Often these people take a certain pride in defiantly stating that they’ve “made up their own minds” and haven’t bought in to the corporate scam/misinformation campaign that everyone else has fallen for. And while I don’t disagree about the importance of using one’s mind, this sort of Ayn Randish “Oh I’m such a stud independent person” mindset is faintly nauseating. Because in plain fact, very often “finding out the facts for yourself” and making up your own mind isn’t a good idea. It fact, it’s downright foolish.

"Making up your own mind" isn't a luxury we can afford

We live in an age of specialization. Gone are the days of Gauss when a single person could know everything about every field of scientific and mathematic endeavor. Even the most common devices today – like cell phones – are so mind bogglingly complex, that I can state with confidence there’s not a single person on earth who knows everything about how they work, including the chip design, electronics and the software stacks and protocols they implement.

And yet none of us hesitate for even a moment before entrusting our lives to an airplane – the workings of which are pretty much mysterious to most of us. We can use fancy words like “aerodynamics” to pretend that we know something, but we don’t. We don’t know the first thing about aircrafts. We don’t stop to “make up our own mind” about it.

I graduated from St. Stephen’s with a B.Sc (G) in physics. I can confidently state that my understanding of the subject is superior to the vast majority of humanity. But even I can’t prove something like the General Theory of Relativity. The mathematics is too complex for me. And yet every educated person knows about this famous theory (some even know what it means!) and people don’t doubt it’s validity or usefulness. If I were to bet my life on the theory being accurate or inaccurate, I would choose the former without a moment’s hesitation. So would everyone else. How come? Why doesn’t everyone try and “make up their own minds” about it?

I’ve played chess for a long time and a few years back, I achieved an ELO rating of around 2000-2100. It’s quite a decent rating, but not master level. Many times I’ve tried to follow a game between Grandmasters and have been totally perplexed as to why a particular move was played. And yet in the post analysis, most GMs will agree that a certain move is the correct one though for the life of me I can’t figure out why. But I believe them! I realize my limitations. I don’t go around making a fool of myself by saying “But if you do that, you’re putting your queen in danger!” I have enough intelligence to know that they would see what I see – and much more. I don’t try and “find out the truth” for myself. Not unless I spend many more years forging my skills and proving myself in battle.

There are many more examples I could give where it makes infinitely more sense to listen to competent minds instead of torturing oneself by trying to figure out the truth – with a very high probability that you’ll reach a wrong conclusion anyway. This doesn’t mean you’re giving up your intelligence or sacrificing your integrity. Quite the contrary. It means you’re using all facets of your intelligence to draw conclusions which a brute force method could never reach. It means you use your powers of observation to know your limitations and choose which battles to fight. It’s a more efficient way of gathering knowledge with a higher chance of success.

But when it comes to Climate Change, suddenly everyone wants to “make up their own mind.” And facts are there in plenty to pick and choose from – enough to support any given view! Never mind that 98% of the most active scientists in the field accept the evidence for human induced climate change. These scientists are from all over the world, from multi disciplinary backgrounds, and working for different organizations and governments. To say it’s unlikey they’re all wrong is an understatement. A skeptic will have to somehow convince me that they’ve all been deceived and that their analysis from a layman’s point of view is more valid.

Good luck with that. So let’s just stop this nonsense shall we? Enough is enough. It’s time for people to stop trying to figure out the truth of climate change for themselves and use their intelligence in a more creative manner. It’s time to use other people’s knowledge to fill the gaps in one’s own. It’s time to stop trying to reinvent the wheel. Because it’s counterproductive, and a waste of my time.

My latest bit of sunshine refers to the fact that we Indians have been ranked as the greenest people in the world for the third year running! This study is conducted annually by National Geographic in conjunction with GlobeScan and is a measure of how environmentally friendly the people of a country are – not the government or corporations.

Now hold the screaming! Don’t be so eager to crash the party – I know the objections. “It’s only because so many Indians live in poverty” and “It’s because so many Indians are veggies.” These facts are true of course.

But here’s the kicker. We’ve actually increased our Greendex for the third year in a row! While more and more Indians are being lifted out of poverty at a breakneck pace, and we’re eating more and more meat, the fact that we’ve constantly increased our “green” scores really deserves some applause don’t you think?

Not only that, Indians have registered the biggest increase from last year compared to all the 17 countries after polling 17,000 people. The survey is pretty damn comprehensive and looks at a whole range of things such as housing, transportation, citizen attitudes, citizen knowledge etc. Strong growth with better environment friendliness.

