Tuesday, July 25, 2017

                          SCARAMUCCI  TO INHERIT  SPICER
   PRESIDENTIAL  PRESS RELEASE  RECYCLING   INITIATIVE

IN AN ECONOMY MOVE EXPECTED TO SAVE PEANUTS,  PRESS RELEASES
  MUST NOW BE  CLEARED BY THE  UNDERSECRETARY OF  COMPOST
  PRIOR  TO  DISTRIBUTION  ON  THE  WHITE  HOUSE LAWN

Sunday, July 23, 2017

  WHEN  THE WHITE HOUSE  SAW  THE WANTED POSTER
                            THEY  OFFERED  HIM  A  JOB

Chris Horner, late  Government relations Chief of  Enron, & CEI climate  denial  legal eagle, has been  unwisely  and  hilariously candid  in talking to  one of the few  colleagues who make him seem reasonable by comparison -  For an hour of truly gonzo  performance journalism try :
http://www.breitbart.com/podcasts/james-delingpole/



Friday, July 21, 2017

CLIMATE SEMIOTICS: NARRATIVE ARCSMANSHIP AT THE GWPF

MUCH AS MEDIEVAL CHURCHES RELIED ON WALL PAINTINGS TO CONVEY THE SENSE OF  SCRIPTURE  TO THE ILLITERATE, THE GLOBAL WARMING  POLICY FOUNDATION HAS
  COMMISSIONED AN UNCOMMMONLY DENSE JOSH CARTOON
 TO CONVEY ROGER PIELKE'S ADDRESS, Climate Politics as Manichean Paranoia
PARTS OF JOSH'S WORK ARE EXCELLENT, BUT  AS WITH  TAR SAND & HEAVY CRUDE
 IT  TAKES  TWO - STAGE REFINING TO  GET  TO  A  SALABLE  PRODUCT - FIRST:
REMOVE BERLIN WALL & BURN OFF CLICHE' UNDERGROWTH
 SECOND : DISTILL  MEME  CONCENTRATE &  CONDENSE 
 INTO  WHAT  GWPF  PATRONS  WANT TO BUY :

While Josh found room for 38 visual memes in his cartoon, it
 completely evades 2 things Pielke repeatedly said he supports:
1. Carbon taxes
2. The  IPCC

Thursday, July 20, 2017

  HISTORY  OF  CLIMATE SCIENCE:  LESSONS  UNLEARNED

Three years ago Carl Sagan and a few other scientists proposed a new theory of Armageddon. 

They called it "nuclear winter,"and their message was chilling.

The end  of  the  world,  they  said, would come not by fire during a nuclear attack but by ice afterward


After a nuclear war, the Earth would become encircled with smoke, dark, and cold. No one could  expect to survive the frost, not the innocent New Zealanders or the remotest tribes of  Africa. Even a small atomic  war  could  end  human  life , Sagan  concluded  in  the  Winter 1983-84  issue of Foreign Affairs  that  all  nuclear weapons should  be eliminated, or at least 99 percent of them.


This insight did not come from a rereading of the book of Revelation, It rested on modern physics and a very sophisticated computer program. It had the glint of hard science. 

Sagan, who is an expert on the solar system and an adviser to NASA on the Voyager space probe, may be America's most famous popularizer of science.  In  1983  several  other  scientists,  including  biologist  Paul Ehrlich  of  Stanford,  joined  Sagan  to  endorse  the view  that  nuclear weapons  were  a  threat to  the  human species, quite  apart  from the obvious threat to civilized life north of the equator.  They launched a media blitz that included heavy technical articles, political essays, and TV interviews.  It  still  reverberates  through  literature.

The message was always the same:
 scientific analysis "proves" that nuclear
weapons are useless. To employ them is
to commit global suicide. Even owning
them is dangerous because it increases
The best thing to do is to get rid of them.
This message came nine months after 
Reagan's "Star Wars" speech,  matching
his technician's dream  with a technician's 
nightmare of equal force.

The nuclear winter theorists wanted
publicity back then, and they got it.
But now the situation has changed.
The death-by-ice theory seems moribund,
riddled with problems, and of diminishing
relevance to strategic policy. The same can
be said of  Reagan's idea  of  using  space 
weapons to protect cities.

