A Paper From Hansen et al. Is Now Open For Discussion

A message for Petroleum Civilization

I. Introduction

The Hansen et al. paper arguing that a vaunted 2°C temperature rise is dangerous is now open for comment at Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion, an open-access journal published by the European Geosciences Union (ACPD, "2°C Global Warming is Highly Dangerous", PDF).

Today, I will only address the sea level rise (SLR) aspects of that paper.

I am convinced that SLR is the prominent danger being created by the increase of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere and oceans as a result of Petroleum Civilization's burning of fossil fuels (Petroleum Civilization: The Final Chapter (Confusing Life with Death), 2, 3, 4).

I mentioned the Hansen et al. paper on Wednesday, not having read it then, but I kept that post limited to "sea levels rising as much as 10 feet in the next 50 years," and "sea level rise is the big impact of human made climate change" (New Climate Catastrophe Policy: Triage - 13).

Today, with that paper in hand, I want to address those issues with quotes directly from the paper itself, rather than from journalists.

II. What Danger?

The title of the paper ("2°C global warming is highly dangerous") indicates that the 16 co-authors feel that the assumption that we can live with a 2°C temperature rise is a dangerous and erroneous assumption.

We are about halfway to a 2°C temperature rise already, and the dangers presented already are killing millions of people and thousands of species of life on Earth (Oil-Qaeda: The Indictment).

Not to mention that we have already seriously damaged the Global Climate System, fresh water sources, farming soils, the oceans, and many other human habitat necessities.

Since the general, normalcy-biased press corps have not considered the serious dangers that SLR presents to current civilization, I have been doing so.

That is, I have been pointing out the dangers to the world's sea ports which an SLR of only 1m / 3 ft. presents.

Since the world's ports are essential to current civilization, many Dredd Blog posts have addressed the issue from many vantage points (e.g. Greenland & Antarctica Invade The United States, 2, 3; The 1% May Face The Wrath of Sea Level Rise First; Why The Military Can't Defend Against The Invasion; Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 44; Why Sea Level Rise May Be The Greatest Threat To Civilization, 2, 3, 4).

Those posts, and others, point out that Petroleum Civilization is based in the main on delivery of commodities such as crude oil, coal, gas, foodstuffs, etc. via sea ports.

Sea ports were built at sea level decades or centuries ago, because that is where sea ports are built (at sea level).

When SLR takes place, those sea ports are thereby rendered below sea level.

Which presents very serious problems that, upon further analysis, are dangerous to current civilization:

"We suggest that this viewpoint ["2°C is ok"] fails to appreciate the nature of the threat posed by ice sheet instability and sea level rise. If the ocean continues to accumulate heat and increase melting of marine-terminating ice shelves of Antarctica and Greenland, a point will be reached at which it is impossible to avoid large scale ice sheet disintegration with sea level rise of at least several meters. The economic and social cost of losing functionality of all coastal cities is practically incalculable. We suggest that a strategic approach relying on adaptation to such consequences is unacceptable to most of humanity, so it is important to understand this threat as soon as possible."

(Hansen Paper Introduction, Section I above, emphasis added). And those are problems which threaten to convert current civilization into a civilization absent the sea trade essential to its existence (Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 44).

There is no realistic denial of that, instead, the resistance to comprehending it comes from pondering when it will happen (find "the law of when" here).

III. Some Arithmetic Concerning SLR

The Hansen et al. paper indicates "sea levels rising as much as 10 feet in the next 50 years," so it is a departure from the IPCC position of 3 ft in the next 85 years.

If we apply linear arithmetic to the paper, it means 5 ft. of SLR per decade (50 ÷ 10 = 5), which would mean 1m / 3 ft. of SLR @ 6 years from now, or the year 2021 (5/10 = 3/x; x=6).

In non-linear arithmetic, i.e. a "doubling" or "an acceleration" of the annual rate, the first 10 year SLR would be less than the second 10 year rate, and so forth.

In contrast, my SLR calculation model indicates a 1m / 3 ft. SLR by 2031, or 16 yrs. from now (The Question Is: How Much Acceleration Is Involved In SLR - 5?).

IV. Surge or Pulse SLR Is Historically Real

What both my SLR calculation model and the Hansen et al. model leave out is surges in SLR.

Scientists call them "pulses" rather than "surges," and they add a number and letter to further identify those events of history (e.g. "Pulse 1B", "Pulse 3C", "Pulse 2A").

I have been considering "pulse 1C" of about 8k years ago, which resulted in a 1m / 3ft. SLR in a few years or less (see NASA GISS here and here).

The "pulse 1C" was not directly related to climate alone, but rather was related to some of the dynamics that take place when ice sheets melt over land during a warming climate.

Sometimes, as in the case of pulse 1C, the meltwater is dammed up by obstructions.

This can take place either down under the surface of the ice sheet, on top of the ice sheet, or around the edges of the ice sheet.

We are talking about meltwater that is still over land, i.e., meltwater that has not reached the sea yet.

When that obstruction or dam eventually gives way, there is a surge in SLR that is not directly related to either the linear or the accelerating melt that is ongoing at that time (the dammed up, obstructed meltwater is from ice that melted earlier on).

That is, there can be a surge or pulse in SLR without there having to be an isolated surge or pulse in global temperature or in global atmospheric CO₂ content.

An example would be the surges or pulses in the N.E. U.S. sea level in very recent years (Will This Float Your Boat - 5).

The SLR in such a case is caused by a debris or ice "dam" type of obstruction finally giving way, which allows the older meltwater to then flow into the sea.

I have posted several times indicating that such obstructions currently take place on both the Greenland Ice Sheet and on the Antarctic Ice Sheet (The Surge: A Forgotten Aspect of Sea Level Rise, Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 45).,

V. Risk Management

We can't calculate, by models, exactly when those types of obstructions will give way to thereby allow dammed up older meltwater to then surge or pulse, and flow to the sea unexpectedly.

So, instead, it is a matter of dealing with chaotic happen-stance, and therefore utilizing "better safe than sorry" risk management as the way to go (New Climate Catastrophe Policy: Triage - 13).

VI. The Odds By The Numbers

It is instructive to remember that SLR catastrophe involves only a tiny percentage (1.14%) of the ice sheets of the Earth melting or otherwise finding a way to the sea:

To spark our interest, and bind ourselves to a sober view of this phenomenon which is called "The Biggest Story in the World" (according to a worldwide circulation news source), first consider the following quote from the video below:

2:43 - "One meter [of SLR] would be a global catastrophic event, 3 meters would remap the world as we know it?"

2:50 - "Yes, absolutely."

(emphasis added). This allows us to focus our attention on 1m / 3ft. of SLR, because it would be "a global catastrophic event."

The delicacy of the issue can be seen ... by realizing that only 1.14% of the global ice volume needs to melt to get us there (3 ft ÷ 263.5 ft. = 0.011385 = 1.14%).

The overall invader needs to use only 1.14% of its forces to accomplish the invasion.
... [furthermore]
If a small portion of one glacier (the Totten Glacier) in East Antarctica melts, or otherwise slides into the sea, the same will happen:

"How little it will take can also easily be seen by a statement from a scientist who is studying those locations closely and regularly:

'One of them, Totten glacier, holds the equivalent of seven metres of global sea level.' [a lower estimate is "at least" 3.3 metres here]

(Dr. Rignot East Antarctica glaciers, cf. Totten Glacier Melting). The percentage of that one glacier which needs to melt to cause 3 ft. / 1 m. of SLR is: 1÷7 = 0.142857143 = 14.3%."

(Why Sea Level Rise May Be The Greatest Threat To Civilization). That is a slim margin, because the Totten Glacier and all other ice sheets are showing signs of decomposition (Nature).
... [furthermore]
The NEGIS is 16% of the entire GIS, JI is 8%, while KG & HG at ~2% each.

These four entities make up 28% of the total ice in the GIS.

The entire GIS represents 21.49 ft. of SLR (Fig. 2), so 28% of that is (21.49 × .28) 6.02 feet.

Which means that only half of that amount (14%) is needed to reach "3 ft. / 1 m. of SLR."

(Why Sea Level Rise May Be The Greatest Threat To Civilization - 3). The threat to the infrastructure of current world civilization is far more imminent (assuming no nuclear war) than the extinction of the human race is.

VII. Conclusion

One can only hope that the clueless minions currently herded by Oil-Qaeda will suddenly freak out and get down to business, calling for a world wide effort never before considered seriously.

An effort that I and others would gladly rejoice in performing ... putting our energy into whatever it takes to LEAVE THE CIVILIZATION-POISONING FOSSIL FUELS IN THE GROUND !!

I would work like a slave to help with that, after Oil-Qaeda is brought to justice.

The next post in this series is here.

---

Paul Beckwith, on The Hansen et al. Paper

---

Another One Bites The Dust

"What goes up must come down ..."

I did not know which series this post fits into (A Tale of Coup Cities, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, or Will The Military Become The Police?, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10).

So, I made it a standalone post for now, but later on it may eventually become the first post in a new series detailing additional dynamics of the corruption of power (About Toxins Of Power).

What gave me pause was that the individual who is the subject of today's post has been featured in Dredd Blog posts in the past.

That is because he described "a coup" and "a policy coup" that took place in the U.S.eh? following 9/11 (e.g. A Tale of Coup Cities - 8).

At any rate, he has evidently joined the coup that he previously spoke of unfavorably.

The video at the bottom of the post presents the picture.

Commentary by other blogs detail some of the internet social media backlash (The Intercept: Wesley Clark wants WW II style internment camps, Mediaite: or re-education camps, Zero Hedge - same, Salon - same, TPM - same).

The real rub here comes because General Clark would have "lawyers and politicians" decide who is "radicalized" and "against the U.S." at a time when there are no valid legal definitions for those concepts (Rethinking Radicalization, PDF).

So, the general seems to have lost his marbles since being claimed by Blackstone (Our People).

Blackstone is one cog in the private empire's labyrinth of gears (Our Offices).

See you in the camps:

"The greatest reaction from government officials, who certainly know that disruption and upheaval are coming, is to spy on the citizens now as they prepare to triage them in detention camps in the future ..." (Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 32)

---

"A new report by the U.S. Army War College talks about the possibility of Pentagon resources and troops being used should the economic crisis lead to civil unrest, such as protests against businesses and government or runs on beleaguered banks.

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” said the War College report.

The study says economic collapse, terrorism and loss of legal order are among possible domestic shocks that might require military action within the U.S." (The 1% May Face The Wrath of Sea Level Rise First).

 What if they were to conclude that the Dredd Blog post "Greenland & Antarctica Invade The United States" is a radicalized, anti-American manifesto?

Anyone still thinking "they wouldn't dare"?

---

Future internment camp general?

---

New Climate Catastrophe Policy: Triage - 13

More than just a saying

This series is about the contrast between what is called "normalcy bias" and its evil twin "worse case scenario bias."

It is also about the legitimate debate in the context of risk management.

There are old adages related to the issue, such as "better safe than sorry" and "the sky is falling."

In terms of global warming induced climate change, the issue involves what some call "alarmism" and its evil twin "false comfort" (see e.g. Which is worse alarmism or false comfort).

The bottom line is that there is a proper time for alarm, and a proper time for comfort, so in today's post let's ponder how these concepts should be applied when considering this announcement:

One of the nation's most recognizable names in climate science, Dr. James Hansen, released a new paper this week warning that even 2 degrees Celsius of global warming may be "highly dangerous" for humanity.

The paper, which will be published online in the European Geosciences Union journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion later this week, projects sea levels rising as much as 10 feet in the next 50 years.

(Former Top NASA Scientist Predicts Catastrophic Rise In Sea Levels).It should be noted that there were "16 co-authors" who are well known climate and/or cryosphere experts (e.g. Dr. Eric Rignot).

Dr. Hansen was quoted further in another newspaper:

The bottom line conclusion, he says, is that sea level rise is “the big impact of human made climate change.”

(Washington Post, emphasis added).  Is this, then, a "better safe than sorry" scenario or a "the sky is falling" scenario?

Catastrophic sea level rise (SLR) has happened in the U.S. even within the short time frame of human history:

" ... meltwater pulse 1C (8,200-7,600 years ago) left traces at numerous locations in the United States ... The torrent of around 100,000 cubic kilometers unleashed within a few years or less amounted to barely a meter rise in global sea level ... the stratigraphic record preserves vestiges of this relatively minor pulse."

(NASA GISS: "The Great Ice Meltdown and Rising Seas", emphasis added). There was no world civilization connected by sea ports back then, so it was a "relatively minor" SLR event.

Today, such an event, a pulse or surge of 1 m / 3 ft. of SLR, would put civilization as we know it now severely at risk.

For one thing, because of the importance of sea ports in international commerce (The Surge: A Forgotten Aspect of Sea Level Rise).

Professional, mature risk management does not decide the case until after the evidence is acquired and analyzed, so reactions before that time are unprofessional and immature.

The only debate remaining in the SLR context is: "when will x meters or feet of SLR happen?"

To scientists, it is not a matter of "if," rather, it is a matter of "when" and "how much."

The "sea levels rising as much as 10 feet in the next 50 years" is in contrast to the latest IPCC projection of about 1 meter, about 3 feet, in the next 85 years.

Basically, Hansen, Rignot, and the other scientists involved in the paper are saying that SLR will happen sooner, and it will be a higher SLR than the IPCC report indicates.

That is not news, in the sense that many scientists over the years have criticized the IPCC habit of underestimating SLR, even though the IPCC has accurately projected other aspects of global warming induced climate change.

Hansen, et al. have published papers already in the scientific journals, which have estimates that are close to the upcoming paper:

The reasons have been explained by Hansen, Sato (2012) in an update, where, not having the use of Cryosat-2 satellite data, they wrote:

The increasing Greenland mass loss ... can be fit just as well by exponentially increasing annual mass loss, a behavior that Hansen (2005, 2007) argues could occur because of multiple amplifying feedbacks as an ice sheet begins to disintegrate. A 10-year doubling time would lead to 1 meter sea level rise by 2067 ... 2045 ... for 5-year doubling time and 2055 ... for a 7-year doubling time.

(Hansen, Ice Melt, emphasis added). The absence of Cryosat-2 data has now come to an end.

(The Question Is: How Much Acceleration Is Involved In SLR? - 2). The new paper has incorporated the advantage of now having Cryosat-2 and other data, so an update of the "doubling" phenomenon is entirely appropriate.

The risks posed by SLR are greater than previously estimated, so the risk analysis is also in need of updating.

In the previous post of this series, I mentioned a social custom we practice in the context of risk management.

I had in mind our custom of having an insurance policy even when the risks are quite low:

A blogger, commenting on the prudence of having insurance, wrote: "[as] far as frequency you could figure that 0.317% of households ... 0.276% of housing units had a fire in the year."

Nevertheless, fire insurance is not only required for mortgages, it is also a custom of our culture to have fire insurance, and in fact even with those very low odds (less than 1%) that our own fire insurance protection will be used in the context of catastrophic circumstances, as a society we still practice "better safe than sorry" insurance ideology.

(New Climate Catastrophe Policy: Triage - 12). The same can be said for vehicle insurance.

The heart and core of risk management is that we need to know the risks well, or we won't ever have a chance of "managing" those risks well.

