[ECOLOG-L] 2 Postdocs researchers for 1 year- Wageningen University, the Netherlands
Open Positions: 2 Postdocs researchers for 1 year- Wageningen University, the Netherlands The project: Spatially explicit, multiple goal optimization is a cutting edge topic in bio-economic models, especially with regard to the sustainable utilization of natural resources, where conservation and other societal needs have to be simultaneously addressed. Spatial issues and non-linear scale-transitions are not sufficiently dealt with in current bio-economic models, where data about resources are generally aggregated over space and time. The Postdoc researchers should study the effect of different scales of measurements on the output of a bio-economic model, by investigating the impact of the extent of the resource distribution (i.e., the set spatial limits of the resource) as well as the grain size (i.e., spatial resolution) that is chosen for the analysis. The Postdocs will deepen the knowledge on spatially explicit bio-economic modelling, using data from the Tembo integrated programme focussing on a vegetation-elephant-humans system (www.reg.wur.nl/UK/Research/Temboproject/), and from projects with similar questions on marine resources, carried out by Imares, such as the North Sea benthic fisheries. Benefit sharing, co-management, and the incorporation of externalities have to be addressed in both study systems. One of the Postdoc researchers will concentrate on profit maximization, while the other focuses on the sustainability of the exploitation. Candidate profile: * the position is available for non EU applicants only * period: 1 September 2009- 31 August 2010 * a PhD degree in Ecology or Economics * experience with spatial modeling with remotely sensed data and GIS * a good publication record * excellent written and oral communication skills in English * advanced knowledge on novel modeling approaches (e.g., multi-species, spatially-explicit bio-economic models under conflicting interests) * scientific curiosity and new bright ideas Our offer: * The stipend (1400 Euro/months) is for 1 year for both positions * The vacancy is located at the Resource Ecology Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands Interested? Applicants should submit a Curriculum Vitae, a copy of their academic records, and a covering letter stating their motivation to fred.deb...@wur.nl before 1 May 2009. More information can be obtained through Fred de Boer (fred.deb...@wur.nl). Resource Ecology Group Centre for Ecosystem Studies Wageningen University P.O. Box 47 6700 AA Wageningen The Netherlands Phone +31 317 484750 Fax +31 317 484845 http://www.reg.wur.nl/UK/
Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans?
Wayne, You ware wanting the kind of data that nobody has really had the chance to gather yet. Have you seen Stuart Pimm's book, The World According to Pimm? That would be a very good start. But, you are talking about data on a global scale - almost no research has been funded on that large a scale, long enough to actually bring together so much. So, there are data from a lot of disparate sources, and logic (the logic of how CO2, and other gases, work as a greenhouse gas, for example). Also, there is some hubris in thinking that we can actually fine tune something that is so large, when we can't even predict the weather a week in advance. Hence the problem with having a data supported and fully referenced study. Jim Wayne Tyson wrote on 30-Mar-09 20:56: Ecolog: Can anyone refer me to data-supported and fully-referenced studies (rather than opinions) that define the balance (percent, ratio) of direct and indirect anthropogenic and non-human sources/causes of the various climate-changing factors (listed) together with mitigating factors and how they influence trends in climate change in terms of fluctuations and long-term trends of what might be called greenhouse and nuclear winter consequences? Such studies should be clearly enough presented that anyone, scientist or non-scientist, should be able to understand the conclusions and their foundations at any level and be able to follow the logic back through the analysis to the raw data. While I am influenced by what percent of scientists believe, I am only provisionally influence by such broad numbers and tend to be more impressed by qualitative than quantitative assessments (WHICH scientists, and their credibility) of that kind. Still, I am far more interested in the hard science and its scholarly but clear presentation, together with all the relevant ifs, ands, and buts than I am in a rather confusing tangle of claims. WT PS: As a matter of common sense, we non-experts can kinda get it that human activity causes all kinds of damage to all kinds of systems, including the climate system. But we get real confused because of the scale and complexity of the relevant factors and the dynamic nature of systems and the potential for shifts in trends. We also can kinda get it that the anthropogenic part is BIG, but we have trouble getting a handle on how big in comparison to all the other climate-change factors and modulating effects and processes. Finally, we've been misled so much that we are suspicious of band wagons and fads as a genre. We realize that those who challenge the dominant view can be hucksters and cranks, but we also seem to remember that The Authorities have often turned out to be wrong throughout history and that challengers tend to get burned at the stake. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Claisse jclai...@yahoo.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? Turns out there a several good references listed on wikipedia under global warming controversy. Thank you to those who already responded. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Jeremy Claisse Sent: Mon 2/16/2009 7:53 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? My brother (who works in marketing) recently sent me the e-mail below. I don't intend this to turn into a discussion of the general public's understanding of uncertainty in science, I am just wondering if anyone is aware of a study that looked at the percentage of scientists that think climate change is caused primarily by anthropogenic factors vs. entirely a natural cycle. Thanks. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1955 - Release Date: 02/16/09 06:55:00 -- James J. Roper Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute Bocas del Toro Marine Research Station MRC 0580-03 Unit 9100, Box 0948 DPO AA 34002-9998 Skype-in (USA):+1 706 5501064 Skype-in (Brazil): 41 39415715 E-mail - personal: jjro...@gmail.com E-mail - consulting: arsart...@gmail.com STRI Bocas del Toro http://www.stri.org/english/research/facilities/marine/bocas_del_toro/index.php Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia e Conservação http://www.bio.ufpr.br/ecologia/ Educational Pages http://jjroper.googlepages.com/ Ars Artium Consulting http://arsartium.googlepages.com/ 9^o 21.122' N, and 82^o 15.390' W In Google Earth, copy and paste - 9 21.122' N, 82 15.390' W
[ECOLOG-L] kriging datasets
Does anyone have any good data sets (not too messy semivariogram) for kriging? I will be using it for my intro level Spatial Analysis class. Much obliged, -Karen * Karen F. Gaines, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Eastern Illinois University Department of Biological Sciences Room 1162 Life Sciences Building 600 Lincoln Ave. Charleston IL, 61920-3099 (o) 217.581.6235; (f) 217.581.7141 e-mail:kfgai...@eiu.edu mailto:kfgai...@eiu.edu Web:http://www.eiu.edu/~biology/personnel/gaines.htm http://www.eiu.edu/~biology/personnel/gaines.htm *
[ECOLOG-L] POST DOCTORAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATE -- Oregon State University -- Micrometeorologist/Biometeorologist for AmeriFlux Network
POST DOCTORAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATE Micrometeorologist/Biometeorologist for AmeriFlux Network Posting Number: 0004009 Location: Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. Earliest Starting Date: May 1, 2009 Application Closing Date: April 20, 2009 Position summary: We invite applicants for a Post Doctorate Research Associate to ensure a high degree of QA/QC and consistency of AmeriFlux measurements among and within network sites, and to lead and participate in network-wide syntheses of data. AmeriFlux is a network of ~90 sites in the Americas where the goals are to investigate carbon dioxide, water and energy exchange between terrestrial ecosystems and the atmosphere. The AmeriFlux objectives are to: 1) establish an infrastructure for guiding, collecting, synthesizing, and disseminating long-term measurements of CO2, water, and energy exchange from a variety of ecosystems; 2) collect critical new information to help define the current global CO2 budget; 3) enable improved predictions of future concentrations of atmospheric CO2; 4) enhance understanding of carbon fluxes, Net Ecosystem Production (NEP), and carbon sequestration in the terrestrial biosphere. Responsibilities: The incumbent will have primary responsibility to conduct comparisons of eddy covariance measurements made with a portable system and instruments at the AmeriFlux sites, analyze the data and act as a liaison between the OSU QA/QC research lab and the site Principal Investigators. In consultation with the AmeriFlux Science Chair and supporting Steering Group, this includes development of protocols and QA/QC of EC data and ancillary physical and micrometeorological measurements for interpreting NEE and associated flux properties and processes. The person will assist in organizing workshops and the annual AmeriFlux meeting, contribute to reports to the agency, and participate in synthesis publications deemed important to addressing network science questions. The incumbent will travel extensively through the summer months, setting up the portable system next to existing tower instruments and making measurements for short durations at sites, analyze the data and provide reports to the Principal Investigators. Required qualifications: The candidate must hold a PhD degree in biometeorology, micrometeorology, environmental physics, or similar field. Proven ability to conduct independent research, and to work as part of a scientific team. Experience in analysis, interpretation and synthesis of eddy covariance data. The candidate must also have demonstrated ability to work extensively thought the summer months at remote field sites with little or no supervision, and demonstrated ability to produce high quality publications. Must possess a valid drivers license to operate University vehicle(s). Preferred qualifications: Tower experience desirable. A demonstrable commitment to promoting and enhancing diversity. View posting for additional preferred qualifications. Employment conditions: Full-time (1.0 FTE) 12-month, fixed term faculty position with reappointment at the discretion of the Department Head. Full-time annual salary starting at $42,000$45,000 (U.S.) commensurate with education and experience. Medical, dental, and life insurance group plans are available. For additional information: Contact Beverly Law, Search Committee Chair, Department of Forest Science, 328 Richardson Hall, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331-5752. Email: bev@oregonstate.edu. For questions regarding the application process, please contact: Jeannette Harper, email: jeannette.har...