Understanding science

A couple of days ago I was ambling along a walkway in the Children's Museum at which I volunteer, when I saw a lady examining a brass sculpture of a Tyrannosaurus Rex. Because it is one of my responsibilities to interact with the visitors, I remarked that the sculpture was an old version of how we envisioned T-Rex and then pointed to an adjacent sculpture and said "this is what we think they really looked like." She replied strongly that she was glad that I used the word "think." I was instantly aware that I was face to face with someone who had no inkling of the science that provides the foundation for these exhibits. I kept my composure and amiably continued with, "This sculpture is based on scientific data obtained from research and from the actual fossil bones in our T-Rex skeletons downstairs.".Her face hardened and she walked away without a reply. She had her opinion and my attempt to alter it was to no avail.

There are, I'm afraid , many people who have no inkling of what scientists do. This large mass of humanity, even in our gadget-filled land of America, know little or nothing about research, the scientific method, the many branches of science, the history of science and the many benefits that the practice of science has brought to humanity.This ignorance can be consequential if the persons who deride the scientific evidence as baloney and are also in positions of political power.

Suppose that you are accused of a heinous crime of which you are innocent. Your attorney addresses the jury with the statement, "I believe that this person is innocent." Well, you are happy that he believes that but how can he convince the jury without evidence? Would you trust that lawyer to save you?

Of course you wouldn't. You would rather trust someone who has investigated the facts of your case and has presented evidence that proves that you are innocent and that no thinking juror could think otherwise.That is what scientists do: gather data, investigate what that data means, provide a working explanation, test that explanation, publish the results and cooperate with all other scientists who attempt to replicate or disprove the explanation.

Here are some facts that even an unscientific person can understand:

Rank of 2006 as hottest year on record in the continental United States.

Rank of America as top global warming polluter in the world.

Percent increase of America's carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels since 1990.

Percent increase of America's carbon dioxide emissions forecasted by 2020 if we do not cap pollution.

Percent decrease in U.S. global warming pollution required by 2050 to prevent the worst consequences of global warming.

Number of days by which the US fire season has increased over the past 20 years - tied closely to increased temperatures and earlier snowmelt.

Number of people around the world who could be displaced by more intense droughts, sea level rise and flooding by 2080.

Number of U.S. mayors (representing 55 million Americans) who have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement pledging to meet or beat Kyoto goals in their communities.

Number of federal bills passed to cap America's global warming pollution.

Number of times President Bush has mentioned "climate change" or "global warming" in his previous six State of the Union speeches.

The above has been borrowed with thanks from the following blog:

http://www.environmentaldefense.org

I recommend that readers of my blog frequent and join this one for up-to-date information.

How dry I am

The above chart shows the degree of drought during the next year in the regions of the United states as forecast by the United States weather Service. Note the southwest corner as well as the Southeast. At this moment in Southern California wildfires are exploding and raging among the hills. At this moment almost one million people have been displaced from their burning homes!

The drought has made this annual trial for the affluent residents of the hills much worse than in most years. In another region on the southeast, Georgia has requested that President Bush declare a state of emergency because of drought effects. Georgia's Lake Lanier is less than three months from depletion. Actually, more than a quarter of the Southeast has been labeled an "exceptional" drought area (The National Weather Service worst drought category).

Inexplicably, the Great lakes are exhibiting a drop in depth which, if continued, can have a devastating effect on the water supply for several states and Canadian provinces. While these disturbing occurrences may be transitory for the present, they can give us an inkling of what is in store in the future.

There are already similar changes going on in Africa and some small nations. While the Southwest and Southeast of North America may have continuing effects, the harm to individual people is minimal compared with the poor of other more vulnerable states and territories.

Although President Bush has, at long last, acknowledged that the scientific consensus on Global Warming is real, he is still showing a bias toward holding to the status quo rather than taking action.

