Content uploaded by William P Hall
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by William P Hall on Sep 12, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Angst of Global Warming
▬
Our Species' Existential Risk
William P. Hall
President
Kororoit Institute Proponents and Supporters
Assoc., Inc. - http://kororoit.org
william-hall@bigpond.com
http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net
Based on a presentation to the Existentialist
Society, Unitarian Church, East Melbourne, Tuesday
6 September 2016
Full presentation updated 21/10/2016
Access my research papers from
Google Citations
2
THIS PRESENTATION IS A HYPERTEXT
INTENDED TO BE READ ON THE WEB
―
DOWNLOAD FROM
http://bit.ly/2ds74VE
THE RELATED PRESENTATION ON
FACEBOOK IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Notes:
•Text links to items on the Web will be underlined as above
•Many graphic objects in the text will be linked to source
documents on the Web. Hover the curser over the object to
see if it is linked. To open the link, click on the object.
•The web presentation includes more slides
Introduction
Where I’m coming from
–Physics / natural history / all generations of computers / lifetime
spent working with research libraries
–Evolutionary biology (PhD Harvard 1973)
–Evolutionary epistemology (1977-1979 Univ. Melbourne Genetics)
–Theory and practice of organizational knowledge management (Tenix
Defence 1990-2007/ANZAC Ship Project)
–Begun in 2000 - Studying and writing about the history and
consequences of the co-evolution of human cognition and technology
from our common ancestors with chimpanzees and bonobos
2015: summarizing Application Holy Wars or a New
Reformation – a Fugue on the Theory of Knowledge
–23 Meetup presentations at Melbourne Uni: Human Origins, Cognitive
Technologies, and Futures
–Began with the questions: How did we get to where we are now?
Where are we going?
–Finished with an open question: Where is it likely to end?
3
Last year’s Meetup concluded with the question – how is the
story of human evolution likely to end?
Humanity risks its continued
existence in a finite world
4
Will the exponential growth of human population,
knowledge and technology end in a singularity,
spike, or an inflected S-curve
The first option – infinite growth – is impossible
The second option – unsustainable exponential
growth followed by a catastrophic climatic/
ecological collapse - is all too likely. This is the
path we are on now. The tipping point is not far
away if it is not already too late
The third option – a sustainable steady state -
may still be possible to achieve if we act now
Survival will require deep cultural
change from individual striving for
continuous growth to striving for
sustainability.
This change can only be achieved
through individuals working
together for the common good
Different kinds of “Singularity”
Maths: a point where a given mathematical object is not
defined, e.g. a point where the solution of an equation
becomes infinite or is discontinuous
Technology: the hypothetical advent of artificial general
intelligence (also known as "strong AI").
–Such an artificial general intelligence would theoretically be capable
of recursive or cyclical self-improvement to design and build
computers or robots better than itself.
–Repetitions of this cycle would likely result in an exponential runaway
effect beyond anything we have seen to date (e.g., an “accelerando”)
–Such an AI would be beyond human control
“Sublimation”: transformation into/replacement by something no
longer recognizably human, e.g., strong AI or “upload”
“Spike”: exponential increase in human population overwhelming
resource base, followed by a crash or dieoff
“Inflection”: a point on a curve at which the curve changes from
being concave (concave upward) to convex (concave downward)
5
Singularities and “spikes”
Damien Broderick used the term in the title of his 1997 book on the
impending singularity, “The Spike”
–Futurist & writer of sci-fi and pop science
–To him, the spike referred to all kinds of singularities
To me, the “spike” is an exponential growth curve that has a sharp
termination, followed by an equally rapid (or even faster) collapse or die
off.
We have one world
–with finite resources
–The biosphere is
homeostatic to a
degree, but
–Its ecosystems are
potentially fragile and
may collapse chaotically
if too stressed
See Malthusian
catastrophe
–People and our tech are
the problem
6
Logistic growth curves in basic population biology
Logistic vs geometric/exponential growth
–Biotic potential =
potential rate of
production
–We have the cognitive
capacity to control
production to stay
within carrying
capacity
–But the real world
isn’t that simple!