@oregonstate.edu; DEPARTMENT OF FOREST SCIENCE 321 Richardson Hall, Corvallis, Oregon 97331-5752 Telephone 541-737-2244 Fax 541-737-1393 Application procedure: When applying, qualified applicants will be required to upload a letter summarizing qualifications for the position, curriculum vitae, up to two examples of your senior authored publications, unofficial copies of transcripts of university work, and at least one letter of recommendation and the name, address, telephone number, and email address of 2 additional references by April 20, 2009. http://oregonstate.edu/jobs. Posting Number: 0004009 Oregon State University is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer.
[ECOLOG-L] M.S. student needed in small mammal ecology
(Apologies for cross-posting) M.S. student needed for Small Mammal population study. I am seeking an M.S. student in the area of small mammal population ecology, beginning Fall 2009, in the Department of Biological Sciences, St. Cloud State University, Minnesota. The successful applicant's thesis will build upon long-term research based at the Kansas Field Station and Ecological Reserves on the effects of experimental habitat fragmentation on populations and communities undergoing old-field succession. This landscape-scale experiment began in 1984 and has resulted in a long series of publications on small mammal, plant and insect communities over the last 25 years. Small mammal work has focused on variation in population demographics and densities among habitat fragments of different size, and movements of individuals among fragments and within the heterogeneous landscape. Research for the thesis is anticipated to have two directions. 1) A substantial amount of data on small mammal populations has been collected over the years and not yet fully analyzed, particularly between from the mid-1990s to the early 2000s. There are several interesting questions which can be answered with skillful data-mining. I would like to know if small mammal population densities continued to show the same spatial patterns after the mid-1990s (and a substantial change in vegetation), and there are several hypotheses related to movement frequency and distance to test. This facet of the project would take place in my lab at SCSU in Minnesota. 2) New field work is planned between late summer 2009 and early summer 2010, testing the effects of matrix composition on small mammal movements between habitat fragments. This field work would take place during periodic trips from Minnesota to Lawrence, Kansas (1-2 week duration, 2-3 times per year), and data analysis woul! d take place in Minnesota. Depending on interest, some additional field work may be possible in central Minnesota on sites owned by the State of Minnesota or private organizations. The ideal candidate for this position would have hold a B.S. or B.A. in ecology or related area, strong quantitative skills (especially in statistics), be experienced in manipulating data in spreadsheets, and have done coursework in population ecology and conservation biology. Field experience with small mammals is desirable but not imperative. Funding for this student will be available through a combination of teaching assistantships ($10,300 for the fall and spring semesters) and summer research support. Teaching assistantships also cover 8 credit-hours of classes per semester at no additional charge. Additional internal funding is usually available for research expenses. St. Cloud State University is a regional comprehensive university in Central Minnesota, and the St. Cloud area supports a population of approximately 100,000 people some 70 miles northwest of Minneapolis. To be considered for this position, please contact me (Dr. William Cook) at wmc...@stcloudstate.edu. To pursue this after a first contact, you will need to complete the SCSU Graduate School application and Teaching Assistant application. See the Department of Biological Sciences (http://www.stcloudstate.edu/biology/), and SCSU Graduate School website (http://www.stcloudstate.edu/gradadmissions/) and the TA application form (http://www.stcloudstate.edu/graduatestudies/current/ga.asp). PLEASE NOTE that while the University application deadline is June 1, to be eligible for teaching assistantships you must have all application materials here by no later than APRIL 20, 2009. William M. Cook Assistant Professor Department of Biological Sciences St. Cloud State University 720 4th Avenue South St. Cloud, MN 56301 USA Phone: (320) 308-2019 E-mail: wmc...@stcloudstate.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans?
