LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  December 2008

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE December 2008

Subject:

Re: Obama picks environment nominees

From:

mart <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:21:27 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (246 lines)

you must not have seen the 'physics of finance'.  it explains it all, as a gauge theory (like everything---and then, what is a guage theory, and why---get to the root problem.).    beliefs and behaviors are just physical properties (which themselves may be beliefs and behaviors, so one has a bit of a tautology).

also, economically, this is crazy.  who needs salmon anyway? they can grow beef in petri dishes, so salmon too.   nature i think ran a piece saying following trends that 100% of americans will be obese in 50 years, so growth is possible.  think pprogress. a book from american enterprise projected Dow 36,000  not long ago, and it seems on track (despite a few fluctuations; maybe -36,000, which is still within the margin of error of the forecast).  house prices in some cities are projected to be on average in the millions soon. 

 but only with more science and engineering will this be possible. love those linear regressions---remember the evolutiobnary scenario which leads from cgimps to larry summers?.   as cass sunnstein (who advised obama and for whom i dont really have a bunch of respect for though he is a good piopularizer) put it you just need a (behavioral economic) 'nudge'.   

more and more NIH funding!!! the military industrial complex needs you.

i do find it interesting that it takes only about 1-2% of science phd's to design alot of what is in the world.  some have to build it, but most of the rest can just herd sheeps.

> 
> I have nothing but respect for his scientific abilities and
 Physical sciences
> don't do diddly to
> address the human beliefs and behaviors that caused global
> warming. 



