Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Global Warming - Page 118







Post#2926 at 08-05-2012 02:25 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
08-05-2012, 02:25 PM #2926
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Jim Hansen: Climate change is here — and worse than we thought

By James E. Hansen, Published: August 3

When I testified before the Senate in the hot summer of 1988 , I warned of the kind of future that climate change would bring to us and our planet. I painted a grim picture of the consequences of steadily increasing temperatures, driven by mankind’s use of fossil fuels.

But I have a confession to make: I was too optimistic.

My projections about increasing global temperature have been proved true. But I failed to fully explore how quickly that average rise would drive an increase in extreme weather.

In a new analysis of the past six decades of global temperatures, which will be published Monday, my colleagues and I have revealed a stunning increase in the frequency of extremely hot summers, with deeply troubling ramifications for not only our future but also for our present.

This is not a climate model or a prediction but actual observations of weather events and temperatures that have happened. Our analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change.

The deadly European heat wave of 2003, the fiery Russian heat wave of 2010 and catastrophic droughts in Texas and Oklahoma last year can each be attributed to climate change. And once the data are gathered in a few weeks’ time, it’s likely that the same will be true for the extremely hot summer the United States is suffering through right now.

These weather events are not simply an example of what climate change could bring. They are caused by climate change. The odds that natural variability created these extremes are minuscule, vanishingly small. To count on those odds would be like quitting your job and playing the lottery every morning to pay the bills.

Twenty-four years ago, I introduced the concept of “climate dice” to help distinguish the long-term trend of climate change from the natural variability of day-to-day weather. Some summers are hot, some cool. Some winters brutal, some mild. That’s natural variability.

But as the climate warms, natural variability is altered, too. In a normal climate without global warming, two sides of the die would represent cooler-than-normal weather, two sides would be normal weather, and two sides would be warmer-than-normal weather. Rolling the die again and again, or season after season, you would get an equal variation of weather over time.

But loading the die with a warming climate changes the odds. You end up with only one side cooler than normal, one side average, and four sides warmer than normal. Even with climate change, you will occasionally see cooler-than-normal summers or a typically cold winter. Don’t let that fool you.

Our new peer-reviewed study, published by the National Academy of Sciences, makes clear that while average global temperature has been steadily rising due to a warming climate (up about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit in the past century), the extremes are actually becoming much more frequent and more intense worldwide.

When we plotted the world’s changing temperatures on a bell curve, the extremes of unusually cool and, even more, the extremes of unusually hot are being altered so they are becoming both more common and more severe.

The change is so dramatic that one face of the die must now represent extreme weather to illustrate the greater frequency of extremely hot weather events.

Such events used to be exceedingly rare. Extremely hot temperatures covered about 0.1 percent to 0.2 percent of the globe in the base period of our study, from 1951 to 1980. In the last three decades, while the average temperature has slowly risen, the extremes have soared and now cover about 10 percent of the globe.

This is the world we have changed, and now we have to live in it — the world that caused the 2003 heat wave in Europe that killed more than 50,000 people and the 2011 drought in Texas that caused more than $5 billion in damage. Such events, our data show, will become even more frequent and more severe.

There is still time to act and avoid a worsening climate, but we are wasting precious time. We can solve the challenge of climate change with a gradually rising fee on carbon collected from fossil-fuel companies, with 100 percent of the money rebated to all legal residents on a per capita basis. This would stimulate innovations and create a robust clean-energy economy with millions of new jobs. It is a simple, honest and effective solution.

The future is now. And it is hot.
We are already at almost 400ppm CO2, that commits the climate to warm to early Pliocene conditions, 2C to 3C warmer than now, with oceans 14 meters higher from the collapse of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets. If we exceed 550ppm CO2 we will revert to middle Miocene conditions, and East Antarctica will start to melt.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#2927 at 08-10-2012 08:44 AM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
08-10-2012, 08:44 AM #2927
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and author of “Storms of My Grandchildren,” joins “Viewpoint” host Eliot Spitzer to discuss the implications of “Perception of Climate Change,” a new study he co-authored with Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy. Their findings show that recent heat waves can be linked to global warming.

Hansen describes how observed seasonal temperatures have corroborated the predictions of global warming climate models he first warned of in the 1980s.

“If we continue with business as usual this century, we will drive to extinction 20 to 50 percent of the species on the planet,” Hansen says. “We are pushing the system an order of magnitude faster than any natural changes of climate in the past.”

http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/the-dice-are-loaded-nasas-james-hansen-warns-escalating-climate-crisis-requires-intervention/
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#2928 at 08-11-2012 08:59 AM by '58 Flat [at Hardhat From Central Jersey joined Jul 2001 #posts 3,300]
---
08-11-2012, 08:59 AM #2928
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Hardhat From Central Jersey
Posts
3,300

The bottom line is, on this and quite a few other issues, that until deaths have reduced pre-Boomer voters to a truly infinitesimal number, the Democrats will have to back off, otherwise they will not be in power at all.
But maybe if the putative Robin Hoods stopped trying to take from law-abiding citizens and give to criminals, take from men and give to women, take from believers and give to anti-believers, take from citizens and give to "undocumented" immigrants, and take from heterosexuals and give to homosexuals, they might have a lot more success in taking from the rich and giving to everyone else.

Don't blame me - I'm a Baby Buster!







Post#2929 at 08-11-2012 10:25 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-11-2012, 10:25 AM #2929
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Taking the Offensive?

Quote Originally Posted by Deb C View Post
“If we continue with business as usual this century, we will drive to extinction 20 to 50 percent of the species on the planet,” Hansen says. “We are pushing the system an order of magnitude faster than any natural changes of climate in the past.”

http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/the-dice-are-loaded-nasas-james-hansen-warns-escalating-climate-crisis-requires-intervention/
The above video ends with the proposition that anyone who studies economics would have to endorse a carbon tax scheme. If one doesn't end fossil fuel subsidies and force users of fossil fuels to pay the true costs to society, the government is apt to use regulation rather than tax structure to address the problem. A true conservative wouldn't want the regulation approach.

Quote Originally Posted by '58 Flat View Post
The bottom line is, on this and quite a few other issues, that until deaths have reduced pre-Boomer voters to a truly infinitesimal number, the Democrats will have to back off, otherwise they will not be in power at all.
Flat might be closer to right. We seem quite far away from a carbon tax, and I suspect China and India are even further away from any sort of action.

***

During the 1930s, isolationism was strong in the United States. Few were eager to join the emerging world war. This lasted until live radio coverage of the London Blitz. Values can change with enough in your face awareness that we have a problem. In a typical war based crisis, there is a spiral of violence accompanied by a spiral of rhetoric. In an ecological based crisis, the violence is replaced by natural disasters, but the need for rhetoric seems the same.

A few years back, the Climategate propaganda push created an temporary advantage for the denialists. Since then we've had three long hot summers in the ecological sense, Moscow in 2010, and the United States the last few years. Perception of Climate Change and similar works might push awareness of the true situation. Henson's paper and the reviews and confirmation of the temperature records prompted by Climategate have left the denialists without much ammunition. The recent attempt to repeat the purloined e-mail tactic fell very flat, was barely covered by the main stream media.

I'm still dubious about the ability of humans to face facts. Still, the professional climatologists after taking a black eye a while back have retrenched and seem ready to take the offensive.

We'll see.
Last edited by B Butler; 08-12-2012 at 08:48 AM.







Post#2930 at 08-12-2012 09:37 AM by '58 Flat [at Hardhat From Central Jersey joined Jul 2001 #posts 3,300]
---
08-12-2012, 09:37 AM #2930
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Hardhat From Central Jersey
Posts
3,300

I'm guessing that we will have to wait until the next 1T begins before the "counterculture" is no longer a factor in American electoral politics.
But maybe if the putative Robin Hoods stopped trying to take from law-abiding citizens and give to criminals, take from men and give to women, take from believers and give to anti-believers, take from citizens and give to "undocumented" immigrants, and take from heterosexuals and give to homosexuals, they might have a lot more success in taking from the rich and giving to everyone else.

Don't blame me - I'm a Baby Buster!