Overshoot and the Malthusian catastrophe (= spike)
–Feedback cycles between different
species’ populations and their
environments include delays
between real world and adaptive
responses to the world
non-linearity complex,
chaotic systems
–And these are ‘sustainable’ resources
7
Existential angst:
As individuals do we accept climate science’s warnings
and act – or will we deny that there is a risk?
The scientific consensus warns that
–Anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases cause global
temperatures to rise
–Because of time lags in the climate system temperatures will
continue to rise for a decade or more even if anthropogenic
greenhouse gas emissions are stopped immediately
–Global temperatures may rise to a value where ecological damage and
ecosystem collapses may lead to the collapse of human society
A number of well funded “deniers” claim
–No warming is occurring
–If warming is occurring, humans have nothing to do with it
–The science is wrong and is refuted by ……
–There is a conspiracy among scientists to scare governments into funding
research into climate science or to invest in mitigation to make special
interests wealthy
–Etc…
As individuals, who do we believe and what do we do?
8
What is existential risk
Risk is the probability or threat of quantifiable damage, injury,
liability, loss, or any other negative occurrence that is caused by
external or internal vulnerabilities. Many risks may be avoided
through preemptive action or remedial action after the fact.
An existential risk poses permanent large negative
consequences which can never be undone - One where an adverse
outcome would either annihilate Earth-originating intelligent life
or permanently and drastically curtail its potential.
The greatest existential risk to humanity is humanity itself.
–~97% of climate scientists agree that anthropogenic CO2 is warming
the planet at an unprecedented and alarming rate.
–~3% of “scientists” claim that it isn’t happening; or if it is, that
humans have nothing to do with it.
–If a doctor said you had cancer and needed surgery soon, you'd be
wise to get a second opinion. If you went to 30 doctors, and 29 said
you need the surgery, but one said you didn’t, would you go with the
29 or the 1?
9
Assessing risks rationally using the risk assessment
matrix – ignore, mitigate or remediate?
Risk analysis is a standard tool used in engineering project management
and corporate strategy development
–Aims to assess potential for unplanned costs and detriments to project that
might engender organizational losses and damage
–Establish contingencies for remediation, mitigation, or avoid project entirely
10
Evaluating climate change risks requires understanding
scientifically what establishes & regulates climates
One body of informed scientific opinion is concerned that the
uncontrolled release of anthropogenically produced CO2 causes
potentially catastrophic global warming.
Other people deny any relationship between CO2 production and global
warming, and further dispute that
–Atmospheric concentration of CO2 is rising
–Global temperatures are rising
–Changes in the concentration of greenhouse gases has anything to do with
global average temperatures
–Polar ice is shrinking and melting, allowing more heat to be trapped in the
polar oceans
–Increased global temperatures will have anything but beneficial effects on
human health and survival.
–Etc……
No one person has the breadth of science to deal with the full
spectrum of contested issues
What claims and sources of knowledge should we trust to use in
adjudicating these important and contested issues?
11
13
PART 1 ― WE LIVE ON A
FINITE PLANET
WHAT HUMANS DO TO IT
HAS CONSEQUENCES
Human population growth has been fueled by the
burning of fossil fuels
The burning of fossil fuels creates greenhouse gases
–Per capita in 1939, ~ 26 x 109 joules x 2.3 x 109 = 59.8 x 1018 joules total
–Per capita now, ~ 62 x 109 joules x 7.4 x 109 = 458.8 x 1018 joules total
–World fossil fuel consumption today is ~7.67 times what it was when I
was born
15
The human footprint on planet Earth is a geological
scale phenomenon
Global light pollution measured from 2014 data shows where
people are using energy, largely sourced from fossil fuels
Conclusion: human impact and energy use currently affects a
large fraction of Earth’s land surface
16
Based on NOAA satellite observations in 2006
Falchi et al. 2016. The new world atlas of artificial night sky brightness. Science Advances 2(6), e1600377
Global scale land clearing is a major geological
process in the Amazon Basin and elsewhere
17
Road transport, chainsaws, bulldozers, and
fire – all converting fossil fuel and biomass
into greenhouse gasses, water vapor, and
soot – are used to clear land for short
term farming until the leached tropical
soils are exhausted
Click circle for Google map:
Zoom in to see detail.
