Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-30 Thread hkhenson

At 11:00 AM 3/30/2009, Bruce Bostwick wrote:


Food security is a fairly significant worry, all things considered.
It's nearly impossible to build up safety margin in the food
distribution systems of most countries on earth because within one or
two generations of any increase in the ability to produce food, the
population has expanded to fill the gap, so the nature of the system
as a whole is to operate near or at its limit to deliver at all
times.


Yep.  Though there are countries where this is not likely to be a problem.


The moment global warming starts to impact food production to
any significant degree, people somewhere on earth will begin
starving.


I agree, though you don't even need that.  Lack of low cost fossil 
energy alone could cause the population to fall by the end of the 
century to one or two billion people.  And consider what diverting 
corn into alcohol production did to food supplies in Mexico.



It won't affect people of our generation in the wealthiest
countries (and the USA is still one of the wealthiest, even in its
current weakened state), but it will affect people elsewhere on the
planet almost from the moment food production starts feeling any sort
of pinch.

If it were possible to maintain a margin of production capacity
without triggering an immediate population growth in response that
eats up that margin completely, then it would be possible to ride out
a lot of secondary effects of even fairly major climate change.  But
the dynamics of the existing systems and population growth together
don't allow that margin ..


Most of the world has not escaped from the Mathusian trap.  Some 
parts have.  It's going to be a rough situation for a while as one or 
the other modes prevails.


Keith


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-29 Thread Chris Frandsen
Sorry I meant that fresh water supplies are going to become a great  
problem very soon. and of course it is the Himalayas not the Andes  
must not have taken my meds:-)

learner
On Mar 29, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote:


At 12:45 PM Sunday 3/29/2009, Chris Frandsen wrote:

Agreed! Reduced fresh water supplies are a great! The Andes glaciers
disappearing in the next 10 yrs will create havoc in India, etc.




Huh?


. . . ronn!  :)




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-29 Thread Bruce Bostwick

On Mar 28, 2009, at 2:05 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:

One of Dyson's main points is that global warming tends to get  
exaggerated. People of our generation or even the next one are  
extremely unlikely to die from the effects of global warming. Even  
a few generations down the road it is still unlikely unless they  
suddenly become very stupid. Who is going to stand still while the  
water rises over your head?


Food security is the biggest worry. But I'm not in any state to  
discuss just now - been up since 4:40am and rode a very hilly 145km  
today...


Food security is a fairly significant worry, all things considered.   
It's nearly impossible to build up safety margin in the food  
distribution systems of most countries on earth because within one or  
two generations of any increase in the ability to produce food, the  
population has expanded to fill the gap, so the nature of the system  
as a whole is to operate near or at its limit to deliver at all  
times.  The moment global warming starts to impact food production to  
any significant degree, people somewhere on earth will begin  
starving.  It won't affect people of our generation in the wealthiest  
countries (and the USA is still one of the wealthiest, even in its  
current weakened state), but it will affect people elsewhere on the  
planet almost from the moment food production starts feeling any sort  
of pinch.


If it were possible to maintain a margin of production capacity  
without triggering an immediate population growth in response that  
eats up that margin completely, then it would be possible to ride out  
a lot of secondary effects of even fairly major climate change.  But  
the dynamics of the existing systems and population growth together  
don't allow that margin ..




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-29 Thread Ronn! Blankenship

At 12:45 PM Sunday 3/29/2009, Chris Frandsen wrote:

Agreed! Reduced fresh water supplies are a great! The Andes glaciers
disappearing in the next 10 yrs will create havoc in India, etc.




Huh?


. . . ronn!  :)




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-29 Thread Chris Frandsen
Agreed! Reduced fresh water supplies are a great! The Andes glaciers  
disappearing in the next 10 yrs will create havoc in India, etc. I  
think Dyson is focusing on the models and not the most recent actual  
data from the ice.


learner

On Mar 28, 2009, at 2:05 AM, Charlie Bell wrote:



On 28/03/2009, at 9:26 AM, xponentrob wrote:
One of Dyson's main points is that global warming tends to get  
exaggerated. People of our generation or even the next one are  
extremely unlikely to die from the effects of global warming. Even  
a few generations down the road it is still unlikely unless they  
suddenly become very stupid. Who is going to stand still while the  
water rises over your head?


Food security is the biggest worry. But I'm not in any state to  
discuss just now - been up since 4:40am and rode a very hilly 145km  
today...


Will expand later.

C.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com




___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-28 Thread Charlie Bell


On 28/03/2009, at 9:26 AM, xponentrob wrote:
One of Dyson's main points is that global warming tends to get  
exaggerated. People of our generation or even the next one are  
extremely unlikely to die from the effects of global warming. Even a  
few generations down the road it is still unlikely unless they  
suddenly become very stupid. Who is going to stand still while the  
water rises over your head?


Food security is the biggest worry. But I'm not in any state to  
discuss just now - been up since 4:40am and rode a very hilly 145km  
today...


Will expand later.

C.

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-27 Thread Wayne Eddy

OK, I'm finished playing Dyson. Someone else take a turn.

xponent
Ignored Synergies Maru
rob


No need to play Dyson, he has summed up my take on global warming very 
nicely thank you.  It is nice to know that someone who ideas have turned up 
in some of my favourite books is on the same wave length as me.


