The national media and much of America is watching the Colorado wildfire drama in rapt, apocalyptic fascination. For those who are just now recognizing the scope of the disaster, S&R has been writing about this (and predicting it) for some time now. If you’d like to better understand the causes of the explosion of wildfires in the summer of 2012, here’s a quick set of links to get you caught up.
Colorado’s massive High Park fire has jumped the Poudre River and is beginning to menace Fort Collins in earnest. This is very bad news. Some experts fear the blaze won’t be contained before fall and if you live anywhere to the east of it you’re probably quite worried, and for good reason. You might well be concerned if you live south or west, too.
Back in March, Tom Yulsman of the University of Colorado’s Center for Environmental Journalism warned us that this could happen. Continue reading “Why is Colorado on fire? Climate effects aren’t always as obvious as the weather…”
So, looks like the heat wave has eased up a little. – Ronan MacScottie
We had a couple posts over the weekend at S&R on the current drought in Colorado and whether or not this might the year that the state finally burns to the ground. Continue reading “Hey, where did summer go?”
Earlier this morning Chris offered up a post entitled “Why are environmentalists missing a mild-weather opportunity?” It raises a pragmatic point about how the climate “debate” plays out in the public sphere and is well worth a read. Go ahead – I’ll wait.
Predictably – and by “predictably,” I mean that last night I e-mailed our climate guru, Brian Angliss, and said “when Chris’s post lands, here’s what’s going to happen,” and it has played out as though I had scripted it; the denialists have jumped on the post in an attempt to cast Chris and the rest of the S&R staff as “hypocrites.” One prominent anti-science type wants you to believe that the message is “we know weather isn’t climate, but let’s lie to people anyway!”
Like I say, as predicted.
The truth is that Chris’s post is part of a larger context. Continue reading “S&R and the marketplace of ideas: yes, Dorothy, sometimes people disagree…in public, even!”
Case 1: In 1997 a prominent scientist made a bet with a colleague over a complex black hole issue that physicists were trying to figure out. This bet was very public and given the egos involved in the field of advanced quantum science, the stakes were huge.
Case 2: In a climate-related thread on S&R, a “skeptic” was asked point-blank: “What evidence would you accept that global warming is real? What tests would you have to see, in order to change your view?” This is a straight-up establishment of terms for consideration of any scientific question: what is evidence in favor of the hypothesis and what evidence disproves the hypothesis? Continue reading “And the Nobel Prize for Sticking Your Fingers in Your Ears and Yelling “I Can’t Hear You” Goes To….”
I hope you made the time to read Wufnik’s post from Friday. Entitled “Surrounded by people ‘educated far beyond their capacity to undertake analytical thought,’” his analysis of our culture’s “active willingness to be deceived” represents one of the iconic moments in S&R’s history. If you didn’t see it yet, go read it now.
In addition to the questions the post explicitly addresses, it also raises other critical issues that deserve equally rigorous treatment. One point for further consideration, for instance, lies in his use of the word “educated.” I don’t think it’s terribly controversial to suggest that our society is, by a variety of metrics, more educated than perhaps any society in history. Those metrics would include factors like “number of people who attended college.” At the same time, we are significantly less educated if we pay more attention to factors like the much harder to quantify “capacity for critical thought.” Continue reading “Why America has more education and less to show for it than ever before”
Something wicked this way comes.
There are a number of problems with these assertions, not the least of which is that when Saudi terrorists started flying hijacked jets into large buildings on September 11, 2001, George W. Bush had been president of the United States for the better part of eight months. The lapses in memory noted above are all striking, but especially so in the case of Giuliani, who was, from September 11 until he dropped out of the presidential race on January 30, 2008 (a span of roughly 2,332 days, if my math is accurate), unable to say so much as “hello” without somehow shoehorning “9/11” into the conversation. Continue reading “9/11 happened on Obama’s watch! GOP noise machine already hard at work on the history books of the future”
Oh dear: Newtongate: the final nail in the coffin of Renaissance and Enlightenment ‘thinking’
It’s now clear that “Sir” Isaac Newton and a series of co-conspirators were guilty of several crimes against science, including:
- Conspiring to avoid public scrutiny
- Insulting dissenting scientists and equating them with holocaust deniers
- Manipulation of evidence
- Knowingly publishing scientific fraud
- Suppression of evidence
- Abusing the peer review system
- Insulting their critics
As this analysis makes clear: Continue reading “Massive calculus and physics hoax exposed”
What kind of place will the ground upon which we now stand be come January 1, 2101?
As we turn into a new millennium I imagine many people have pondered what the coming century holds for them, their children, and their grandchildren. Will the 2000s be a time of peace, of prosperity, an age of enlightenment and human achievement?
Or will humanity succumb to its darker instincts, engulfing the planet in war, environmental disaster, and economic inequity? Continue reading “Nostrasamus Prophesies the 21st Century”