tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post7884032497763181981..comments2023-09-28T08:13:11.489-07:00Comments on Only In It For The Gold: Very Slow NewsMichael Tobishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-21774297343701313562009-11-16T12:33:02.791-08:002009-11-16T12:33:02.791-08:00Even though we're on different sides of the fe...Even though we're on different sides of the fence most of the time, I enjoy what you write and how you write it. I've been blogging since 1999, and your point about being 'newsy' is close to the mark. The only tips I ever give newcomers is, try and post more than once a day, and interact with your commenters.<br /><br />Did you ever investigate doing your thing on Examiner.com? I get a couple of hundred bucks a month out of it, which is about one fifty more than I'd get out of serving ads up on a blog.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747117922597525042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-69529274201430355542009-11-14T04:38:51.834-08:002009-11-14T04:38:51.834-08:00Fleck's problem, methinks, is that he thinks a...Fleck's problem, methinks, is that he thinks all he needs to do is to expose the shills who are obviously working for oil/coal/energy-intensive interests (e.g. the American Petroleum Institute), while keeping quiet on the more general right-wing/free-market fundamentalist 'think-tanks' (like the Heartland Institute).<br /><br />-- <a href="http://frankbi.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">bi</a>bi -- International Journal of Inactivismhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03030282249404084578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-59413178145534138952009-11-13T18:02:44.376-08:002009-11-13T18:02:44.376-08:00Good post, made me think, thanks. I think I'm...Good post, made me think, thanks. I think I'm also more than a bit tired of trying to drink from the fire hose--good way to drown. I've always approached science as a branch of philosophy, not news or entertainment.Jim Bouldinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10062200124702011010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-4421503545386002012009-11-12T11:42:21.191-08:002009-11-12T11:42:21.191-08:00The previous comment by "Ric" is mine. ...The previous comment by "Ric" is mine. I prefer to give my first and last names (and prefer it when others do as well, though I'll give Tamino a pass on account of his many sterling contributions).<br /><br />Comment submission is a tad confusing on this score. I give the info for my Google Account, which is attached to me just because I'm on gmail. I don't pay much attention to my profile there, but it does have my full name. Yet the full name doesn't show in the comment, and there's no box dedicated to supplying it while posting a comment.<br /><br />-- Ric MerrittRichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00677573041684027902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-42880694752513204272009-11-11T18:47:32.297-08:002009-11-11T18:47:32.297-08:00William T may have a point. Romm is never off mess...William T may have a point. Romm is never off message. I guess that appeals to people who already know what message they want to hear. <br /><br />OK, that was too easy. I don't entirely mean it...<br /><br />Seriously, this blog was never particularly intended for a broad audience. This is about introspection. It's not the public outreach but the reflection on what we might do better. So really comparing my audience with Romm's is beside the point. <br /><br />I am interested, eventually, in doing more of a pure pop science outreach effort (maybe something like Bob Grumbine's) someday. Maybe soon. Stay tuned.<br /><br />On the other hand, maybe I'll worry about more about boring people when my numbers actually stop going up. I've had a gratifying increase over the last couple of weeks.<br /><br />To people who find me only sporadically interesting, I suggest you use a feed reader. Then you can follow up on entries you find interesting and skip the rest.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-65270291436685242872009-11-11T18:27:11.915-08:002009-11-11T18:27:11.915-08:00I think that you sort of answered your own questio...I think that you sort of answered your own question (about why Joe Romm's blog is more popular than yours) by this very post. There is a vast number of places where news and stories about climate issues are presented. Most people don't have time to follow all of them. Some sites are much more focussed than others, so offer a clear point of difference. Realclimate and ClimateProgress for instance. Always something interesting and/or stimulating to read about climate issues. Others are more meandering and really only appeal if one connects with the author or the comment-group. Your's is in that category.William Thttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13285679538054366979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-39416248978829007742009-11-11T15:13:22.809-08:002009-11-11T15:13:22.809-08:00PS - I am not about muzzling Romm or Revkin and th...PS - I am not about muzzling Romm or Revkin and their cohorts. I'd just like to our cohort to be competitive with them. <br /><br />In the end I think what we do is more lasting and important.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-90052709986749510372009-11-11T14:57:51.076-08:002009-11-11T14:57:51.076-08:00Ric, hmm, my opinion, though tentative, is colored...Ric, hmm, my opinion, though tentative, is colored by two facts. 1) Williams and Zabel explicitly claimed what I originally suspected in more substance and detail than I could have come up with and (possibly not entirely independently) 2) To my nose, Williams and Zabel's presentation lacked the odor of horseshit that so persistently accompanies most of what partisans of either stripe say about this matter. <br /><br />I suppose you could call it confirmation bias, but I could also call it confirmation.