Zoom out and rotate world to see global
imprint of human activity
AIS Real-time satellite tracking of registered
vessels: i.e., commercial shipping
153,000 ships were being tracked when this was snapped
All converting petrochemicals into greenhouse gas, water vapor, and soot
Conclusion: human activities currently affect much of Earth’s ocean
surface: smog trails, commercial depletion of many fisheries, floating
islands of plastic, etc.
18
Global footprint
Humanity’s growing population and affluence has already
exceeded the “carrying capacity” of our planet.
In 2007 the Global Footprint Network estimated that “humanity
uses the equivalent of 1.6 planets to provide the resources we
consume and absorb our waste”, or around 1½ years to replace
one year’s biological resources we use and to absorb our waste.
This does not include:
–Depletion of critical non-renewable resources for our technologies
such as oil, rare elements, etc.
–Unsustainable use of fertile soil and fresh water
–Collapse of world fisheries
–Human induced global warming and climate change leading to ocean
acidification, rising sea levels and inundation of prime agricultural
lowlands.
–the impacts our footprint has on possible keystone species, critical
for maintaining ecosystem health
Rising extinction rates suggests we are teetering on the edge of
ecological collapse
21
22
CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS
CLAIM THAT ANTHROPOGENIC
CO2 EMISSION IS NOT
DELETERIOUS / THE GLOBE IS
NOT WARMING
▬
WHAT IF THEY ARE WRONG?
23
Natural selection got us to where we are beginning to destroy the
beautiful biosphere that gave birth to us. But, it isn’t the last word.
We have the cognitive capacity and technology to inflect our population
and technology growth curves to manage a soft landing.
Will we/can we choose to do so?
24
PART 2
IS GLOBAL WARMING
OUR MOST URGENT
EXISTENTIAL
RISK?
Fort McMurray – worst disaster in Canadian history
Fort McMurray Fort McMurray,
northern Alberta - Canadian oil tar
sands mining town, recorded 32.6°C
temp, ~5°C above the previous
record and 23°C above the long-
term average
Wildfire began May 1 when the
ground is still normally covered with
snow
~80,000 people evacuated
Some 1,600+ buildings in the town
destroyed, insured damage between
$5 and $9 billion not counting ~$1
billion to GNP to lost oil production.
25
15 of the 16 warmest years on record have occurred this century. 2015 was by far
the hottest year ever recorded. 2016 may be even hotter
European Russia (2010) and Siberia (2012) blasted by similar record high
temperatures and catastrophic, long-burning wildfires
The Russian fires had worldwide effects as burning peat bogs released huge
quantities of carbon dioxide and heavy smoke into the air that accelerate the
greenhouse effect and made the air nearly unbreathable.
And then there is the deliberate torching of forests and peat in tropical Asia,
Africa and South America, and “land clearing” in Australia
North American temperature anomalies at time of
Fort McMurray fire catastrophe
Temperature anomalies
as at 3 May, 2016
The temperature
anomaly for a place is
the positive or negative
deviation from a long-
term average temp over
a stated period of time.
Note extreme anomalies
in western Canada (Fort
McMurray area), in the
Arctic Ocean, and north
eastern Greenland.
To see the state of the
world at other times,
click map, select:
Region, Parameter -
Mean Temp Anomaly,
Year/Month/ day.
See also: http://arctic-
news.blogspot.com.au/2
016/05/wildfire-
danger-increasing.html
26
Globally, 2015 was by far the hottest YEAR yet
recorded
27
15 of the 16 warmest years on record have occurred this century.
The global annual temperature has increased at an average rate of
0.07°C per decade since 1880 and at an average rate of 0.17°C per
decade since 1970. If the graph is indicative, the rate of increase is
accelerating!
NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies - http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
The average global
temperature across land
and ocean surface areas
for 2015 was 0.90°C above
the 20th century average
of 13.9°C
Not only was the calendar
year 2015 the hottest yet
recorded, but also the
hottest for ANY 12-month
period on record.
Also
The average global temperature for August 2016
was the highest for this month ever recorded
28
?