I'm afraid I don't have a citation handy, but try a literature search on Suess effect. This is the dilution of atmospheric 13C and 14C by 12C from fossil fuels. It's a pretty clear measure of the magnitude by which humans are contributing to the rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration. Charles W. Welden Departments of Biology and Environmental Studies Southern Oregon University Ashland, OR USA 97520 wel...@sou.edu 541.552.6868 (voice) 541.552.6415 (fax) On Mar 31, 2009, at 4:31 AM, James J. Roper wrote: Wayne, You ware wanting the kind of data that nobody has really had the chance to gather yet. Have you seen Stuart Pimm's book, The World According to Pimm? That would be a very good start. But, you are talking about data on a global scale - almost no research has been funded on that large a scale, long enough to actually bring together so much. So, there are data from a lot of disparate sources, and logic (the logic of how CO2, and other gases, work as a greenhouse gas, for example). Also, there is some hubris in thinking that we can actually fine tune something that is so large, when we can't even predict the weather a week in advance. Hence the problem with having a data supported and fully referenced study. Jim Wayne Tyson wrote on 30-Mar-09 20:56: Ecolog: Can anyone refer me to data-supported and fully-referenced studies (rather than opinions) that define the balance (percent, ratio) of direct and indirect anthropogenic and non-human sources/causes of the various climate-changing factors (listed) together with mitigating factors and how they influence trends in climate change in terms of fluctuations and long-term trends of what might be called greenhouse and nuclear winter consequences? Such studies should be clearly enough presented that anyone, scientist or non-scientist, should be able to understand the conclusions and their foundations at any level and be able to follow the logic back through the analysis to the raw data. While I am influenced by what percent of scientists believe, I am only provisionally influence by such broad numbers and tend to be more impressed by qualitative than quantitative assessments (WHICH scientists, and their credibility) of that kind. Still, I am far more interested in the hard science and its scholarly but clear presentation, together with all the relevant ifs, ands, and buts than I am in a rather confusing tangle of claims. WT PS: As a matter of common sense, we non-experts can kinda get it that human activity causes all kinds of damage to all kinds of systems, including the climate system. But we get real confused because of the scale and complexity of the relevant factors and the dynamic nature of systems and the potential for shifts in trends. We also can kinda get it that the anthropogenic part is BIG, but we have trouble getting a handle on how big in comparison to all the other climate-change factors and modulating effects and processes. Finally, we've been misled so much that we are suspicious of band wagons and fads as a genre. We realize that those who challenge the dominant view can be hucksters and cranks, but we also seem to remember that The Authorities have often turned out to be wrong throughout history and that challengers tend to get burned at the stake. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Claisse jclai...@yahoo.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? Turns out there a several good references listed on wikipedia under global warming controversy. Thank you to those who already responded. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Jeremy Claisse Sent: Mon 2/16/2009 7:53 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? My brother (who works in marketing) recently sent me the e-mail below. I don't intend this to turn into a discussion of the general public's understanding of uncertainty in science, I am just wondering if anyone is aware of a study that looked at the percentage of scientists that think climate change is caused primarily by anthropogenic factors vs. entirely a natural cycle. Thanks. - --- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.25/1955 - Release Date: 02/16/09 06:55:00 -- -- -- James J. Roper Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute Bocas del Toro Marine Research Station MRC 0580-03 Unit 9100, Box 0948 DPO AA 34002-9998 Skype-in (USA):+1 706 5501064 Skype-in (Brazil): 41 39415715 E-mail - personal:
[ECOLOG-L] Human Wildlife Conflict Course at Smithsonian CRC Su 09
Greetings, Please see the flier attached for this undergraduate course: CONS 420 Human-Wildlife Conflict Thursdays from July 9 - August 6, 2009; 9:30 am-5:30 pm Located at the Smithsonian Conservation Research Center, Front Royal, Virginia Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is of growing concern to many conservation biologists. This class will give students an understanding of the impact of HWC on conservation efforts and human health and well-being.Through participation in solo, small group and class work, as well as lectures, discussions and readings, students will enhance their understanding of the complexities of HWC and conservation biology and leave with a strong foundation in the tools needed to effectively deal with HWC. For more information, please contact the instructor: Megan Draheim at mdrah...@gmu.edu This course is being offered through the Smithsonian-Mason Global Conservation Studies Programs. Anne Marchant, PhD Associate Director, Mason Center for Conservation Studies http://mccs.gmu.edu amarc...@gmu.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans?
