Climate Change

joefrank wrote:

5/5/2014

                   You forgot one !

                   Shelagh Watkins... One of the greatest authors and publishers
                                             of our times...

                                                Cheers..Joe .. 

I can always rely on you to make me smile, Joe.

There's that money issue again.  Wealthy people can afford to buy more expensive clothing made in developed countries.  Poor working people need the less expensive clothing.  I don't think many people are helped by their stint in the slave factories.  They are ripped from their families, housed in filthy dorms and worked long hours.  They send their money back to their parents.  If they are girls, the boys in the families get the money after the parents.

I work at being thrifty on a daily basis which also impacts conservation of resources.  I already said my newspaper job and lack of public transport make driving to assignments necessary.

The rich do not wish to be taxed here which is how they share their wealth in other developed countries.  In other countries they are taxed so that universal healthcare, pensions, etc.are available to all people in the country not just the wealthy.  Some of the wealthy here donate back portions to culture and schools and buildings, etc., but it is a pitiful portion of the extravagant lifestyles.

I spent one year volunteering as a founding board member and treasurer for a philanthropic organization.  My work environment before that was akin to volunteering for the six years I worked in the migrant community.  I am so poorly paid for the newspaper articles that it is also akin to volunteering. 

I walk every day two miles at the beach and and "work at" my diet.  I am not as healthy as I should be and it is the fault of my diet.  I just don't resist sweets the way I should. 

As for spreading joy, people around me here think I do.  I have many responsibilities however that are draining.  Sometimes it shows.  I have lost faith in human nature at times because so many people have been disappointments in their behaviors.  However, my church is a great place for renewed joy each Sunday and so is the walk on the beach, in the swamp and even in the back yard with the bunnies and the birds.

So far none of it will have any affect on climate change.

dkchristi wrote:

So far none of it will have any affect on climate change.

It will have as much or as little effect as you want to believe it has. Remember the butterfly effect: the flapping of a butterfly's wings in South America could affect the weather in Texas. The tiniest influence on one part of a system can have a huge effect on another part. Taken more broadly, the butterfly effect is a way of describing how, unless all factors can be accounted for, large systems like the weather remain impossible to predict with total accuracy because there are too many unknown variables to track. Which means that your walk to the beach could produce a significant weather event on the other side of the world, and you'll never know because it can't be measured.

I mentioned something in a recent post about the difference between our Circle of Concern and our Circle of Influence as described by Steven Covey in 7 habits of Highly Effective People. It's a book I would imagine you were familiar with, DK.

You might remember that it contained an excercise that asked the readers to draw the two circles, and list their concerns in one, then list the things they actually had some influence over in the other. The point of it was to realize that there are some things we have no ability to control or to personally effect change over.

The truth is, the only thing we can control is ourselves. There are some things in that circle of concern that we just have to let go of.

I strongly believe we each came here with a purpose. And that purpose shifts and changes with different stages of our lives. The things we could accomplish at 30 and the things we can accomplish at 70 are different - not better or worse, just different.

I agree with Shelagh about the half-full glass and spreading a bit of joy. We can start and/or end our days with gratitude. Sarah ban Breathnach recommends keeping a gratitude journal, and listing the things we are grateful for at the end of each day. Some days the list is longer than the others, and the items on the list are harder to come up with, but we can make a commitment, and each day the list gets a little easier.

We can drive the most fuel efficient cars we can afford, whatever that is. We don't have to drive a Prius and we don't have to worry about those who can afford one. We can make a point of keeping a recycling bin next to our trash bin, keeping cloth bags to take with us to the grocery store rather than using plastic or paper ones. My supermarket has recently come up with water in cardboard cartons. No need for plastic bottles.

We can buy local produce, and check to see if it is coming from farms that practice sustainability and that keep pesticides to a minimun, and eat meats from grass-fed animals (if we eat meat).

We can write articles and/or blogs, and I could go on a good bit further, but I imagine you could come up with an even longer list.

The main thing is we each begin with ourselves; we make our own lists of what we can actually influence and we set our goals and live up to them as best we can.

We can be aware of the concerns that lie beyond our ability to change and keep them in mind when we are voting or conversing with friends(some of the time). We can set intentions for a world that we would like to live in, write or journal about those, and work on the ones we can help to effect. But once we have determined that we are doing as much as we have the power to do, we let the rest of it go.

We can be far more effective when we determine what our special gift is, our unique purpose for being on this planet at this particular time, and commit ourselves to fulfilling that purpose as best we can - each day - given the circumstances of the day.

The Universe doesn't expect more of each of us than that, and we shouldn't expect more than that of ourselves or of those around us.

As T. S. Eliot wrote, "For us, there is only the trying; the rest is not our business."

 

I think listing thoughts about making a difference are beneficial and inspiring.

If I have learned one thing for sure it  is that assumptions always lead to a gap in understanding.

5/6/2014

                  I remember seeing an interview with Richard Burton and he told
                  Merv Griffin if he gave away all his wealth it wouldn't solve the
                  world problems, so he said he did as much as he could.
                  As for cloth bags versus plastic I agree, I have 5 in my car trunk
                  and everytime I go into the store I forget them, then I have to go
                  back to the car to get them ( Must leave a note in the car " Take 
                  bags out of trunk !" ) Recycle we have three , glass, cans and plastic,
                  newspapers and regular garbage. So we as humans try our best, as I
                  was told once we can only do our best, that's it..

                                             Cheers.Joe...  

Good posts.

There's still a great deal of natural beauty in the world, DK. It isn't all doom and gloom:

http://www.lauravuphoto.com/tag/texas-wildflowers-photography/

More of Laura's photographs can be found here:

http://www.lauravuphoto.com/gallery/

And I want to be sure it is always here.