How about this latest gem: Yesterday Dr. Julie Gerberding addressed a Senate hearing on the impact of climate change on the health of Americans. On questioning from the Senators she mentioned specific diseases likely to affect our health because of Global Warming. After White House review of her presentation, her document was cut from the original 14 pages to only four!

We should look forward to White House statements on the California wildfires and the Georgia thirst.

According to NASA, June through September 2007 brought record sea ice melt in the Arctic. The amount of ice was well below the previous record low, set in September 2005, 38 percent below average and 24 percent below the 2005 record. This particular agency operates the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer Instrument on the Aqua satellite, so--skeptics are reminded that most of the Global Warming supporters are scientists. A corollary would be that most of the skeptics are not.

It's hard for non-scientists to comprehend the tools of the researchers. It's harder still to understand how the results can be used to predict the future of anything so difficult as the temperature in future years. It's quite normal for anyone unfamiliar with scientists, their use of computer simulations or baffling equations to say "How can you possibly say that the temperature of the world will be so many degrees higher than now! We can't even predict the weather in Podunk next week!"

One major difference between predicting weather changes and predicting climate changes is that weather is a local phenomenon. A hurricane in Florida may mean that there will be rain in the Northeast (somewhere) and that it might be heavy (or light) and it may come in three days (or next week). Climate is another animal. The key word in Global Warming is "GLOBAL." Data from around the world is accumulated and fed into the many computer programs that provide the results that the atmospheric scientists use to come to their conclusions.

Well, why is the loss of ice in the Arctic so important?

What color is ice? White, of course. What happens to the sunlight that falls on white objects? It is reflected. What if it wasn't reflected? It would be absorbed. If we were talking about a white shirt, the wearer would not feel hot because of the reflection. If it is a dark shirt the heat from the sun would be absorbed by the shirt and the wearer would feel hot.

Then a loss of ice in the arctic would mean that less sunlight would be reflected into space and that it would be absorbed by the Earth instead.

O Canada!

It has been a pleasant visit to New Westminster, a city that is part of Greater Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada. Even more pleasant were the green efforts in this part of the Northwest that are evident in many ways.


The first thing we noticed were the three separate boxes in our daughter's home that she and her husband diligently filled. Three? The local government mandates that paper, glass and other recyclables be separated so that they can be collected and sold more easily.


Yes, sold. This stuff doesn't go into a landfill. There are companies that derive profit from chewing up this junk and producing saleable materials. So what do many municipalities in the USA do? They charge homeowners for placing this material on the curb. Advice? Check on how your municipal garbage collection is handled and then raise hell about any governmental stupidity that is detected. By the way, residents here are not charged for this service. Why should they, when the city benefits financially. A definite win-win.


Here are a few other things that help save the environment and some bucks as well.


Do you have a fireplace? Have you heard of Ecologs? These are made from compressed hardwood waste with no glue or wax used to bind them. So, when used in a fireplace they burn clean without any buildup in the chimney. Save the forest that sucks up the CO2. Don't use logs but get these Ecologs instead.


The winter will be coming on soon enough in the northern reaches of the USA where I'm located. What do we do when the cold winds blow? We shut our windows and turn up the thermostat, thereby turning our indoors into a biological hazard zone. Our carpets and cleaning agents give off enough poisonous vapors to land some of us in the hospital! Unless, that is, we use some things available to stop that contamination. Heard of HEPA filters? Some of the better vacuum cleaners use them to take out the fine particles that ordinary filters pass right on through. There are filters available at your nearby hardware store that stop these particles from your furnace or air handler especially with HEPA.

Is the summer hot and humid in your place? Do you use a dehumidifier? Good! You don't? Oh,oh. Mold and mildew make asthmatics out of your kids and sicken you as well. Not only the health of your family is at risk, however. The drywall and wood in your home can be ruined by fungus and mold. Investigate antifungal coatings that can be applied to your interior.

That's enough for now. We have to save the environment from the warming threat. At the same time we should not neglect the environment within our own homes