Hi Carl,
I like Steve's idea (Was it Steve's? I am having a hard time following!)
that as scientists we live in a network of other scientists, and our own
behavior is not so important as the constraints enforced on us as part of
the network. So, my wonder at the fact that we make decisions in ou
Speaking as a mammal, who has gone to some efforts to be well preserved,
it now appears that I am carcinogenic if consumed. I am unsure as to
whether to be disappointed or elated. Certainly a caution to those of
cannibalistic bent.
This does raise the issue that if I am indeed carcinogenic,
Well, one eventually gets 3m from the West Antarctica collapse alone, if
that happens. However there are other
possibly-soon-to-be-not-so-frozen bits on the planet (Greenland, the
Arctic, other parts of Antarctica, etc) which are outside that
particular study. So one could imagine 3m to be
Surely someone has collected the digital elevation models (DEM) to find
potential growth areas near areas that would be impacted by such a water rise?
You know, as investment opportunities. (Or to systematically short-sell
them.) New Orleans lost half their population after Katrina..
_
Glen -
>At first, I struggled to find something to argue with. But I finally
found it!
Well struggled, well found!
>> As those here who have actually *done* science, know, it is far
from trivial to really track down all the data and reproduce all of
the >>experiments, etc. to begin to "prov
Sorry, misquoted the abstract in a particularly alarming way by
paraphrasing journalistic sources: 60 years of continuing destabilization
of the Amundsen Basin, as is currently being observed, leads to a
subsequent collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and an eventual 3m sea
rise.
-- rec --
On
speaking of crash and burn, you all caught the PNAS early release today,
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/10/28/1512482112.abstract?sid=6a257104-4e5a-45e0-ad64-03d3b03c8f43,
anticipating 3m sea rise in the next 60 years, and no sign of anything to
be done at this point?
-- rec --
On Mon, N
At first, I struggled to find something to argue with. But I finally found it!
On 11/02/2015 02:33 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
Even though I was trained as a Scientist (especially though?) I find it impossible to do enough research on any
"popular" topic to even pretend to understand the issue and
I enjoyed Friam for a few years -- glad to see a few others have ventured
into expanded awareness explorations, like Zen -- shared paranormal
experience is core to conveying mysticism -- this is becoming more
prominent in recent years with the proliferation of free video teaching,
crafted to induce
On 11/02/2015 08:44 AM, glen wrote:
On 11/02/2015 01:55 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
It seems to highlight the state vs. behavior duality.
[NST==>Do I know that duality? I am guessing that I think of them in terms of
levels of organization. Can you say more? <==nst]
So, in the 20 or so
Nick/Glen -
I haven't tracked the details of this thread, but the bits I've
skimmed have been interesting.
My own experience has more to do with "entrainment" than
"deference to authority".
Even though I was trained as a Scientist (es
Hi, Glen,
Interesting response. As I get older, I see the asymptote on which I am
converging is that by the time I die I will know nothing. Thus, it's quite
possible that I am just being inconsistent. But let's look into it. See
below.
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Ps
I really like the idea of virtuous argumentation. It seems to highlight the state vs. behavior
duality. But, this seems right in line with my tendencies against (naive) realism. You tend
to spend quite a bit of time trashing relativist positions (including the more extreme
postmodernism), y
13 matches
Mail list logo