Check out the stunning photographs taken by the photographer of the year 2013:

http://www.inspirational-images.com/england/

You can see Tony's complete portfolio here:

http://www.inspirational-images.com

Climate Change is already here according to government report: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/06/national-climate-assessment_n_5270541.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

5/6/2014

                    The photography is awesome !

                          Cheers.. Joe.. 

The scientists are not sitting on the fence then. What a relief! Now we will see if they are right or not. The predictions are for the future, and since human endeavour can't change the climate overnight, if it does change in the next decade, one way or another, it will be because of natural forces and not because humans are in control!

joefrank wrote:

5/6/2014

                    The photography is awesome !

                          Cheers.. Joe.. 

Yes, it is, Joe. The vast, untouched areas of the world are in pretty good shape.

That report and others was the basis for my opening remarks on this thread.  I felt those reports were substantive enough to indicate the human race does impact climate change in addition to  natural causes and should be correcting their ways because of the negative results.

The great thing about the report is that you can see the projections for climate change. The real weather changes can now be mapped against the predictions:

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report-findings/future-climate

It is my hope that someone with money and power will be able to introduce a shift in the world behavior that is causing the changes that create negative results.  Any of the proposed fixes so far are too long range and obviously pander to the corporate/industrial complex.

Shelagh wrote:

The great thing about the report is that you can see the projections for climate change. The real weather changes can now be mapped against the predictions:

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report-findings/future-climate

By the way, all the IPCC's previous predictions were wrong:

The IPCC never acknowledge their science is wrong. Every single IPCC forecast from the 1990 Report was wrong. Instead of re-examining their science they began what became their standard practice of moving the goalposts. The full politicizing of climate science took hold between the 1990 and 1995 Reports. Instead of acknowledging the science was wrong they changed from forecasts to projections and all those were incorrect since. Figure 6 shows Clive Best’s three IPCC levels of projection from 1990 against actual surface (blue) and satellite (green) temperature.
Short (hours and days) medium (weeks and months) and long term (decades) forecasts are all wrong, being close to or less than chance in almost every case. Despite billions of dollars and concentrated efforts at improvement there is little or no improvement. If such a level of forecast failure persisted in any other endeavor logic would demand, at the very least, an acknowledgement that something is fundamentally wrong with the science.

Maybe the February 20, 2014 story in the Daily Caller will stir some response as the government forecasters are insulted in the worst way for their profession. The headline reads, “Report: Farmers’ Almanac More Accurate Than Government Climate Scientists.” I know most people are not surprised, they’ve known for a long time government forecasts are mostly wrong, very expensive and of very little value. As Thomas Sowell so pointedly asked,

Would you bet your paycheck on the weather forecast for tomorrow? If not, then why should this country (US) bet billions on global warming predictions that have even less foundation?

It is worse than that. The government science is wrong and therefore their forecasts are wrong. From this base they push policies that are the opposite of the evolving and future conditions.

- See more at: http://drtimball.com/2014/government-weather-and-climate-forecasts-are-failures/#sthash.ab3OUWCg.dpuf

I edited my previous post, DK, but accidentally deleted it, and then reposted at the same time you posted. I see that you deleted your response!

I'm afraid one mad scientist, Tim Ball, with a donate button on his site and not non-profit corporation behind it is interesting and valuable for his opposing perspectives.  He's just wrong in the light of the preponderance of evidence from across the globe.  It's okay to be wrong.  It keeps people on their toes.

Shelagh, I had a great and wordy response that showed the error of your words in every word I posted unequivocally and without question; but since the forum is under your signature, the forum ghosts did not like my post and felt it very one-sided in its approach thus deleting it in its entirety without my permission, including deleting it from my memory to reinstate it.  Thus, your words stand without challenge except for my weak little paragraph about your Ph.D. Ball.  He makes some good points in the wilderness, but the population is not moving to the wilderness so it will continue to destroy where it lives, alas  .

P.S.  I loved the study of world geography (Dr. Ball's specialty) and the distribution of populations and their migrations.  I took about twenty semester hours in that and related classes, but none really discussed much about weather except as it related to food consumption, vitamin D and the evolution of  ethnically diverse traits due to food consumption, migration, weather, etc. etc.  It was truly a grand series of college classes because I realized another truth - the prejudice against people of color is a prejudice against my own ancestral beginnings.  Black was first and sickly white followed as migrations for food moved into northern climes where skin had to lighten to take in needed vitamins from the sun. I was born without fear of ethnic differences and wasn't taught to hate so the classes merely confirmed where we likely began and that man in God's image more likely made an image of God to be with dark skin and a black beard than that old white guy with the flowing white beard.  Christ, too, was likely dark.  However, I see God in a spiritual sense now with no corporal image so it doesn't really matter.  I think I digressed from my own thread!!!

dkchristi wrote:

Shelagh, I had a great and wordy response that showed the error of your words in every word I posted unequivocally and without question; but since the forum is under your signature, the forum ghosts did not like my post and felt it very one-sided in its approach thus deleting it in its entirety without my permission, including deleting it from my memory to reinstate it.  Thus, your words stand without challenge except for my weak little paragraph about your Ph.D. Ball.  He makes some good points in the wilderness, but the population is not moving to the wilderness so it will continue to destroy where it lives, alas  .

I didn't delete your post, DK. I added a post immediately below the post I made earlier about the inaccuracy of UK weather forecasts. Then I decided to add it to my original post, which I did. Meanwhile, you replied to the post I'd added. I received a message on the screen to say that someone had posted before my post had been updated and asked if I wanted to modify it. I didn't do any further modifications and sent the edited post, which was a combination of the two.

Then I intended to delete the post that you replied to, so that your reply would follow on from my post instead of coming before it. Unfortunately, I deleted the wrong post. Then, I assume that you deleted your response.