BEFORE MOVING TO A WARMING TOPIC, I thought to share with my readers a bit of my inspired fan mail as presented in the comments section of The Herald’s website. This is to confirm for all those who distrust my commentary that others do share their angst and that, while not quite in agreement, I am sympathetic to their plight.
My “Democracy, corporate style” (May 11) stimulated the following pungent reactions from my favorite critic:
“As long as ‘Dead’ folks can still vote at least once per election and Republicans are dissuaded from voting all together, Jerome will be content.
“It occurs to me that most of Jerome’s missives and the elicited replies are merely admonitions of the inferred villains (The GOP), but never is a solution to any calamity proffered. Though it may ‘Float Your Boat’, the art of ‘Verbosity’ solves nothing.”
Many solutions proffered, a few understood, none accepted! We float boats in different streams but yours is surely a neat cutter.
“The perils of reality denied” (April 13) elicited the following from the same fine writer: “Not to be confused with ‘Reality Fabricated’.” I don’t believe that it detracts from the delicious wit of the commentary that no fabrication is documented; clearly the art of that sort of richly phrased critique lords over the pathetic pettiness of fact.
And a final piece from this gifted critic:
“Perhaps Obama can issue an ‘Executive Order’ banishing all Republicans to Mexico. There by eliminating all bothersome political disagreement while at last deporting someone across the southern border. Unfortunately, I fear that such an action would leave Jerome void of topics on which to ‘Bloviate’.”
I could in pique suggest that the eloquent unkindness of that last flourish is roughly proportional to the truth value of the views that inspired it! But, all’s fair in … !
My “Science versus the corporate world” (April 4) elicited the following thoughtful summary from someone with considerably less flair and style but far greater animus — see this “Analysis of Jerome’s Failings”:
“Nothing to say but just keeps on talking.
“His technique is to grab the nuttiest stuff from the craziest websites and just post it and then move on to the next thing without a pause. Don’t try to talk sense, it’s a waste of your time …”
And once more to the batters box:
“As I said… incoherent. Just keeps scooping up the nuttiest stuff on the web and throwing it at the wall. Don’t waste your time responding … he’ll just move on to some other nutty thing from the web. Sad but true …”
I think the above speaks for itself and I had better get on with that obligation to play my appointed role and throw more stuff at the wall. I surely hope that this salute to my critics will be accepted in the spirit in which it is offered.
And now back to that make-believe world of mine for another set of inventions. Time for a visit to West Antarctica and its gigantic ice sheet.
“Part Of West Antarctic Ice Sheet Starting Slow, Unstoppable Collapse, Studies Indicate,” The Associated Press, May 13:
“The huge West Antarctic ice sheet is starting a glacially slow collapse in an unstoppable way, two new studies show. Alarmed scientists say that means even more sea level rise than they figured.
“A NASA study looking at 40 years of ground, airplane and satellite data of what researchers call ‘the weak underbelly of West Antarctica’ shows the melt is happening faster than scientists had predicted, crossing a critical threshold that has begun a domino-like process.
“‘It does seem to be happening quickly,’ said University of Washington glaciologist Ian Joughin, lead author of one study. ‘We really are witnessing the beginning stages.’
“It’s likely because of man-made global warming and the ozone hole which have changed the Antarctic winds and warmed the water that eats away at the feet of the ice, researchers said at a NASA news conference Monday.
“‘The system is in sort of a chain reaction that is unstoppable,’ said NASA glaciologist Eric Rignot, chief author of the NASA study in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. ‘Every process in this reaction is feeding the next one.’
“Curbing emissions from fossil fuels to slow climate change will probably not halt the melting but it could slow the speed of the problem, Rignot said.
“Rignot, who also is a scientist at the University of California-Irvine, and other scientists said the ‘grounding line’ which could be considered a dam that stops glacier retreat has essentially been breached. ‘The only thing that could stop the retreat in this low-altitude region is a mountain or hill and there is none. Another way to think of it is like wine flowing from a horizontal uncorked bottle,’ he said.
“Rignot looked at six glaciers in the region, with special concentration on the Thwaites glacier, about the size of New Mexico and Arizona combined. Thwaites is so connected to the other glaciers that it helps trigger loss elsewhere, said Joughin, whose study was released Monday by the journal Science.
“Joughin’s study uses computer simulations and concludes ‘the early-stage collapse has begun.’ Rignot, who used data that showed a speed-up of melt since the 1990s, said the word ‘collapse’ may imply too fast a loss; it would be more the start of a slow-motion collapse and ‘we can’t stop it.’
“Several outside experts in Antarctica praised the work and said they too were worried.
“‘It’s bad news. It’s a game changer,’ said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, who wasn’t part of either study. ‘We thought we had a while to wait and see. We’ve started down a process that we always said was the biggest worry and biggest risk from West Antarctica.’
“The Rignot study sees eventually 4 feet (1.2 meters) of sea level rise from the melt. But it could trigger neighboring ice sheet loss that could mean a total of 10 to 12 feet of sea level rise, the study in Science said, and Rignot agreed.