Jim and Ecolog: I'm sorry if I left the impression that I want the impossible. To clarify, I really want to know the current state of data and the standard of adequacy of the conclusions derived therefrom. As to scale, is some sort of congruence of the sampling with the whole irrelevant or crucial? But given that a study, any study, sets forth its theoretical foundations clearly (rather than in the most obfuscatorial style possible) I'm willing to buy its conclusions if the foundations are sound. However, I still want to see that the data continue to be accumulated and tested and retested (who could hope for a more inexhaustible grant-cow than that?) unless it can be demonstrated that nothing significant can be gained thereby. Thanks for the book reference; I'll put it on my list. WT - Original Message - From: James J. Roper jjro...@gmail.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 3:31 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? Wayne, You ware wanting the kind of data that nobody has really had the chance to gather yet. Have you seen Stuart Pimm's book, The World According to Pimm? That would be a very good start. But, you are talking about data on a global scale - almost no research has been funded on that large a scale, long enough to actually bring together so much. So, there are data from a lot of disparate sources, and logic (the logic of how CO2, and other gases, work as a greenhouse gas, for example). Also, there is some hubris in thinking that we can actually fine tune something that is so large, when we can't even predict the weather a week in advance. Hence the problem with having a data supported and fully referenced study. Jim Wayne Tyson wrote on 30-Mar-09 20:56: Ecolog: Can anyone refer me to data-supported and fully-referenced studies (rather than opinions) that define the balance (percent, ratio) of direct and indirect anthropogenic and non-human sources/causes of the various climate-changing factors (listed) together with mitigating factors and how they influence trends in climate change in terms of fluctuations and long-term trends of what might be called greenhouse and nuclear winter consequences? Such studies should be clearly enough presented that anyone, scientist or non-scientist, should be able to understand the conclusions and their foundations at any level and be able to follow the logic back through the analysis to the raw data. While I am influenced by what percent of scientists believe, I am only provisionally influence by such broad numbers and tend to be more impressed by qualitative than quantitative assessments (WHICH scientists, and their credibility) of that kind. Still, I am far more interested in the hard science and its scholarly but clear presentation, together with all the relevant ifs, ands, and buts than I am in a rather confusing tangle of claims. WT PS: As a matter of common sense, we non-experts can kinda get it that human activity causes all kinds of damage to all kinds of systems, including the climate system. But we get real confused because of the scale and complexity of the relevant factors and the dynamic nature of systems and the potential for shifts in trends. We also can kinda get it that the anthropogenic part is BIG, but we have trouble getting a handle on how big in comparison to all the other climate-change factors and modulating effects and processes. Finally, we've been misled so much that we are suspicious of band wagons and fads as a genre. We realize that those who challenge the dominant view can be hucksters and cranks, but we also seem to remember that The Authorities have often turned out to be wrong throughout history and that challengers tend to get burned at the stake. - Original Message - From: Jeremy Claisse jclai...@yahoo.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? Turns out there a several good references listed on wikipedia under global warming controversy. Thank you to those who already responded. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of Jeremy Claisse Sent: Mon 2/16/2009 7:53 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? My brother (who works in marketing) recently sent me the e-mail below. I don't intend this to turn into a discussion of the general public's understanding of uncertainty in science, I am just wondering if anyone is aware of a study that looked at the percentage of scientists that think climate change is caused primarily by anthropogenic factors vs. entirely a natural cycle. Thanks.