Post#2931 at 08-12-2012 10:25 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-12-2012, 10:25 AM #2931
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Rock Your World

Quote Originally Posted by '58 Flat View Post
I'm guessing that we will have to wait until the next 1T begins before the "counterculture" is no longer a factor in American electoral politics.
This doesn't match the rhythm of the theory. The Crisis is the time when values change and radically new policies are put into place. The high is the time new infrastructure is built. Thus, one would expect late crisis for the people to see the light while like the railroads and interstates, renewable energy infrastructure would be fully implemented during the high.

Alternatively, if the economic urge to maintain the life style to which we have become accustomed trumps ecological values, things will likely continue to get worse for another decade or three, until the new prophets come of age. I remember as a young prophet distrusting anyone over age 30. While today the GIs are remembered as saints, as the Greatest Generation, in my youth I carried a live draft card, a woman's right to choose consisted of a coat hanger, blacks had their own rest rooms, water coolers and places on the bus, and the streams stank. We didn't think much of the GIs and their priorities, and said as much very loudly and very clearly.

More recent generations take our gifts to the culture for granted while thinking no better of us than we thought of the GIs. The present younger generations have no clue what it takes to change a culture or when it is worth the effort to force the change. They disparage the drive, focus, idealism and emotion that are essential tools if anything is to get done.

Anyway, if the generations dominating this crisis pass a hot planet and a ton of debt onto a generation of prophets, the summers will be long and hot in both the literal and metaphorical senses. If the Millenials don't care about the planet, and many of them don't seem to, forget about ecology, beware the next generation of prophets. If you wreck their planet, they'll let you know about it and rock your world.







Post#2932 at 08-12-2012 11:39 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-12-2012, 11:39 PM #2932
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Arctic Ice Loss

Summer is ending, and we're approaching minimum annual ice coverage in the Arctic Ocean. Looks like another new record low. RealClimate provides an introduction plus links. The Guardian covers some of the basic numbers. For discussion purposes...

Quote Originally Posted by The Guardian
In winter 2004, the volume of sea ice in the central Arctic was approximately 17,000 cubic kilometers. This winter it was 14,000, according to CryoSat.

However, the summer figures provide the real shock. In 2004 there was about 13,000 cubic kilometers of sea ice in the Arctic. In 2012, there is 7,000 cubic kilometers, almost half the figure eight years ago. If the current annual loss of around 900 cubic kilometers continues, summer ice coverage could disappear in about a decade in the Arctic.

However, Laxon urged caution, saying: "First, this is based on preliminary studies of CryoSat figures, so we should take care before rushing to conclusions. In addition, the current rate of ice volume decline could change." Nevertheless, experts say computer models indicate rates of ice volume decline are only likely to increase over the next decade.
Simply, the less ice, the less white the more deep blue, the more heat is absorbed into the Arctic Ocean, the less ice. About five years back the models projected no summer ice by the end of the century. Now, actual measurements are projecting no summer ice in about a decade.







Post#2933 at 08-28-2012 01:02 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
08-28-2012, 01:02 PM #2933
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

The Obama Administration just finalized breakthrough standards for new cars, SUVs and pick-up trucks that will raise their fuel efficiency to 54.5 miles per gallon, on average, by 2025.

The dramatically improved standard means that cars and light trucks will achieve roughly double the fuel economy of the average vehicle on the road today.

Please thank President Obama today for standards that will pave the way toward a cleaner car future.

When combined with existing auto standards set by the Obama Administration, the new standards represent the biggest step taken by any administration in history to reduce carbon pollution and our nation’s dependence on oil.

Not only will the new standards cut America’s oil imports by one-third, they will collectively save American drivers $1.7 trillion dollars at the pump -- or roughly $8,000 per vehicle!

Carbon pollution that fuels dangerous climate change will be cut by an amount equal to the emissions from 85 million vehicles in a single year.

The new standards also give American automakers a turbo-charged opportunity to remain competitive in the global marketplace. It will encourage investments in technology and produce new jobs in our domestic auto industry.

Do not let this momentous day go by without sending a message of thanks to the President.

Sincerely,

Frances Beinecke
President
Natural Resources Defense Council
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2934 at 08-28-2012 10:32 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-28-2012, 10:32 PM #2934
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Arctic Ice Loss

We've about a month to go in the Arctic melting season, and we've already hit a record low ice extent. Realclimate covers it...







Post#2935 at 08-29-2012 09:29 AM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
08-29-2012, 09:29 AM #2935
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by B Butler View Post
We've about a month to go in the Arctic melting season, and we've already hit a record low ice extent. Realclimate covers it...
The climate has become like some absurdist artwork. I'm having trouble believing what I'm seeing!

To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#2936 at 08-29-2012 11:48 AM by antichrist [at I'm in the Big City now, boy! joined Sep 2003 #posts 1,655]
---
08-29-2012, 11:48 AM #2936
Join Date
Sep 2003
Location
I'm in the Big City now, boy!
Posts
1,655

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
The Obama Administration just finalized breakthrough standards for new cars, SUVs and pick-up trucks that will raise their fuel efficiency to 54.5 miles per gallon, on average, by 2025.

The dramatically improved standard means that cars and light trucks will achieve roughly double the fuel economy of the average vehicle on the road today.

Please thank President Obama today for standards that will pave the way toward a cleaner car future.

When combined with existing auto standards set by the Obama Administration, the new standards represent the biggest step taken by any administration in history to reduce carbon pollution and our nation’s dependence on oil.

Not only will the new standards cut America’s oil imports by one-third, they will collectively save American drivers $1.7 trillion dollars at the pump -- or roughly $8,000 per vehicle!

Carbon pollution that fuels dangerous climate change will be cut by an amount equal to the emissions from 85 million vehicles in a single year.

The new standards also give American automakers a turbo-charged opportunity to remain competitive in the global marketplace. It will encourage investments in technology and produce new jobs in our domestic auto industry.

Do not let this momentous day go by without sending a message of thanks to the President.

Sincerely,

Frances Beinecke
President
Natural Resources Defense Council
This is awesome. I love comedy. Thanks for the laugh.







Post#2937 at 08-29-2012 03:05 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-29-2012, 03:05 PM #2937
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Laughter

Quote Originally Posted by antichrist View Post
This is awesome. I love comedy. Thanks for the laugh.
You do realize laughter is a threat display? The open mouth and smile was a showing of teeth. The loud noise was to intimidate. It evolved into a dismissal of threat. Instead of attempting to force the opponent to back down, it became a declaration of victory, a dismissal of the rival, a way of indicating that the butt of the joke was not perceived of as a threat. It became a different way of reducing the status of the opponent.

Or, given your attitude towards science, are you one of those creationists that doesn't believe in evolution?







Post#2938 at 08-29-2012 04:59 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-29-2012, 04:59 PM #2938
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Evolutionary Behaviorism

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
Wow. Do you have a source for this?
I'm afraid I can't give you a specific reference. Several decades back it was popular to analyze human behaviors and cultures in terms of animal behaviors. There were several books such as On Aggression, The Territorial Imperative and The Hunting Hypothesis that explored this perspective. I'd guess it was in On Aggression, which dealt primarily with contests for leadership and various drives that minimized violence while allowing it to be used when appropriate.

There was a not small exaggeration of the male hunting role in the hunter-gatherer cultures these books explored. Thus, there were a few books written by women that skewered a good deal of the male posturing found in the books. Perhaps the gatherers provide many more calories than the hunters in a typical hunter-gatherer society? Perhaps the ladies are the center of the tribe, while the males are a bunch of arrogant violent opinionated freebooters? Or perhaps the primary function of the adult males wasn't to hunt, but was to defend enough territory for the gatherers to do their thing?

The authors of the above did have something of a macho attitude. Their reconstruction of the hunter gatherer society relegated the female role to something akin to 'barefoot and pregnant.' The authors deserved considerable skewering. One should read the above works with the same skeptical attitude as one would apply to Snow White, Cinderella or any other of the other old classic Disney movies that were written before the 1960s feminist movement.

