar wind was zero. This occurred in June, when Voyager 1 was about 17 billion kilometers (10.6 billion miles) from the sun.

Because the velocities can fluctuate, scientists watched four more monthly readings before they were convinced the solar wind's outward speed actually had slowed to zero. Analysis of the data shows the velocity of the solar wind has steadily slowed at a rate of about 20 kilometers per second each year (45,000 mph each year) since August 2007, when the solar wind was speeding outward at about 60 kilometers per second (130,000 mph). The outward speed has remained at zero since June.

The results were presented today at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.

"When I realized that we were getting solid zeroes, I was amazed," said Rob Decker, a Voyager Low-Energy Charged Particle Instrument co-investigator and senior staff scientist at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Md. "Here was Voyager, a spacecraft that has been a workhorse for 33 years, showing us something completely new again."

Scientists believe Voyager 1 has not crossed the heliosheath into interstellar space. Crossing into interstellar space would mean a sudden drop in the density of hot particles and an increase in the density of cold particles. Scientists are putting the data into their models of the heliosphere's structure and should be able to better estimate when Voyager 1 will reach interstellar space. Researchers currently estimate Voyager 1 will cross that frontier in about four years.

"In science, there is nothing like a reality check to shake things up, and Voyager 1 provided that with hard facts," said Tom Krimigis, principal investigator on the Low-Energy Charged Particle Instrument, who is based at the Applied Physics Laboratory and the Academy of Athens, Greece. "Once again, we face the predicament of redoing our models."

So after travelling for 33 years at about 15 Km/second Voyager 1 is 17.4 billion kilometers from Earth, which is about 2.7 times the average distance to Pluto (from the Sun. It is the most remote human-made object. This sounds impressive but when viewed in interstella terms it has travelled only 0.0017 light-years.

The nearest star to our sun is Proxima Centauri, which is 4.2 light years away. At its current speed, Voyager 1 it would take until the year 84,000 A.D. to get to our nearest star, if it were traveling in the right direction. (It isn't.)

So much for interstellar travel.

Jeep

2010-12-25T11:14:00.001+11:00

"Want proof the Willys Jeep -- the original military-spec off-roader -- was a work of engineering genius? Watch six soldiers drive up, hop out, tear one apart, put it back together and drive away in four minutes."
Happened in Halifax , Canada .

My Blackberry Is Not Working!

2010-12-23T22:24:00.001+11:00

Science, Non-science and Nonsense

2010-12-21T13:20:00.012+11:00

Ben Santer is one of the leading climatologists in the world today.

The first video is of his appearance at US congressional hearings, where he responds to claims made by climate skeptic, Pat Michaels. In the video he carefully explains why the claims made by Michaels are wrong. It is great to see a talented scientist in operation, but it is a very unfortunate that he has to take time out from his real work - studying climate - to rebut the nonsense spouted by Michaels, and other climate denier propagandists.

In the second video, Santer is introduced by the late Stephen Schneider. In his introduction, Schneider, provides an informative glimpse into the workings of the IPCC.

The talk could be summarised in terms of the title of this post: Science, Non-science and Nonsense

Science
It is always interesting when scientific findings are in conflict. In this instance, the surface temperature record and basic theory said that the planet was warming, but measurements from space of the atmosphere seemed to show that it was cooling. In the end the problem was resolved when it was discovered that the scientists using the satelite data had made a basic mathematical mistake. When that mistake was corrected the satelite atmospheric measurements also showed warming.

A report, called Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere, that included scientists from the UAH group, RSS and other experts seemed to finally resolve this issue. The report is summarised in the first paragraph as follows:

Previously reported discrepancies between the amount of warming
near the surface and higher in the atmosphere have been used to
challenge the reliability of climate models and the reality of humaninduced
global warming. Specifically, surface data showed substantial
global-average warming, while early versions of satellite and radiosonde
data showed little or no warming above the surface. This significant
discrepancy no longer exists because errors in the satellite and
radiosonde data have been identified and corrected. New data sets
have also been developed that do not show such discrepancies.
Source: here

Non-science
Santer then discusses a paper, Douglass et al, which attempted to overturn the findings of the Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere report. Santer discussed the flawed nature of the paper and the response that he led to the Douglass paper. This section is somewhat statistical, where Santer shows that the mathematics of the Douglass is very suspect.

