Libellés

dimanche 24 novembre 2013

How to become a climate skeptic

Global anomalies galore! So you’ve seen the biggest typhoon ever wreak havoc in the Philippines. You’ve seen snow fall where it rarely, if ever, falls (Palhoça, Brazil). You’ve seen deadly forest fires that killed 19 firefighters in Arizona and others that devastated part of the Yosemite natural park, killing thousand-year-old sequoias, due to intense heat waves.  You’re scratching your head trying to imagine when and where the next catastrophe will hit.

Destruction in Tacloban, Philippines from the typhoon Haiyan. Photo taken by French journal La Libération.
All of the events mentioned above happened in 2013, folks.

But how on Earth can scientists still claim that this is perfectly normal and we’re not experiencing any major global changes caused by human activity?

Here’s my guide on how to become a climate skeptic in three easy steps. First, inform yourself on all the major changes the Earth goes through that can cause climate change. Second, learn how to deny and contradict arguments employed by scientists on the opposite team, basing your facts scientifically. Thirdly, ally yourself with important politics that will approve your claims and have economic interests in proving/disproving climate change.

So! Buckle up, this is a long one.

#1.  Inform yourself about all the other processes that can affect the climate

  • Ice ages
First of all, the Earth didn’t always have this warm, sunny climate that we’re used to today. You’ve all heard of ice ages that periodically cover part of the Northern hemisphere in ice and the wooly mammoths that come with. Ice ages are just one of the Earth’ many cycles. They are part of Earth’s past and will happen in the future.

In fact, the period between ice ages is so short, it’s called interglacial period. It’s much shorter than the ice ages. While each ice age lasts about 100 to 150 thousand years, the interglacial periods last only 20 thousand years.

So what we’re living in today is nothing more than a brief interruption of the last ice age, known as Würm here in Europe or the Wisconsin glaciation across the Atlantic Ocean.  Rises and drops of temperature are normal during this period. In fact, a rise in temperature may mean that the Earth is bracing itself for another ice age, not that we’re releasing enormous amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Influences from outer space
  • The sun

When we hear about the Earth warming up, we tend to look up- with good reason. The sun is Earth’s heat source and the greenhouse effect is what traps part of this heat and keeps the Earth toasty.  Any changes in the sun itself would impact Earth’s temperature directly. As it is, the sun does has its own cycles, one of which lasts around 11 years and is responsible for boosting the solar “constant”, or the radiation factor that makes the sun transmit more or less heat to Earth. Another longer cycle lasts from 80-200 years and gradually increases the constant maximum before bringing it back to normal.

The number of sunspots are related to an increase in the solar constant and solar radiation that the Earth receives. Source: http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/images/ssn_predict_l.gif

This isn’t a great argument to use in climate-skeptology, because the period involved in climate change is too short to be taken into account. Unless you're ingenious and you want to show that global warming nowadays is a result of the end of this sun cycle. Or maybe you’re part of the group that denies climate change completely and you want to use this argument to show that according to the number of sun spots recorded over the last decade, the solar radiation is actually going down, not up. The great thing about science is that you can pick your data according to your beliefs and back it up with your own arguments, right?

  •  The Earth

Then there’s the Earth’s position in outer space.  Everyone is familiar with the Earth’s two main rotations; one around itself, creating day and night; and one around the sun that accounts for the change in seasons. But there are three other processes that change which parts of Earth are closer to the sun, commonly known as the Milankovitch cycles:

Precession, or the rotation of Earth’s axes, as demonstrated by this video:

A complete rotation takes about 23 thousand years to be completed.

Axial tilt or obliquity, which are responsible for the changes in seasons, but can also vary over a long period (41 thousand years), as demonstrated by this video: 


Eccentricity, or the change in Earth’s eliptic orbit, as demonstrated by this video: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mlUXzHoJsk

This takes about 100 thousand years to be completed. All in all, these many cycles have a major impact on Earth’s climate in the long term.
  • Volcanoes

Next on the anti-climate change menu is volcanic activity. Yes, volcanos have a major impact on the planet. When a strong eruption reaches 12 to 18 kilometers in altitude, it releases sulfur in the stratosphere. This will cause a layer of reflective material that make the sun rays bounce back from where it came from, and keep the Earth from warming with the greenhouse effect. Volcanic eruptions such as Krakatoa in 1883 create harsh winters.
In fact, releasing sulfur in the stratosphere is such a powerful combatant against the greenhouse effect that a couple scientists have considered launching missiles in the stratosphere to imitate what volcanoes do naturally.
  • Ocean currents and wind

And last on my non-exhaustive list of arguments are the changes in ocean currents, known as El Niño and La Niña. El Niño is a transfer of heat from the Pacific Ocean towards South America, where there will be heavy rain fall. This will also cause droughts in Indonesia and Australia. La Niña is the opposite, caused by strong winds that push this heat away from South America. The warm water is blocked near Indonesia and cold underlying water is forced to move towards South America.