Regards,

Wayne Eddy 



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-27 Thread xponentrob
- Original Message - 
From: "Michael Harney" 

To: "Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion" 
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: Freeman Dyson on climate



Alberto Monteiro wrote:

Rob wrote:

Worth a read. Dyson is a Global Warming skeptic with an interesting take 
on the subject.




A GW skeptic or an AGW skeptic? It would be hard to deny GW from the
past 400 years with data.

Alberto Monteiro




Let me attempt to play Dyson here.



Based on what I read in the article, I would say that he doesn't dispute 
global warming.  What he does dispute is the global impact that it would 
have.
I can understand people saying "we need more data", what I can't 
understand is that they insist we keep things status quo until we have 
conclusive data when the current


"disputed"

data we have predicts multiple global catastrophes.  With stakes that high, 
it makes no sense to say that we should err against the side of caution.


Dyson's first point in simple terms is that the data you speak of is 
computer models, and computer models are simply thatmodels. They are not 
beasts of a factual nature. They are projections within which some of the 
criteria are adjustable, giving rise to best case scenarios or worst case 
scenarios. Basing your actions and spending large portions of your wealth 
when the potential for inaccuracy is high is foolish. (Dan addressed a 
similar situation with Sagan and Nuclear Winter just a few days ago)


Dyson's next point is that the developing nations burning of coal is a good 
thing, a very good thing. The improvements in the quality of life in China 
will save more lives than will be lost due to global warming in a couple of 
generations.


Another point is that this is a fairly cool period in the history of earth 
and that most of the evolution of life occurred in warmer periods with 
higher levels of CO2. Global warming is not global but local with cool areas 
getting warmer but warmer areas not getting warmer.




It reminds me of the chicken gun episode of Mythbusters where Adam, who is 
the one usually doing foolish things and getting hurt, got angry at Jamie 
for wanting to make a potentially unsafe pressure tank.  Sure, there is a 
chance that nothing catastrophic will happen, but if something 
catastrophic does happen, people are going to die.  Erring against caution 
in such a situation is just a big middle finger to all those people who 
are potentially in harms way.  Its like saying "We are willing to risk 
your lives and the lives of your family and friends to maintain our way of 
living."


One of Dyson's main points is that global warming tends to get exaggerated. 
People of our generation or even the next one are extremely unlikely to die 
from the effects of global warming. Even a few generations down the road it 
is still unlikely unless they suddenly become very stupid. Who is going to 
stand still while the water rises over your head? People will simply adjust 
and they will have many years to do so. There won't be any sudden changes, 
it will all be very gradual and there will be a good number of benefits that 
come with a warmer climate.

Like more food to eat for instance.

***
OK, I'm finished playing Dyson. Someone else take a turn.

xponent
Ignored Synergies Maru
rob 



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-27 Thread Keith Henson
It makes no difference in what we need to do no matter what you think
about global warming.

The global models indicate that energy shortage will kill far more
people much sooner than global warming can be a significant factor.

However, if you solve the energy problem on a global scale, fixing
global warming *or* cooling is easy.

I know how and have been talking about it for the last 10 months.  It
is now starting to get serious traction.

Keith

___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-27 Thread Michael Harney

Alberto Monteiro wrote:

Rob wrote:
  
Worth a read. Dyson is a Global Warming skeptic with an interesting 
take on the subject.




A GW skeptic or an AGW skeptic? It would be hard to deny GW from the
past 400 years with data.

Alberto Monteiro

  


Based on what I read in the article, I would say that he doesn't dispute 
global warming.  What he does dispute is the global impact that it would 
have.
I can understand people saying "we need more data", what I can't 
understand is that they insist we keep things status quo until we have 
conclusive data when the current data we have predicts multiple global 
catastrophes.  With stakes that high, it makes no sense to say that we 
should err against the side of caution.  It reminds me of the chicken 
gun episode of Mythbusters where Adam, who is the one usually doing 
foolish things and getting hurt, got angry at Jamie for wanting to make 
a potentially unsafe pressure tank.  Sure, there is a chance that 
nothing catastrophic will happen, but if something catastrophic does 
happen, people are going to die.  Erring against caution in such a 
situation is just a big middle finger to all those people who are 
potentially in harms way.  Its like saying "We are willing to risk your 
lives and the lives of your family and friends to maintain our way of 
living."


Michael Harney
dolp...@mikes3dgallery.com


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Re: Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-27 Thread Alberto Monteiro

Rob wrote:
> 
> Worth a read. Dyson is a Global Warming skeptic with an interesting 
> take on the subject.
> 
A GW skeptic or an AGW skeptic? It would be hard to deny GW from the
past 400 years with data.

Alberto Monteiro


___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com



Freeman Dyson on climate

2009-03-26 Thread Rceeberger

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp

Worth a read. Dyson is a Global Warming skeptic with an interesting take on 
the subject.


Remember brinl brinl if you don't have an account for NYT.


xponent
This Is Not Crichton Maru
rob 



___
http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com