Author Topic: Episode #728  (Read 2648 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10464
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2019, 10:29:35 PM »
A surprising amount of my pants/shorts have ornamental or button-close back pockets. Got out of the habit of using back pockets; my wallet wouldn't fit anyways.



Offline lucek

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 120
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2019, 05:40:37 AM »
Regarding Steve's comments on developing alternative energy sources to combat climate change, he expressed skepticism that we could reduce emissions to avoid 1.5 or 2.0 C warming.  Some people think the stakes are even higher than that....they are convinced that the collapse of civilization due to climate change is imminent (e.g. within the lifetime of adults):

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy

"What if I told you there was a paper on climate change that was so uniquely catastrophic, so perspective-altering, and so absolutely depressing that it's sent people to support groups and encouraged them to quit their jobs and move to the countryside? Good news: there is. It's called 'Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy.'"

"...the stark conclusions that it draws about the future. Chiefly, that it's too late to stop climate change from devastating our world—and that 'climate-induced societal collapse is now inevitable in the near term.' How near? About a decade."

It would be interesting if the rogues could tackle the arguments made in this paper.  I guess I'm old enough now to roll my eyes anytime a prophet argues that "the end is nigh".....I've been hearing this and getting freaked out about it since I was a child in the 70s and 80s.  In this podcast, Orson Welles' "The War of the Worlds" radio show from the 1930s was referenced, and I blame him since in the early 80s, he narrated The Man Who Saw Tomorrow "documentary" on Nostradamus that was repeated ad nauseam on HBO.  After hearing this (and numerous other stories about the "end of the world" or at least civilization as we know it [e.g. 'The Day After', 'The Great Depression of 1990', 'Bankruptcy 1995', etc]), getting freaked out, and then growing older and not witnessing "The End", I've become quite cynical for any new similar proclamations.  Anyone else feel this way?
Steve didn't doubt we could he lamented we probably won't.
You have the power, but. . .
Power is just energy over time and. . .
Energy is just the ability to do work.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4925
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2019, 11:59:10 AM »
What really stood out for me about this episode was Steve's pessimism about climate change and humanity's prospects of avoiding the worst consequences. In previous episodes, blogposts, and interviews, he appeared to be quite upbeat and ultimately optimistic, while not denying the seriousness of the issue. Not so this time around. I hope we will see more elaboration on this in the future.

Regarding Steve's comments on developing alternative energy sources to combat climate change, he expressed skepticism that we could reduce emissions to avoid 1.5 or 2.0 C warming.  Some people think the stakes are even higher than that....they are convinced that the collapse of civilization due to climate change is imminent (e.g. within the lifetime of adults):

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy

"What if I told you there was a paper on climate change that was so uniquely catastrophic, so perspective-altering, and so absolutely depressing that it's sent people to support groups and encouraged them to quit their jobs and move to the countryside? Good news: there is. It's called 'Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy.'"

"...the stark conclusions that it draws about the future. Chiefly, that it's too late to stop climate change from devastating our world—and that 'climate-induced societal collapse is now inevitable in the near term.' How near? About a decade."

It would be interesting if the rogues could tackle the arguments made in this paper.  I guess I'm old enough now to roll my eyes anytime a prophet argues that "the end is nigh".....I've been hearing this and getting freaked out about it since I was a child in the 70s and 80s.  In this podcast, Orson Welles' "The War of the Worlds" radio show from the 1930s was referenced, and I blame him since in the early 80s, he narrated The Man Who Saw Tomorrow "documentary" on Nostradamus that was repeated ad nauseam on HBO.  After hearing this (and numerous other stories about the "end of the world" or at least civilization as we know it [e.g. 'The Day After', 'The Great Depression of 1990', 'Bankruptcy 1995', etc]), getting freaked out, and then growing older and not witnessing "The End", I've become quite cynical for any new similar proclamations.  Anyone else feel this way?

The question I would ask is how much of a consensus there is regarding that thesis. There are always outliers generating headlines. But does this thesis (collapse of civilization in a decade) enjoy scientific or scholarly consensus?
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Online brilligtove

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7276
  • Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity, you deal with.
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2019, 10:07:09 PM »
What came to my mind during the Dogs Eyes section:

It is the first instance that I've seen of a dog communicating something in an implicit / passive-aggressive way... haha

Yeah, they're usually just aggressive rather than passive-aggressive. The way he keeps his nose pointed at the camera, but moves his eyes to look at the leash. OTOH, I suspect Photoshop might have been involved.

Do you have a lot of experience living with different dog breeds and mixes? I'm curious, because that behaviour looks 100% realistic to me. I'm guessing the doggo was not turning away because there was a chance of a treat in the direction of the camera, but lust for the leash was too much.
evidence trumps experience | performance over perfection | responsibility – authority = scapegoat | emotions motivate; data doesn't

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2019, 10:29:23 PM »
What really stood out for me about this episode was Steve's pessimism about climate change and humanity's prospects of avoiding the worst consequences. In previous episodes, blogposts, and interviews, he appeared to be quite upbeat and ultimately optimistic, while not denying the seriousness of the issue. Not so this time around. I hope we will see more elaboration on this in the future.