Now isn’t that something that’s worth being optimistic over? So the next time someone tells you that Indians are good for nothing, you know what to say :)

This simply shows that we humans are unable to change our short term habits and stave off long term disaster. For this shortcoming, we deserve to go extinct. Don’t mistake me though. Obviously the earth itself isn’t going anywhere – we are! Watch this video where George Carlin eloquently explains how we’re screwed. Initially it seems as if he’s against environment protection, but then 2 and a half minutes into the video, he reveals his real agenda. Kind of an odd way to look at it at first, but then it makes sense. Carlin argues that the planet is just fine – it’s the people that’re fucked!

To cap it all, climate change skeptics are pointing to the recent cold wave sweeping the US and Europe and are saying that this disproves global warming. This really makes me lose hope and question the concept of humans being an intelligent species. As if you can disprove decade long trends by a single data point. As if climate is the same as weather. And worst of all, as if they really think that global warming means that the whole earth is just going to get warmer and warmer each year – like switching on the thermostat!

So you think we have some hope left eh? Let me tell you why that’s an illusion.

The amount of CO2 the planet can handle without catastrophic climate change (catastrophic for us that is) is 350 ppm. Here is proof for that. And here is more proof. Our current level is 390 ppm and we’re predicted to touch 900 ppm by the end of the century! So basically:

Required CO2 concentration = 350 ppm
Current CO2 concentration = 390 ppm
Projected CO2 concentration = 900 ppm
Last time the earth had 400 ppm = 13 million years ago!

And in case you think we can cut emissions to reach 350 ppm, let me disabuse you now. Here is what we need to do to reach 350 ppm:

1. No further oil and gas exploration
2. No more dirty coal burning by 2030

If the US or China takes either of the above two steps, I’ll eat my iPod Touch. Nuff said. So pack your bag folks, we’re leaving. It’s been a nice 100,000 years on this earth of ours. There must be another one out in space somewhere but we’re so separated that they might as well not exist. It’s just as well we didn’t find any actually – fucking up one planet is enough! And I’m so glad I’m not having any children. What’s the use? We’re gonna all die anyway, and I don’t want my progeny to curse me.

What do you think? Are we screwed?

It’s a travesty and an insult to the natural behavior of humans and goes against the very impulse that has propelled humanity to the top of the food chain. Don’t believe me? Read on!

Image Credit: 917press

Patents and Intellectual Property are killing us

Being copycats makes humans great!

Does anyone really think that the brain of a human is good enough to survive in the wild by itself? Take any human, with his opposable thumbs, his giant brain, and his upright stature – take him and dump him (say it’s a guy) in the middle of a forest. He wouldn’t have a chance. Not one in a hundred – unless he can reach civilization somehow. No fur, claws, flight, smell, speed, strength (relatively), or super cool eyesight. Chances are he’ll wind up in several bellies in no time – opposable thumbs and all. Don’t kid yourself. None of us know how to make a fire from scratch, carve weapons, or hunt.

So what makes us stand out? What put us in a position to decide the fate of the planet? What makes us a super predator? I’ll tell you what. Learning. Mimicking. Because children don’t have to learn how to make a fire by themselves, and can build on knowledge freely transferred from others. If one person invented a superior spear, that invention (if it works) would spread throughout the tribe, enhancing it as a whole. Enhancing humanity as a whole. The advances made by one person are quickly propagated and give the entire race an edge.

Sophisticated ways of passing on knowledge to others via writing merely cements our position. Looking at what others are doing and improving on it has made us what we are. Communication, learning from others, copying others and building on other’s work. Not any inherent intelligence or dexterity.

Inventing and Copying are Instinctive

These two qualities are therefore built into us. We invent on instinct and curiosity. We copy and improve without conscious intention. It is our nature to make things as well as copy them. Individual inventors never really need an external motivating force to invent. They have it in them from the start. If the right mind exists, and the right materials exist, an inventor cannot help inventing and exploring any more than he or she can help thinking.

We don’t need “Intellectual Property!”

The moment we start imposing “Patents” and IP on inventions, we throw a spanner in the entire works. We bring to a grinding halt the diffusion of technology and ideas that have served mankind so well in the past. Did people never invent before patents existed? Did the man who first made fire do so because he could sell the idea? People who claim that patents and intellectual property motivate people to invent seem to think that innovation needs an external reason to take place. We’re humans! It’s in our blood dammit!