The area of the Arctic Ocean around
Novaya Zemlya is anomalously hot
The average global temperature for August 2016 was
the highest for this month ever recorded (cont.)
According to the US NOAA, for the 16th consecutive month,
the longest such streak in NOAA's 137 years of record
keeping, the global land and ocean temperature departure from
average was the highest since global temperature records began
in 1880. Ref: US NOAA – State of the Climate Global Analysis –
August 2016.
The combined average temperature over global land and ocean
surfaces for September 2016 was the second highest for
September in the 137-year record, only 0.04°C cooler than the
record warmth of September 2015. Ref: US NOAA – State of
the Climate Global Analysis – August 2016.
A few months after the end of one of the strongest El Niños in
at least the past half century, this month ended the 16-month
streak of record warm monthly global temperatures. Many of the
previous extremes were recorded during El Niño periods. Each El
Niño is worse than the last.
29
But NASA analysis finds September was the warmest
month on record by narrow margin
30
GISTEMP argues that September
2016's temperature was a razor-
thin 0.004 degrees Celsius warmer
than the previous warmest
September in 2014. The margin is
so narrow those two months are in
a statistical tie. (Goddard
Institute for Space Studies)
The months of 2015 and 2016 to date have had the
highest avg temps above the 20th Century average
Fifteen of the 16 highest monthly
temperature departures in the
record have all occurred since
February 2015, with January
2007 (a tie) among the 15 highest
temperature
31
Year-to-date temperature anomalies for 2016
(black line) to what were ultimately the seven
warmest years on record: 2015, 2014, 2010,
2013, 2005, 2009, and 1998. Each month along
each trace represents the year-to-date
average temperature anomaly. In other words,
the January value is the January average
temperature anomaly, the February value is the
average anomaly of both January and February,
and so on.
Inconvenient fact:
As temperatures spiral out of control, 2016 is
already on track to be the hottest year ever
The latest extreme temperatures are
in part an effect of the current El
Niño.
As we are entering what appears to be
La Niña part of the climate cycle, the
rate of temperature increase may slow
or even turn negative for a year or so.
However, each El Niño tends to be
more extreme than the previous one.
32
Click graphic for
animation
See additional graphics from the Washington Post
36
PART 3
POLAR ICE
MELTING
Arctic sea ice is melting at an unprecedented rate
The sea ice cover is one of the key components of the climate
system.
Modeling results that indicate that global warming could be
amplified in the Arctic by a factor of about 3 to 5 times on
account of ice-albedo feedback.
(http://neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.php?section=234)
THIS IS A DANGEROUS POSITIVE FEEDBACK LOOP
37
(Ramez Naam 2012. Arctic Sea Ice: What, Why, and What Next. Sci. Am. Guest Blog, Sept. 21, 2012)
Inconvenient fact:
2015 had the fourth lowest minimum extent in the
satellite record
On September 11, 2015, sea
ice extent dropped to 4.41
million square kilometers, the
fourth lowest minimum in the
satellite record, with the
Northwest Passage wide open
to cruise ships.
However, the 2015-16 winter
recorded the smallest
maximum ice extent yet
measured…
Also, the ice that remains at
the minimum is getting
thinner and thinner so it
melts all the quicker next
year…
38 National Snow and Ice Data Center
Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis
Inconvenient Fact:
2016 Arctic sea ice wintertime MAXIMUM extent
hits another record low.
The 13 smallest maximum extents on the satellite record have
happened in the last 13 years. (NASA; US National Snow and
Ice Data Center)
39
Arctic sea ice reached a
record low wintertime
maximum extent for the
second year in a row (see
Slide 17).
On March 24, Arctic sea ice
peaked at 14.52 x 106 km2 ,
a new record low winter
maximum since records
began in 1979.
This is slightly smaller than
the previous record low
14.54 x x 106 km2 that
occurred last year.
Inconvenient picture
A perspective view of the declining minimum extent
and thickness of sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean
From Zachary Labe http://sites.uci.edu/zlabe/arctic-sea-ice-figures/
As the ice cover diminishes, solar heating of the Arctic Ocean increases
As the ocean warms, melting of adjacent ice caps and land ice
accelerates
As can be seen from the map of ice thickness, the ice is thinning even
faster than the extent is shrinking.