 Sorry
> to all you hard science elitists out there, but ideologies
> of denial and
> calamitous behavior are not in the purview of microbiology,
> physics, etc.
> They are studied by humanities and social sciences  - the
> fields scanted and
> scorned by modern society, and consequently underfunded,
> and gee ya think
> that's a coincidence?
> 
> When the heck is US society going to wise up and recognize
> that so long as
> we seek "technical solutions" to
> non-technological problems, we are simply
> continuing to try to shop and gizmo our way around the
> truth: humans and our
> domestic animals (all those cows, Louis) are increasing the
> major biomass on
> earth.  We are leaving very little room for anything else. 
> At the rate
> we're going, Soylent Green actually is the logical end
> state.
> 
> Meanwhile, Obama is continuing to disappoint me, as in his
> answers to that
> national science questionnaire that was given to the
> candidates, by seeming
> to be back in about 1960 with respect to science. More
> money! More research!
> More projects! More engineers and scientists!
> 
> There's absolutely not the slightest evidence that
> pouring millions more
> into, say, scholarships for science students, is going to
> affect whether
> Sarah Palin, for instance, decides to stop shooting wolves
> from helicopters
> and start recycling and promoting local organic food.  Just
> because
> scientific instruments are used to document the physical
> aspects of a
> problem doesn't mean the problem lies wholly within the
> domain of physical
> sciences.  Or that the solution is to do more science,
> build more
> technology, and sell more gizmos (whether to individuals or
> institutions).
> 
> "Combating climate change using scientific
> methods" is like promoting
> international peace by funding Star Wars.
> 
> But I doubt many scientists, now that science is the
> Emperor of climate
> change funding, are going to point out that this emperor
> has no clothes.
> Design, develop and build as many new energy solutions as
> you want, move
> mountains and glaciers. Until humans decide to stop
> saturating the planet
> with our species and our food animals, our roads and our
> shopping malls, no
> technology will ever catch up with the march of the
> millions, and millions,
> and millions yet to come.
> 
> Browner, Jackson and their Congressional allies will act to
> "reduce" GW
> emissions.  That reduction will in turn be canceled out by
> the increase in
> humans... even before that scant reduction occurs.  You
> don't reach zero
> through even a 50% decrease.  You don't even reach a
> 50% decrease when you
> offset it with a prior, unchecked increase in the species
> whose per capita
> emissions cause the problem to begin with.
> 
> Chu will lead vast numbers of highly trained teams of
> well-paid science and
> technology folks to research "new energy" and
> "energy efficiency."  Again -
> if you are trying to decrease the net amount of energy
> used, isn't the
> simplest and fundamentally only solution to .. decrease net
> energy used?
> Not "change to a different form" that encourages
> people to simply expand
> their use. To take up the new slack. To once again max out
> the system, graze
> the commons, until we're up against a wall once again.
> 
> That wall is not technology.  The wall is us.  The wall is
> sheer numbers of
> infinitely expanding humans on a finite and non-expanding
> planet.
> 
> But apparently this will continue to be the elephant in the
> room - even
> while the real elephants are crowded and poached into
> extinction. While more
> and more of the planet is converted to more and more
> humans, human food
> animals, human cities, human machine space, are scientists
> simply going to
> say, "More money for research"? More technology? 
> Are scientists truly that
> blind -- or grandiose in their dreams of being the All and
> Everything on
> Every Subject -- that they won't point this out?  Will
> they simply keep
> taking money to do research (and buy more Stuff and move
> into bigger Houses
> and keep living the American Dream, which ever more
> increasingly resembles
> an addict's denial).
> 
> I have a statistician friend who works with fisheries
> scientists.  They
> develop expensive and ever more elaborate instruments and
> computer methods
> to verify the ever fewer salmon.  He's worried about
> losing his job.  I'm
> worried about losing the salmon!  I'm worried that a
> bunch of well-paid
> scientists, along with perhaps even more well-paid agency
> managers, have
> colluded for years to cluck their concern about salmon --
> while holding
> their hands out for more and more money to count the
> decrease in runs.
> 
> sorry about the long rant, but I find Obama's
> "business as usual" approach
> to global environmental problems -- as it were, a
> "science as usual"
> approach -- distressingly unthoughtful.
> 
> As Upton Sinclair said, " It is difficult to get a man
> to understand
> something when his job depends on not understanding
> it."
> 
> The new wealth of jobs and funding for scientists depends
> on not
> understanding - or not admitting - that much of the
> "problems of society"
> are not solved by stepping away from society into a science
> lab. Or a
> manufacturing plant. They are solved within society - an
> area science
> disciplines, by definition, do not study.  Obama
> doesn't seem to have
> studied them either.
> 
> Claudia
> 
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Phil Gasper
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7776616.stm
> >  Published: 2008/12/11 01:13:12 GMT
> >
> > *Obama picks environment nominees*
> >
> > Barack Obama is to nominate leading scientist Steven
> Chu as his Energy
> > Secretary, US media have reported.
> >
> > Mr Chu is an energy specialist and the director of the
> Lawrence Berkeley
> > National Laboratory.
> >
> > Mr Obama will pick former head of the New Jersey
> Department of
> > Environmental Protection Lisa Jackson to head the
> Environmental Protection
> > Agency (EPA).
> >
> > And Carol Browner, EPA chief under Bill Clinton, will
> be Mr Obama's "energy
> > czar", according to media reports.
> >
> > Ms Browner will coordinate energy, climate and
> environmental policy across
> > a number of different government departments.
> >
> > The incoming president has said that tackling climate
> change will be one of
> > his administration's top priorities.
> >  Mr Chu shared the 1997 Nobel Prize for physics for
> his work on cooling
> > and trapping atoms using laser light and is a leader
> in the field to combat
> > climate change using scientific methods.
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "EVERY GUN that is made, every warship launched, every
> rocket fired
> signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who
> hunger and are not
> fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms
> is not spending
> money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the
> genius of its
> scientists, the hopes of its children." --U.S.
> president Dwight D.
> Eisenhower, 1953.
> 
> "War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into
> the stratosphere, or
> sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might
> otherwise be used to
> make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long
> run, too
> intelligent." --British author George Orwell
> (1903-1950)



      

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager