Bob Kopp’s Post

𝗔𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗖𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 Beyond helping to reduce emissions and enhance the resilience of communities and infrastructure, AI can accelerate climate action by taking climate modeling to the next level, enabling new approaches to climate education, and supporting breakthroughs in climate science, climate economics, and fundamental research.

Why at BION LABS, we were forced to build a new economic model to determine strategic interventions at bioregional levels for regenerative transitions. Spirit of Dr Herman Daly drove us when we tested assumptions and a story of why here, Nothing much to say - but it is amazing to see how common sense gets captured by neoclassical economics BS. I believe all neoclassical economists in training should be first exposed to "Complexity and Adaptability" through detailed systems theories. And maybe that will be the beginning of new life for "economics". John Fullerton Bill Baue Martijn Veening Malte W. Tanuja Prasad #neoclassical #regenerativeeconomy #climatescience https://lnkd.in/dG3z7iv3

Last week I did an essay on how political correctness has undermined the quality of scientific research papers through the falsification of data to reach "approved" conclusions. Some who commented on that essay reinforced the theme by referencing how this was particularly true in climate studies. Today, there is an Op-ed in the WSJ by Allysia Finley specifically on how gatekeepers in academia block certain avenues of study and reward those who follow the party line on such topics as "Climate Change" and "Covid Research." Finley opens her Op-ed by relaying the story of Patrick Brown, climate director at the Breakthrough Institute in Berkely, California, who admitted that he'd censored one of his studies to increase the odds of getting published. Mr. Brown had attempted to rationalize his duplicity by writing an essay in which he said "Editors of scientific journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and by what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives." While the professional journals deny this accusation, it is patently obvious that so many people can't be feeling pressure to conform without it existing. As Stanford Epidemiologist, John Ioannidis wrote, in his essay titled "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," The greater the financial and other interests and prejudices in a scientific field, the less likely the research findings are to be true." And frankly, what topics these days is the government and the academic elite more interested in that "climate science" and "Covid." Hence these would be the ripest areas for censorship and preferential treatment of "conventional thinking." In her essay, Finley gives some examples of fraudulent research in both these areas, but I don't have space to detail them. Suffice it to say, that her Op-ed makes all the right points and her examples are stellar. She concludes by saying that "scientific journals aren't selective about research quality. They're selective and the conclusions." Because, "Too many scientists no longer care about science."

"Nordhaus’s models tell us that at a temperature rise somewhere between 2.7 and 3.5 degrees Celsius, the global economy reaches “optimal” adaptation." Ok I will admit I am not good at numbers, but very simply how can there be optimal adaptation at 3.5 when there are a number of identified global warming accelerators aka amplifying feedback loops that increase the global warming already kicking in and seemingly showing negative effects many species including ourselves continued existence. We have been at 1.5 degrees warming for a 1/3 of this year already and my understanding is the accelerators are often not fully accounted for in current climate models which could mean the reality is unknown and current mitigation plans might be optimistic. Surely this alone would impact Nordhaus's assumptions / predictions? Appreciate any insight from those that know more / have a perspective on this. Thanks for sharing Shashi Bhatnagar

Is climate change ‘settled science’? #Science, at its core, thrives on open inquiry and a willingness to challenge established paradigms. Yet, many critical issues, like #climatechange, get caught in the crossfire of #political agendas. This post argues for a return to a scientific approach in tackling such debates, prioritizing evidence-based analysis over political rhetoric. Public discourse surrounding climate change is a prime example of how politicization can overshadow scientific understanding. News outlets and social media often focus on sensationalized narratives, rather than presenting the nuances of scientific research. This creates an environment where ‘heat,’ in the form of passionate arguments, overpowers the ‘light’ of objective data. However, the claim that any scientific understanding is ‘settled’ is a dangerous misconception. The history of science is a testament to the ongoing process of questioning and refining established knowledge. From Galileo refuting the established geocentric view of #Earth being the center of the universe to Einstein correcting the seemingly ‘perfect’ theory of Newtonian mechanics, scientific progress hinges on challenging seemingly self-evident truths. The concern lies in the current realities of scientific funding. With #research becoming increasingly expensive, scientists feel direct and indirect pressures to tailor their work toward securing grants that align with specific political agendas like those of the #IPCC or unqualified media darlings like Greta Thunberg. This can stifle the freedom to explore alternative hypotheses and hinder the self-correcting nature of science. Furthermore, the public's desire for definitive answers in an uncertain world can be detrimental. Science is a process of continuous investigation, not a one-time revelation of absolute truths. Silencing dissenting voices or cherry-picking data to create a sense of certainty undermines the very foundation of scientific inquiry. In conclusion, prioritizing a scientific approach to critical debates is paramount. We must move beyond the realm of political rhetoric and embrace open discussions that are grounded in evidence-based research. Encouraging scientific literacy, fostering healthy skepticism, and ensuring independent research funding are crucial steps in ensuring that scientific inquiry continues to illuminate our path forward. As Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology at MIT says, “When you hear a scientist say ‘the science is settled’, you know that person has stepped out of the science.”