Nonsense
Santer finally discusses the harrassment by Stephen McIntyre, who claims to audit the work of climate scientists. Interestingly McIntyre's auditing only extends to the work of scientists who conclude that human activities are the major cause of global warming. He does not attempt to audit the faulty work of the climate skeptics. It is clear that the vast majority of people qualified to have an opinion support the view that the climate is warming, humans are the major cause and that the warming is dangerous; see this post for evidence for this claim.

The final 50 minutes of so involve the questions and answer section.

In the video below, Stephen Schneider, who introduced Ben Santer in the video above, discusses a wide range of issues, including:
* in what ways can climate science be considered settled
* the philosophy of science - ie falsification and systems science
* how judgements are made regarding the probabilities of opinions in climate science - ie how did the IPCC decide that human influence on warming was at a 90% level, and,
* risk management

During the risk management section of the talk, Schneider discusses his health and his discussions with his doctors about treatment. It is very sad to realise that at the time that he gave this talk, Schneider only had 5¹/₂ months to live.

Spoiler Alert

2010-12-21T13:12:00.001+11:00

Link to cartoon here.

Source: XKCD A webcomic of romance,
sarcasm, math, and language.

Arsenic Bacterium

2010-12-15T10:53:00.008+11:00

On December 2nd NASA scientists announced the discovery of a very unusual type of bacterium. The scientists claim that the bacterium replaces phosphorus with arsenic in essential biochemical molecules - such as DNA. This is surprising as biochemists consider that phosphorus is one of the six building blocks of all known life forms. The other five are: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, and sulfur.

Before serious consideration of this finding, XKCD has an interesting take on the finding:

Source: http://xkcd.com/829/

Here is a link to NASA's web page announcement of the discovery.

The videos below cover the NASA press conference (unfortunatley the audio is our of synch):

A couple of times Felisa Wolfe-Simon mentioned the Pale Blue Dot. Here is my post on that topic.

Not everyone is convinced as this link shows. There will be considerable discussion of this finding in the scientific community.

RealClimate has an interesting take on the issues raised in this post. There are links to critics of the study, but the most interesting points made by the post are the three general ones about the nature of science, quoted below.

Lesson one: Major funding agencies willingly back studies challenging scientific consensus.

Lesson two: Most everyone would be thrilled to overturn the consensus. Doing so successfully can be a career-making result. Journals such as Science and Nature are more than willing to publish results that overturn scientific consensus, even if data are preliminary – and funding agencies are willing to promote these results.

Lesson three: Scientists offer opinions based on their scientific knowledge and a critical interpretation of data. Scientists willingly critique what they think might be flawed or unsubstantiated science, because their credibility – not their funding – is on the line.

XKCD Convincing

2010-12-15T09:21:00.009+11:00

A joke for geeks.

For a larger version click on the graphic.

This comic is from XKCD, A webcomic of romance,sarcasm, math, and language. Here is the link to the cartoon.

Christmas Letter 2010

2010-12-09T07:20:00.032+11:00

Christmas again, how quickly the years seem to fly past!

The Village

We remain very happy in our choice of Retirement Village, but there have continued to be changes during the last year. In the 2009 letter we reported new ownership of the Village but since then two other companies have taken over. We are currently owned by Stockland, our sixth owner. We hope that this is the last change of ownership. We have many events in the Village. Recently, our son-in-law, Mark, and three of our grand children, Josh, Cameron and Troy, joined an ensemble of players to accompany our Christmas Carol Singing service. The video below contains some brief segments of the event.

Birthdays

There were two landmark birthdays this year. Stephen turned 60 in September and Michelle 40 in early December. We celebrated Stephen’s birthday with a cruise on the Tramboat (pictured below).

Margaret had originally organised the cruise for the last Saturday in September. Most Australians will understand that as a sacrosanct date – the AFL grand final. We changed the date to the first Saturday in October. Unfortunately the grand final finished in a draw which is rare – the last one was more than 30 years ago. The replay, unlike the first game, was a dog, so it was not a particular problem that we were partying during the first half of the game.

Stephen cut the cake wearing the Tramboat hat:

He is quite happy to now be a certified old coot as his Seniors Card is quite handy, particularly providing cheap access to public transport.

Given that many kids would be attending Michelle’s celebration, she chose a great venue with lots of activities. Some shot down bombers over wartime London, others fired balls at each other from small cannons and yet others set PBs in the 10 pin bowling centre. A great time was had by all at both celebrations.

Grandkids

The letter this year features some of our younger grandchildren.

