Science & Technology News

[GordMay]

“Our hunter-gatherer future: Climate change, agriculture and uncivilization” ~ by John Gowdy
Highlights:
• The stable climate of the Holocene made agriculture and civilization possible. The unstable Pleistocene climate made it impossible before then.
• Human societies after agriculture were characterized by overshoot and collapse. Climate change frequently drove these collapses.
• Business-as-usual estimates indicate that the climate will warm by 3°C-4 °C by 2100 and by as much as 8°–10 °C after that.
• Future climate change will return planet Earth to the unstable climatic conditions of the Pleistocene and agriculture will be impossible.
• Human society will once again be characterized by hunting and gathering.
More ➥ https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...507?via%3Dihub

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by GordMay

“Our hunter-gatherer future: Climate change, agriculture and uncivilization” ~ by John Gowdy
Highlights:
• The stable climate of the Holocene made agriculture and civilization possible. The unstable Pleistocene climate made it impossible before then.
• Human societies after agriculture were characterized by overshoot and collapse. Climate change frequently drove these collapses.
• Business-as-usual estimates indicate that the climate will warm by 3°C-4 °C by 2100 and by as much as 8°–10 °C after that.
• Future climate change will return planet Earth to the unstable climatic conditions of the Pleistocene and agriculture will be impossible.
• Human society will once again be characterized by hunting and gathering.
More ➥ https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...507?via%3Dihub

In my opinion, this is based on two completely unrealistic assumptions:

1. "Business as usual" -- carbon emissions continue at something like the present rate, for decades or centuries
2. Agriculture cannot adapt

and is probably intended just to scare people about climate change.

First of all, we will stop emitting carbon on this scale, pretty soon. Burning fossil fuels is an obsolete technology which will be left behind like whale oil lighting, whatever regulation we impose. We have all the necessary technology in our hands, with huge advances in the practical rollout of renewables, particularly wind, and if we would stop being superstitious and irrationally afraid of nuclear power, we could transition off fossil fuels in a couple of decades.

Secondly, human ingenuity and the science of agriculture is immensely powerful and adaptable. Whatever wobbles in the climate we still have ahead of us (and we do have some), agriculture will easily adapt. This is just one more in a long serious of predictions that mankind will soon not be able to feed itself and will collapse, yet every decade mankind is better and better fed.

If we would just give up eating meat (now I'm going to say something controversial), then it's really all solved. To feed the whole world on a vegetarian diet would mean actually giving back a good bit of arable land to wilderness. Plus would dramatically reduce greenhouse emissions (more greenhouse gas comes from animal husbandry, than from all the cars in the world, for example).

I have to shake my head when I meet people who claim to be serious about climate change, yet eat meat and are opposed to nuclear power. :nono:

We don't even need any particular technological breakthroughs, to feed everyone well and stop climate change. It's all in our grasp already today. And I believe we will grasp it.


My libertarian principles revolt against the idea of banning the selling of meat for food, but not against imposing a hefty carbon tax on meat, in order to eliminate the externalities.

[Ded reckoner]

Context is provided for the WHO’s statement recognizing their “problem” with their PCR protocol.

European researchers (including Cormen-Drosten’s seminal paper) set the benchmark for diagnostic workflows and real time reverse-transcription PCR protocol at 45 thermal cycles in Jan2020 (1, 2, 3).

In Nov2020, an international team of researchers requested the earlier European report be retracted for flaws at the molecular and methodological level “…making it highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur...” This matters because the WHO protocol for RT-PCR was derived from the European researchers’ paper. To date, “…no corroboration of claims has even been done with the actual virus; the work done by the Europeans relied on theoretical sequences based on the 2003 Sars-CoV…” And, because of design errors, “…the test cannot discriminate between the whole virus and viral fragments. The test cannot be used as a diagnostic for SARS-viruses…Regarding amplification cycles (Ct), PCR data evaluated as positive after a Ct value of 35 cycles are completely unreliable…”

