Elinor Ostrom on climate change

by on October 13, 2009 at 10:41 am in Uncategorized | Permalink

You'll find a two-part transcript here, or the podcast version.  One recurring theme of her remarks is that we will need a great diversity of adjustment plans and that a "one size fits all" approach is bound to fail.  In this dialog Elinor occasionally speaks in a personal manner:

To some extent I’m kind of worried that there are many, many more people who are apart from the Earth in their everyday life. How do we get more kids involved in research on nature earlier? And there are some very exciting programs where they’re getting kids, in terms of bird observation days, training kids how to take measurements of birds and be involved in the counts. How to get them involved in measuring stream flow. There’s just lots of things that kids can do— all the way up to college kids. I’m not talking about just five year olds…But, five year olds can start. [Clears throat] If we take self-consciously the recognition that if we’re going to understand ecological processes, we have to understand them in a deeper way than the experience the last twenty-five to fifty years has been leading people.

Seward October 13, 2009 at 10:52 am

Ahh, what? You, know, pushing organized, etc. education on children of that age just bugs the heck out of me.

The best way – IMHO – to get kids interested in “nature” is the way that my parents got me interested in nature; to roam around it without any “educational agenda” and to get muddy.

Mike Lorrey October 13, 2009 at 7:07 pm

Geeze, given its now out that most of the papers supporting IPCC arguments are based on Briffa’s Yamal dendro series, which has now been shown to be only 12 tree cores from Ural Larch trees, and of those 12, 90% of the hockey stick climate signal comes from only ONE tree (YAD06), don’t you think its time to totally reexamine all these BS political arguments?

Ben Kalafut October 16, 2009 at 7:07 pm

“Geeze, given its now out that most of the papers supporting IPCC arguments are based on Briffa’s Yamal dendro series, which has now been shown to be only 12 tree cores from Ural Larch trees, and of those 12, 90% of the hockey stick climate signal comes from only ONE tree (YAD06), don’t you think its time to totally reexamine all these BS political arguments?”

Yes, because all of that physics–radiative balance, convective “teleconnections”, all of it!–hinges on a few proxy reconstructions of paleoclimate. And the warming signal isn’t instrumental, it’s from proxies.

Thanks for letting me know that–I wonder why it’s not in the scientific literature.

Mike Lorrey=epic fail.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: