Slashdot Mirror


2013: an Ominous Year For Warnings and Predictions

dcblogs writes "This year may be remembered for its striking number of reports and warning of calamitous events. The National Intelligence Council released its Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds report that included a number of dire possibilities ahead, including the prospect of a catastrophic solar storm, on par with the 1859 Carrington Event. Historical records suggest a return period of 50 years for a repeat of the Quebec-level storm that knocked out the power for 6 million in 1989, and 150 years for very extreme storms, such as the Carrington Event, according to Lloyd's, in a report this year. Scientists at the Idaho National Laboratory recently demonstrated in tests that 'geomagnetic disturbances have the power to disrupt and possibly destroy electrical transformers, the backbone of our nation's utility grid.' This was also the year the average daily level of CO2 reached a concentration above 400 parts per million. In a recent National Academies report this year, 'Abrupt Impacts of Climate Change: Anticipating Surprises,' scientists recommend creation of a global early warning system to alert mankind to abrupt climate changes. A recent paper in Nature, Abrupt rise of new machine ecology beyond human response time, said financial trading systems are driving transaction times down to the speed of light, and 'the quickest that someone can notice potential danger and physically react, is approximately 1 second.'"

17 of 94 comments (clear)

  1. How are we going to harness tech and knowledge by WillAdams · · Score: 3, Informative

    How are we going to harness tech and knowledge to create a better world for our children and grand-children?

    Is it really an improvement to have machines such as the ShapeOko: http://www.shapeoko.com/ rather than teaching children how to use a set of carving gouges, chisels, saws, &c.?

    Is it inevitable that we will see the banning of commercial fishing as commercial hunting was out-lawed during our grand-parents' day?

    What technologies or organizations are there which offer options for making the world a better place?

      - http://opensourceecology.org/ --- and their ``global village construction kit are one bright light --- arguably the ShapeOko has a place in that though.
      - http://www.heifer.org/ --- teach a man to fish and all that

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    1. Re:How are we going to harness tech and knowledge by Richy_T · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Will you teach your children to flake flint hand axes?

      Thought not.

    2. Re:How are we going to harness tech and knowledge by blackanvil · · Score: 2

      Probably, if I ever have children. Flintknaping is fun, easy, the materials are common as rocks, and once you know how to flake out an edge, you'll never be without a tool.

    3. Re:How are we going to harness tech and knowledge by operagost · · Score: 3, Funny

      I assure you that the Internet will never be short of tools.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  2. Sky is falling by Richy_T · · Score: 3, Funny

    Time to put on the sack-cloth and roll around in the dirt.

  3. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by CajunArson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    More fun: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/22/failed-mirth-earth-day-predictions/

    http://reason.com/archives/2000/05/01/earth-day-then-and-now

    Here's a joke:

    Q: What's the difference between a Bible-Thumper who predicts the Rapture and an Environmentalist who predicts a religious Eco-Apocalypse?

    A: There are actually two differences: The Bible-Thumper actually has the decency to predict a firm date, and then admits that he was wrong when the rapture didn't occur.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  4. Sometimes those warnings are muted by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Billons were spent between 2003 and 2010 to deny climate change (pdf) and probably even more has been used for that goal in the last 3 years. In any case, is more money that was ever used to measure climate change, to detect dangerous asteroids, and prevent the spreading of pandemic diseases.

    Maybe science should stop doing warnings and studies and let things happens with no preparations from our side. We deserve it.

    1. Re:Sometimes those warnings are muted by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      Maybe science should stop doing warnings and studies and let things happens with no preparations from our side. We deserve it.

      The problem with this from the scientists' point of view is that we have to live with the consequences too. Now, in my field I'm not likely to be issuing any dire warnings any time soon--but in the unlikely event that I did come across something in my work that could kill millions of people or crash the economy, I'd damn sure want to do something about it, if for no other reason than that my family and friends and I would be just as likely to be affected as anyone else.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Sometimes those warnings are muted by s_p_oneil · · Score: 2

      "That'd be nice - 'science' could just stick to doing sciencey things, then, instead of creating contrived and falsifiable histrionic reports about things which, almost invariably, will not prove out to be true."

      All of this started when NASA was asked to do "sciencey" things with a clear non-political goal, namely to start tracking/modeling/predicting global weather patterns to help the US prepare for natural disasters like hurricanes, blizzards, tornadoes, floods, droughts, etc. However, those things are very hard to predict without trying to look at larger climate patterns, which means gathering and crunching as much data as they could pull together. When all of that data pointed toward a potential long-term danger, NASA scientists did their jobs and informed their bosses of the potential danger.

      Is that danger 100% clear? No. Did NASA scientists claim it was 100% clear? No. People like Al Gore may have, but last I checked, he wasn't one of NASA's scientists. Have the predictions remained constant over the years? No, they've been modified as more has been learned, and they will continue to be modified because there is always more to learn in every field of science. Have their discoveries and claims been backed up by other climate/weather tracking organizations like the ESA? Yes. The only thing that is 100% clear here is which side of the fence has been politically motivated the whole way and which side has not, which side has been trying to learn more and which has merely been obstructionist, etc.