Regarding Steve's comments on developing alternative energy sources to combat climate change, he expressed skepticism that we could reduce emissions to avoid 1.5 or 2.0 C warming.  Some people think the stakes are even higher than that....they are convinced that the collapse of civilization due to climate change is imminent (e.g. within the lifetime of adults):

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy

"What if I told you there was a paper on climate change that was so uniquely catastrophic, so perspective-altering, and so absolutely depressing that it's sent people to support groups and encouraged them to quit their jobs and move to the countryside? Good news: there is. It's called 'Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy.'"

"...the stark conclusions that it draws about the future. Chiefly, that it's too late to stop climate change from devastating our world—and that 'climate-induced societal collapse is now inevitable in the near term.' How near? About a decade."

It would be interesting if the rogues could tackle the arguments made in this paper.  I guess I'm old enough now to roll my eyes anytime a prophet argues that "the end is nigh".....I've been hearing this and getting freaked out about it since I was a child in the 70s and 80s.  In this podcast, Orson Welles' "The War of the Worlds" radio show from the 1930s was referenced, and I blame him since in the early 80s, he narrated The Man Who Saw Tomorrow "documentary" on Nostradamus that was repeated ad nauseam on HBO.  After hearing this (and numerous other stories about the "end of the world" or at least civilization as we know it [e.g. 'The Day After', 'The Great Depression of 1990', 'Bankruptcy 1995', etc]), getting freaked out, and then growing older and not witnessing "The End", I've become quite cynical for any new similar proclamations.  Anyone else feel this way?

The question I would ask is how much of a consensus there is regarding that thesis. There are always outliers generating headlines. But does this thesis (collapse of civilization in a decade) enjoy scientific or scholarly consensus?

I didn’t read the paper, but I gather that the 12 year deadline for taking action on global warming is not that civilization will end in 12 years otherwise, but that processes with tipping points will be started making further global warming irreversible for the next thousand years or so.  Global warming of such a degree likely to end civilization might occur in a hundred years, and it won’t be preventable (it also would be difficult to sit out the collapse of civilization in rural Sweden, though it might help your great great grandchildren).
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline Igor SMC

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 305
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2019, 11:05:38 PM »
About Steves change of stance on the prospects of climate change: that happens to everyone single individual who look at the new data with intellectual honesty.

Only wishful thinking can make you rationalize a positive outcome for humanity. You can be sure, all of these scenarios involve technology that we don't have, a huge political turn and instant support that never happened before, a massive shift in the economy,  etc... Of course, all of these radical changes would take place in record time ( 20 years or less ).

Worst case scenario assumes the status quo.
A positive scenario assumes a shitload of IFs and wishful thinking.
"Knowledge is preferable to ignorance. Better by far to embrace the hard truth than a reassuring fable"

Online The Latinist

  • Cyber Greasemonkey
  • Technical Administrator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 7633
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2019, 01:59:16 AM »
Why the hell is everyone calling dogs ‘doggos’ all of a sudden and can they please just stop now?
I would like to propose...that...it is undesirable to believe in a proposition when there is no ground whatever for supposing it true. — Bertrand Russell

Online brilligtove

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7276
  • Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity, you deal with.
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2019, 05:42:03 AM »
Why the hell is everyone calling dogs ‘doggos’ all of a sudden and can they please just stop now?

Floof, pupper, doggo and other terms emerged from various memes featuring dogs. The terms have been kicking around for years, so I suspect the answer to your stop request is "no".
evidence trumps experience | performance over perfection | responsibility – authority = scapegoat | emotions motivate; data doesn't

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #23 on: June 25, 2019, 07:21:26 AM »
Why the hell is everyone calling dogs ‘doggos’ all of a sudden and can they please just stop now?

Floof, pupper, doggo and other terms emerged from various memes featuring dogs. The terms have been kicking around for years, so I suspect the answer to your stop request is "no".

I prefer ‘dog,’ but ‘doggy’ is also acceptable.
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline daniel1948

  • Isn’t a
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8414
  • I'd rather be paddling
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #24 on: June 25, 2019, 11:18:50 AM »
Do you have a lot of experience living with different dog breeds and mixes? I'm curious, because that behaviour looks 100% realistic to me. I'm guessing the doggo was not turning away because there was a chance of a treat in the direction of the camera, but lust for the leash was too much.

No, I do not have a lot of experience with dogs. We had a dog for several years when I was a kid, and I've been around friends' dogs a fair amount. I've seen plenty of dogs turn to look at what they wanted, such as the leash which meant a walk. What I don't think I've ever seen is a dog looking to the side by only moving his eyes, while keeping his face forward. If you tell me this is common, I'll accept that. I just never saw it and it made me suspect an altered video.

I didn’t read the paper, but I gather that the 12 year deadline for taking action on global warming is not that civilization will end in 12 years otherwise, but that processes with tipping points will be started making further global warming irreversible for the next thousand years or so.  Global warming of such a degree likely to end civilization might occur in a hundred years, and it won’t be preventable ...

