domain:arjunpanickssery.substack.com
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6hr ago
I think it's more that I tend to care about the things they lie about.
sun_the_second
6hr ago
Do you really not care about the impact of mass media lies on the society around you, or are you unaware of it?
Sigh.
"WMO Secretary General Petteri Taalas soothes people's climate pain: "Only small changes to our everyday life" Fighting the climate crisis looks promising and hopeful from the eyes of an aeronautical scientist.
Secretary General of the World Meteorological Organization Petteri Taalas
The actions required to combat climate change are significantly easier than what has been done to combat the corona pandemic. And they don't have to be done immediately, but over time.
This is the message of the Secretary General of the World Meteorological Organization, WMO, Petteri Taalas, in his book , Climate change in the eyes of a meteorologist, published today .
- That's how it is. The change that is needed can be made with fairly small changes in terms of our everyday life, says Taalas.
WMO is an international organization in the field of meteorology under the UN. Taalas works in the organization's highest office. The core of the world's climate science, the intergovernmental panel on climate change IPCC, is also under his supervision .
So Taalas' words have weight. That's why he is listened to.
Taalas makes the fight against climate change sound easy and nice. And like you don't have to give up or suffer from anything.
That's what he wants it to sound like.
- We have hope in this matter. At the moment, the situation looks quite promising, says Taalas in an interview with Yle.
However, in Taalas' opinion, the image of combating climate change is in danger of slipping off the wrong track. According to him, the necessary actions, at least from the individual's point of view, will not revolutionize anyone's life in one way or the other.
- My mission is to tell the facts, and also to think about which are important and which are less important in combating climate change. Sometimes it's a bit lost, which are the most important things. As a mathematical scientist, I want to tell you what the magnitude classes of things are, he says.
So Taalas wants to restore dimensions to the climate debate. In his book, he repeatedly reminds us that understanding the proportions of things is important when choosing ways to solve a problem.
- It is important to be aware of the magnitudes of things. Sometimes big and small things get mixed up, for example in the media. For example, we may create unreasonable burdens for mothers of small children when they feel that they have to make certain choices to solve climate change, says Taalas.
We sacrifice 75 percent of the Earth's arable land for growing livestock feed. It's a fool's errand and globally the biggest drawback of land use.
According to him, the means to combat climate change should be chosen carefully and thoughtfully.
- Not everyone has to start living a life like Pentti Linkola's , but this can be solved with fairly small changes in our everyday life. We need both large-scale political decision-making guidance and our own activities, such as movement choices, housing choices and diet choices, says Taalas.
According to Taalas, people should focus on big things if they want to play their part in climate action. Big things mean moving, living and spending.
Recently, the airspace has been dominated by diet changes, reducing the economic exploitation of forests and stopping air travel as the best ways to solve the climate problem. Someone is already talking about climate fanatics as standard-bearers of the true doctrine and guides in the lives of fellow human beings , he writes in his book.
Climate fanatics are taking climate talk on the wrong track Petteri Taalas has seen how climate change has turned from a phenomenon that worries a small group of researchers into mainstream news that shakes the whole world.
He has also seen how climate skeptics, who once strongly attacked science, have withdrawn from the debate. Now Taalas thinks it has gone to the other extreme.
This time, in Taalas' opinion, the desire to combat climate science has partly arisen as a result of "sharp and incriminating climate communication".
The desire to limit people's movement, diet, living or leisure time habits or the number of children under the guise of combating climate change has certainly put many people on the back foot , Taalas writes in his book.
On the other hand, Taalas does put the number of children on the agenda in an interview when talking about climate change. He would like population growth to be discussed in connection with climate change.
- I'd be happy to put curbing population growth alongside combating climate change. Very little has been said about it. If our population was at the same level as 100 years ago, there would be no climate change, says Taalas.
In Taalas opinion, diet is also an issue that needs to be considered.
- The most important challenge is that we sacrifice 75 percent of the Earth's arable land to grow livestock feed. It's a fool's errand and globally the biggest drawback of land use. It should be abandoned. By eating less meat, we could use arable land to produce, for example, biodiversity or biofuels, he says.
Taalas also blames the sharpness of communication as the reason why the support of some parties has increased and others have decreased. In Finland, according to him, the Greens and the left-wing coalition have been at one extreme, and the basic Finns at the other.
