Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Yeah we definitely need the drought to break Chief. But, my fingers are only half crossed. Was kind of enjoying dry, oftentimes warm, winter cragging at elevations up to 7000' in this abnormal weather.
|
|
krahmes
Social climber
Stumptown
|
|
Hey DMT
I think the urban-urge runs strong in the next generations.
I don’t know about that; I mean who wants to live in an apartment for the entirety of their life?. Put me in a double wide before the tyranny of glorified hotel room, but as for normal and adjusted young folk check this out:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/01/young-americans-yearning-for-the-suburbs-stuck-in-the-city/384752/
High-rise condos and apts going up in most every active economy US city I visit at this point; lots of them. And that is certainly happening in the Portland area and this is a lesson in what happens when a central bank and federal government create a new 4 trillion or so worth of USD and then distribute to federal, state, county, and city governments and their connected cronies to do what they think is wise and just with no real consequence of risk to the people making those decisions. I suppose what we are seeing is bloom of quantitative easing before it tranched to seed, thorn and slum. My question is what will the outcome look like 15 years out? I’m not optimistic.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
The Chief...I hope you're right about the weather for once...rj
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
There are multiple examples of scientists recognizing environmental problem, determining the root cause, and pushing policy makers to enact solutions. Acid rain, the damage to the ozone, widespread use of DDT etc.
A big one that has parallels to CC is lead in the environment. The associated health problems were recognized and for years the various industries that did not want to incur the expenses of getting lead out of gasoline, paint and the many other products fought the research, produced their own scientists who claimed the research was wrong or not conclusive, bought politicians to slow or stop efforts to put controls in place and I am sure had a tiny army of angry nutcases who wanted to prove to everyone that they were just as smart as scientists who ridiculed the "lead alarmists".
It was only when environmental lead issues were shown to disproportionately affect inner city/black kids that the political will was mustered to do something about it.
The huge difference between CC and all these other examples is the longevity of the greenhouse gases and their effect already in the atmosphere.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Science's track record clearly indicates that it has absolutely NO accurate manner in which to research the long term affects of the entities it produces and deems good to be implemented within society.
not sure about the total lack of accuracy, which is a confused concept, and while I'm not supposed to "feed the trolls," it should be pointed out that science recognizes it's own errors and corrects them... that is, science makes predictions and the predictions are tested, that's an essential part of doing science.
So for someone to turn that around and state sanctimoniously that science is "wrong" so we shouldn't believe it, I'd say that the fact that science can be wrong is a good reason to believe it. These words will be twisted by the very people who feel they are not and cannot be wrong, those are the people that not only should not be believed, but should not be listened to.
confusing science and technology is a common error. Often technology is developed prior to the science being understood for that particular technology, sometimes there is no science for a technology...
take pebble tools, a definite technology which was developed prior to understanding the science of materials and the understanding of minerals. All the "science" behind this technology was hidden from the practitioners of the technology, though they figured out what the best materials were and the best techniques for crafting their tools.
this sort of technology is one that I'm sure is more acceptable to some posting to this thread (or reading it) because it is a "doer's" technology rather than a "thinker's" technology, doers are a preferable American characteristic, thinkers not so much (actually it seems not at all).
the need to extend technologies often motivates what science gets done rather than the other way around. the discover and creation of the LASER is an example, a science that sat around for a very long time (decades) before Sony realized that you could use them in a personal entertainment device. that took both science and technology to develop. This is an interesting example on the event of the recent death of Charles Townes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/29/us/charles-h-townes-physicist-who-helped-develop-lasers-dies-at-99.html
interestingly, the decrease in the cost of the laser technologies developed for the entertainment industry provided a device useful for scientific studies. The former DOE secretary won his Nobel Prize studying the properties of atoms cooled to very low temperatures using lasers extracted from the very cheap entertainment devices.
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1997/chu-facts.html
how we might use Bose-Einstein condensates, which is why you cool atoms, is an example of science waiting around for some technology idea...