Thus, the approach of looking at human behavior through animal behavior isn't as popular as it once was. Thus, one has to be careful about projection one's own culture and world view when reimagining our hunter gatherer past.

Alas, that was a good while ago. I forget which book the thing on laughter came from. I still appreciate the evolutionary behaviorist perspective. It helps give me a reality check when someone on these forums promotes idealistic schemes requiring humans to behave as no primate would. (Go, socialism! The only possible approach to human civilization is to have no hierarchical groups competing with one another!) It also gives me a perspective on the status displays regular acted on here on the forum. We act like a bunch of primates, we do. Still, don't say I didn't warn you about the male chauvinist pig aspects of the original works in the field.







Post#2939 at 08-29-2012 06:12 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-29-2012, 06:12 PM #2939
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
Here's some real science on primates and their teeth:
That meshes reasonably well with the other real science. Bared teeth in some species indicates deescalation, a desire not to escalate. This is of course not true of all species, though it is true among many primates. You should be careful not to assume what is true of one species is necessarily true of another.







Post#2940 at 08-29-2012 06:23 PM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-29-2012, 06:23 PM #2940
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
If you know of any primate species for whom it's not true, feel free to cite the science and stop operating on assumptions yourself.
Nah. This is turning into another one of those dominance display exchanges I generally don't bother with.







Post#2941 at 08-30-2012 08:07 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-30-2012, 08:07 AM #2941
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Talking Laughable

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
Are you kidding?
It started with a dominance display, when you jumped all over antichrist .... for baring his teeth and appeasing Eric.
Craziness.
Well, no in a couple of ways. I wasn't particularly defending Eric, another member of the liberal 'tribe.' If I attempted to defend Eric every time someone attempted to diminish his status, I'd be very very busy. He's a big boy and deserves a lot of what he gets.

Antichrist seemed to be laughing at the whole concept of Global Warming in a way entirely devoid of scientific content. That drew the response.

I'd a soon not prolong a skirmish with you, especially with the "if you don't do a ton of research I've won the argument" approach. Let's try another.

A joke:
Q: What is 27 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?
A: A good start.

Slapstick: Moe hits Curly on the top of the head with a hammer. The hammer makes a boink sound.

Schoolyard: A large bully punches a scrawny kid in the nose, which starts to bleed. The scrawny kid retreats, does not attempt to return the violence. The bully laughs.

Internet Forum: Antichrist states he is laughing at Eric's post.

All are examples of 'humor', situations where laughter is present or plausibly present, though not all find the same things funny.

One often finds two elements present. There is a threat that is being dismissed as a serious threat, as something important or significant. There is an individual or group whose status is being diminished. Often the two are combined. The person whose status is diminished is part of the threat being presented as insignificant.

In my opinion, there is a big distinction between the person laughing and the person being laughed at, the butt of the joke. The person laughing has his status intact, and is bonding somewhat with others who join in the laughter. The person being laughed at has the option of joining the laughter, of being a good sport, thus minimizing status loss and minimizing any increased distance between himself and the group.

I'll emphasize that it is the Bully who is laughing, not the scrawny kid. Among humans, laughter is a tool to diminish the status of another, not a sign of appeasement, not a way for the loser to concede a conflict. Antichrist, when virtually laughing at Eric, was not yielding to Eric, was not crying uncle, was not attempting to yield to Eric's superior wisdom. He was claiming higher status, he was declaring he thought Eric's position absurd, unimportant, laughable. He was playing a role analogous to the bully, not to the scrawny kid.

Thus, no matter how other primates might use the exposed teeth visual display, you're position is 'junk science.' It is laughable. You seem far more interested in defending a member of your virtual political tribe than seeking truth. This is what I expect of you, which is part of why I seldom bother with you.

(Insert sound of laughter.)







Post#2942 at 08-30-2012 09:29 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-30-2012, 09:29 AM #2942
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow Rhesus

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
Ok, so you still want to play.
Where are your references to support your claims, Mr. Science?
I already supplied them. Pay attention. Could you try to give me some indication that you have read them, that you are familiar with the perspective?