Naturally we attended functions that involved our grand childern. The video below shows Mandy performing gymnastically at a school concert ...

The next video shows Jonathan playing an unusual instrument at a school assembly:

Stephen is known as grandpa cricket by many of the grandkids. It is good to see that Spencer has got the bug. Here he is wearing his milo cricket gear:

Next year we plan to visit England for Hayley's 13th birthday, so next year's letter will feature Hayley and Jeremy.

Travel

A major aim in our retirement was to travel, and we decided that 2010 would be an Australia year, with travel only in our homeland. In February we went to Sydney with other people from The Village to see the Tattoo.

Maybe, one of these years, we will see the Tattoo at Edinburgh Castle, but the Sydney one was very entertaining.

Here is a slide show of our Tattoo trip.

In April we stayed at timeshare resorts on the Northern and Central NSW coast, where we saw some magnificent scenery including:

... turbulent waterfalls ...

... tranquil rivers ...

... and wandering wildlife ...

Our major trip was in September, to Probus Rendezvous in Darwin. Neither of us had been to Darwin before, and we really enjoyed it. Of particular interest were the trips to Kakadu and Litchfield National Parks.

At Kakadu we cruised the Alligator river ...

... and saw eight crocodiles, including those in the video below ...

The entertainment included the sing-along below ...

... we also cruised Darwin Harbour ...

... and spent lots time eating and socialising ...

For a full report on Rendezvous see this post.

The Kids

All of our children are doing well, in their lives and careers. In spite of the parlous state of the British economy, Philip has found an excellent job with Airbus. Sometimes he works in Madrid, and we hope to visit some of his Spanish friends next year. Beth continues to work with the Victorian Police Force in the payroll section, Recently she travelled to Perth to inform the WA police force of the work being done in Victoria. Christopher and Catherine have been promoted to a position where they are responsible for running programs for the Salvation Army youth in northern Melbourne.

That the years roll by quickly is attested to by the fact that next February four of our grand children will be in Secondary School, with Troy entering year seven, and thereby joining Joshua, Hayley and Cameron, in the second stage of education.

The Older Generation

There is, though, some very sad news. Recently Stephen’s mother, Edna, had a stroke. She is currently in the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Although we would love to report that her prognosis is good, her doctors can give no clear indication of her chances of recovery. As well, her brother, Bill, is a patient at the Western General Hospital suffering from bowel cancer. Finally Margaret’s mother is also un-well with a very bad tooth infection.

Weddings and New Additions

On a more cheerful note, there were a number of happy events in the family involving Stephen's three nieces - two weddings and two births:

Krystal married David:

Narelle married Emile :

Fiona and Warren welcomed Gemma:

From Gypsies

and very recently Krystal

gave birth to Chloe

Congratulatins Krystal and David and welcome Chloe.

Lots of love,

Margaret and Stephen

The Darkling Thrush

2010-12-04T07:46:00.006+11:00

The Darkling Thrush
Thomas Hardy

I leant upon a coppice gate
When Frost was spectre-gray,
And Winter’s dregs made desolate
The weakening eye of day.
The tangled bine-stems scored the sky
Like strings of broken lyres,
And all mankind that haunted nigh
Had sought their household fires.

The land’s sharp features seemed to be
The Century’s corpse outleant,
His crypt the cloudy canopy,
The wind his death-lament.
The ancient pulse of germ and birth
Was shrunken hard and dry,
And every spirit upon earth
Seemed fervourless as I.

At once a voice arose among
The bleak twigs overhead
In a full-hearted evensong
Of joy illimited;
An aged thrush, frail, gaunt, and small,
In blast-beruffled plume,
Had chosen thus to fling his soul
Upon the growing gloom.

So little cause for carolings
Of such ecstatic sound
Was written on terrestrial things
Afar or nigh around,
That I could think there trembled through
His happy good-night air
Some blessed Hope, whereof he knew
And I was unaware

As noted in this analysis, "The most significant aspect of Thomas Hardy's brooding poem is the date and time of its composition". The poem is dated 31 December 1900, the last day of the 19th century. That the poem is referring to the end of the old century and the opening of the new one is indicated by the lines:

The land’s sharp features seemed to be
The Century’s corpse outleant,

The first two stanzas are uniformly bleak, with Hardy leaning (wearily ?) on a gate leading to a dark forest, surveying the cold, frosty, spectre-gray, desolate surroundings, as the late afternoon leads to evening.

