Feeling half my age on Maui
Spot the impostor
Mole control tips
We all are Terri Schiavo
Terri Schiavo and Democratic silence
Democrats on wrong side of Schiavo law
Carpet cleaning: the horror of it all
Thank you, Willamette Week personals
Blogging about Nightline’s blogging program
White House doublespeak about rendition
“I Heart Huckabees”
Oregon’s climatologist denies global warming
Oregon is in a drought. That’s undeniable. The U.S. Drought Monitor says so. Global warming caused by manmade greenhouse gases is for real. That’s also undeniable according to the results of a recent study of ocean temperatures.
As I wrote in an earlier post, “Global warming: the big truth,” Oceanographers analyzed more than seven million recordings of ocean temperatures from around the world. They compared the rise in temperatures at different depths to predictions made by two computer simulations of global warming.
Bingo. Right on. No doubt about it. Man-made greenhouse gases are the cause of observed changes in ocean temperatures. One of the researchers, a marine physicist, said: “We’ve got a serious problem. The debate is no longer: ‘Is there a global warming signal?’ The debate now is: ‘What are we going to do about it?’
Yet Oregon’s climatologist, George Taylor, denies that global warming is occurring. In September 2004 Taylor was part of a group that sent a letter to Sen. John McCain, who was chairing a Commerce Committee hearing examining recent scientific research concerning climate change impacts. The group was quoted as saying that “there is little supporting meteorological evidence” for global warming.
That’s ridiculous. Take a look at the New Scientist “Special Report on Climate Change” and the first thing you’ll read is, “Climate change is with us. A decade ago, it was conjecture. Now the future is unfolding before our eyes.” Scientists at the University of Washington have studied changes in northwest snowpacks and concluded that global warming could shrink already diminished snowpack water content by over 50% in coming decades.
Meanwhile, George Taylor gives speeches where he says that global warming actually isn’t an imminent threat.
I hope Taylor will change his mind. Oregon can’t afford to have a state climatologist who doesn’t understand that global warming almost certainly is a major influence on our state’s climate. Its worrisome when the climatologist for a coastal state doesn’t believe that oceans are warming because of greenhouse gases. By contrast, the climatologist for Washington state says that global warming is no myth and the repercussions could be severe in the Pacific Northwest.
They already are. Close to home here in Salem, Detroit Lake, along with other reservoirs, probably won’t fill up with enough water for boating this year, just as in 2001—another drought year. This will hammer the Detroit economy. A recent Salem Statesman-Journal article lists other impending drought problems: “shortages of irrigation water for farms, tight municipal water supplies, inadequate river flows to nurture salmon and other wildlife and extreme wildfire danger.”
Right after this list of impending catastrophes, the article says, “State climatologist George Taylor, calling himself an eternal optimist, said he thinks a wet spring is possible.” Well, we’ll see. Longer term, Taylor believes that Oregon will be cooler and wetter than normal for the next 15 years. That’s hard to imagine given the trends of the past few years.
During most of the past winter the jet stream took storms to the south, into California and away from Oregon. To my understanding, this is a typical El Nino pattern. In his paper, “Impacts of the El Niño/Southern Oscillation on the Pacific Northwest,” Taylor writes that the warmer ocean temperatures associated with an El Nino results in lower than normal precipitation for the Northwest.
Which is just what is happening. And it has been happening for years. A 1998 NOAA (National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration) report said that global warming might be exacerbating El Nino’s effects on the weather. After this report was issued Al Gore urged Congress to act to reduce greenhouse gases. His advice was ignored. People are more likely to believe in the reality of El Nino than in the reality of global warming. Politically, says this analysis, the two have been disconnected.
Yet almost certainly they are connected. It isn’t difficult to make a persuasive argument that Oregon is going to suffer through a drought because manmade global warming has raised ocean temperatures, which has created El Nino conditions, which divert Pacific storms away from the Northwest.
Oregon’s policy-makers shouldn’t be focused only on dealing with the effects of global warming, as the group Taylor is associated with has argued. This group advised that emergency preparedness should be the focus of efforts to mitigate the effects of Florida hurricanes. Since Taylor doesn’t accept the reality of global warming, I expect that he isn’t supportive of the West Coast Governors’ Global Warming Initiative that Oregon is a part of.
Doesn’t it seem strange that Oregon’s climatologist is at odds with not only most of the world (which has adopted the Kyoto Treaty) but also the official policy of our state? The above-linked Oregon Department of Energy page says that “on September 22, 2003, Governors Kulongoski, Davis and Locke announced that they have concluded that Oregon, California and Washington must act individually and regionally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions because global warming will have serious adverse consequences on the economy, health and environment of the west coast states. (Governor Schwarzenegger has continued California’s participation.)”