[ECOLOG-L] Bioinformatics intern at Rocky Mtn Bio Lab
The Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory is taking applications for a Bioinformatics Intern in 2009. We are looking for a student interested in managing biological datasets, as well as someone who has some GPS/GIS and/or Computer lab experience. The intern will spend approximately half of his or her time as an assistant on several projects: 1) assisting the GPS/GIS technician with mapping sites, creating maps, reviewing metadata and helping with other mapping related projects, 2) overseeing upkeep and troubleshooting of the Barclay computer lab, and 3) assisting with the installation of permanent weather stations at remote sites. The remaining half of the intern's time will be spent on a structured research project that will archive at least one valuable scientific dataset in the RMBL's database. More info can be found at http://rmbl.org/home/index.php?module=htmlpagesfunc=displaypid=183 Ian Billick, Ph.D. Executive Director Rocky Mountain Biological Lab PO Box 519, Crested Butte, CO 81224 phone/fax (970) 349-7231 www.rmbl.org
[ECOLOG-L] Green Party of England and Wales Endorses Position on Economic Growth
The Green Party of England and Wales has endorsed the position on economic growth championed by the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE). The position statement points out the conflict between economic growth and environmental protection and proposes the steady state economy as a desirable alternative. Although leading sustainability scholars have acknowledged that the economy can’t grow forever, it is a breakthrough for a well-established political party to take such a stand. The endorsement comes on the heels of a dialogue at the Green Party conference in Blackpool, England, where CASSE European Director Dan O'Neill delivered an address on steady state economics and the financial crisis. Dr. Caroline Lucas, Leader of the Green Party and Member of European Parliament, stated, I'm delighted to say we'd be very happy to [endorse the CASSE position]. The economic meltdown has most government and business leaders scrambling to reassemble the growth machine. They are bent on bandaging the system that delivered the current debacle of an economic crisis mixed with profound social and environmental problems. The Green Party of England and Wales sees a better path to prosperity -- a non-growing economy that achieves high levels of wellbeing for all citizens while respecting the limits of natural systems. It is about getting better rather than getting bigger, a distinction supported by the Green Party.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans?
Jonathan and Ecolog: Thank you for sending the attachments. While I am not a climatologist either, they appear to be excellent examples of well-conducted research. However, neither of them seem to get to the root of the matter--i.e., the amount of anthropogenic effect on global climate compared to the background or non-anthropogenic effects. One thing about the papers that sprang out from the page was the LOCAL influence upon arctic climate indicators. This, it would seem, would need to be isolated or at least considered in any analysis of GLOBAL climate. Further, the paper indicates both the lack of data over a long period and the need for further research. For those interested, I have excerpted two statements from the Huntington, et al paper: The examples presented in this paper suggest that human activity in the Arctic, particularly in combination with climate variation or change, has had large-scale impacts in the past, and has the potential for even greater impacts in the future. This conclusion, supported by both data and models, implies that the human activities and climate are inextricably linked and examining either one alone will produce misleading results, particularly as human activity increases. Future trajectories of development should be the subject of additional modeling and assessment work to develop well-grounded scenarios in the context of climate and arctic system models. (Note that we have not discussed the drivers of human activity that would need to be incorporated in any such modeling or scenario work, and which constitute a complex system in their own right.) [clip] Whether and to what extent human activity in the Arctic can lead to large-scale biophysical impacts and consequent feedbacks to regional climate requires more study. Our initial analysis indicates that human activity is likely to be underestimated at present. In light of projections of future development, continuing to omit human activity from models and other assessments of change appears unwise. Of particular interest will be efforts to gather and analyze data that can provide a quantitative basis for the conceptual figures in this paper, thus quantifying human influences and allowing them to be incorporated in numerical models. WT - Original Message - From: Jonathan Nelson To: Wayne Tyson Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] CLIMATE Change Anthropogenic Belief and Evidence Re: [ECOLOG-L] Reference for % of scientists that think climate change is caused by humans? Wayne, The journal Climatic Change is an excellent resource in my view, but I'm not a climatologist. Many articles there address these questions. The following reference does not address your question, but I've found it very useful in exposing scientifically-minded people to (a) the complexity of the climate problem and (b) some of the possibilities available in terms of outcomes and policy options. The Arctic systems taken as a sort of whole are large enough that while interactions with global climate are still very complex, it's possible to envision the