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Don't have time to go into it right now but this discussion reminds me of Allan Schnaiberg's distinction between impact science (which might observe externalities from economic production, such as pollution or health effects) and production science (science in the service of economic production). Both evidence and theory suggest that conservatives tend to look more favorably on production science, and don't like impact science. Chief here is hating on impact scientists (e.g. climatologists) for what he imagines to be the sins of production scientists (e.g. chemical-company engineers).
The impact/production scheme can't be carried too far, does not seem to work for many areas such as evolution or vaccines, but it does come to mind with this exchange.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 3, 2015 - 10:21am PT
|
Arlene Blum, of Annapurna fame, ...
Arlene Blum, yes. Doesn't Arlene hold the record for... for...
Oh, forget it.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
k-man, I think you're recalling Annie Whitehouse... on something she sorta discussed at the recent Oakdale Climbers' festival... in associations with an ad campaign of Mal's... "Trad climbers..."... which was never published... if I catch your drift... ... ...
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 3, 2015 - 11:56am PT
|
Hmm, I didn't catch Annie's preso, but this has more to do with a mountaineering team than anything trad.
Mostly an inside joke I heard from a friend.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
"Feed the trolls", interesting. Exactly who are the trolls here. Is It supporters of the IPCC, which was founded by a criminal, and the political agenda claimed to be settled science propelled forward by idealogues and those paid by big government, enviro NGO's, and foreign governments in competition of our industry to FIND AGW at a cost of many hundreds of billions of u.s. dollars. Or is it those that practice the skepticism that science used to proudly proclaim.
Here is some circumstantial evidence to consider: Have any of the dire consequences repeatedly claimed to have already transpired actually occurred? Is the modest .8c rise out of the LIA unprecedented? Why hasn't the GMT not risen in parallel with CO2 emmissions? Why hasn't the model projected mid tropospheric hotspot or increase of atmospheric RH not occurred? If the poles are melting from AGW why is the global total sea ice mass at or above average levels seen since the beginning of direct observations? There is much much more.
So the next time you ask yourself, "should I feed the trolls", make sure you properly identify them.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Is It supporters of the IPCC, which was founded by a criminal, and the political agenda claimed to be settled science propelled forward by idealogues and those paid by big government, enviro NGO's, and foreign governments in competition of our industry to FIND AGW at a cost of many hundreds of billions of u.s. dollars
an uninteresting, unsubstantiated statement... that happens to be demonstrably false.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Hey, take it easy on Arlene Blum! She was at Berkeley, and part of the U.C. Hiking Club, when I was an undergrad there.
I like the distinction between production science and impact science. I think, though, that it's rather oversimplified to say that conservatives dislike impact science. Rather, at least this conservative dislikes those who would impose their solutions as optimal without a proper analysis to determine optimality. I'll admit, though, that my dislike probably leads me to more disagreements with, say the Heritage Foundation than with the IPCC, so maybe the generalization has validity after all.
While Bjorn Lomborg isn't exactly a popular figure in the climate science community, I think he gave a helpful commentary in yesterday's Wall Street Journal:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/bjorn-lomborg-the-alarming-thing-about-climate-alarmism-1422832462
I cite this commentary not because I agree with all he says (although I agree with some of it), but because it demonstrates a way that one can argue a point respectfully, and without denying what competent scientists have observed.
John
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
^^^ thanks for the continued brilliance. Now we know that we can blame scientists for all burning of coal, peat, and whale oil 1000 years ago.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
We may blame science for Biodiesel,Solar,Wind,Hydro,Biomass,Fuel Cell,Geo-Thermal.
You know ,the sh#t you all are against as well.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
I have not changed any subject ,at all.
We will just call the proliferating scientists working with renewables,
Responsible.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
I like beer.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 3, 2015 - 06:59pm PT
|
The sixth mass extinction is caused by overpopulation, which is caused by increased agriculture yields, which are caused by better science around pesticides and fertilizers.
Kill all scientists because they are killing us!
Now let's go have a beer, E.T.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!