It isn’t too far off the mark to say that a meteorologist who doesn’t believe that global warming is occurring is akin to a zoologist who doesn’t believe in the theory of evolution, or a cosmologist who doesn’t believe in the big bang. Taylor’s writings (such as this, and this) point toward a conclusion that he is out-of-touch with the broader scientific community.
Hopefully he is keeping his mind open. I look forward to learning whether recent research has led George Taylor to change his opinion about global warming.
When even evangelical leaders are getting behind the effort to fight global warming, Oregon’s climatologist should become a convert to doing what’s right for our state and the earth. (See post continuation for a New York Times article on this evangelical movement)
Blogging focus of “Nightline” tonight
Bloggers and those who love them will want to watch “Nightline” tonight (ABC, 11:35 pm on our local Portland station). The scheduled subject is blogs and their effect on society. Here’s an excerpt from today’s Nightline email:
Tonight’s piece is a fascinating one. Turns out that as John and producer Elissa Rubin were conducting interviews with bloggers, they were being blogged. The bloggers had some interesting opinions, to say the least. And as this program airs (and this e-mail is read by viewers), there’s no doubt that bloggers will blog about it.
Yes, they got that right.
(See post continuation for the full Nightline email about this program).
I love Karl Rove
Relax, vitamins won’t be banned
Taoism talk flows
Yesterday I gave my first-ever talk about Taoism to a Chemeketa Community College class. As befits the subject matter, it flowed pretty well. I rationalized my minimal preparation by saying to myself, “That’s how a Taoist sage would do it—speak from the heart, not from notes.”
Of course, one problem with this approach was that I’m not a Taoist sage. And the heart from which I tried to speak from is filled with all kinds of crap. Some wisdom too, I hope, but largely crap. Which reminds me that somehow I missed sharing with the class a favorite quotation from The Book of Chuang Tzu. Now that it comes to mind, I feel better about what’s in my heart:
Master Tung Kuo asked Chuang Tzu, “That which is called the Tao, where is it?”
Chuang Tzu replied, “There is nowhere where it is not.”
“But give me a specific example.”
“In this ant,” said Chuang Tzu.
“Is that its lowest point?”
“In this panic grass,” said Chuang Tzu.
“Can you give me a lower example?”
“In this common earthenware tile,” said Chuang Tzu.
“This must be its lowest point!”
“It’s in shit and piss too,” said Chuang Tzu.
Master Tung Kuo had no answer to this.
Almost as soon as I walked into the Judson Middle School classroom for the second half of the three hour class I got a question from an earnest student: “What does the te mean in Tao Te Ching?” “Oh, no,” I thought. “Am I expected to actually know something about Taoism?” I started to lose confidence in my whole lesson plan, which basically consisted of reading some mystifying anecdotes from The Book of Chuang Tzu and commenting confusedly on them.
If nobody had any idea what I was talking about, that was OK. After all, Chuang Tzu is known as the “genius of the absurd.” If the mojo (or should I say “ch’i”?) in the class started to flag, I had a copy of my “The Tao of Paris Hilton” and “I become a Taoist” posts ready to roll. One thing I wasn’t ready for was a serious question about the meaning of a Taoist term. Fortunately, the class was on a break and I could wriggle away with a “Good question, I’ll try to get to the meaning of te during my talk.”
But I didn’t try very hard. I think te means “life force,” which seems real similar to “ch’i.” And isn’t ch’i part and parcel of the Tao? Whatever. That’s the beauty of Taoism. Words count for nothing. No matter what you say about Taoism, you’re wrong.
I was pleased that everyone in the class appeared to stay awake right up to 9:00 pm. That was my main goal: not put anyone to sleep. To achieve that end I used several of my tried and true public speaking techniques: (1) when interest seems to flag, tell an embarrassing story about yourself, and (2) if that doesn’t perk up the room, tell an embarrassing story about someone else. Such as Laurel. Well, it wasn’t so much embarrassing as revealing. I observed that Laurel will spend all afternoon tending to the trees she’s planted on our property, then come in and say, “Look at my desk! I’ve got so much paperwork! I should have been inside working on it!”
But if she had done that, I can almost guarantee that come dusk she would be saying, “Look at how nice the day was! I’ve got so much gardening to do! I should have been outside working!” We don’t trust our instincts, was my conclusion. If we feel the urge to do something, and then do it, second-guessing often sets in after the first-impulsing. Taoism discourages such mental musings: “Maybe it would have been better if….”
Chuang Tzu says, “That which one does because it is impossible to do other, that is the Tao of the sage.” Easy to say. Also easy to do. It only is possible to do one thing at a time, so why not simply do that one thing fully, completely, passionately, unreservedly, happily?
Figuring that if I ended my talk on a mysteriously enigmatic note I’d be less likely to get any additional quasi-scholarly questions that I couldn’t answer, I turned to “The Shores of the Dark Waters” chapter. Here’s how it begins. If I took Chuang Tzu’s message seriously, I’d welcome tough questions about Taoism. And answer just as Words-of-Actionless-Action did.
