Liveblogging it, only two days later 7

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   Kit Stolz Posted 3:26 am
   29 Oct 2006

   the courtesy trapIn settings such as these, the courtesy of far-right flamethrowers making outrageous statements is, in my experience, a argumentative trap. They know that the outrageousness of their statements (global warming is good!) may provoke outraged responses and incivility or rudeness. In fact, that's what they're hoping for, so they can look like victims.
   I hope that no one gave him that opportunity on this panel. The facts are overwhelmingly clear; there's no need to froth at the mouth.

   Permalink

2. 

   Brian Hosey Posted 4:59 am
   29 Oct 2006

   Special vs. General interestMorano's repetitive use of the "special interest" label for the work of environmental organizations should not have gone unchallenged. Granted he was throwing so much other stuff out there, I'm sure it wasn't possible to refute everything. He's like a Gatlin gun of deceit.
   When a group of people work to protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, and currently to keep the life-support system of our globe from becoming a slow-roast rotisserie, it is called working for the "general" interest. It's in the interest of the general population to have clean air, clean water, and a livable planet.
   When any for-profit group on the other hand lobbies, wines, dines and contributes to the coffers of politicians, then it is in fact working towards a special interest. Namely, it is working to boost its profits, a cause which despite how important an industry may think it is, is not in the interest of the general population.
   
   

   Permalink

3. 

   Bart Anderson Posted 5:46 pm
   29 Oct 2006

   A pro surrounded by amateursListened to the whole fascinating discussion. Several observations:
   Marc Morano is a professional advocate and propagandist. That's his job and he's good at it.
   The scientists and journalists seemed ill-equipped to handle professionals like Morano. They treated him like a fellow seeker after the truth and were dumbfounded at his accusations and disinformation.
   "He's not playing by the rules!"
   Well, duh! Do we expect used car salesmen and lawyers to be objective and tell the unvarnished truth? Their goals are to make the sale or win their case, not to be fair and balanced.
   First mistake. The panel was structured so that this appeared to be a debate between two sides of the global warming question. Because of this framing, Morano AUTOMATICALLY gained his main goal which was to be seen as intellectually respectable.  
   Why invite only Morano and not a climate change activist?  Why not invite some of the victims of climate change?  
   Why not have a panel diagnosing how the climate denial industry works - showing the institutions and techniques they use?
   Second mistake. Morano took the offensive, making dozens of absurd accusations. The other panel members spent their time defending themselves,  correcting Morano. Guess what? He doesn't care. If you correct a dozen accusations, he has two dozen more ready. He does not play by your rules.
   If you are going up against someone like Morano, recognize that you are going to have to change your style. Bill Blakemore and Dan Fagin came closest to taking the offensive, but even they were too conscientious to be as effective as they could be.

   Permalink

4. 

   Patrick Hughes Posted 4:10 am
   30 Oct 2006

   China-US Work to promote Sustainable DevelopmentBy: Patrick Hughes
   The week of October 15-21 the China-U.S. Center for Sustainable Development (CUCSD) played host to 28 delegates from China's Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR) in Portland, OR for six days of training and an introduction to sustainable development practices.  The CUCSD, an organization with its flagship office in Portland, utilized the city's numerous examples of sustainable development applications.  The seminars--a collaboration between CUCSD, Portland State University's College of Urban Planning, Executive Leadership Program and the City of Portland--included discussions surrounding U.S. legal framework and comparative land use and planning, Cradle-to-Cradle sustainable development design application in China, and a continuing dialogue that wove a thread through the role of local, state and federal responsibility for implementing sustainable development practices.
   China's vast economic growth over the course of the past twenty-five plus years has enabled the country to rise from its meager existence during the reign of Chairman Mao, to currently rank fourth in the world in terms of GDP.  The country's economy, built predominantly on its ability to efficiently and inexpensively produce and export goods to global consumers has not matured without growing pains.  The World Bank has stated that China is home to sixteen of the world's twenty most polluted cities.
   China's immense prosperity and subsequent environmental fallout is often compared to the Industrial Revolution, which took place in the U.S. during the latter portion of the 1800's.  The CUCSD aims to give Chinese government officials the knowledge the U.S. has ascertained to implement land use systems and practices to curtail environmental degradation, protect watersheds, agriculture and forest lands and promote a harmonious relationship between urban and rural areas in accordance with Cradle-to-Cradle design principles. CUCSD aspires to reduce the learning curve for the world's most populated country and promote a higher quality of life for China's citizens, now and in the future.
   The CUCSD is a forward thinking organization, founded on philosophies that promote well-planned progress, which are meant to alleviate hardship and allow China to get off on the right foot.  However, often blurred in the headlines that boast the country's economic prowess is the fact that much of the country's 1.3 billion citizens live in poverty.  The British Government's Department for International Development estimates that 600 million of China's citizens live on less than $2 a day---double the population of the U.S.  Zhang Pu, Deputy Director General of the Department of Supervision and Law Enforcement of the MLR, a delegate participating in the training reinforced this stating, "In most of China the minimum life functions are still primary concerns.  China is still in a developmental stage, maybe after we have met some of the primary challenges it can be studied more acutely.  Knowing these principles we can avoid mistakes made by other countries."
   The overall consensus from the delegates is that the work of the CUCSD is very good and important to the responsible development of China. MLR delegate, Gu Zhixin, put mission of CUCSD in context by stating, "To raise awareness is an incremental process--of course we don't want to make the mistakes of other countries."  It is the hope of CUCSD that the seed they plant with China's leaders today, in the future will blossom into a country that is a model for sustainable development.
   