The entire concept does gross injustice to human nature as a whole and stops us from progressing. The problem is compounded in emerging markets like India and China. Patents are getting in the way of combating climate change, and it is at this very moment that we need the diffusion of technology more than ever. In its time of ultimate crisis, humans need to reach out for the very qualities that have tided them over for thousands of years. Adaptability, adoption, looking at others and learning. This is no moment to hold back!

As a first step, let us get rid of Patents and Intellectual Property (at least for clean technologies), and let us work together to save ourselves.

What do you think? Take the poll!

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Clean Technology and Intellectual Property (IP)

Given that it’s in everyone’s best interests to adopt clean energy technologies, it makes sense that developed countries should give poorer ones the means to do so. However, rich nations have issues like patents and intellectual property that they are unwilling to let go of. They want poor nations to pay the high prices for these technologies so that they can profit by selling them. It goes without saying that poor nations cannot afford these technologies as long as they’re sold by the rich countries. It’s no secret that big businesses are not happy with the whole climate change issue and are willing to sacrifice our planet at the altar of their profit.

Image Credit: Dominic’s pics

Opposing Clean Technology Transfer

Developed nations (especially the US) say that a “free market” ensures that lower prices will result over time. But this doesn’t wash. For one thing, the “patents” for clean technologies take several decades to expire before a free market can ensue. Valuable time that we can’t afford to waste. By all estimates, we have a maximum of 10-15 years to cut and stabilize carbon emissions and for that, we must start now.

Developing and Developed – Not on the same plane

The truth is that developed countries have become rich in the first place at the cost of disrupting our planet. Not to blame them as such, since they didn’t know. But it does shift the burden of fixing the problem onto them since they created it.

Secondly, cutting carbon emissions will hurt poorer countries much more than it will developed countries. One reason is that people in rich nations are already well off. On the other hand, there is widespread poverty, lack of electricity and clean drinking water in poorer nations. These people will be doomed to remain in that state if carbon emissions are to be reduced without clean technologies to offset the loss. This is grotesquely unfair since it means that poor nations will be doomed to forever remain poor if they commit to cutting carbon emissions by themselves.

Another reason is that rich countries possess the know how that will enable them to cut carbon emissions without compromising economic development. Poor nations on the other hand will have to stop growing to achieve the same cuts. Once again, this is preposterously imbalanced.

In a way, developing countries are being punished for being poor since by being poor, they will suffer more. This is completely unfair. Certainly, developing countries also have to try and keep emissions in check – and from what we hear, they’re making more grassroots efforts than people in developed countries.

When all the world leaders meet in Copenhagen, it must be understood that it’s not a trade conference. It is meant to protect our planet. Something that they must be willing to make sacrifices for. Developed nations, having caused the problem must by necessity sacrifice more. No one’s asking for direct monetary assistance. The least that can be done is by helping poor nations help themselves by releasing patents and intellectual property rights for solar, wind and other clean energy sources. Given the burden of historic responsibility for the current crisis, it’s the least that can be done.

Now, there’s some refreshing news coming from Kolkata. The possible introduction of an Indian Green Party gives us hope. Some of us have heard about the recent coup d’etat by the environmentalists in Kolkata who managed to remove all old and polluting vehicles in the city. Of course, they had to fight to achieve this. Auto drivers went on a long strike rendering the city paralyzed, but to no avail.

Perhaps the most important factor was the massive support from the public. Despite facing a tremendous inconvenience due to the strike, they remained steadfast. This showcases an important fact – something that cynics don’t believe to be true – that the people of India are willing to do what is right even though they may have to suffer for it. One commuter said, “I would rather stand in long queues for a bus or a green auto than patronize these polluting vehicles again.” This sort of statement is inspiring and showcases our willingness to look past ourselves.

Indian Green Party of Subhas Datta

Now the man behind this campaign Subhas Dutta is starting a national party based on its environment policies. I’m personally very excited about this. A party that is progressive, based on ideals, and headed by a man passionate about his job rather than keeping power will be a breath of fresh air in Indian politics. He’s certainly serious. The European Green Party (EGP) has invited him to Brussels to give him tips from their experience about what his party’s principles should be. By throwing their support behind him, Dutta’s dream to set up an Indian Green Party has just come a bit closer.

The party’s first step is to fight in the West Bengal Polls in 2011. When it comes to the rest of the country, it’ll have my vote with pleasure.

]]> http://www.bhagwad.com/blog/2009/environment/climate-change/green-party-india.html/feed/ 3 http://www.bhagwad.com/blog/2009/environment/climate-change/us-businesses-challenge-global-warming-court.html/ http://www.bhagwad.com/blog/2009/environment/climate-change/us-businesses-challenge-global-warming-court.html/#comments Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:28:18 +0000 bhagwad http://bhagwad.com/blog/?p=787 We had seen earlier how most Americans don’t believe in Global Warming, and I had gotten some pretty interesting comments including a typical American who put forth arguments claiming that human induced Climate Change isn’t real.

