This is manuphonic's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following manuphonic's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
You might as well extend your diagnosis to cover a key aspect of governance: its impact on systemic dependencies. For instance, deportation and border enforcement could impact the domestic food supply, which currently depends on foreign labor, for which legal immigration quotas have historically not been adequate. Likewise, a rollback that weakens essential environmental regulations could impact social and economic health, which both depend on ecosystem services ranging from photosynthetic oxygen to stable coastlines. No doubt such initiatives as regulatory rollback and immigration control could be pursued while minimizing adverse impacts, yet this would require both competent leadership and widespread competent coöperation. This is the area where an extension of your diagnosis would likely bear the choicest fruit.
In this context I have a question for Paul Beckwith or any of you. The recent Arctic sea ice volume loss rate that Walt Meier inexplicably fails to address in the Icelights interview ... the loss rate that appears closer to exponential than to Gompertz in many eyes ... the rate charted by PIOMAS & validated by Cryosat-2.... What mechanism, neglected or underestimated by the extent models that Meier cites, do you suppose is driving this ice thinning at such a recently high rate?
After avidly reading this blog for how long now, 2 or 3 years maybe, I'm finally feeling compelled to comment. At least in the USA, the denial of danger from our fossil carbon emissions has been so immensely frustrating to those of us who accept the scientific findings that every year we hope the Arctic sea ice melt will be dramatic & scary enough to awaken the general public. This leads us to say it looks bad (for the melt) when cooler temps reduce or delay the melt, or good (for the melt) when high pressure governs mid-July. Yet we do not want the Arctic sea ice melt to be so dramatic & scary that it tips the behavior of the Arctic's physical systems into a new basin of phase space. This leads us to use "bad" & "good" in the opposite direction, good (for the ice, & for us all) when cooler temps reduce or delay the melt, or bad (for the ice, & for us all) when high pressure governs mid-July. We should probably spell this out on occasion, reminding listeners & readers why it is we so often appear to favor or applaud a rapid or a record melt: we want people to wake up. Otherwise from the way we use "bad" & "good" it looks like we want the ice to be lost, or that we are conflicted about what we want.
manuphonic is now following The Typepad Team
Jul 10, 2013