This is because, studies show ”…There was no growth in samples with a cycle threshold (Ct)>24 or symptom onset to test (SST)>8 days…SARS-CoV-2 Vero cell infectivity was only observed for RT-PCR Ct<24 and STT<8 days…A major drawback to PCR and other diagnostic approaches (including other NA, serology, and antigen detection) is that they all fail to determine virus infectivity; PCR sensitivity is excellent but specificity for detecting replicative virus is poor…” In contrast, …”the ability of viral culture to inform infectivity is an important aspect of diagnostics, but its use is hampered by its difficult and labor-intensive nature…”

And, …”patients could not be contagious with Ct >25 as the virus is not detected in culture above this value…At Ct=35, the value…used to report a positive result for PCR, <3% of cultures are positive…”

“In other words, there was no successful virus isolation of SARS-CoV-2 at those high Ct values…”

“….Further, scientific studies show that only non-infectious (dead) viruses are detected with Ct values of 35…A binary Yes / No approach to the interpretation RT-PCR unvalidated against viral culture will result in false positives with possible segregation of large numbers of people who are no longer infectious…”

One study indicates to get to 100% confirmed real positive assessments, the PCR Ct must be 17. Amplification cycles above this result in false positive assessments.

The prevalence of false positives caused by using high PCR Ct values is the basis for skewed data with respect to the counts of infected cases and deaths attributed *with* the coronavirus. Therefore, in their statement, the WHO deprecates PCR testing for diagnosis of COVID-19 infection in favor of more traditional practices.

[GordMay]

“Lunar Crater Radio Telescope (LCRT) on the Far-Side of the Moon” ~ by Saptarshi Bandyopadhyay, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
NASA engineers are studying the feasibility of building a massive, kilometre-wide radio telescope, on the moon, that would dwarf anything we could build on Earth. The telescope, which would be constructed by robots, would take the form of a huge, wire-mesh antenna, in a dish shape, that would hang suspended in a three-kilometre-wide crater, on the far side of the moon.
The Lunar Crater Radio Telescope would provide a unique perspective on the early universe, though it likely won't be built for decades.
In the 14 billion years since that event, the light waves from that era have been stretched out, from tiny fractions of a millimetre, to more than 10 metres, as the universe expanded. They're now extremely long radio waves, and those can't be seen on Earth, because the ionosphere absorbs it. So, we want to go somewhere away from Earth, so that we can get a picture of the Big Bang and evolution of the universe.
For now, this is an early stage engineering feasibility study, rather than a fully developed mission proposal, but it would certainly be expensive, and would be a very high-profile endeavour for NASA.
If the LCRT were ever to come to fruition, it would be the largest filled-aperture radio telescope in the Solar System. Its 1-km reflector would be twice the size of China’s terrestrial FAST* observatory, which has a reflector spanning 500 m (1,640 ft), and is currently the largest filled-aperture radio telescope ever constructed.
More ➥ https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/sp...dio_telescope/

“A CONCEPT FOR THE DEPLOYMENT OF A LARGE LUNAR CRATER RADIO TELESCOPE USING TEAMS OF TETHERED ROBOTS” ~ [2020] by Patrick McGarey, Saptarshi Bandyopadhyay et al
➥ https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/is...s/pdf/5072.pdf

“Conceptual ideas for radio telescope on the far side of the moon” ~ [2018] by Saptarshi Bandyopadhyay et al
➥ https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8396801

* FAST: “World's Largest Radio Telescope Prepares to Listen”
➥ World's Largest Radio Telescope Prepares to Listen----Chinese Academy of Sciences

[GordMay]

An oldie, but goodie:
MIT researchers calculated the carbon emissions for “a homeless person who ate in soup kitchens, and slept in homeless shelters" in the U.S..A.
That destitute individual will still, indirectly, emit some 8.5 tons of carbon dioxide, each year - more than double the world average.
Estimated average for U.S. resident = 20 metric tons
Estimate for U.S. homeless person = 8.5 tons
Average for the world (U.S. included) = 4 tons

“Leaving our mark” ~ MIT Tech Talk (2008)
MIT class tracks carbon footprint of different lifestyles; finds even the smallest U.S. footprints are relatively large.
➥ https://news.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/techtalk52-23.pdf
➥ https://news.mit.edu/2008/footprint-tt0416