Now in a natural extension of this attitude, a coalition of American businesses are . . . → Read More: US Businesses Challenge Global Warming in Court!]]> We had seen earlier how most Americans don’t believe in Global Warming, and I had gotten some pretty interesting comments including a typical American who put forth arguments claiming that human induced Climate Change isn’t real.

Now in a natural extension of this attitude, a coalition of American businesses are challenging Climate Change scientists in court, trying to show the public that Global Warming is false. This is typical of American corporations who try and skew public opinion by manufacturing “doubt” as to what is true in science in order to further their own goals.

Image Credit: http://www.seppo.net/

American Corporations fuel Climate Change denial

I for one, welcome this. It is going to be pleasant watching them crushed. What is amusing however, is that the final decision will be taken by a judge – a non scientist, whereas there is already a global consensus of scientists on the issue. Those familiar with their history will recall the Scopes Trial in 1925 when a science teacher was caught “illegally teaching evolution.” This will be only the second time in history where something like this is happening. The Scopes trial was in the United States as well. Coincidence?

It’s not surprising that American corporations are taking this step as the Government has woken up and realized that it can’t remain in denial about Climate Change any longer, and as a result have introduced legislation that will force these corporations to clean themselves up. Well, bring it on! Let’s watch this farce die a public humiliating death, and then we can finally get on with trying to save the planet if it’s not too late already.

So it was a shock to me when I came to the United States to learn that it was not a given here – after all, it’s a developed country. But large percentages of people (more than 50%) do not believe that man is causing an important change in the temperatures of the earth. My wife and I were ill prepared for this since it was akin to suddenly trying to talk to someone who didn’t believe the earth was round. Several arguments ranging from “Climate change isn’t happening”, “The earth is too big for man to affect it”, “Are you crazy? It’s getting colder!” and even “There is no scientific consensus on the matter.” And the worst response – “So what?”

Image Credit: sepponet

Americans and Global Warming

Well, just for the record, 84% of all scientists believe that significant human induced climate change is taking place. That’s a huge majority. The influence of humans on climate change has not been disputed by any national or international scientific organization (including American ones!) for the past 2 years. And yet more than half of all Americans don’t believe it’s happening. Why?

For one, there have been records of interested groups such as oil companies actively trying to debunk Global Warming since that would lead to a negative image about fossil fuels in the country and therefore against them. Also, when public opinion is divided, the government doesn’t feel enough pressure to seriously think of switching to non polluting energy sources – thus keeping their business models safe. Lobbying in America is bribery of the Government and the public on a colossal scale. For example, the Tobacco industry in the United States once spent billions of dollars on projects funding “research” to demonstrate that smoking didn’t cause lung cancer.

We in India have a huge interest in the American public waking up to the reality of Climate Change since the United States is the largest emitter of Carbon dioxide (though it seems that China is fast catching up.) It has the resources to really make a difference to the world – and themselves of course since Climate Change affects everyone. What is needed is the will.

So that is why the attitudes of people in a developed country like America lag behind those of countries like China and India. In Europe of course, there is a high awareness of Global warming. In the United States, people depend on cars much more than anywhere else in the world. Cars that run on fossil fuels. And this might be the driving force behind the American public’s apathy towards Climate Change.

The latest in this field is the development of synthetic trees to remove Carbon Dioxide from the air. These ultra efficient and cheap devices take carbon out of the air and turn it into another form where it can’t trap heat unlike gaseous CO2. Each unit costs the same as one car and takes out CO2 equivalent to 20 cars. Meaning that a 5% tax on each car would serve to build enough “trees” to completely negate their CO2 emissions. Sounds good?

Removing Carbon from the Atmosphere - What the "tree may look like"

The biggest problem in my opinion is what to do with the “modified (in this case liquid) carbon dioxide” that is collected. We need a safe way to dispose of it. Before we used fuel, all this carbon was locked into fossil fuels deep inside the earth. We need to find a similarly efficient way of getting rid of it. Putting it in the oceans would turn the water acidic, kill off marine life and make the water even less efficient at doing it’s job of absorbing CO2.

It’s a bit like putting the Genie back in the bottle. Once the carbon is out of the ground via drilling for oil, how on earth do we get rid of it once it’s satisfied our energy needs? That’s the big question.