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-52193631487188546102009-11-11T14:36:32.637-08:002009-11-11T14:36:32.637-08:00A fine piece, one of many reasons I read this blog...A fine piece, one of many reasons I read this blog. Generally my sensibility is far closer to yours than to, say, Joe Romm's.<br /><br />And yet. The weakest part of this post, imho, is all the grumbling about those (Joe? T.C. MITS?) who have a greater tolerance for the famously messy parts of legislation, indeed of the human condition. Notice all the scare quotes around the things "they" are telling us. Even if some of "them" actually said whatever it was that offended, and we take care to give a link to it (not always done in this post), it's still a judgment call how seriously to take each statement, and what it means for the conscience of each of us as we consider what to say and do next. Readership counts tell you only so much. I read Joe and you and others, and none of you always speaks for me. Your judgment may paraphrase and distort what "they" said, and the worse that gets, the closer your arguments come to straw men. (Umm, straw persons??)<br /><br />The only proper rebuttal to "this is the best we can do" is "we can do better, and here's how". But that gets you immediately into very deep waters, because everything involving human thought, let alone cooperation among billions of humans, is buried in layers of radically circular causality on unknown bases, best discussed in the deepest humility.<br /><br />There's no angel's gonna descend to reveal whether it's really better to go with the bill we have this session or hold out for a better one. Either path is defensible. Romm certainly is all for continuing improvement after the hoped-for passing of this one. I don't think that you and he are actually all that far apart on how messy and inefficient the provisions are. Have humans ever done anything truly big in a cleaner fashion? Maybe one like Joe, conspicuously lacking in deepest humility, really is the best advocate for his unique position. (A logical contradiction to my last paragraph? I give up.)<br /><br />Anyway, there's no contradiction between either position on the bill and efforts toward public education and better social networks of trust. I trust you to write brighter lucubrations about the networks, but I'm not all fired up about muzzling Joe, either.Richttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00677573041684027902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-91420668402134504392009-11-11T13:48:24.014-08:002009-11-11T13:48:24.014-08:00I'd disagree that current legislation is mostl...I'd disagree that current legislation is mostly put together in a hurry. Parts certainly are, but there are two-plus years of preceding bills that they've drawn on, not to mention the European experience.<br /><br />Here's a thought experiment - would we in the US be better off or worse off right now if we had been in the European cap-and-trade program? That program has many flaws that congressional legislation is designed to prevent, yet I think it's still had an effect, is now gearing up to be even stronger, and has helped move Europe in the right direction. If we would've been better of joining, then we're certainly better off passing the current legislation.Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09301230860904555513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-9412115785255362292009-11-11T08:15:19.974-08:002009-11-11T08:15:19.974-08:00Well, there's outreach to young people.
And t...Well, there's outreach to young people.<br /><br />And there's this:<br />http://breakthroughgen.org/about/<br /><br />Want to help their program?<br /><br />Send Tax-deductible donations to “Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisers — Breakthrough Institute Fund — BT Gen.”<br /><br /><br />It's what it sounds like, a cornucopian/cargo cult/profit-proves-blessings approach to changing the world by making everyone rich, starting at the top.Hank Robertshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521410755553979665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-91078647817449900792009-11-11T08:14:22.452-08:002009-11-11T08:14:22.452-08:00Plenty of people are motivated to act. Very few ar...Plenty of people are motivated to act. Very few are motivated to act sensibly. This is demonstrated by the way even the cooperative politicians act. <br /><br />Realistic understanding of the tradeoffs and triages, the time scales, the prospects and the risks is missing from all major political camps. There's a lot more learning to be done besides getting across that "it's a problem".Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-57759144604771161272009-11-11T08:01:08.303-08:002009-11-11T08:01:08.303-08:00To follow up, I don't think that it is even ne...To follow up, I don't think that it is even necessary. Anyone who is interested in understanding has already understood. The remaining opposition is funded by large industries, using an ideological minority that will never change its beliefs. There is no purchase there for information to do anything.<br /><br />I suppose that it's possible that news could convert people who understand, but who aren't motivated to do anything, into active people. But that's what you call advocacy journalism.<br /><br />You were pretty hard on the localism people, in part for what seems like good reason. (I haven't looked into what those particular people believe.) But I agree that people need to do what's needed to avert catastrophe, not what they'd like to do or what comforts them in some way. You certainly seem to be trying your best to avert catastrophe. But I really don't see any basis for your belief that the kind of projects that you'd like to do are what's needed.<br /><br />And -- to continue another long-running bit -- I don't really like the positioning of what you're trying to do. It's always something with straight science at one end, the advocacy journalists at the other, and what you'd like to do somewhere in the middle. That plays directly into the tired, straight-from-the-GOP trope that advocacy is icky, impure, something that partisans who can't be trusted do -- an activity for the DFHs.