magnitude of the effects. http://www.springerlink.com/content/v071147673623610/ There's a great site associated with this paper, making the studies a little more accessible: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/indicators.shtml Since the link to the paper at the bottom of that page doesn't seem to work today, I've attached a casually highlighted version of the above (sorry for the visual interference). I've also attached another paper which may or may not have useful references. In the end, though, this brings us back to the problem of being able to understand the conclusions and their foundations at any level and be able to follow the logic back through the analysis to the raw data. That's a tall order. I suspect it may not be possible to satisfy it. For example, neither of the papers above really addresses soot particulate interactions. One of our major problems right now, in my personal and undereducated view, is that no one person is capable of fully understanding the global climate. I would venture that one of the reasons we are so dependent on modeling is that it is really the only method available to us of integrating so much specialized knowledge into a coherent vision. We are at the mercy of the quality of our scientific process. Good luck, and please report back to ECOLOG-L if you find a great reference. Thanks! Jon On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net wrote: Ecolog: Can anyone refer me to data-supported and fully-referenced studies (rather than opinions) that define the balance (percent, ratio) of direct and indirect anthropogenic and non-human sources/causes of the various climate-changing factors (listed) together with mitigating factors and how they influence trends in climate change in
[ECOLOG-L] Summer courses at the Rocky Mtn Bio Lab
The RMBL has spots available in its undergraduate research program. The deadline for requesting financial aid is April 1, though applications received by April 5 may also be considered. More information can be found at rmbl.org/education. Advanced Undergraduate Research: Students conduct a fulltime research project under the supervision of a RMBL scientist. Structured Undergraduate Research and Course: Students conduct independent research under the supervision of RMBL scientists while participating in one of three training programs (Wildlife Biology, Field Botany, and the Biology of Climate Change). Introduction to Field Research: This course introduces students to the practice of doing ecology in the fieldby helping them learn how to identify and test ecological hypotheses, design experiments, statistically analyze data, and present results in brief presentations and papers. The course combines short lectures, discussions of the scientific literature, and copious amounts of time in the field actually doing collaborative and independent ecological research. Ian Billick, Ph.D. Executive Director Rocky Mountain Biological Lab PO Box 519, Crested Butte, CO 81224 phone/fax (970) 349-7231 www.rmbl.org
[ECOLOG-L] Mapping-GPS Certified User Workshop: 13 - 15 MAY 2009
Ladies and Gentlemen: FIRST, SORRY FOR ANY DOUBLE POSTING. IT WAS NOT INTENDED! Are you all “funned out” of winter? Looking for that perfect opportunity to get up to speed with mapping GPS before your SPRING/SUMMER field seasons hit? Here it is! I would like to invite you to consider participating in the following Certified User Mapping GPS Workshop: 13 – 15 MAY 2009. Each workshop is a total immersion 3-day workshop titled: INTRODUCTION TO GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEMS FOR MAPPING AND NAVIGATION. Each workshop is limited to a maximum of 10 participants to insure quality instruction and lots of personal attention! These courses generally fill quickly, so if you are interested, please reserve your place as soon as possible. You may secure your reservation prior to payment, but arrangements for payment must be made by the time the session begins. SCOPE OF COURSE: This is an intro (but intense) course to mapping GPS with no prior experience in GPS required or expected. But you'll definitely be a GIS mapping-level GPS power tool when you're finished with this workshop! We will train on TRIMBLE GEO XH mobile GIS GPS units with TERRASYNC PRO, and we will use PATHFINDER OFFICE integration software. We will also learn to use bluetooth wireless communication, WAAS real-time differential, Coast Guard Beacon real-time differential. These courses are taught by an experienced manufacturer trained Certified Trainer (me; Trimble Navigation, LTD). For details including course content and instructions on how to register, I invite you to visit the course website at: http://www.wi.missouriwestern.edu/Professional/GPS/index.asp There is also a workshop brochure you can download (pdf file format)! If you would like to discuss the nature of these workshops, or if I can be of service in any way, feel free to contact me at your convenience! These are professional workshops, designed to bring you “up to speed” quickly. These are ideal workshops for professionals who want to gain operational competence quickly and also excellent workshops for students wanting to acquire these skills to increase their marketability! NO PRIOR EXPERIENCE IN MAPPING GPS NECESSARY OR EXPECTED! I also do “on site” training as well. If you are interested in planning a training session at your institution, contact me at your convenience! Cary D. Chevalier, Ph.D. Department of Biology Missouri Western State University 4525 Downs Dr. St. Joseph, MO 64507 Ph: 816.271.4252 Fax: 816.271.4252 Email: cc...@missouriwestern.edu Latitude 39o 45' 29.94559 N - Longitude 94o 47' 6.49119 W
[ECOLOG-L] Hungry shrimp eat climate change experiment- Duh!