Regular readers know that Dredd Blog sees the risk in the same light that Hansen, et al. do ("sea level rise is the big impact of human made climate change").

That issue has even been discussed in recent posts (Why Sea Level Rise May Be The Greatest Threat To Civilization, 2, 3, 4).

Note that the word "civilization" has several meanings, and that a particular and specific meaning is used in Dredd Blog posts.

The "global civilization" or "world civilization" composed of global trade, global commerce, and global economy is the main focus (e.g. What Do You Mean - World Civilization?, 2; Confusing "Civilization" With "Species", Petroleum Civilization: The Final Chapter (Confusing Life with Death).

We are not talking about extinction of species here, instead, we are focusing on extinction of world civilization in its current configuration.

The key infrastructure of this current world civilization is sea ports (Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 44, The Agnotology of Sea Level Rise Via Ice Melt).

I have described SLR as an invasion that the military cannot defend against (Greenland & Antarctica Invade The United States, 2, 3; Why The Military Can't Defend Against The Invasion),

I have also said that SLR is non-discriminatory (The 1% May Face The Wrath of Sea Level Rise First).

In closing today's post, let's reconsider the denialist sarcasm-propaganda such as "the sky is falling" mixed with the smear based "climate change alarmists" campaign.

And, let's do it by remembering that, historically, the question "which is worse alarmism or false comfort" (asked at the top of today's post), has been clearly answered:

"In other words, a society does not ever die 'from natural causes', but always dies from suicide or murder --- and nearly always from the former, as this chapter has shown." 

(A Study of History, by Arnold J. Toynbee). History teaches us that in every case civilizations of the past failed to heed the alarmed ones among them who warned of danger and demise.

Be alarmed, because as go the sea ports, so goes current world civilization (which depends on one thing: leave the fossil fuels in the ground or drown trying not to).

The previous post in this series is here.

Exposé on the Church Crutch of Euthanasia

"We announce our candidacy for Preznit Sky Pilot"

Pontius Pilate and the other oids are at it again (The Elections of Pontius Pilots).

How soon we forget (Inside Job and/or Conspiracy?).

In the ongoing Olympics we call the election cycle, do you observe a struggle to see who can be the dumbest of dumb or dumber?

But, let's not lose sight of some world record campaigns of the past, which may surpass the current unconscious babble.

Much of it is coming from religious candidates, while other aspects of the cacophony comes from predator capitalists, and perhaps the remainder are from those much less likely to prevail: "the few, the sane, the also-rans."

For instance, a certain campaign of yore may be instructive:

"Another typical example of infatuation is the Unabomber Political Action Committee, a Boston-based group that is pushing the Unabomber for President. Chris Korda, a campaign worker and member of a related group called the Church of Euthanasia, is completely serious. For him, the Unabomber's appeal comes from his theoretically strict rumblings about mankind-as-pox. (The church's slogan is ''Save the Planet -- Kill Yourself.'')"

(They Call It Luddite Love, emphasis added). One has to wonder about the impact of that theatre of the absurd.

Evidently, supporting such an infamous person (Unabomber) for president can cause genetic morph into a maelstrom of ministration:

Chris Korda is under the ultimate deadline. As reverend of the Church of Euthanasia ... she's running an edgy, in-your-face campaign to stop human overpopulation before every redwood, owl, and butterfly fades into history.

With a droll theology that advocates suicide, abortion, cannibalism, and sodomy, Korda and her crew of young eco-hackers are waging war on the reproductive habits of the baby boomer generation - before the planet gets too messed up."

(You Are The Problem, emphasis added). They target the current world of youth, whom they evidently now see as a problem (They prey on youth).

That may be in whole or in part a projection from a type of Manson Complex:

Chris Korda (1962 - ) priest ... a great-nephew of film magnate Alexander Korda and the only son of Michael Korda, the novelist and editor-in-chief at Simon & Shuster in New York. Chris was a loner as a teenager, incarcerated for a while, and left New York for good when 14.