<br /><br />I suppose that I think you'd be more useful if you just signed up with an environmental group and got dirty already. Maybe one of them is hiring.Rich Puchalskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13565210317964576866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-80122906206845014672009-11-11T02:49:47.861-08:002009-11-11T02:49:47.861-08:00"Trying to determine what is going on in the ..."Trying to determine what is going on in the world by reading newspapers is like trying to tell the time by watching the second hand of a clock." - Ben Hechtskankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-88386598549564209912009-11-10T22:37:46.011-08:002009-11-10T22:37:46.011-08:00Rich, I am not arguing that better understanding a...Rich, I am not arguing that better understanding among the public is sufficient, only that it is necessary.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-78529386071112594982009-11-10T19:57:54.631-08:002009-11-10T19:57:54.631-08:00I work as, essentially, a sort of librarian, and t...I work as, essentially, a sort of librarian, and therefore at the distribution of information. As such I have to have a high regard for the accuracy, back-trail, and so on of the information I distribute. That's part of what I do -- but I have no illusions that accurate information is going to make any difference politically.<br /><br />There are a number of stock phrases about truth: "the truth will set you free", "speaking truth to power", and so on. They seem to me to be comfortable propaganda. "Speaking truth to power" is a meaningless activity; power will let you say whatever you want, as long as you do what it tells you to. That's the central fact of American politics since at least the 1980s.<br /><br />So, as ever, I remain skeptical about your focus. News, slow or otherwise, is immaterial. Anyone who actually wants to know the basics about global climate change can find them out pretty easily. What's needed is political organization. Not necessarily political organization within a party, but the organization of people who already know that something needs to be done into a form that is capable of taking on the sources of power within society that want nothing to be done.<br /><br />The role of providing scientific news in this crisis, slow or otherwise, is an honorable one, but not really of critical importance. I can see why people who skill sets are there want to do it -- just as I keep doing what I'm good at -- but should providers and readers of news both improve as much as you'd like, little would change.Rich Puchalskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13565210317964576866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-19459559827338802082009-11-10T18:42:45.607-08:002009-11-10T18:42:45.607-08:00Well then, does The Nation print slow news? It ha...Well then, does <b>The Nation</b> print <i>slow news?</i> It has been around for a long time as a source of thoughtful opion about politics and the arts.<br /><br />Not much about climate, tho'.David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-43415147701879593252009-11-10T18:39:36.543-08:002009-11-10T18:39:36.543-08:00To be slightly clearer on TB's question, nobod...To be slightly clearer on TB's question, nobody with any authority over me or control over my fate has ever told me to shut up or speak up either way on the bill.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-64387892910377713352009-11-10T18:38:29.077-08:002009-11-10T18:38:29.077-08:00To be clear on TB's question, nobody with any ...To be clear on TB's question, nobody with any authority over or control over my fate me has ever told me to shut up or speak up way on the bill. <br /><br />Thanks for asking for this clarification.Michael Tobishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08229460438349093944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-70452196853004573202009-11-10T18:31:27.215-08:002009-11-10T18:31:27.215-08:00Ever since you wrote that bit about "My Littl...Ever since you wrote that bit about "My Little World" I've been a fan of your writing. You do a great job of communicating the problem without running off on tangential rants as Roberts and Romm are prone to do or sinking into the despair of Paul Chefurka or Jay Hansen. There is a small problem.<br /><br />In your average city the number of people willing to do something tangible about climate change wouldn't be enough to form a bowling league. Kim Stanley Robinson came to talk at the local Uni and we couldn't get 300 people in the room including students assigned the lecture as extra credit. The usual number for a climate themed event is about twenty, mostly grey, heads. <br /><br />Until we can solve the problem of communicating long-term risks to lay people we're treading water. The majority don't get that the scale of the problem will overwhelm pretty much everything else in a few short years. <br /><br />Thank you for your efforts. We can educate, demonstrate, share best practices and prepare for the eventual mass disaster that will wake people up. Now you know how Noah felt; minus the reassurance of God's presence.Pangolinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18369503994505817789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8524070301101240472.post-17251889663724348422009-11-10T18:18:54.341-08:002009-11-10T18:18:54.341-08:00I was urged by fans of the bill to keep my mouth s...<i>I was urged by fans of the bill to keep my mouth shut</i><br /><br />Just out of curiosity, is this meant to suggest people actually did explicitly that, or people offered rebutting perspectives on why one might be inclined to support cap and trade? It's a nontrivial distinction. There have been enough claims and counterclaims of censorship/stifled dialog/McCarthyism surrounding the subject to last us several lifetimes to go down that route again unnecessarily.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com