So, according to Taalas, has a certain kind of politics done a disservice to climate protection?
The topic involves political sensitivities, because a significant part of the world's economic growth, jobs, transport and industry has been achieved by coal, oil and natural gas. Humanity's dependence on these was and is considerable , he writes.
- It is important how climate measures are sold to citizens. Taxes are not popular, tax reductions are, even if heavy emissions are taxed more, he formulates.
For example, Taalas raises the yellow vest movement in France. The people took over the streets in protest of France's intentions to slightly increase diesel taxation .
- We have to think about what is acceptable to the people. You have to choose the means so that the general public also accepts them.
According to Taalas, the majority of the world's population is of the opinion that climate change should be combated.
- But there must also be a certain calmness and reasonableness in the measures. I believe that reasonable measures will be accepted by the public.
Things have to be considered from many points of view; in terms of climate, biodiversity, economy and employment.
- This is the question for the political decision-maker. But we have the technical and financial means to solve this problem, and it doesn't have to change our everyday life very much.
According to Taalas, people are worried about how they will be able to move around at a reasonable price in the future, eat the reasonably priced food of their choice and vacation as they wish.
Presenting the fight against climate change as a penitential exercise requiring asceticism and self-flagellation falls into the lair of populists , Taalas writes in his book.
According to Taalas, sharp and blaming talk about climate change leads to polarization.
- Something similar has been seen in religious circles. When extremist Christians say things in public, the general public feels anxious and finds it negative. There is a somewhat similar risk in combating climate change. If it requires a Pentti Linkola-type life, the general public will easily reject it, says Taalas.
Just like the church, the fight against climate change also needs objective and moderate messengers, so that its image remains positive , writes Taalas.
According to Taalas, extremeness when talking about climate change can lead to the popularity of populists.
- As has been seen in the USA, populists are not the best outcome in terms of combating climate change.
"The domestic climate debate has tones different from many other countries" In his book, Taalas accuses Finland's climate debate several times of being too fanatical and of moving at the level of imagination.
According to Taalas, it is important to value the importance of diet, the number of children, forests and air traffic with the numbers that describe them, and take into account the entire spectrum of reducing emissions.
Well, what are those numbers? You can look at it from many angles.
If you look at it from an atmospheric scientist's point of view, i.e. from the perspective of the amount of greenhouse gases ending up in the air worldwide, the numbers look like this.
Global greenhouse gas emissions. The biggest cause is energy 73.2%.
- The biggest producer of emissions is energy production, second is transport, third in countries like Finland are real estate and housing. Then come land use issues and dietary issues, which are clearly smaller issues. They are also worth doing, but we cannot solve this problem with them. There are ways to improve energy, transport and housing systems. As individuals, we can support this activity, says Taalas.
Taala is annoyed by the fact that, for example, the coverage of the IPCC's land and sea reports has given rise to the image that, in his opinion, the most central issue of climate change is agriculture and forestry or the seas.
According to him, the general public may have had a deficient picture of the fight against climate change as a whole, because the role of fossil fuel emissions has not been discussed in these contexts.
- We solve this by changing our energy production from fossil energy to hydropower, to renewable energy, and to some extent also to nuclear power. Our transport system needs to be changed to electric and to use biofuels and hydrogen. There are also new opportunities for synthetic fuels, which can even absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Living in Finland is central to how we heat or cool our apartments, he says.
If you look at emissions from the perspective of a single person, they look like this.
The carbon footprint of the average Finn is 10,300 kg C02/person/year
- I believe that electric cars will become cheaper. Geothermal heat is an attractive solution. A vegetarian diet is also healthy. Light traffic is also good for health, he lists.
According to Taalas' view, small climate measures are pointless tinkering. In his opinion, it doesn't matter from the point of view of the climate whether he chooses a paper or plastic bag in the store.
If climate change is not curbed, the earth will not be able to support the current number of people According to the most recent measurements, the global average temperature has broken the limit of 1.2 degrees of warming. According to the British Meteorological Institute, the magical 1.5 degrees may be reached at least momentarily already by 2024.
A return to the climate gap of pre-industrial times is no longer in sight.
Finland's Arctic region will warm by at least three to five degrees, even if the Paris Agreement is kept within the limits. In winter, the readings are even higher.