The last two stanzas describe the joyful singing (caroling)of an old thrush, (aged ... frail, gaunt, and small).

The last two stanzas could be interpreted as Hardy's optomistic hopes for the new century. If so the hope was to be dashed 14 years later as Owen's Dulce et Decorum Est makes amply clear.

A more likely interpretation is that the pessimism remains as Hardy wonders why a bird should be singing its heart out when there is nothing in sight but gloom and misery.

The title of the poem reminds me of two lines from Matthew Arnold's seminal poem Dover Beach

And we are hear as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alrams of struggle and flight

Another link to Arnold's poem is the likely source of Hardy's pessimism. Unlike the modern New Athiests, both Arnold and Hardy realised that the retreat from religious belief, no matter how necessary for intellectual reasons, entailed also a serious loss of certainty, security and hope.

As Arnold explained it:

The sea of faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled;
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar ...

Timothy Takach set the Darkling Thrush to music ...

Links:

The Guardian's Poem of the Week

Cindy Shanks at Helium.com

Hitchens Vs Blair on Religion

2010-12-01T09:12:00.002+11:00

Don Pasquale

2010-11-28T09:15:00.000+11:00

Yesterday I attended the MET in HD performance of Don Pasquale.

I really enjoyed this Opera Buffa classic.

I agree entirely with Paul Pelkonen when he writes:

The Metropolitan Opera's revival of Don Pasquale featured the spitfire soprano of Anna Netrebko. While the Russian beauty is the main reason to catch one of these performances, she is a key component of a fine comic ensemble that delivers the opera buffa goods.

You can see what Pelkonen means from the video below:

To quote Pelkinen again:

In the title role, John del Carlo gave a performance that blended physical comedy and vocal athleticism. His slow, gouty gait and moans of woe elicted sympathy for the poor old Don ...

He was ably partnered with Mariusz Kwiecien, an athletic baritone as the conniving Dr. Malatesta. His comic fencing with Ms. Netrebko established their relationship quickly in the eyes of the audience.

The photo shows Dr Malatesta (Kwiecien) and Don Pasqual (del Carlo):

Tenor Matthew Polenzanai may not have the name recognition of some of the other fine bel canto singers working today. But he is a fine, comic actor with a pleasing lyric tenor voice. He sang the long vocal lines of Ernesto's two big arias with impressive control.

The photo below shows Norina (Netrebko) and Ernesto (Polenzanai) during the Love Duet from the final scene in the opera.

And here they sing it:

And here is the finale of the opera:

For more reviews see: here, here and here.

Thisis a summary of the plot as described at this site (follow the link to find photographs of the opera accompanying the plot description):

Act I : A room in Don Pasquale’s villa in Rome, mid eighteenth century. Pompous old Don Pasquale is furious at his nephew and heir Ernesto. Don Pasquale found Ernesto a wealthy bride, but Ernesto is in love with beautiful Norina, and won’t look at another woman. Don Pasquale thinks Norina isn’t rich enough for Ernesto. He’s ordered his nephew to leave her—or lose his inheritance forever.

As the opera begins, Don Pasquale announces that he’s tired of his nephew’s disobedience. He’s going to get married and father some brand-new heirs. That will show Ernesto! As luck would have it, family friend Doctor Malatesta knows the perfect bride: his own sister Sofronia. She’s beautiful, young, and modest—in fact, she’s hardly ever ventured outside of her convent school. Pasquale feels younger already; he can barely wait to start his new family.

Ernesto shows up, and Don Pasquale offers him one last chance to give up Norina and keep his inheritance. Ernesto, of course, refuses. “Well then, start looking for somewhere else to live!” cackles Don Pasquale. He announces that he’s kicking Ernesto out of the house, and getting married himself.

Astounded Ernesto thinks the old man is joking; he suggests that Don Pasquale ask Doctor Malatesta for advice. Pasquale smugly informs him that he’s marrying Malatesta’s sister. Ernesto is crushed.

Scene ii : Later that day, at Norina’s house. Alone in her room, Norina reads a book about chivalrous love. She laughs to herself; she too knows how to use a fleeting smile and a deceitful tear to capture a man’s heart. She receives a letter from Ernesto, informing her that Don Pasquale is getting married. The now-destitute Ernesto has no choice but to seek his fortune overseas. He will leave Rome that very day.