40
Annual Min Thickness (1979-2016)
After several years of nearly stable extent,
Antarctic sea ice is also shrinking significantly
42
Why the loss of sea ice is so dangerous to global
warming
Sea ice minimizes local warming by reflecting most solar energy away
from the ocean. Open water absorbs most of that energy to heat the
water and overlying atmosphere
44
Early April start to Greenland Ice Cap melting season
As at 22/06/2016 Greenland’s three melt surges rivalled the 2012 record:
Greenland’s 2016 melt season started fast. It maintained a brisk pace with three extreme spikes in areas of
melt through June 19. On June 9, Nuuk, the capital, reached the warmest temperature ever recorded for
the month of June anywhere on the island, 24 degrees Celsius (75 degrees Fahrenheit).
Melting from April 10 through April 15, from record warm air over the entire ice sheet and rain along the
west coast. 10 percent of the ice sheet surface melted on April 11, 5 percent on April 12 and less later.
During that melt event, temperatures rose up to 16 degrees Celsius (29 degrees Fahrenheit) above average
for this time of year.
Positive feedback: Melting increases snow grain size to absorb more energy, fostering further melting.
If the Greenland Ice Sheet melts away completely, sea level will rise ~7 meters (Gregory et al. 2004)
For the latest news on Arctic warming see http://Arctic News/
45
(US National Snow and Ice
Data Center: Greenland Ice
Sheet Today)
(See Slide 11)
Although extent of melting early in the year was higher than
the baseline average, the end of El Nino has slowed the melt
compared to previous extremes.
Positive forcing of ice melt by soot, dust and algea
Even though
the total
surface area
where melting
takes place,
once the cover
of fresh snow
melts, the low
albedo old and
dirty ice
absorbs more
heat and
begins to melt
a lot faster.
46
Ash and dust
band exposed
by snow melt
Since 2003 Greenland has lost ~3.4 tera tons/3400
cubic miles of ice – to raise sea level by ~7.5 cm
Shows the total change in mass of the
Greenland Ice Sheet.
Data comes from NASA and German Aerospace
Center (DLR) GRACE mission. Monthly models
are processed after Barletta et al. (2013) to
derive ice mass changes
47
Monthly changes in the mass of Greenland ice
since 2003 based on satellite measurements
Areas of mass loss and accumulation
Approx 6 m
sea-level rise
if it all melts!
Much of the land surface of Antarctica (and some of
Greenland) is below current sea level
49
If the entire West Antarctic Ice Sheet
melted, this would contribute 4.8 m to global
sea level (Because ice below sea level is
replaced by the ocean, melting here does not
add as much to sea level rise as ice perched
enitrely above sea level in the east).
New York Times version of map published in deConto &
Pollard (2016). Contribution of Antarctica to past and
future sea-level rise. Nature 531, 591–597
Approx 60 m
sea-level rise
if all Antarctic
ice melts!
Warm ocean currents melt glacier fronts reaching
sea level so grounding line retreats inland.
Ice shelves melt from bottom to lose mass.
When ice shelves lose mass, inland glaciers march
to the sea, accelerating and thinning.
Thinning facilitates further retreat of the
grounding line, More ice flows to sea every year
and sea level rises. (Positive feedback!)
(NASA The "Unstable" West Antarctic Ice Sheet: A Primer)
Fresh meltwater floats on denser but warm sea
water and freezes quickly in winter to insulate
warm water below from icy winds – paradoxically
allowing undermining to continue even in winter!
Global sea levels are already rising due to warming
oceans and melting ice caps
High quality measurements of (near)-global sea level have been made
since late 1992 by satellite altimeters.
This data shows a more-or-less steady increase in Global Mean Sea Level
around 3.2±0.4 mm/year since 1992 - more than 50% larger than the
average value over the 20th century. (CSIRO Sea Level Rise – Historical
Sea Level Changes)
50
Sydney, 7 June ‘16
Shoreline retreat
will accelerate!