Sea level rise is happening slowly and will inevitably continue into the 21st century, even if we stay within the limits of the Paris Agreement.
- So far, we have not gone in the right direction. We have broken records for these concentrations year after year. The same goes for temperatures. So far it has gone in a bad direction.
The IPCC showed in 2018 that one and a half degrees would be the most ideal goal for the entire planet. Even two degrees would be happy in terms of the well-being of humanity. In conditions above three degrees, feeding the world's population would become very difficult.
Both policy makers and various companies and financial actors have heard this message and want to be part of solving this problem.
If emission restrictions are completely failed and all fossil resources are burned, the average temperature may rise by 3-5 degrees by the end of the century. Life on Earth continues even under those conditions, but the biosphere, i.e. the environment, experiences dramatic changes and is unable to support the current number of people.
Taalas wants to remind you that climate change is not leading to the destruction of humanity or the destruction of our planet.
- This is not the case. The scenarios that have been calculated do not support such an idea. We have certain risks that need to be monitored. There are certain shades of gray to choose from for the future, if the 2050-2060 carbon neutral goal becomes the prevailing goal throughout the world.
Taalas even sees the situation as promising at the moment. By promise, Taalas means that so many countries in the world have made promises about climate action. China, the EU, Japan, South Korea, South Africa, with President Biden, the USA will also join the same front.
- It means that two thirds of the world's emissions are behind these commitments. We also have a growing number of technical ways to solve this problem, and new innovations are emerging all the time. I am quite optimistic that we will reach the 1.5-2 degrees range of the Paris [climate agreement].
This is despite the fact that the Earth has already warmed 1.2 degrees on average and 1.5 degrees is knocking on the door.
- We have quite a good chance of reaching two degrees. Of course, 1.5 degrees would be better for the well-being of humanity, or in fact the best situation would be that we could museumize the situation to its current state. That is no longer possible. The change will continue until 2060. That's a fact.
According to Taalas, the message that climate scientists have been preaching for 40 years has now been heard.
- In that respect, the situation is promising. Both policy makers and various companies and financial actors have heard this message and want to be part of solving this problem. That there is hope, but we haven't seen that positive change in the atmosphere yet, he says."
RenOS
I cope, therefore I seethe
6hr ago
It's actually quite similar. Pre-selected immigrants generally have unusually low crime rates, free and in particular illegal immigrants have unusually high crime rates. This is true for both europe and the US. It's just that a mexican in europe is more likely than not legally pre-selected, highly educated and highly conscientious, while the opposite in the US. It's vice versa for other groups, such as eastern europeans.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
6hr ago
This makes zero sense.
Same to you, bro. If you lie about something that doesn't matter to me, it's not going to matter to me. I can't wrap my head around getting worked up about it.
sun_the_second
6hr ago
If it really doesn't matter because it's so rare, people could stop freaking out over Trump/Vance dropping these claims.
This makes zero sense. If it doesn't matter, then I don't want Trump dropping claims like it matters. He'd be misrepresenting truth. Lying, as the saying goes.
ControlsFreak
6hr ago
Allow classic Milton to get you into the basics with only a sound bite.
Rosencrantz2
6hr ago
Yes, and it also gets at a preference that is more primal than political. Would you prefer to hang out with a lawyer who selects their words carefully or a sales guy who's always bullshitting?
ControlsFreak
6hr ago
But how do they deal with “unknown unknowns?”
How do pre-modern subsistence farmers deal with the "unknown unknowns"? How much of that risk was correctly measured? My sense is that they mostly just died.
Rosencrantz2
6hr ago
The position that you can be a habitual liar without deceiving seems like a difficult needle to thread!
Mushguffler
7hr ago
Lol, that makes more sense than shirking Puerto Ricans, which was the only idea I came up with.
Can't you just say that Trump lies, the democrats deceive, if that's what you mean?
Would fit well with general rightwing memeplex of casting the democrats as the great deceiver(s). It would also be an opportunity to own the fact that Trump lies. Truth or lies isn't the primary issue, it's deception that's the issue (in politics, in news, in science, etc).