The Energy Absurdity of the Week: Democracy Dies in Climate Alarm Propaganda at the Washington Post [Follow me on Twitter/X at @EnergyAbsurdity] John Clauser is a world-renowned physicist known chiefly for his contributions in the realm of quantum mechanics. Clauser holds degrees from prestigious research universities like Columbia University, Cal-Tech and Baltimore Polytechnic Institute. His qualifications for expertise in the scientific field are impeccable and barely rivaled among his peers. Indeed, until this year, Clauser was so universally respected that he won the Nobel Prize in physics in 2022. In 2010, he was also awarded the equally prestigious Wolf Prize in physics, awarded each year by the Wolf Foundation in Israel. But Clauser now finds himself under assault by many of his government grant-funded peers and our worthless propaganda media establishment because of his decision to tell the truth about the so-called “climate crisis,” i.e., that there is no such thing as a climate crisis at all. One of the most reprehensible propaganda outlets in business today is the Washington Post, whose standards are so low that it still employs slander merchants like Taylor Lorenz and publishes op/eds written by the terminally vacuous Jen Rubin and warmongering Max Boot. Today, the WaPo took the legacy media’s lead in the smear campaign targeting Clauser, in a story headlined “He won a Nobel Prize. Then he started denying climate change.” There is much, much more at the link below. Enjoy. #energyabsurdity #energy #climatecrisis #WashingtonPost #NobelPrize #JohnClauser #Physics #QuantumMechanics https://lnkd.in/dfZiA3Gv

2023 was a groundbreaking year for science, with exciting developments in weight-loss drugs and climate records. What can we expect in 2024? Join Ian Sample and Hannah Devlin as they discuss the upcoming science predictions and top climate stories with environment reporter Patrick Greenfield. Tune in to gain insights into the future of science! #SciencePredictions #2024Outlook #ClimateStories

Whew! On two ~100 degree days amidst the hottest summer ever in Washington DC, we just held 22+ sessions over two days, with 100s of people in person and online in each session, contributions from dozens of staff from all across the National Academies, over 100 speakers, 30 Fellows celebrating the completion of the inaugural year of the Climate Crossroads Congressional Fellowship, and SO MANY connections made in all the interstitial spaces; the entire National Academy of Sciences building was abuzz with ideas and energy Climate Crossroads Senior Director Amanda Staudt summarized some emergent themes from the two days: 1. Trust. The importance of trust - in each other, and in science - in facilitating progress on such complex issues as those related to the climate crisis 2. People. The importance of centering people and equity in all of this work 3. Listening. As research questions are defined, we need to listen to communities and understand their needs. We need to find ways to build new tables together rather than invite communities to existing tables 4. Systems. Climate change is a “systems of systems” problem. It can be overwhelming, but there are so many opportunities in those interconnections 5. The messy middle. There is polarization and inequality in society, but the “messy middle” between those poles is larger than it seems, and has a lot of room for engaging 6. Scale and pace. How do we do all of this work at scale and pace? The answers are still coming, but we need to think about this hard 7. Hope. There is innovation (like AI as an accelerator for the good things we want to do), creativity (even in moments of crisis), and people doing great work in labs, agencies, classrooms, nonprofits, businesses, philanthropies, and more, all of which make opportunity for positive change! Onward!

34th SAIIE CONFERENCE: Call for Papers 14 - 16 October 2024 Humanity stands on the brink. Climate change, dwindling resources, poverty, illiteracy, and technological disruption represent clear and present dangers to our posterity. However, all is not lost. “Because knowledge belongs to humanity, and it is the torch that illuminates the world,”- Louis Pasteur   Industrial engineers play a critical role in illuminating problems and developing solutions by applying their knowledge in systems analysis, process improvement, data-driven decision-making, and myriad other applications. Indeed, we are the glue that binds enterprises together, the oil that lubricates the engine, the spotlight that shines forth towards the vision.   Two questions often asked are “What is this,” and “How is this done?” The second question immediately illuminates the first, but it often does not get asked. Perhaps it sounds too technical. Perhaps it sounds pedestrian. Whichever the case, come and ask the questions freely, proffer the answers, engage in the discussion, or simply sit back and bask in the glow of Industrial Engineering brilliance. Academics, Practitioners, Students and all who have the profession at heart, there is a reason to hope, a reason for hope.   View details below: https://lnkd.in/dGFekCUW  

Unlocking the Power of Chain of Thought Reasoning in Problem Solving Discover the revolutionary concept of chain of thought reasoning and its potential in solving complex challenges in science, medicine, material science, and climate change. Explore the possibilities of producing 1000-step recipes to tackle pressing issues. #ChainOfThoughtReasoning #ProblemSolving #ScienceAndMedicine #MaterialScience #ClimateChange #InnovationInProblemSolving #FutureChallenges #ComplexProblemSolving #RevolutionaryThinking #SolvingComplexChallenges