Norina is intensely worried—until Doctor Malatesta shows up with a plan that’s sure to bring Don Pasquale back to his senses. Norina, who’s never met the old man, will pretend to be Malatesta’s demure sister Sofronia. She’ll “marry” Don Pasquale in a fake ceremony. Once they’re “married,” “Sofronia” will drive the old man to the brink of insanity; he’ll be forced to give her whatever she wants just to get rid of her.

Doctor Malatesta’s next task is to teach Norina to act like a “sweet simple young thing,” but Norina proves that she should be the one giving lessons. Malatesta applauds her skill; he knows it won’t be long until the fireworks go off!

Act II : Back at Don Pasquale’s house, Ernesto is feeling very sorry for himself. He’s been disowned, his friend Malatesta proved to be an enemy in disguise—and it looks like he might lose Norina forever. He exits in despair.

Enter Don Pasquale, dressed in splendid wedding clothes. Doctor Malatesta leads in “Sofronia.” Already in character, Norina plays the part of a bashful convent maiden to perfection. Pasquale is delighted with the demure and submissive young girl; he’s as nervous as a schoolboy around her. He agrees to give her half his property, and to obey her every word.

During the mock marriage ceremony (conducted by Malatesta’s cousin, disguised as a notary), Ernesto bursts in to bid his uncle farewell. He stops in his tracks when he sees Norina. Malatesta hastily pulls Ernesto aside and persuades him not to make a scene: he should just enjoy the comedy he’s about to witness.

The instant the phony marriage contract is signed, “Sofronia” drops her naïve sweetness. She refuses to embrace Pasquale, and even threatens to slap him if he doesn’t behave. Ernesto begins to laugh. Furious, Pasquale orders him to leave at once. “Sofronia” icily overrules the old man, and commands Ernesto to stay. Pasquale yells to Malatesta that she has changed, but Malatesta pretends to be completely dumbfounded.

“Sofronia” doubles the servants’ wages. She orders a complete redecoration of the house, plus a new wardrobe for herself and a whole stable full of new horses. Ernesto finally understands that it was love alone that prompted Norina to play this part. The nagging “Sofronia” and the stubborn Pasquale fight tooth and nail until the doctor urges the furious old groom to go to bed.

Act III : Don Pasquale’s house has been transformed. Expensive hats, gowns, and furs are scattered everywhere. Scores of servants rush back and forth as Don Pasquale sorts through a mountain of bills. “Sofronia” flounces past on her way to the theater. When Pasquale forbids her to leave the house, she simply boxes his ears and saunters past him. Humiliated, the old man warns her that he’ll seek a divorce, but his words fall on deaf ears.

On her way out, she “accidentally” drops a letter, and Pasquale, of course, reads it. It’s a love note, inviting “Sofronia” to meet an anonymous lover that night in the garden. Eager to catch his wife red-handed, Don Pasquale sends for Doctor Malatesta.

Later that night. Don Pasquale staggers in, a shadow of his former self. His marriage is wreaking havoc on his nerves; now he wishes that he had just let Ernesto marry Norina in the first place. He shows Doctor Malatesta “Sofronia’s” letter. The Doctor suggests that they surprise “Sofronia” with her lover and force her to agree to a divorce.

Scene ii : That evening, Ernesto serenades Norina outside the little gate to Don Pasquale’s garden. Norina creeps down to meet him, and they sing a beautiful love duet.

Hearing footsteps, Ernesto disappears into the shadows. Don Pasquale and Doctor Malatesta pop out of the bushes and shine lanterns on “Sofronia,” but can’t seem to find her lover.

Don Pasquale sternly orders “Sofronia” to leave his house, but she refuses. After all, the house is hers too! Pasquale is beginning to think he’ll never get rid of her. Then Doctor Malatesta tells “Sofronia” that another woman may soon marry into her household – Ernesto’s Norina. “Never!” says “Sofronia”; she would rather move out than share her house with trashy Norina. Pasquale is delighted—finally, a way to free himself from the monster wife!

Photo Copyright © Beth Bergman 2006
Doctor Malatesta calls Ernesto out into the open and tells him that his uncle will allow him to marry Norina after all. Don Pasquale begs Ernesto to find Norina as soon as possible—he can’t stand “Sofronia” another second.

Malatesta finally reveals that “Sofronia” was Norina all along; the Don’s marriage was a sham. The real Sofronia never left her convent school. The Doctor gently explains that tricking Don Pasquale was the only way to keep him from actually marrying someone else. Don Pasquale considers humiliation a small price to pay for getting rid of the horrid “Sofronia.” He gives the lovers his blessing, and as the curtain falls all join together to sing the moral of the story: old bachelors should always act their age.