This is my understanding of the "decade" comment as well. And I would expect a gradual decline in civilization after that, rather than a sudden catastrophic collapse.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 13209
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2019, 11:25:11 AM »
I am as always reminded of the Limits of Growth and the Population Bomb. 

Online CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 11337
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2019, 12:03:54 PM »
I am as always reminded of the Limits of Growth and the Population Bomb.

Global warming will solve that.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Online brilligtove

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7276
  • Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity, you deal with.
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2019, 12:09:34 PM »
Do you have a lot of experience living with different dog breeds and mixes? I'm curious, because that behaviour looks 100% realistic to me. I'm guessing the doggo was not turning away because there was a chance of a treat in the direction of the camera, but lust for the leash was too much.

No, I do not have a lot of experience with dogs. We had a dog for several years when I was a kid, and I've been around friends' dogs a fair amount. I've seen plenty of dogs turn to look at what they wanted, such as the leash which meant a walk. What I don't think I've ever seen is a dog looking to the side by only moving his eyes, while keeping his face forward. If you tell me this is common, I'll accept that. I just never saw it and it made me suspect an altered video.

I wouldn't say it is common, but dogs do look around moving just their eyes. No reason to think it's doctored just for that.
evidence trumps experience | performance over perfection | responsibility – authority = scapegoat | emotions motivate; data doesn't

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4925
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2019, 01:24:29 PM »
What really stood out for me about this episode was Steve's pessimism about climate change and humanity's prospects of avoiding the worst consequences. In previous episodes, blogposts, and interviews, he appeared to be quite upbeat and ultimately optimistic, while not denying the seriousness of the issue. Not so this time around. I hope we will see more elaboration on this in the future.

Regarding Steve's comments on developing alternative energy sources to combat climate change, he expressed skepticism that we could reduce emissions to avoid 1.5 or 2.0 C warming.  Some people think the stakes are even higher than that....they are convinced that the collapse of civilization due to climate change is imminent (e.g. within the lifetime of adults):

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy

"What if I told you there was a paper on climate change that was so uniquely catastrophic, so perspective-altering, and so absolutely depressing that it's sent people to support groups and encouraged them to quit their jobs and move to the countryside? Good news: there is. It's called 'Deep Adaptation: A Map for Navigating Climate Tragedy.'"

"...the stark conclusions that it draws about the future. Chiefly, that it's too late to stop climate change from devastating our world—and that 'climate-induced societal collapse is now inevitable in the near term.' How near? About a decade."

It would be interesting if the rogues could tackle the arguments made in this paper.  I guess I'm old enough now to roll my eyes anytime a prophet argues that "the end is nigh".....I've been hearing this and getting freaked out about it since I was a child in the 70s and 80s.  In this podcast, Orson Welles' "The War of the Worlds" radio show from the 1930s was referenced, and I blame him since in the early 80s, he narrated The Man Who Saw Tomorrow "documentary" on Nostradamus that was repeated ad nauseam on HBO.  After hearing this (and numerous other stories about the "end of the world" or at least civilization as we know it [e.g. 'The Day After', 'The Great Depression of 1990', 'Bankruptcy 1995', etc]), getting freaked out, and then growing older and not witnessing "The End", I've become quite cynical for any new similar proclamations.  Anyone else feel this way?

The question I would ask is how much of a consensus there is regarding that thesis. There are always outliers generating headlines. But does this thesis (collapse of civilization in a decade) enjoy scientific or scholarly consensus?

I didn’t read the paper, but I gather that the 12 year deadline for taking action on global warming is not that civilization will end in 12 years otherwise, but that processes with tipping points will be started making further global warming irreversible for the next thousand years or so.  Global warming of such a degree likely to end civilization might occur in a hundred years, and it won’t be preventable (it also would be difficult to sit out the collapse of civilization in rural Sweden, though it might help your great great grandchildren).

Fair enough. But I would still be interested to know if it is the consensus of experts, or the interpolation of one or a few people.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Online CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 11337
Re: Episode #728
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2019, 01:57:08 PM »

Fair enough. But I would still be interested to know if it is the consensus of experts, or the interpolation of one or a few people.




https://www.lifeworth.com/deepadaptation.pdf


Quote
Sadly, the latest climate data, emissions data and data on the spread of carbon-intensive lifestyles show that the landslide has already begun. As the point of no return can’t be fully known until after the event, ambitious work on reducing carbon emissions and extracting more from the air (naturally and synthetically) is more critical than ever. That must involve a new front of action on methane.
Disruptive impacts from climate change are now inevitable. Geoengineering is likely to be ine ective or counter-productive. Therefore, the mainstream climate policy community now recognises the need to work much more on adaptation to the effects of climate change.

Have a look. I find it bleak and depressing. It's written by one guy, but in the year since it has been out there seems to be a growing consensus behind it.

It certainly hasn't been disputed in any valid or factual way.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

 

personate-rain