Also, note that this is the Global Warming thread. I'm not sure that referencing the scientific consensus automatically wins an argument here, though I'd be pleased if you acknowledged that it did. Sure, we can quote conflicting references. Still, an assertion that Antichrist was yielding to Eric, was making himself submissive, just does not make sense from an english reading comprehension perspective. I think you have some explaining to do on what you are claiming.
Last edited by B Butler; 08-30-2012 at 09:54 AM.







Post#2943 at 08-30-2012 10:30 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
08-30-2012, 10:30 AM #2943
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
You referenced three books, written by what you described as chauvinists, and you couldn't even remember which (if any) confirmed your theory about laughter...
Then again, if that's what he thinks of as an appropriate citation, his views on science in general become a lot more understandable...
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#2944 at 08-30-2012 10:59 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
08-30-2012, 10:59 AM #2944
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

Left Arrow 2944

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
Dude, if you want to stop dealing with me, you'll have to stop dealing with me.


You referenced three books, written by what you described as chauvinists, and you couldn't even remember which (if any) confirmed your theory about laughter.
I referenced an actual scientific paper, written by primate researchers, and I quoted them directly.


Then you attacked my character, and added your own laughter, which by your standards I guess was supposed to be a declaration of victory.
Not impressive.
You quoted an article on rhesus monkee. It doesn't seem to apply to a discussion of human laughter. There is no hint that the observations made apply to all primates.

I think those three books mentioned are somewhere down in the basement among many boxes of other books. At this point this discussion is not important enough for me to spend the time finding and rereading the books. I also don't see that on these boards one has to give page number references for every idea one shares. Would you wish to declare such a standard? Are you willing to be held to it?

You have not addressed my post 2944 at all. Until you do, I will assume you are incapable of answering the points raised.

Quote Originally Posted by antichrist View Post
This is awesome. I love comedy. Thanks for the laugh.
Perhaps Antichrist should clarify his meaning. I believe he is dismissing Eric's article in particular and perhaps global warming in general as unimportant, as unimpressive. I believe in laughing at Eric he is disparaging Eric, dismissing him as having not so much status or attempting to lower his status.

Alternately, Antichrist might be behaving like a rhesus monkey, in showing his teeth (is he showing his teeth?) he is submitting to Eric. This does not seem like a plausible interpretation. It is an idea out of the blue that does not seem to apply at all to the discussion.







Post#2945 at 08-30-2012 11:25 AM by JohnMc82 [at Back in Jax joined Jan 2011 #posts 1,962]
---
08-30-2012, 11:25 AM #2945
Join Date
Jan 2011
Location
Back in Jax
Posts
1,962

Gosh people, there are multiple forms of smiling and laughing. Smiling is generally submissive and non-confrontational, but laughter can come from relief, absurdity, insanity, aggression, or submission. Then again, there are different types of smiles too, including the canine-framing "I'm about to mess you up" smile that no one wants to see.

Anyway, I figured antichrist is laughing at the absurdity of the concept in the article: the extreme confidence that an unfunded government decree can change the technological and physical limitations inherent to automotive combustion.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.

'82 - Once & always independent







Post#2946 at 08-30-2012 11:33 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
08-30-2012, 11:33 AM #2946
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by JohnMc82 View Post
Anyway, I figured antichrist is laughing at the absurdity of the concept in the article: the extreme confidence that an unfunded government decree can change the technological and physical limitations inherent to automotive combustion.
That's how I took it, too. As if Teh Prezident can decree "Higher Fuel Mileage," and Lo, there were Higher Fuel Mileage throughout the land.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#2947 at 08-30-2012 11:50 AM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
08-30-2012, 11:50 AM #2947
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by B Butler View Post
I'm afraid I can't give you a specific reference. Several decades back it was popular to analyze human behaviors and cultures in terms of animal behaviors. There were several books such as On Aggression, The Territorial Imperative and The Hunting Hypothesis that explored this perspective. I'd guess it was in On Aggression, which dealt primarily with contests for leadership and various drives that minimized violence while allowing it to be used when appropriate.