Anyone else read this and think “Duh!”? From: New Scientist published March 27, 2009, authored by Catherine Brahic “Hungry shrimp eat climate change experiment” “Earlier this month, the controversial Indian-German Lohafex expedition fertilised 300 square kilometres of the Southern Atlantic with six tonnes of dissolved iron. The iron triggered a bloom of phytoplankton, which doubled their biomass within two weeks by taking in carbon dioxide from the seawater. Dead bloom particles were then expected to sink to the ocean bed, dragging carbon along with them. Instead, the bloom attracted a swarm of hungry copepods. The tiny crustaceans graze on phytoplankton, which keeps the carbon in the food chain and prevents it from being stored in the ocean sink. Researchers from the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research reported that the copepods were in turn eaten by larger crustaceans called amphipods, which serve as food for squid and fin whales.” “The grazing effect had not been seen in previous fertilisation experiments. These had caused blooms of diatoms, a type of phytoplankton that is protected against grazers by a hard shell of silica. But the Lohafex experiment did not trigger a diatom bloom because there was little silicic acid available in the water for diatoms to build their shells from. Lohafex researchers say the results suggest that using iron fertilisation to increase the ocean carbon sink would rely on a complex chain of events, making it difficult to control. The Southern Ocean is thought to be the planet's largest ocean carbon sink. But most of the northern half of the region is low on silicic acid, ruling it out as an option for carbon fertilisation. The researchers tried to provoke a second bloom by fertilising the same patch of ocean three weeks later, with no success — most probably because the water was already saturated in iron. ‘It seems that if it is possible to fertilise enough ocean to make a difference to climate, we would need to turn vast ocean ecosystems into giant plankton farms,’ says Caldeira.” David Hilmy Chief Operations Officer, Director of Conservation, KuTunza Environmental Education Program (KEEP) Europe: 27 avenue de l'Opéra, 75001 Paris, France USA: 2804 Shepherd Street, Mount Rainier, MD 20712 888.379.2879 ~ 202.379.2879 ~ 202.316.4902 (cell)
[ECOLOG-L] Application deadline extended for: 2009 MBI Workshop for Young Researchers in Mathematical Biology (WYRMB)
**Application Deadline Extended** 2009 MBI Workshop for Young Researchers in Mathematical Biology (WYRMB) August 24-26, 2009 Mathematical Biosciences Institute, The Ohio State University Columbus OH, USA Application Deadline is now: May 1, 2009 Apply at: http://www.mbi.osu.edu/forms/applywyrmb.html This workshop is intended to broaden the scientific perspective of young researchers in mathematical biology and to encourage interactions with other scientists. Workshop activities include plenary talks, poster sessions, and discussion forums on Applying for Jobs and Math Bio Jobs in Industry. We cordially invite young researchers to apply for participation in the workshop! All invitees will be expected to present a poster, and this year, a select number will be chosen to give short talks as well. The MBI will plan to cover local expenses for all invitees, but travel expenses may only be available on a competitive basis. Accepted Plenary Speakers: * Kirk Jordan, Computational Science Center, IBM T.J. Watson Research * Yang Kuang, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Arizona State University * Suzanne Lenhart, Department of Mathematics, University of Tennessee * Johan Paulsson, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School * Pejman Rohani, School of Ecology, The Center for Tropical and Emerging Global Diseases Further Details can be found at: http://www.mbi.osu.edu/wyrmb/wyrmb2009.html Sincerely, MBI Postdoctoral Fellows
