[pp.int.general] Climate change discussion [Re: The Venus project?]

[Maike Marrek]

Hi Pat!

Am Sat, 13 Aug 2011 19:49:25 +0200
schrieb Pat Mächler  <patrick.maechler at pp-international.net>:

> > (horrible ... greenpeace energy GER is working on transforming wind
> > and solar energy in storable gas, they've already managed it to find
> > investors and are now looking for clients)
> 
> Could you explain to me what exactly is bad about that approach?

it's a great offer and invention :-) sorry, with "horrible" I meant the
8 degree in 120 yrs, didn't know the figures and relations ... 

> 
> > ... maybe someone thought it would be better to forget about this to
> > prevent mass media from publishing bullshit - they have been
> > right ;-)
> 
> IMO mass media tends to report on a lot of issues in a way which
> misses crucial points and generates dubious beliefs; but that's rather
> structural problem with mass media and the way people perceive
> information transmitted 'through it. Such misinformation of the public
> may always be mourned by interest groups considering a certain issue,
> but it has hardly anything to do with those issue in particularity;
> it's merely an overall problem but not so much has been done trying to
> fix the actual, structural problem; likely due to the fact that some
> still think it might become helpful again to their interests at a
> certain point and most humans tend to dislike the idea of living in a
> world where "facts" are always uncertain up to a certain point.
> In that regard the research concerning the opinion tipping point is
> certainly interesting.

In my view that's exact the point concerning the whole
discussion about climate warming: all relevant
papers and data seem to be published only exclusively. 

It's about transparency - in mass media (giving links to relevant
origins), in science (relevant thesis, expert discussions) ... and for
parties or any other "democratic" organization linking decisions
etc. .... 

which leads finally to the Venus ;-) *yeah*

If you're interested in PP, you can find everything or at least there
is always somebody who can give you the relevant link ..... 

Just skipping the FAQ of the Venus Project (AFAIK as well as
the Zeitgeist stuff) - there's no real information in it. There's no
space for debates - it's getting people by formulating peaceful
blueprints of dreams and mixing them up with some popular theses. Maybe
I'm wrong ... but their focus is not to convince people by arguing
with the help of concrete figures.  

I know we as a party have a lot of trouble with the process of finding a
decision within common time frames - but meanwhile I definitely prefer
this way. For example: Venus suggests to build up totally new buildings,
autonomic or whatever. There have been many urban planners and
architects all over the world who tried this again and again. Who shall
get such a flat, what to do with their old housings, how to mix up the
population there, how to finance it (and who does it) and so on. They
cause at least as many & important problems as they try to solve  ...
to bring in the idea of linux: for every task one specific small
program. In this case we are talking about human beings, not about
technical infrastructure - artificial social modifications have always
caused ghastly social developments.  

> I'm certain that some climate change is occurring, I'm not certain
> that climate change is to a large extend caused by humans.
> So what?
> What would be a possible negative side effect for either case?
> If it is occurring we likely will need to address it either way.
> Researching the issue will help clearing that up. Not researching it
> won't ever clear that fight up; also we might run into serious
> trouble, as we might miss crucial changes that we should have had
> addressed.

I absolutely agree with you. And I was wrong with my first
assumption (this damned mail shouldn't have left my mailbox ;-)). 

The concrete numbers and relations that were given by these
scientists are still irritating me as well as their different
subsumptions of the proven effects. Right now I believe there are
much more relevant effects on cloud building than these cosmic
ones ... let's wait and see what tomorrow will bring ;-)