      The human race has never been short of people like the hunters who killed the very last of the dodo birds and smashed the last of their eggs, poachers who illegally hunt elephants and tigers toward extinction, fisheries who dredge the ocean floor because it's getting so much harder to find/catch enough fish to stay in business, or loggers who illegally cut down the rest of the trees in the Amazon rain forest. Every one of them is certain that the world is too big for their contribution to make a difference, and every one of them is wrong. Most global warming deniers aren't doing anything illegal or immoral (unless they're actively publishing fake scientific "studies"), but they have the same mind-set.

      "I don't see what your point is. People (and the companies they run) make choices in the interest of self preservation and self-interest."

      They sure do. And just like when someone's (or some company's) choices involve something illegal like human trafficking, it is the government's job to put a stop to it. It is also the government's job to decide whether something that is legal today should remain legal. They'll never be able to satisfy everyone, but it's their job. Of course, we can't outlaw coal and oil without harming everyone (yet), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be trying to look for ways to head in that direction.

  5. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your weird obession with denying the overwhelming evidence we're destroying the environment aside, I was referring to your statement that Reagan was President in the 70s.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  6. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by CajunArson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Get with the program: Everything bad that has ever occurred in the 20th century is due to Reagan and Reagan alone. Don't let the corporatist media fool you into thinking that anyone other than Reagan was running the show in the 20th century. DON'T BE A SHEEPLE.

    Oh, BTW, Reagan was also so stupid that he couldn't tie his own shoes.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  7. I was there! by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

    for a repeat of the Quebec-level storm that knocked out the power for 6 million in 1989

    I was there. And it was really, really creepy. From my apartment building I could see the electrical arcing from the power station way on the other side of town. The lights went out everywhere, and then the Aurora Borealis started lighting up the sky - something that rarely happens at that lattitude (Montreal). It was - surreal.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  8. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everything bad that has ever occurred in the 20th century is due to Reagan and Reagan alone.

    Oh, it wasn't so bad. Back when Reagan was President, "sleeping with the President" meant taking a nap during cabinet meetings. Clinton gave it spanking new meaning . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  9. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by CajunArson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You mean +5 funny satire? The sad truth is that there are plenty of "enlightened" people who post all the "correct" beliefs spoonfed to them over at HuffPo who basically believe that post at face value.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  10. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These predictions are all 100% accurate, just like Ted Danson's prediction that all U.S. cities will be completely uninhabitable by 1980 because Reagan was president throughout the 1970's and are even MORE accurate than ALGORE's 100% accurate prediction that the entire polar ice cap has permanently melted and all polar bears are dead.

    Which specific predictions are you talking about? Nobody brought up Ted Danson, so I fail to see his relevance unless you are making this argument: if Ted Danson's predictions aren't accurate, then nobody's can be.

    In any case it seems to me that the summary and linked article is kind of sloppy, almost as if it were designed to provoke this kind of silly strawman response.

    For example, the notion that the power grid might be vulnerable to a geomagnetic storm the size of the 1859 event isn't a prediction. It's merely an assessment of vulnerability to a rare but possible event (e.g., a 14+m tsunami hitting Japan). A large geomagnetic storm is a possibility that should be taken into account, not an event to put on the calendar.

    Likewise, nobody is suggesting that there's anything special about the 400ppm CO2 figure, other than that it is a round figure. It's common sense to look for climate impact, not because we've hit some "magic" number, but that CO2 levels are higher than they've been at any time in the past three million years. This is especially so because the slope of the CO2 concentration graph shows no sign of topping out.

    Keep in mind there's no such thing as a "natural disaster". There are only natural events that catch us unprepared. There's nothing inherently disastrous about flooding in Bengladesh, except that economics and politics forces people to live in the flood plain. Likewise there's nothing about a world that's two or three degrees warmer that makes it uninhabitable by humans, but the changes involved along the way will be *perceived* as catastrophic. For example models predict a drier western US. That doesn't mean that one day it will stop raining, it only means that rainy years will be less common and drought years more common. For all we know we'll have a rainy year in 2014, but it still makes sense to plan for the day when the Colorado River won't be able to supply all the water cities in the west require from it (Los Angeles, San Diego, Denver, Phoenix, Tucson, Salt Lake City, and others). The disaster won't be lack of water, it will be lack of preparedness.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  11. 2013: an Ominous Year For Warnings and Predictions by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Like every other year before it.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  12. Re:Yeah and there's no more North Pole by mspohr · · Score: 2

    Sub-prime lending was low (and even declining) until 2003 then increased dramatically and peaked in 2006 ending with the crash starting in July 2007 when Bear Stearns funds folded... I believe that this is Junior Bush's reign.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?