Some definitions relating to atmospheric science and
“greenhouse gases”
Greenhouse effect:
-Determined by physical properties of
atmospheric gases and the wavelength of
radiant energy
-Short wavelength energy (i.e. visible light)
not absorbed/reflected by gas
-Long wavelenth energy (i.e., infrared)
absorbed or reflected to some degree
-Reflected/absorbed IR heats planet
See Global Warming, Clouds, and Albedo:
Feedback Loops
Atmospheric lifetime:
–Simplistically, the atmospheric “lifetime” of a greenhouse gas is the time it takes a pulse of
the gas to decay to 0.368 (=1/e) of its original value.
–CO2’s lifetime is complicated (1) by temporary removal processes which store carbon in the
biosphere before it is returned to the atmosphere as CO2 via respiration or, as a combustion
product, in fires and (2) by its absorption by and acidification of the oceans. Because the
modelled decay curve depends on the model used and the assumptions incorporated therein,
it is difficult to specify an exact atmospheric lifetime for CO2. Most IPCC estimates fall in
the 100-300-year range.
–Methane is removed from the atmosphere primarily through oxidation by hydroxyl radicals
(OH-), but increased concentration of CH4 reduces the OH- concentration, which, in turn,
reduces the rate of methane destruction, effectively lengthening its atmospheric lifetime.
52
The concentration of CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere has
increased markedly since the Industrial Revolution
53
Based on measurements from ice cores in the Vostok Lake
region of the Antarctic Ice Sheet the highest CO2
concentrations reached was 300 PPM that extends back to
415,000 years before the present.
How much effect does rising CO2 have on the
atmosphere
Rise from 275 ppm to 400 approximately doubles the
CO2 greenhouse effect
Negative spikes show effects of major volcanic
eruptions where reflection of light by dust causes
temporary cooling
54
Methane may soon have even more impact on global
warming than CO2 has
55
Although human
activities release a
lot of methane, huge
amounts are stored
in temp sensitive ice-
like hydrates known
as clathrates in
arctic regions.
These reserves are
held in arctic
permafrost and on
shallow continental
shelves.
As temperatures
rise, methane in
clathrates turns to
gas that escapes to
the atmosphere to
further increase
global warming.
Because this is a
geophysical process
depending on
temperature and
pressure alone, it
will be an
unstoppable positive
feedback process
Current radiative forcing
Radiative forcing is
defined as the
difference of insolation
(energy transported by
sunlight) absorbed by
the Earth and energy
reflected back to space.
Radiative forcing is
quantified at the
tropopause in units of
watts per square meter
of the Earth's surface.
Positive forcing (more
trapped incoming energy)
warms the system, while
negative forcing (more
energy escaping) cools it.
The graph summarizes the various components of the atmospheric greenhouse.
–Albedo refers to the percentage of light reflected back to space as light. An albedo of 1
means that 100% of the incoming light is reflected without heating the planet, while an
albedo of 0 means that all the light is absorbed and turned to heat.
–Aerosols refer to dust and tiny droplets of sulfuric acid that reflect light back to space.
56
58
PART 5
METHANE AND
METHANE HYDRATES
59
CO2 vs methane in the amosphere
CO2 currently contributes more to global
warming than methane. IPCC believes that
natural processes remove CO2 from the
atmosphere very slowly, with an
atmospheric lifetime of centuries
Methane has a lifetime of around 12
years in the atmosphere but
catastrophic outgassing is possible
60
Amount more
than tripled
A very alarming warming trend in the Arctic winter –
Is it due to methane outgassing?
63
Full year 2015 January 2015
February 2015 March 2015
This year, the average temperature over the Arctic
Ocean has been catastrophically high
66
The highest temperature anomaly for the year to date is just north of Novaya Zemlya
Island where tundra is observed to be outgassing large volumes of CO2 and methane.
Nov 2015 13°; Dec ‘15 11°; Jan ‘16 15°; Feb ’16 15°; Mar ‘16 13°; Apr ‘16 11°
On 15 Oct. temp
anomaly Novaya
Zemlya region
was 9° C
What is the risk to humanity from positive feedback!