[GordMay]

Half Million Deaths - $2.5 Trillion Cost

Nearly 500,000 killed by extreme weather disasters in 20 years, with Puerto Rico, Myanmar, and Haiti the worst-hit countries.
The mortality burden of climate-related catastrophes such as storms, flooding, and heatwaves is overwhelmingly borne by developing nations, according to a new assessment*, of the direct threat, posed to humanity by global warming.
At the start of the “Climate Adaptation Summit”, held virtually this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the think-tank Germanwatch calculated* these disasters have cost the global economy a staggering $2.56 trillion this century.
- The countries and territories affected most in 2019 were Mozambique, Zimbabwe (cyclone ‘Idai’), as well as the Bahamas ( Hurricane ‘Dorian’). Just last weekend, central Mozambique was hammered, again, by another tropical storm, ‘Eloise’.
- For the period from 2000 to 2019 Puerto Rico, Myanmar and Haiti rank highest.

* “Global Climate Risk Index 2021" [Germanwatch]
The Global Climate Risk Index identifies the extent to which countries have been affected by extreme weather events.
Report ➥ https://germanwatch.org/en/19777

“The Climate Change Performance Index 2021"
The Climate Change Performance Index compares 57 countries and the EU in the areas of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Renewable Energies, Energy Use and Climate Policy, thus providing a comprehensive overview of the current efforts and progress of the countries analyzed.
More ➥ https://www.germanwatch.org/en/19602

“Climate Adaptation Summit 2021"
25-26 JANUARY 2021 – ONLINE WORLDWIDE
The Climate Adaptation Summit (CAS) 2021 will feature a range of Anchoring Events streamed from around the globe over the course of 24 hours starting 25 January. In chronological order (CET = UTC+1):
15:30-17:30 | Accelerating African Adaptation
16:00-18:00 | Disaster Risk Management
16:30-18:30 | Nature-Based Solutions
18:00-20:00 | Water
18:30-20:30 | Finance & Investment

19:00-21:00 | Resilient Cities
09:00-11:00 | Locally Led Adaptation
09:00-11:00 | Youth Leadership
09:30-11:30 | Infrastructure
09:30-11:30 | Agriculture & Food Security
CAS 2021 ➥ https://www.cas2021.com/

“Climate change is a risk to global economic stability” ~ Ceres
Our new report urges financial regulators to recognize climate change as a systemic risk and act now to protect the U.S. economy.
Report Summary ➥ https://www.ceres.org/climate-change...RoCDkcQAvD_BwE

[Ded reckoner]

Mandatory stay-at-home orders and business closures ineffective against COVID-19 spread

European researchers conclude in a new study of the spread of COVID-19, corroborating several others, that, "we find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mandatory restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions on case growth in any country." In this article's context, mrNPI's mean mandatory stay-at-home and business closures.

[GordMay]

“Half a century of global decline in oceanic sharks and rays” ~ by Nathan Pacoureau et al

Globally, the abundance of oceanic sharks and rays dropped more than 70 per cent between 1970 and 2018, according to a study published today in the journal Nature.
Of the 31 species of sharks and rays, 24 are threatened with extinction, while three species (oceanic whitetip sharks, scalloped hammerhead sharks and great hammerhead sharks) are considered critically endangered.

Much more ➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-03173-9

And [Full] ➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...wscientist.com

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

“Half a century of global decline in oceanic sharks and rays” ~ by Nathan Pacoureau et al

Globally, the abundance of oceanic sharks and rays dropped more than 70 per cent between 1970 and 2018, according to a study published today in the journal Nature.
Of the 31 species of sharks and rays, 24 are threatened with extinction, while three species (oceanic whitetip sharks, scalloped hammerhead sharks and great hammerhead sharks) are considered critically endangered.

Much more ➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-03173-9

And [Full] ➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...wscientist.com

Issue is there are over 1,000 species of sharks and rays with new ones being discovered every year.

[Lodesman]

Science on the take: https://torontosun.com/news/provinci...ol-re-openings

Just a reminder that "research" is not always unbiased, and it pays to see who's paying...