If you compile all this data, you will have a great selection of what to choose to prove those pesky scientists that it's ok to keep on polluting. Climate change is natural and not caused by human activity at all. 

And that, my friend, is how you make a climate skeptic.


Keep tuned for Part 2 on becoming a climate skeptic: how to deny global warming.

mercredi 20 novembre 2013

The motivation to play

The French flag- photo by me.

Soccer. Everyone knows it's not about two teams chasing a ball around from one side to another while releasing healthy endorphins. When we're talking about the World Cup, it's about countries competing against each other. Who is the best? Who invests more in education and sports programs? Who gives their citizens the better chance to develop their abilities?

So why do we see certain developing countries excel at soccer?

This question came to me yesterday as I was watching a decisive soccer game : France vs. Ukraine. It was the last chance of either country to be qualified to play in the World Cup '14. The French were downhearted, because their country had been brutally beaten by Ukraine in their last game (2x0). The 80 thousand spectators at the Stade de France were dressed head to toe in red white and blue, but their eyes were all transmitting the same doubt : are we going to make it? And for goodness' sake, why did we have to lose to Ukraine?

This is coming from a country whose team went to the finals a mere 8 years ago against Italy. The French team is notably one of the best of the world. It was a surprise to all that this year, the French just might not qualify due to the prowess of other countries.

But when you look at the background stories, you begin to understand why. France is already a developed country with a valorized sports program, an excellent education system, and accesible health care. The majority of its citizens are well cared-for. There are excellent atheletes that want to play soccer for a profession and to show off their patriotism- but that's it. 

While in countries like Ukraine, people are still struggling to ascend socially and financially. Corruption is still a big part of their daily lives. Those who choose to play soccer as a profession have more drive and more at stake - if they succeed, they may enter the world of the rich. If they don't, they might be condemned to spend life in misery.

Take a look at Brazil. Back in the 50's and 60's, Brazil had the best team in the world, proven by their numerous Cups - 3 won in 12 years! At that time, Brazil was still a growing country. Most of its players came from its poorest neighborhoods. Boys would learn to play soccer with a makeshift ball, but they had big dreams. For some of these boys, their dreams came true.

Today, reality has changed in Brazil. Life has improved for the majority of its citizens, though the clash between the rich and the poor is still pronounced. But today, there aren't little boys dotting the dirt streets with a rubber ball tucked under their arms. They've been replaced by the oppressed lives of favelas, or shanty towns, where smuggling drugs is the new trend. Making big money is still a dream for most, but there are other ways to attain it. Many, illegal.

The motivation that once existed in Brazil to play soccer is lost. Many a Brazilian has shook its head, asking themselves what went wrong. But maybe nothing went wrong, and the motivation went elsewhere. Just like in France, where the level of patriotism is represented by how well the team plays soccer.

It turns out that in the end, patriotism wins. France beat Ukraine 3x0 much to the joy of the crowd. It wouldn't surprise me if François Hollande's popularity suddenly soared today. Sometimes the motivation comes from odd places, but it's better to have it than none at all. 


dimanche 17 novembre 2013

The English names for the days of the week

So a couple weeks ago, I got to see Thor 2: The Dark World, where Loki is undisputably the best character and villain ever invented. When I got out of the movie theater, not only did I immediately post a review, but I scavenged Youtube for interviews, bloopers, and other behind-the-scenes.

Loki, the god of chaos. Image taken from an 18th century Islandic manuscript and uploaded to Wikicommons by a kind soul.

While there are many funny videos out there, I found a particular information to be very amusing. And that is that when they were filming Thor 2, the project was called 'Thursday Mourning."

Thursday? Thor's day? Ring a bell, anyone?

What I loved about it is that not long ago, I was explaining to a French friend where the name Thursday came from. Coincidentally, it was on a Thursday, and we were hearing thunder. I pointed into the sky and shouted, "Hey, isn't that cool! It's a really Thunder's day on Thursday!" And then I launched myself into a lecture, which my friend was more than happy to contribute, explaining the French origins of the days of the week, also.

So the origin of Thursday comes from Thor's day, which is the god of thunder. Thursday = day for worshipping Thunder.

I'm not sure how Scandinavian culture wound itself around the English language, but there you go.

The other days of the week are simpler.

Sunday = Sun's day
Monday = Moon's day
Tuesday = Two's day  (my friend had suggested this and I laughed it off. Turns out he was somewhat, at least according to Wikipedia. It could also be the god Tiw).
Wednesday = Wodan's day (a Germanic god)
Thursday = Thor's day
Friday = Frige's day (a Norse goddess).
Saturday = The only day in the week that is Roman of origin and similar to other Romance languages: sabado, samedi, sabato, etc. Also Saturn's day.

The Portuguese names for the days of the week are much funner to explain. I'll be addressing them shortly. For now, don't forget to get your Vitamin D on Sunday!