   

   Permalink

5. 

   JMG Posted 4:30 am
   30 Oct 2006

   This is why I don't debate creationistsGreat points Bart.
   I have received several invitations to represent science in debates with creationists, and I was eager to accept them.  Luckily, wiser heads than mine helped me see the points that Bart made above, noting that creationists win merely by making it appear to the audience that creationism is an arguable alternative view to evolution.
   Same with global heating.  
   There may be sincere folks who want to debate the wisest ways to make the necessary responses, and these people may be worth engaging.
   But we need to be alert to recognize those--dare I say "ideologues"--who simply want to obstruct the discussion and put off any response.  These folks "win" any debate they are in simply by prolonging it.

   Permalink

6. 

   Bart Anderson Posted 5:46 am
   30 Oct 2006

   The hand of InhofeClimate research center's oversight up for bidding (LA Times): Wanna run a government lab staffed by hundreds of scientists tackling climate issues like global warming?
   For the first time in 46 years, management of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, perched on a ridge under the Rocky Mountains northwest of here, is up for grabs. Since 1997, National Science Foundation policy has required that all government research institutions be subject to a competitive bidding process when their contracts come up for renewal.
   Foundation officials say that a formal request for bids is imminent and that the competition will be open to all organizations -- academic, nonprofit and for-profit. Since its founding in 1960, the atmospheric center, based in Boulder, has been run by a nonprofit consortium of 70 universities, the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.
   The center's research on global warming and its forecasts of rising temperatures, fiercer wildfires and stronger storms have drawn the ire of some politicians. But officials in Washington say that politics will not affect the competition.
   ...Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), who contends that human-caused global warming is a "hoax," wrote to the foundation in February to confirm it was putting the atmospheric center's management agreement out for bid. He also asked for lists of the roughly 1,000 employees of the center and its operating consortium, as well as the identities of such employees under contract with other government agencies or nonprofits.
   
   

   Permalink

7. 

   jjwfmme Posted 6:28 am
   30 Oct 2006

   Galbraith's Affluent Society, Anyone?Page 135:
   Scientists [and other intellectuals are] imporant competitors of the businessmen for public esteem.
   This competition is especially noticeable in comment on public affairs--on economic policy, foreign policy, the effect of government measures on popular morals and behavior... No one enjoys quite such distinction as the man who, by common consent, is allowed to look ahead and advise as to what we should do to promote or retard a particular occurence. The intellectual naturally assumes his authority on these matters. He is likely to be gifted well beyond the businessman in erudition and oral capacity. That felicity the businessman counters by stressing his identification with production...
   ...Were anything to happen to the prestige of production, it is plain that the businessman, whose mystique is his identification with production, would suffer severely in his competition with the intellectual...
   Page 100:
   Scientists are not without prestige in our day, but to be really useful, we still assume that they should be under the direction of a production man. "Any device or regulation which interferes, or can be conceived as interfering, with [the] supply of more and better things is resisted with unreasoning horror, as the religious resist blasphemy, or the warlike pacifism."

   Permalink