“The recent reports from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change don’t include melt from West Antarctica or Greenland in their projections, and this would mean far more sea level rise, said Sridhar Anandakrishnan, professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University.”
Finally, a fascinating — and frightening — piece dramatizes the impact of sea level rise on some U.S. cities: “What Irreversible Antarctic Ice Melt Could Mean for Some U.S. Cities,” by Andrew Freedman.
Freedman explores the impact on a selection of cities under a number of scenarios, from a rise of 4 feet above the high tide line at Miami Beach, with much of Miami Beach flooded to higher storm surges. “The impacts of sea level rise, in the form of higher storm surges and increasingly common flooding at times of astronomical high tides, are already causing damage in the U.S. and worldwide. For example, when Hurricane Sandy struck New York City in 2012, it hit an area where the sea level was about a foot higher than it had been a century before. This may have resulted in as many as an additional 40,000 people affected by flooding than otherwise would have been.”
He further notes that “while the melting of Antarctica and the associated long-term sea level rise will take many centuries to play out, near-term sea level rise from what is currently a relatively slow melt of land-based ice sheets will cost more money and lives with each passing year and each coastal storm.”
One might dramatize this relatively “short-term” danger by simply combining 2, 3 or 4 feet of higher sea with Hurricane Sandy!
Finis. And so it goes in one more stab at achieving fame and fortune as a Sunday columnist for the finest newspaper in Beni … oh, hell, north and east of San Francisco!
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
From the piece: elicited the following thoughtful summary from someone with considerably less flair and style but far greater animus …
“Nothing to say but just keeps on talking.
I went pack and reread the comments section of the referred to original column. That comment above, as well as the others that are mentioned from the same poster, are not directed at Mr. Page but are intended for the poster that they follow.
The style of the posts can sometimes be confusing and are subject to misinterpretation as to intent. But in this case Mr. Page, you have taken those comments incorrectly as being directed at you.
Correction: “pack” = back
Dear Mr. Page,
I am sincerely honored by your bestowment of ‘Favorite Critic’ status and my heart is ‘Warmed’ by the fact that you appreciate the ‘Piquancy’ of my reaction to your commentaries. I humbly acknowledge the obvious degree of thought and research invested in your missives, particularly as regards the ‘Global Warming/Climate Change’ issue. While we may differ in our opinions regarding the validity of studies and conclusions proliferated by the so-called ‘Scientific Community’ as well as others whom you cite, I question their motives.
There can be no doubt that the climate of our planet is variable and most likely resulting from myriad factors. However, I find it the epitome of ‘Human Hubris’ to resolve that not only are we responsible for this ardently conceived assumption, but have the ability to control same. My dissension stems from the realization that this concept has evolved into a lucrative business which excludes valid opposing data and scientific opinion in order to generate fear while supporting profiteering by corporations and individuals.
I concede that ‘Man-kind’ has historically and negatively impacted our environment. Yet, we have followed-up with positive reactions of rectification, both being generally localized rather than global.
I close with a quote which will be familiar to some and is in no way intended as an assault to Jerome, but to those who continue to ‘Drink the Kool-Aid’.
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” Mark Twain
Excellent comment, Mr. Harley.
And everyone assumes that glaciers melt due to am made global warming ….. Geez. Mr. Page, the polar ice caps completely melted and were non-existent during the Mesozoic period (dinosaurs).
How did man possibly do that?
This is all speculation. Greenland’s and the Arctic ice shields are at larger masses than in decades. Is man responsible for that?
You can cut and paste articles from experts, I can do the same stating the counter. All this proves is that there is no proof. Let the debate continue. Man Made Global warming is far from proven science.
Yes do tell us your opinion … Oh wait.
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/05/12/john-oliver-on-climate-change-skeptics-you-dont-need-peoples-opinions-on-a-fact/
That’s right, we don’t care. We’re moving on. Troglodytes to the rear.
Thanks Hank, that was great!
Ok guys … I’ll play this out.
Let’s say you are correct. Man is causing catastrophic climate change.
Now answer this … What do you propose as a solution to this catastrophe?
I can’t wait for this response …
And Hank, your post do show an amazing amount of immaturity and sophomoric name calling.
Matter you are correct about H H. He offers nothing but negative name calling comments. Matter just watch his return comments to me and DDL. He is very predictable
Matter, the climate change crowd is all talk. They have not up to now done much in the way of personal inconvenience. Something as simple as riding a bicycle to the grocery store. How often do you see anyone in this town peddling a bike with a Burley or a BOB trailer full of groceries? NOT.
If they truly feel climate change is a life threatening issue then they would move close to work, ride a bike to work.
If all the climate change crowd went car free, you would see CO2 emissions plummet, refinery’s would shut down. Think how happy they would be and the planet would be saved.
”If all the climate change crowd went car free, you would see CO2 emissions plummet, refinery’s would shut down. Think how happy they would be and the planet would be saved.”” But, that is not going to happen. So, you’d better have a contingency plan.
I see where Hamburg Germany plans to go car free,
This is for the community and our elected leaders past and present to consider…
With the onset of hybrid technologies, automakers are making it possible for daily drivers to use less and less fuel, but wouldn’t the ideal solution be to not have to use a car at all? One city in Germany thinks so, and is trying to eliminate cars completely from its roads.