She settled in Boston, worked for a while as a female impersonator, and considered but did not complete a full transition to female.

In 1992 an alien intelligence, The Being, visited her in a dream and warned of the coming eco-catastrophe. She immediately changed her life and founded the Church of Euthanasia and anointed herself as Reverend. The Church advocates four pillars: suicide, abortion (the Church is not pro-choice – giving birth leads to excommunication), cannibalism (for those who are not vegan like Chris) and sodomy (any form of non-procreative sex).

... She has a girl-friend.

(A Gender Variance Who's Who, emphasis added; cf Wikipedia). Like father, like son, in the sense that the High Priest of Kill Yourself had a father who also had a girlfriend.

In addition to the little priest's mother.

Eventually, the little priest's dad divorced his wife, the little priest's mother, in favor of the girlfriend (Wikipedia, Michael Korda).

The father of the little priest was heavily into power, money, and sex, but evidently he was not so much into his kid, the little priest (Big-Shot Editor).

This is a fitting metaphor for civilization today, where the movers and shakers are into power and money, but are not so much into the welfare of the populace (The Private Empire's Social Media Hit Squads, cf. The Common Good, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10).

Thus, we watch another election cycle that resembles a popularity contest in an insane asylum (NeoCon Planet: The Presidents of Kolob, NeoCon Planet: Maggie's Farm).

The one thing that their words deny, but their behavior evinces, is that for the most part, those running for preznit want to destroy this planet (Oil-Qaeda & MOMCOM Conspire To Commit Depraved-Heart Murder).

The High Priest in Chief (The Dogma of The High Priest In Chief, 2, 3) is reproducing little high priests in chief it would seem (Petroleum Civilization: The Final Chapter (Confusing Life with Death) - 4).

It is so bad that civilization is on euthanasia watch (Civilization Is Now On Suicide Watch, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

That is not your fault (The Psychology of the Notion of Collective Guilt).

---

Sky Pilate ...

---

You Are Here - 4

In the first post of this series I mentioned the psychological confusion generated by YAH ("you are here") maps.

I don't know about other mammals, but one big factor that throws people off in YAH scenarios is the "Y" ... the "you" ... the human.

We can never understand where WE are unless WE know what WE are.

Dredd Blog has been criticized ad nauseum over the years for explaining that so long as we don't know what a human is, we will continue to be disoriented in the context of YAH.

Today, I will use the space program that has been ongoing for years and years to illustrate the point.

We landed on the moon on this date almost 50 years ago (July 20, 1969).

Only a few years ago we discovered that only 1% of our genetic material is human, and the other 99% of our genetic material is microbial.

Not only that, we also learned that the microbial cells in and on us keep us healthy and/or alive (see video and this).

Anyway, the space program was designed without our knowing the "Y" of "YAH."

So, how are we going to exist in space without 99% of ourselves?

Is that why our bones turn rubbery in space after awhile?

What microbes do we have to take with us, including backup systems, when we travel in space?

You ask yourself some similar questions now ... but watch the video and especially the Q&A following the lecture to give yourself ideas.

Dr. Bassler, in the video below, (watch it to find out some critical YAH information) explains that we have only very recently found out that the "Y" is not what we have though it was for a few thousand years (On The New Meaning of "Human", 2).

Got "Y" ?

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

Dr. Bonnie Bassler lecture, with a follow-up question answer session:

25:00 the language of bacteria has a basic word, with "carbons" (carbon atoms) added on to that basic molecule so as to make additional "words" used by different species of bacteria.

29:30 E. carotovora releases antibodies that it is immune to, so as to eradicate competition that are not immune to those antibodies.

39:00 many, if not all, bacteria use a word known by all bacteria, when communicating with other species of bacteria different from their own species.

57:25 Q&A session ... why did we just find this out 400 years after microbes were discovered using the first microscopes? "hubris ... snobbery ... dogma that only higher species have language, etc."

---

---