4bpp
このMOLOCHだ！
7hr ago
Are you saying that you don't think states or peoples have moral rights beyond what the Americans grant them? I would be curious if most people (in the West? in the US?) actually see it that way. It seems to echo a sentiment that used to be featured in those sneering-at-fundamentalists collections that were popular in the 200Xes frequently, where Christians would assert that without God there are no moral principles or rights (and so Atheists are scary/probably only pretending to have morality and ready to rob and murder you whenever nobody is watching).
aardvark2
7hr ago
I'm a nerd that if why I am here to start with. As for utility, I think I'd been better if I spent same time working as a cab driver.
well it just first that got in my head. I don't think if Cyrus was killed by lone wolf changed anything, in the end, Greek army was left with no person they could legally install as ruler as so had so leave. Assasinating Cyrus opponent would be probably effective.
RenOS
I cope, therefore I seethe
7hr ago
I have to admit I strongly disagree on the basics of inflation, then. It is agreed that the price of any good is dependent on supply and demand. Inflation, being about the increase in price of everything, necessarily needs to be dependent on both supply and demand as well. Constraining the supply of everything will straightforwardly lead to a price increase of everything.
There are some examples in which ignoring substitutions entirely would be foolish, yes. But imo the CPI goes too far in the other direction.
pm_me_passion
אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה
7hr ago
Did you know that, roughly speaking, Lebanon has 3 major ethnic/religious groups that aren’t super-friendly with each other? So everyone who isn’t a Shia Muslim isn’t really on their side anyway. Christians in Lebanon have already been blaming Hizballah for bringing Israeli wrath on Lebanon for a conflict they have no interest in. When Muslims from Beirut’s Dahieh started looking for places to move to, some Maronites and Druze simply refused to rent them. Now this is further pulling these groups apart, who would want to associate with a group that at any moment could either blow up or be bombed, and you already hated anyway?
You’re modeling this as if it’s all of Lebanon fighting Israel, while in truth it’s one part of Lebanon dragging the rest into unwanted war - AGAIN. Did western media not show you the Syrian opposition groups giving out candy in the streets after the pager attacks? Where do you think that comes from? Or did you not hear of the Sabra and Shatila massacre- blamed on Israel, but perpetrated by Lebanese?
The Germans used to have a "crime by nationality" chapter in their annual crime report, where all the stereotypically criminal minorities turn out to be actually criminal. Though the last in year for which the full report seems to be available is 2020.
I think immigration dynamics tend to be pretty different in Europe vs the US, for whatever reason.
I think this was true in the past moreso than it is now, though obviously you have different nationalities coming over, which might have it's own impact.
Sheepclothes
8hr ago
Get ducks
Jesweez
8hr ago
I think immigration dynamics tend to be pretty different in Europe vs the US, for whatever reason.
But yes you can post it.
Sheepclothes
8hr ago
Im younger, less long distance, not about to engage, but otherwise in the exact same boat. I have nothing helpful to say sorry. My current thinking is that this is just something introspective people have to suffer through.
Sometimes i whish she gave me a reason to break up with her. Maybe i need to be challenged by my partner in order to have something else to pour energy in. I love putting energy into the relationship.
RenOS
I cope, therefore I seethe
8hr ago
Somebody wrote that he is now doing some regular mountain climbing instead. Can't find a link, though.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
8hr ago
Would you accept a European source, or would you say it's irrelevant to the conversation you're having in America?
RenOS
I cope, therefore I seethe
8hr ago
Yeah, sorry, this sounds like a no-brainer. Don't fall for modern soul mate propaganda. Especially if you're here, chances are you're prone to over-thinking and to be over-critical. Objectively, the things you worry about are absurdly rare in women, to the degree that any women exhibiting these traits will most likely have something wrong with them. If you want kids, you ought to want a great women, not an even greater man with tits.
Also, I know it sounds unromantic, but long-term what matters is to find a person you can respect, whose quirks you can tolerate each day again and again, and who is attractive enough that you like having sex (and vice versa, of course). Love at first sight, deep intellectual connection, sharp humor, extreme attractiveness, spontaneity, all those things that romantic movies push are certainly nice extras, but don't really matter much in the long run.
Or to put it in a bit more romantic terms: It's not the love you start with that matters, it's the love you learn.
I'm pro-emotional connection and anti-slut shaming, inasmuch as birth control makes chastity obsolete.
More options
Context Copy link