In Hamburg, a plan is in place to eliminate cars from the roads, and turning the automotive thoroughfares into greenways that can be traversed by bicycle. These greenways would be connected to already-existing parks and trails.
Ha ha ha great column as usual Jerry! Read this for a good laugh!
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/05/conservatism-is-a-desperate-sick-and-absurd-conspiracy-theory/
From Politifact.com: “Marco Rubio says humans are not causing climate change”
Fact check ruling:
“Rubio said human activity is not “causing these dramatic changes to our climate.” An overwhelming majority of scientists agree that humans, by burning fossil fuels, contribute directly to global warming.
Not only is Rubio incorrect, but he’s ignoring a mountain of concrete, scientific research. We rate his claim False.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/may/13/marco-rubio/marco-rubio-says-humans-are-not-causing-climate-ch/
Could you point to where that concrete mountain is located? I have been looking for but it seems to be out of site, well hidden some where. Maybe at the IPCC.
Read Jerome Page. He writes for the Benicia Herald. Very illuminating stuff.
Blah blah blah. How about some credible facts. All that is floating around out there on the inter webs is conjecture, theory and data modeling, much of which has been proven to be faulty, unsubstantiated or flat out falsified.
Blah blah blah sums up your position nicely I think.
Fact check ruling: “Rubio said human activity is not ‘causing’….global warming. Scientists agree that humans…contribute directly to global warming “
It would appear that the self-proclaimed ‘fact checkers’ are unclear on the concept of causation versus contribution.
The statements of Rubio and the scientists are not mutually exclusive.
Rubio just f’d his presidential prospects. What a tool.
Your skepticism of the Politifact fact checkers is noted and will be remembered next time they call out a prominent Democrat. I note however that the conservative to liberal falsehood ratio is something like 10 to 1 — a reflection of reality.
As I was saying …
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/may/18/jerry-brown/jerry-brown-says-virtually-no-republican-believes-/
Beyond the “blah blah blah,” climate change denial crowd—
From the article below: more information for the community and our elected leaders past and present to consider…
“GOP Senator Attacks Retired Military Brass for Saying Climate Change Threatens Security:
16 generals and admirals warn that “we no longer have the option to wait” and plead for a “bipartisan call to action.”
“Republican Sen. James Inhofe is once again dismissing a report on climate change, attacking the integrity of the report’s authors. ..”
“Other Republicans, however, have been notably quiet since the report’s release. Typically, they form a chorus to shout down any climate-change report, claiming that man-made climate change is fraud perpetuated by the “liberal agenda.” This time, the authors of the report are not scientists and environmentalists, the typical targets of conservative derision. It would be political suicide for any Republican to categorize such a large group of career military officers as liberals, especially in an election year.”
One of the report’s authors, retired Rear Admiral David Titley, the former oceanographer of the Navy, told the Huffington Post he hopes the message will be received differently by climate-change deniers as it comes from retired and respected U.S. military brass.
“This report is signed, not by environmentalists or climate scientists, but by 16 admirals and generals who collectively have over 500 years of service to our country,” said Titley, who is now a meteorology professor at Penn State University
http://www.alternet.org/inhofe-attacks-retired-generals-and-admirals-over-climate-change?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
So that makes them credible witnesses, because they served the country in a different capacity? It is sort of like celebrities using their platform to make a stand for some issue with no other knowledge, credibility or experience. Simply a voice and a platform. You are going to have to do a lot better than that.
Beyond the “blah blah blah,” climate change denial crowd—
More information and a few key excerpts from the article below for the community to consider…
“How To Convince Conservative Christians That Global Warming Is Real”
“Millions of Americans are evangelical Christians. Climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe is persuading them that our planet is in peril.”
“Simply put, millions of Americans are evangelical Christians, and their belief in the science of global warming is well below the national average.”
“I feel like the conservative community, the evangelical community, and many other Christian communities, I feel like we have been lied to,”
“We have been given information about climate change that is not true. We have been told that it is incompatible with our values, whereas in fact it’s entirely compatible with conservative and with Christian values.”
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/05/inquiring-minds-katharine-hayhoe-faith-climate
How to Save the Planet—
Beyond the “blah blah blah,” climate change denial crowd—
From the article below: more information for the community, Mr. Page ( who in his own way, through research and writing is helping to save the planet ) and our elected leaders past and present to consider…
“Report after report tells us our planet is in trouble. Most recently, two teams of researchers concluded that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet’s gradual collapse due to global warming has become unstoppable; as a result, sea levels will rise by feet, not inches, in the centuries to come. This is just one of the many frightening effects of climate change.”
“So what can we do?”
“We reached out to a handful of scientists, policy experts, writers and activists to ask: “If you could require America to do just one thing — any one thing — to combat climate change in 2014, what would it be?” Here’s what they said:
http://zcomm.org/znetarticle/how-to-save-the-planet/
This is great Will, What can you do? A call on business and governments to change but no call for personal carbon footprint reduction.