The main technical challenge to nuclear
winter comes from Stephen Schneider
and Starley Thompson, researchers at
the National Center for Atmospheric 
Research in Boulder, Colorado. They agree
with Sagan that the number of nuclear
weapons should be reduced, but they
say the integrity of atmospheric science
should not be sacrificed to make that
point. 

Schneider claims that it has been
clear for perhaps two years that Sagan's
original description of nuclear winter is
not the most accurate. But coaxing has
not brought any acknowledgment that
this is so. Sagan said recently that he
found "nothing new" in a state-of-theart
computer analysis by Schneider and
Thompson to change his view of
Armageddon.

Schneider and Thompson laid out
their doubts in a Foreign Affairs article last
summer, reporting that the chance of
human extinction after a nuclear war is
"vanishingly low," They find no risk of
a new ice age. Some open, dry areas in
the war latitudes might undergo temporary
"quick freezes," But, on average,
the temperature drop in the Northern
Hemisphere would not be worse than 12
degrees during the first week or so after
an attack.

At a private gathering of experts at the
National Academy of Sciences in January,
it became clear that this new mild
version of "nuclear autumn" is credible
and may even overstate the temperature
drop. This does not mean the climatic
impacts of war would be mild, Schneider
and Thompson say that rice and soybeans
are sensitive to small temperature
changes and that global rainfall patterns
might be disrupted. Millions (billions?)
might starve. But there would be no ice
in the tropics; that is certain. Schneider
says: "Carl's idea was brilliant. He proposed
an invasion from Mars," It just
didn't hold up under scrutiny.

The more apocalyptic version of nuclear
winter has become a part of the
anti-weapons dogma of the 1980s, As a
result, some people may be reluctant to
let it go. Others will delight in its agonies...

Although Schneider's milder scenario
has more credibility today, the technical
argument has a long way to run.


This is because the Pentagon has been
cajoled into taking nuclear winter seriously.
The Defense and Energy Departments
have increased research on nuclear winter
from around $300,000 a few years ago
to around $5.5 million now. It is embedded
in the budget. The amount is nothing like 
the $5 billion spent on the other millennial
fancy of  the 1980s, "Star Wars," and not
enough—the vested researchers  say—to
provide definitive answers to the questions
Sagan has raised.

But even without definitive answers,
it may be time to say goodbye to nuclear
winter as a policy issue. If Schneider and
Thompson are right, and atmospheric
scientists seem to think they are, the climatic
impact is just one of a dozen "secondary
effects" of nuclear war that would make 
life hardly worth living.

The main policy debate will continue to
focus on the "primary" effect: the use of
weapons. In this sense, nuclear winter
was a diversion, providing little insight
on how to cooperate on arms reductions,
an area rife with distrust.

The freeze movement may have gained
a tactical victory through the promotion
of nuclear winter. It helped get attention.
But the advantage appears to have been
short-lived. Now, as the computer termites
gnaw at the data, the structure creaks and
totters. Soon it may be gone.

Perhaps if we are lucky, 1987 will bring
the final debunking of two great science
fictions of the Reagan era: nuclear winter
and Star Wars.

Thanks to Eliot Marshall for  providing the pdf from which this was excerpted- 
Copyright 1987 , The New Republic




    THE  PLANTATIONOCENE PEANUT GALLERY

Environmental Humanities, vol. 6, 2015, pp. 159-165 
COMMENTARY
Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: Making Kin

Donna Haraway
History of Consciousness, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA


...
the issues about naming relevant to the Anthropocene, Plantationocene, or Capitalocene have to do with... the effects of bioculturally, biotechnically, biopolitically, historically situated people (not Man) relative to, and combined with, the effects of other species assemblages and other biotic/abiotic forces...
No species, not even our own arrogant one pretending to be good individuals in so-called modern Western scripts, acts alone; assemblages of organic species and of abiotic actors make history, the evolutionary kind and the other kinds too...is there an inflection point of consequence that changes the name of the “game” of life on earth for everybody and everything? 

It's more than climate change; it's also extraordinary burdens of toxic chemistry, mining, depletion of lakes and rivers under and above ground, ecosystem simplification, vast genocides of people and other critters, etc, etc, in systemically linked patterns that threaten major system collapse after major system collapse after major system collapse. Recursion can be a drag...we need a name for the dynamic ongoing sym-chthonic forces and powers of which people are a part, within which ongoingness is at stake. 