[SailOar]

What if … A Perfect CME Hit Earth?

You’ve heard of a “perfect storm.” But what about a perfect solar storm? A new study just published in the research journal Space Weather considers what might happen if a worst-case coronal mass ejection (CME) hit Earth. Spoiler alert: You might need a backup generator....

The “Perfect CME” ... would be fast, leaving the sun around 3,000 km/s, and aimed directly at Earth. Moreover, it would follow another CME, which would clear the path in front of it, allowing the storm cloud to hit Earth with maximum force....

A Perfect CME would reach Earth in only 12 hours, allowing emergency managers little time to prepare, and slam into our magnetosphere at 45 times the local speed of sound. In response to such a shock, there would be a geomagnetic storm perhaps twice as strong as the Carrington Event of 1859. Power grids, GPS and other high-tech services could experience significant outages....

Now for the good news: Perfect CMEs are rare....

[GordMay]

Great Lakes ice coverage reaches near-record low in January
Just two per cent of the lakes were covered in ice last week, which is close to the all-time record low of 1.5 per cent.
Right now, we are seeing a total of eight percent ice covered, compared to the median, that we should be seeing right now, od 19 percent. So, we're less than half of what we should be for this time of year.

➥ https://iceweb1.cis.ec.gc.ca/Prod/pa...le=Great+Lakes

[Ded reckoner]

Wind power and oil are inseparable

An article in an engineering journal makes the point it is impossible to separate wind power from oil. The reason is wind generators are made with and from oil-based products, and their continued use requires oil products, too. Excerpts: “If wind-generated electricity were to supply 25 percent of global demand by 2030…to make the steel required…you’d need fossil fuels equivalent to more than 600 million metric tons of coal.” “…To get 2.5 TW of installed wind power by 2030, we would need…about 90 million metric tons of crude oil…” for the airfoils alone. Once installed, waterproofing and gearbox lubrication require oil products. The article neglects consideration of associated costs and dependencies on fossil fuels that are as great including grid modification (since wind generation is located far from electricity consumers) and backup fossil fuel (typically natural gas turbines) capacity for the many times wind-generated electricity falls short of demand (e.g. as with very cold days or very hot days or days without sufficient wind).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Ded reckoner

Wind power and oil are inseparable

An article in an engineering journal makes the point it is impossible to separate wind power from oil. The reason is wind generators are made with and from oil-based products, and their continued use requires oil products, too. Excerpts: “If wind-generated electricity were to supply 25 percent of global demand by 2030…to make the steel required…you’d need fossil fuels equivalent to more than 600 million metric tons of coal.” “…To get 2.5 TW of installed wind power by 2030, we would need…about 90 million metric tons of crude oil…” for the airfoils alone. Once installed, waterproofing and gearbox lubrication require oil products. . . .

And so what?

Burning the stuff is what is harmful. Using it to make plastics and chemicals is far less so.

And furthermore, you don't HAVE to use petroleum to make lube oil -- as we all know -- or even plastic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioplastic

Originally Posted by Ded reckoner

. . . The article neglects consideration of associated costs and dependencies on fossil fuels that are as great including grid modification (since wind generation is located far from electricity consumers) and backup fossil fuel (typically natural gas turbines) capacity for the many times wind-generated electricity falls short of demand (e.g. as with very cold days or very hot days or days without sufficient wind).

Someone has apparently never heard of nuclear power, the ideal base load generator . . . . No, we don't need oil or gas. Wind and oil are not inseparable. We already have all the technology we need to stop burning oil and gas.

[Franziska]

As long they are serious and reputable sources I agree that is not necessary, but if there are deliberately political tainted sources which tend to spread falsehoods involved I deem it absolutely necessary to at least give an indication of the true intent of such a source.

Originally Posted by Ded reckoner

I don't think the intention of this site is to discuss which media sources are reputable. The information from the site provide appears to be accurate. I think before disparagement is made, that much due diligence should have been done.

The WHO statement apparently was pulled from their site. But, it is archived on the Wayback Machine.