There was a not small exaggeration of the male hunting role in the hunter-gatherer cultures these books explored. Thus, there were a few books written by women that skewered a good deal of the male posturing found in the books. Perhaps the gatherers provide many more calories than the hunters in a typical hunter-gatherer society? Perhaps the ladies are the center of the tribe, while the males are a bunch of arrogant violent opinionated freebooters? Or perhaps the primary function of the adult males wasn't to hunt, but was to defend enough territory for the gatherers to do their thing?

The authors of the above did have something of a macho attitude. Their reconstruction of the hunter gatherer society relegated the female role to something akin to 'barefoot and pregnant.' The authors deserved considerable skewering. One should read the above works with the same skeptical attitude as one would apply to Snow White, Cinderella or any other of the other old classic Disney movies that were written before the 1960s feminist movement.

Thus, the approach of looking at human behavior through animal behavior isn't as popular as it once was. Thus, one has to be careful about projection one's own culture and world view when reimagining our hunter gatherer past.

Alas, that was a good while ago. I forget which book the thing on laughter came from. I still appreciate the evolutionary behaviorist perspective. It helps give me a reality check when someone on these forums promotes idealistic schemes requiring humans to behave as no primate would. (Go, socialism! The only possible approach to human civilization is to have no hierarchical groups competing with one another!) It also gives me a perspective on the status displays regular acted on here on the forum. We act like a bunch of primates, we do. Still, don't say I didn't warn you about the male chauvinist pig aspects of the original works in the field.
Those books you mention are considered BS, nowadays. The first stone tools were used to scavenge carcasses, not hunt.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#2948 at 08-30-2012 12:38 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
08-30-2012, 12:38 PM #2948
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
That's how I took it, too. As if Teh Prezident can decree "Higher Fuel Mileage," and Lo, there were Higher Fuel Mileage throughout the land.
Well, that would be absurd all right if the technology to do so weren't already fully developed, and if failure to implement it weren't a product of pure corporate foot-dragging. As it is, though, he can in fact do that.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#2949 at 08-30-2012 01:41 PM by Semo '75 [at Hostile City joined Feb 2004 #posts 897]
---
08-30-2012, 01:41 PM #2949
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
Hostile City
Posts
897

Laughter has been identified in a bunch of primates; you might want to take a look at the work of Marina Davila-Ross and her fellow researchers for that. Meanwhile, Jaak Panksepp and his team have not only identified laughter in rats, but they have discovered a close association between how likely a rat is to laugh and its overall playfulness. It is not associated, in primates or rats, with displays of dominance. Its primary purpose seems to be to prolong social play, as that's the effect that it typically has. Laughter is infectious, even in other primates, and that's where Marina Davila-Ross' research is taking her and her team--laughter as perhaps the most primal empathetic response.

In humans, it's more complicated than that. We laugh spontaneously not only during social play, but also in response to novelty and unexpected surprises. This has been documented pretty extensively in human infants. It's pre-verbal, and the incongruity of surprise seems to be the basis of a lot of our humor.

That spontaneous laughter is only part of the story, however. Humans seem to be the only species capable of divorcing laughter from emotion. We can laugh on command in ways that other animals can't. If you're looking for that kind of laughter in other primates, you're not going to find it. That sort of laughter ("non-Duchenne" laughter, in the terminology of people who study this stuff) can be used in a variety of ways, including signaling social dominance, dismissal, or whatever. However, it can be said with a high degree of certainty that it did not evolve from those uses, as Bob is claiming.

Also, Bob's argument is awfully grim, as are the examples he offers. I'm not sure what's going on there. When I think of laughter, I don't immediately think of the bully on the playground, or jokes that put lawyers or other groups down. I don't know what's going on with that.
"All stories are haunted by the ghosts of the stories they might have been." ~*~ Salman Rushdie, Shame







Post#2950 at 09-01-2012 05:47 AM by B Butler [at joined Nov 2011 #posts 2,329]
---
09-01-2012, 05:47 AM #2950
Join Date
Nov 2011
Posts
2,329

The National Resource Council recently put together an overview video giving an overview for the Global Warming case. It covers a lot of the bases, though there isn't much there that those truly following this thread shouldn't have already encountered.
-----------------------------------------