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

PEOPLE WHO PLAY WITH GLASS BOXES SHOULD DRAW MOANS

THE MOST  EARTH  SHATTERING DISCOVERY  SINCE  LAST WEEK'S  NATIONAL ENQUIRER:
WORLD NET DAILY EXCLUSIVE

STUDY BLOWS ' GREENHOUSE THEORY 

OUT OF THE WATER '

'All observed climatic changes have natural causes completely outside of human control'


AIR TIME   IS  FAR  TOO  VALUABLE  TO  WASTE  ON  PEOPLE 
              WHO KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT

Are TV  weatherman climate experts because they're on TV?

A generation has passed since the editor of Science Technology and Human Values ruefully remarked that  to Americans at large, science was "Whatever Carl Sagan says on the Johnny Carson Show"- Carson was the Colbert of the 1980's.  Those with the most access to the popular imagintion might be the last source disinterested analysts might turn to today for climate expertise resides, but stopping on the yellow brick road to do some virtue signaling to Administrator Pruitt,  Judith Curry has turned to yet another TV  weatherman to challenge the American Meteorological Society's claim to know what it's talking about in terms not of weather, but climte change.

Her blog Climate Etc.'s latest post, by former  Oklahoma City TV meteorologist Mike Smith, now a VP of Accuweather,  takes geophysicists to task for:


Stealth advocacy: a survey of weathercasters’ views on climate change

I can imagine a weathercaster in Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas would get a lot of feedback from angry viewers if they came out of the climate science closet. They need to though, especially my friends in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. Our job as science communicators is to give our viewers good science and omission because it is politically unpopular is unethical journalism
The American Meteorological Society (AMS) has departed from its mission of the past 80 years, which was to advance and disseminate meteorological knowledge. The Society has wandered from its original mission to one of both overt and stealth advocacy related to the politics of climate change."
But a previous article by the author  Smith attacks, Dan Satterfield 
The Death of Expertise
“Tom Nichols, a professor of national security affairs at the US Naval War College, says America has become a country “obsessed with the worship of its own ignorance.” Americans have always been skeptical of intellectuals and experts. Today, says Nichols, that attitude has mutated into outright hostility. In general, Americans have never been so willing to reject the knowledge of those who actually know something. This embrace of self-righteous ignorance bodes ill for the nation’s future. Nichol’s puts some blame on US universities, which fail to instill critical-thinking skills in students, and on the proliferation of news sources that compete by affirming their audiences’ biases.” (Review from here.)
A talk by Nichol’s ...is below:

    WHY WASTE  TAXES  ON  GOVERNMENT SCIENCE WHEN
                 TRUMP  UNIVERSITY  CAN  DO  THE  JOB?

DR. BALL IS  CANADA'S FOREMOST AUTHORITY ON  THE GEOGRAPHY OF WOODCHOPPING & GEESE

The Foibles of Climate Research


Government Created Misuse of Climate Research; Even a Little More Government is Not the Solution.
WUWT Guest opinion: Dr. Tim Ball
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt wants to set up a Red and Blue team approach to climate research. It appears to be a commendable goal given the effective exclusion of one of the teams to date. The problem is it perpetuates another artificial division created by government involvement in climate science in the first place. David Middleton’s article comments on Pat Michaels’ proposed, “A Climate Roadmap for Pres. Trump” ... Both stories miss the real issues. First, governments should not be involved in scientific research at all because, if nothing else, the freedom of the scientist bureaucrat is inherently compromised. Second, it doesn’t matter what process of analysis you establish, there is insufficient data to prove anything.
Deliberately Marginalizing People Because of Their Ideas
You know you are winning a debate when your opponent switches from debating the facts to personal attacks. One way this is done is by identifying you with a group, in a mixture of ad hominem and guilt by association; although I am not sure a collective ad hominem is possible. Some general examples include being labelled a “birther” if you question in any way the documentation of President Obama; or being called a conspiracy theorist...the emails leaked from the CRU in 2009 and again 2010 showed that pivotal members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) knew exactly what they were doing as they conspired to deceive the world over the cause of global warming. In summary, we were legitimate skeptics, practicing edifiers of change and there really was a conspiracy...
Let The Experts Do It.
Pruitt and the Trump regime must remove most politics from the study of climate and climate change. They simply reduce government’s role to nothing but data collection, but the government cannot be trusted to do the job. The current stations are inadequate, and most don’t even meet standard scientific requirements and need dramatic improvement. Anthony Watts now classic Surface Stations study showed that only 7.9% of existing stations achieved accuracies less than 1°C.
clip_image006
People like Watts and many other climate specialists must be involved or even running the entire operation. Close the weather offices and use the money to set up and monitor a dense network of data collection stations. Once the Trump Administration has that underway, they can do what the Federal government is required to do and choose to work with other nations to set up a climate data collection system meeting the same criteria across the globe. Only then can any meaningful research occur.

Monday, July 17, 2017

                      THE  DIMMEST  BULB  IN  THE  ROOM

IN A REFRESHING CHANGE OF PACE,
 ^ DAVID MIDDLETON  DRILLS  CO2  WELLS  FOR A LIVING-
THE  CO2 BEING  USED TO PRESSURIZE  OIL WELLS  IN TEXAS 
DECLARES:

" there is no such thing as “climate gases”… EPA Administrator Pruitt’s “Red Team” should focus like a laser beam” on the climate models and snuff out the CAGW flashlight."






                  THE  CLIMATE  WARS : SEASON SEVEN

London Review of Books
Vol. 35 No. 7 · 11 April 2013

"So... the second structural reason for this story’s appeal ... is to do with the seasons. In Westeros, seasons last not for months but for years, and are not predictable in duration. Nobody knows when – to borrow the minatory motto of the Starks – ‘winter is coming.’

At the start of Game of Thrones, summer has been going on for years, and the younger generation has no memory of anything else; the blithe young aristocrats who’ve grown up in this environment are, in Catelyn’s mordant judgment, ‘the knights of summer’.

The first signs of autumn are at hand, however, and the maesters – they’re the caste of priest/doctor/scientists – have made an official announcement that winter is indeed on its way. A winter that is always notoriously hard, and can last not just years but a decade or more. It’s a huge all-encompassing environmental force, determining the lives of everyone, open-endedly.

The climate change aspect of this is obvious to the contemporary audience, but there’s something more subtle and subtextual at work here too: another economic metaphor, another kind of difficult climate....the contemporary appeal of this story, this world. It’s a universe in which nobody is secure, and the climate is getting steadily harder, and no one knows when the good weather will return."


When did you get hooked?

John Lanchester


  • A Song of Ice and Fire: Vols I-VII by George R.R. Martin
    Harper, 5232 pp, £55.00, July 2012, ISBN 978 0 00 747715 9
  • Game of Thrones: The Complete First and Second Seasons
    Warner Home Video, £40.00, March 2013

Vol. 35 No. 7 · 11 April 2013
pages 20-22 | 4659 words

Sunday, July 16, 2017

    IF  YOU  DON'T  CITE  THEM,  MAYBE  THEY'LL  GO  AWAY


The latest methodological advance in Feminist Geography  is  to refuse to cite what men write:

Citation matters: mobilizing the politics of citation toward a practice of ‘conscientious engagement’




Pages 1-20 | 
Received 11 Aug 2016, 
Accepted 04 Apr 2017,   Published online: 13 Jun 2017

Abstract   An increasing amount of scholarship in critical, feminist, and anti-racist geographies has recently focused self-reflexively on the topics of exclusion and discrimination within the discipline itself. 

In this article we contribute to this literature by considering citation as a problematic technology that contributes to the reproduction of the white heteromasculinity of geographical thought and scholarship, despite advances toward more inclusivity in the discipline in recent decades.
 Yet we also suggest, against citation counting and other related neoliberal technologies that imprecisely approximate measures of impact, influence, and academic excellence, citation thought conscientiously can also be a feminist and anti-racist technology of resistance that demonstrates engagement with those authors and voices we want to carry forward. 
We argue for a conscientious engagement with the politics of citation as a geographical practice that is mindful of how citational practices can be a tool for either the reification of, or resistance to, unethical hierarchies of knowledge production. We offer practical and conceptual reasons for carefully thinking through the role of citation as a performative embodiment of the reproduction of geographical thought.