67
68
PART 6
DENIAL
VS
MITIGATING / REMEDIATING
EXISTENTIAL RISK
Fossil fuel divestment: a $5 trillion challenge
A huge financial incentive to deny the problem
Bloomberg New Energy Finance (2014) explains:
Fossil fuels are an enormous asset class. The current
value of the 1,469 listed oil and gas firms is $4.65trn;
275 coal firms are worth $233bn. ExxonMobil, the
largest oil and gas firm, has a market cap of $425bn.
The world’s largest investors … are the key
shareholders in fossil fuel companies. BlackRock, the
largest investor in oil and gas equities, controls
$140bn via just its largest 25 holdings. Governments
of many countries, including China, Russia, and India,
are strategic investors in public companies as well.
Oil and gas companies are too large, and too widely
held, for divestment to be easy or fast.
69
A sample dialog from Facebook’s Climate Change
Discussion
George Brabant Ok . Again.the origonal post is
bold face evidence the wrming "alarmist" are
spot on. Wake up. all that banter and the
original post was never disproven to be blatant
eveidence that we are warming just as the
climate scientist have explained.
Mark Frazer Warming is not evidence of
causation
Pat Hackett and saying warming is not evidence
of causation doesnt stop it for being so....no
matter how scared you are or how much you
deny or hide from reality.
Mark Frazer Go & study cause & effect -
obviously you practice science fiction
Mark Frazer Your intelligence has not improved
Pat Hackett It is funny to see one in denial of
science advising one who isnt to go and and
study
Mark Frazer Not denying anything - cite
something to prove your point
Mark Frazer Thats just an insult because you
cant prove your point
Mark Frazer Citation please
Pat Hackett Do you assume that correlation is
proof that there is no causation.....thats the
best you have come up with so far.
Mark Frazer Citation please
Mark Frazer Waiting
Pat Hackett Comment from Marc facer...only an
idiot would ask for proof. :-) Do you want me to
find that quote?
Mark Frazer Prove your claim or run away
weasel
Pat Hackett strawman.
Mark Frazer Cant prove your claim huh - didnt
think so
Mark Frazer FOS
Pat Hackett only an idiot.....:-)
Pat Hackett ask Marc Facer
Mark Frazer Cant prove your claim huh - didnt
think so
Mark Frazer Still as stupid as ever - nothing
changes with you
….
72
And then, there are sock puppets (paid ?) to cover rational posts and
blogs with piddle, poop and bad smells
Physical reality will inevitably trump belief
Physical reality won’t go away because we don’t like it
“The tragedy of the commons”
Garrett Hardin 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science Vol. 162, No 3859, pp. 1243-
1248
–Sets out the consequences of an uncompromising economic logic
governing the harvesting of valuable but limited resources from a
commons
Unfettered individuals make a net profit of +1 for every unit of resource
they extract/harvest and use
The future loss due to the removal of that unit is shared with all other
individuals extracting the resource for a net loss of -1/n
It is always to the net economic advantage of every individual to continue
extracting the resource until it is totally consumed
Situation grows worse if the resource’s unit value rises with scarcity
Any individual refraining from extraction only benefits those who thus
have more resource to extract
Only through some form of higher level control or governance
(e.g., social or despotic) over the scarce resource can its
extraction be limited to some socially beneficial level
74
How urgent is the climate risk?
75
Adding the third dimension to the climate change risk
matrix
Where the rate of change is slow
compared to generation times of
affected organisms, natural
selection will lead to genetic
adaptation and survival.
Where the generation time is
long compared to the rate of
change, organisms die when changes
exceed their physiological limits.
When keystone species in
ecosystems disappear, complete
ecosystems are likely to collapse.
Temperatures (and associated
extreme weather) are increasing
significantly within the life-times of forest trees, reef corals, and large
mammalian keystone species.
The rapidity of climate change greatly increases the extremities of a wide range
of risks that our biosphere faces from global warming
76
77
IF THE SCIENTIFIC
CONSENSUS IS RIGHT ABOUT
GLOBAL WARMING
URGENT ACTION IS REQUIRED
IF OUR HUMAN HERITAGE IS
TO SURVIVE LONGER THAN A
FEW DECADES MORE