Excuse me, but what, exactly, does this have to do with rutabagas? [?]
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Nicholas Thompson < [email protected]> wrote: > Steve S., > > Now I KNOW you should write an op=ed for the Times. Or better still, the > NEW YORKER. > > The Liberal's Contract with the world: "You let me do to you whatever I > want, and in return I give you my guilt." > > Another Liberal fallacy: "As long as I have contempt for myself, I get to > have contempt for you" > > These are habits of mind I both deplore and indulge in myself in the same > sentences. In fact, in those very sentences. > > But when I am trying to be serious, I return to the existentialism that I > was braised in as a kid.: Choosing is what humans do; we have to take our > best shot! And if our best science tells us (1) that global warming may be > a terrible problem and (2) that we wont know if it is a terrible problem > until after it is too late to do something, then we ==>must<== take a crack > at solving the problem. > > Note the use of modal language! ("==>must<==") Anytime somebody uses > modal language, they have entered into the world of values ... have, in > fact, taken leave of their sense, gone mad!. I cannot argue for "taking our > best shot". I just believe that as humans we "should" do it, and hope that > you will join me in this belief, because I would rather be mad together than > mad alone. This is the best rationale I can muster for supporting > Anti-global warming measures. > > To be serious, we have to escape irony; to escape irony, we have to go > mad. The solution is that easy. > > Nick > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology, > Clark University ([email protected]) > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/<http://home.earthlink.net/%7Enickthompson/naturaldesigns/> > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Steve Smith <[email protected]> > *To: *The Monday Morning MisApplied Complexity Coffee Group > Grope<[email protected]> > *Sent:* 3/30/2009 12:41:38 PM > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Freeman Dyson and Homo Sapiens Exploitatus > > In the spirit of avoiding deadlines by reading things I don't have time for > and writing things I probably should delete before sending, or better yet, > not bother to write: > > I have a love/hate relationship with Freeman Dyson and his work and legacy. > > I have a love/hate relationship (quite parallel actually) with Global > Climate Change. > > I'm a human-chauvanist (in the sense of Robert Heinlein) and I loathe > myself for it. > > I'm a bleeding heart liberal humanist (in the sense of many of us on this > list) and I loathe myself for it. > > Yes Nick, it is time for another huge helping of starchy, fatty, Ennui, > liberally drizzled with rich, spicy Angst: > > I think it is horribly/wonderfully arrogant of us to think we can do > anything of consequence to this planet. But then "what means > consequence"? After all, even our most devastating nuclear holocaust would > look like a drop in the bucket compared to one good impactor from space (or > any other historical Extinction Event). And at the same time, there is > some evidence that humans, at the end of the last ice age managed to wipe > out most of the megafauna (where did those mastadons, giant tree sloths, > dire wolves and sabertooth cats go anyway?) on the planet, sparing only > those in Africa who (apparently?) adapted to our enhanced predatory > (neolithic?) capabilities as fast as we developed new ones? > > Mother Nature is not really that nice to her children (and I think of us as > some of her most precocious brats to date), starting as early as the > Siderian period, the rise (and cum-uppance) of the Oxygen Extinction. > Stupid Photosynthesizers... didn't they know when to quit? And look what > they ushered in, Oxygen Metabolizers that could run circles around them, > gobble them up like so much fodder and shit them out. The over-zealousness > of the photosynthesizers lead to the creation of their own new masters, the > oxygen-eating herbivores who in turn provided a substrate for the > carnivores, which collectively provide a great playground for Homo Sapiens > Exploitatus (read Genesis and talk to some fundamentalist Christians if you > don't think this planet was designed to be our playground). > > Like members of the pantheon of Greek (and Roman and Norse) Gods, Ma Nature > gives us the rope to hang ourselves, lets us stew in our own juices, offers > us the best of all parental benefits: "benign neglect". Those cigarette > burns on our cheeks? That just comes from not being careful enough around > adults smoking cigarettes at a cocktail party (gesticulating wildly in their > drunken exuberence). Only the slow and dull-witted let that happen more > than once. Thanks Ma, you are right... I'll be more careful next time... > and thanks again for the chemistry set you gave me for Xmas and the big box > of matches! Have a nice party. > > Whether Al Gore (and the many very serious scientists he quotes, or the > many Chicken Littles who flock to him) are correct or not, I am not sure. > My human-centric arrogance loves the idea that in 100+ years of industrial > activity we have been able to kick the planet's ecological and > climatological balance so far out of whack that we might not recover. My > (somewhat more humble) humanist side abhors that we can so blithely set the > planet on fire (metaphorically) with little thought to the consequence to > all the cute little baby seals and our cute little grandchildren and their > even cuter grandchildren (if we, the species last that long). > > Dyson is not only a deep thinker, but also a grand thinker. What could > something as mundane as "Global Climate Change" mean to someone who has > proposed collecting up all of the planetary and asteroidal material in the > solar system to create a perfect shell at the optimal distance from the sun > to create a perfect "inside out" planet, intercepting every bit of radiation > energy leaving the sun. If it were set at 1 AU, to simulate the solar flux > of earth (how terra-centric can we get?) we get a surface something like 55 > million (~2^16 ) times that of earth. The total energy output of the sun > is about 2^43 times our current use. All the engineering problems aside > (hah!) we have a theoretical maximum in this solar system (unless we decided > we needed to boost the rate of fusion in the sun, if we could) of at least > 55 million times as many people consuming trillions as many times as much > energy per capita (put your money back in GM/Hummer stock)! Given that we > would be living on a shell whose "other side" (a few meters or kilometers > away?) we might even be able to make much more efficient use of the solar > flux than we do now, restricted by having to create/find gradients in our > closed little atmospheric and oceanic shell. Imagine the entire surface of > the sphere a huge set of valved heat-pipes just waiting to provide thermal > gradients for optimal energy utilization to do useful work! Imagine all > that "useful work"! Oh the things we could do! > > Of course Dyson scoffs at our fears of global warming, and suggests we > bio-engineer forests to sequester carbon. He might even be right (that we > have the wherewithal to do such). And if we start doubling our population > every 30 years right away, we can have the population necessary to maximally > use the Dyson Sphere in a mere 11 generations (330 years!) (check my math > guys). We'd better quit worrying about minor problems like rising sea > levels and desertification of the interior of north America and get cracking > on the really hard problems like how to gather up and reshape all the > non-solar matter in the solar system. Better kick a few Obama Bucks into > Space Technology, hell kick them all in! > > So, is anthropogenic global climate change real? I fear it is. I hope it > isn't. What I'm equally disturbed about is that *we can't tell!*. I don't > mean that the climate change scientists don't have really good data and even > good models (ice cores from antartica, greenland, etc.). What I mean is > that as a species, as a culture, we are so tangled up in our value system > that something vaguely like half of us (well, half of those living in the > US, or half of those in the 1st World) insist that *they know for a fact* > that the *other half* are totally insane and being disagreeable for entirely > specious and political reasons. Half of us think the other half are trying > to destroy the biosphere while the other half think that the *other* other > half are trying to destroy the economy. > > Either way, everyone thinks everyone else is trying to destroy humanity > (and life, the universe, and everything)! If the stakes are this high, why > are we screaming and running in every direction at once? Wait... isn't that > what we humans (primates, mammals, vertebrates) do? What possible survival > value is there in that? The canoe is rocking and tipping madly and we are > all rushing to see how far out the side we can hang our bodies to try to > balance the "idiots" hanging out the other side. Anyone who's fallen out > of a canoe knows that a good strategy when things get tippy is to move to > the center and drop down low, not shriek loudly as we manically try to > obtain a dynamic balance with the other shrieking occupants. > > When the wildfire roars through the forest or prarie, the animals, great > and small run blindly in all directions. Those that run away from the > fire, flush more, and give them a direction to run in. The only thing a > smoke-blinded panicked creature needs to know in a wildfire is to run like > hell in the same direction everyone else around you is running (even if they > are running in circles). By the time the fire is about to consume you, this > is a good strategy. Back when it was just starting and you were (un)lucky > enough to be near the front, this is as likely to get you killed immediately > as it is to help you run in a direction where you get to have a chance of > being killed slowly or maybe, just maybe, not at all. We are the ones who > started the fire (if there is one), isn't it amazing that some of us are > eager to run right back into it and toss some more accellerant on it? > Maybe it is just an illusion, a collective hallucination, and isn't it brave > of those who run directly into it spraying volatile combustibles around like > holy water? > > In the spirit of hunkering down in the center of the canoe... I think I > should dig out those 5 year old vegetable seeds and start patiently doing > germination tests. Then I should start preparing an area inside my south > facing windows to sprout some starts. In about a week, the soil will be > ready for some light tilling and I could plant those peas and an early crop > of greens outside and start getting ready to put in the starts mid-May. > Nah... I think I'll go to the Hummer store and see if the prices are finally > down enough that I can finally trade my 30 yr old 40MPG Civic in on... I > deserve to ride in style. I am, after all, one of Mother Nature's most > special children! Gas is hovering at $2... no big deal. And the produce > section is *full* of great green goodness shipped halfway across the planet, > all shiny and wrapped up in cellophane, much prettier than anything I could > grow myself. What was I thinking? Articles on big thinkers like Dyson get > me all nostalgic sometimes. > > Besides, I need to work on the mathematics to see if my version of the > Dyson Sphere will remain solar-stationary based on the "solar wind" alone, > and what angular velocity I need to provide 1G, and whether the resulting > coriolis forces will mess with my head. I guess I should go back and read > Niven's RingWorld again for some pointers. What are we going to use to > replace the magnetic field to deflect the "bad rays" and where will they > go? Oh shit! I think we just created a giant Cavitron! No wonder there > are so many pulsars in the known universe... they are just all of the > civilizations who survived their own nonsense long enough to turn their > solar system into a giant Cavitron spewing beams of intense energy around > the Universe as cautionary beacons for the rest of us. > > Ahhhhhhhhyeeeeeeee! > > - Steven Angsty Smith > Homo Sapiens Exploitatus ExtraOrdinaire > > That's a funny coincidence ... I am reading it just now. > I'm always glad to come across another skeptic on anthropogenic global > warming, particularly from someone with such strong credentials. The > sustained level of pervasive hand-wrangling on this issue is quite > worrisome. The actions that some are proposing to curb carbon emissions is > far out of line relative to the level of uncertainty that still exists, and > I think it likely that a stiff carbon tax of some sort will do much more > harm than good. > > And I do get tired of the badly written articles one finds on this subject > in the press. The level of blind acceptance among the press corp is rather > reminiscent of those covering the Bush white house. > > Anyway, that's just my opinion. I have seen a slight uptick in skeptical > writings over the last year or so on AGW, so maybe we have started to turn > the corner on this issue. One can hope. > > Cheers, > > Ted > > *I didn't just drop a bomb, did I? > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Nicholas Thompson < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> While we are at it, did anybody read about Freeman Dyson in the Times >> Mag today? What did you think? >> > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org >
<<813.gif>>
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