Christopher Hitchens inteviewed by Tony Jones

2010-11-25T11:24:00.002+11:00

Trick Shots

2010-11-23T22:39:00.003+11:00

The Ingenious Ways We Avoid Believing in Climate Change

2010-11-19T10:12:00.009+11:00

The campaign against climate science has been remarkably successful. George Marshall, founder of the Climate Outreach and Information Network (COIN) discusses the many reasons for the lack of effective action on anthropogenic climate change.

(Don't confuse George Marshall with the George C Marshall institute discussed by Naomi Oreskes in the last video in this post.)

Summary of Part One
1. Risk - why many people do not feel immediately threatened by Climate Change
2. Belief - it is not enough just to present the evidence for Climate Change because belief is a socially constructed
3. Attention - groups of people may decide that difficult issues like Climate Change are not to be discussed

Summary of Part Two
4. Stories - the way the issue is framed is crucial; for example, seeing it as a resource issue rather than an environmental issue changes perspectives of people; because environmentalists were the first group to accept the science, climate change was discussed from an environmental perspecitve.

Summary of Part Three
5. Distancing – the strategies we adopt to keep the information at arm’s length
6. Compartmentalising – how we can accept climate change and continue polluting behaviour
7. Positive Framing – how we seek to turn climate change into a personal advantage
8. Ethical Offsets – how we adopt the easiest behaviours as proof of our virtue
9. Cynicism - the commercial appropriation of climate change images
What happens next? - surprisingly - what happens next
10. Denial - there is an active political campaign to deny the reality of climate change, which is feeding through to general attitudes
11. What happens next? - as more evidence for the damage that we are causing accumulates more people will become convinced, otherw will contine to oppose change and if it becomes obvious that we are beyond tipping points some quite aberrant behaviour.

This talk covers a wide range of issues. When I started to watch it, I expected that outright denial would be the major theme - instead it was the tenth issue. Clearly there has been a very active campaign to deny the reality of climate change as Naomi Oreskes documents in her book Merchants of Doubt.

Oreskes discussed her book and the evidence of the systematic campaign against the facts about global warming in the video below.

Here is a link to a longer talk on the issue.

Oreskes makes the point that most climate scientists support the view that human activities are causing damaging changes to our climate. For evidence that this is the case see this post.

To support their case and cause confusion amongst the general populace climate deniers have mounted a wide range of spurious arguments discussion of which can be found at this link

The Ultimate Rollercoaster

2010-11-16T18:30:00.006+11:00

Fossil fuels have powered human growth and ingenuity for centuries. Now that we're reaching the end of cheap and abundant oil and coal supplies, we're in for an exciting ride. While there's a real risk that we'll fall off a cliff, there's still time to control our transition to a post-carbon future. (source: post carbon institute)

The video gives a brief and entertaining introduction to the history of our fossil fuel adiction.

Here are links to more detail on some of the issues:

Our over use of resources

Passing planetary tipping points

The end of growth

Prosperity without growth

Erosion of ecosystem services and biodiversity loss

Anthropogenic global warming (AGW)

Evidence that human activities are causing global warming

Evidence that the great majority of those qualified to make a decision support the claims of AGW

Evidence that over Earth's history carbon dioxide has been the major determinant of climate

Peak oil

Who is Ryuichi Sakamoto?

2010-11-13T17:55:00.005+11:00

The world of Ryuichi Sakamoto is characterised by stark contrasts and by contradictions -- both apparent and real. He has an obsession with synthesizers and the latest music technology, and as a member of the Yellow Magic Orchestra he was one of the inventors of techno-pop. Yet some of his greatest and most well-known work has used the vehicle of that centuries-old mainstay of Western classical music, the orchestra. (Source of quote).

In the video below Sakamoto discusses his approach to music, and confirms its eclectic nature.

Follow this link for his some of his classical western music.

Follow this link for some of his music in more popular genres.

Here is an interview that he gave to Fader Magazine.

Ryuichi Sakamoto - pop mode

2010-11-13T17:13:00.003+11:00

For an introduction to Sakamoto follow this link.

He also writes and performs in a western classical mode, examples of which can be found at this post.

From his Beauty album:

With Yellow Magic Orchestra:

Neo Geo