James Linzel

Recent Activity

• 

  James signed the petition | about 1 year ago

  Tell CNN to Make a New Year's Resolution: Keep Away From the Anti-Gay Industry
• 

  James signed the petition | about 1 year ago

  Tell the EPA To Ban Deadly Poisons That Kill Our Wildlife
• 

  James signed the petition | about 1 year ago

  Stop Anti-Women Groups From Shaping Reproductive Health Policy
• 

  James signed the petition | about 1 year ago

  South Africa: Take Action to Stop 'Corrective Rape'
• 

  James commented on the article | over 1 year ago

  Are Schools Killing Your Child’s Creativity?

  I  showed the first 'Ken' talk to classes three years ago and continue. Students agree with the majority of his opinions. I do to. The answer to how to change education is less obvious. But it does require moving away from the industrialized, curriculum tsunami we currently employ. 

• 

  James commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Cash Fails to Motivate Students

  Nothing new here: Watch: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

  
  

   

  
  

   

• 

  James commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Will South Dakota Schools Teach Kids That Climate Change Isn't Real?

  Ok Paul. I have a feeling [yes this is an assumption] that you are simply going to retort with more lousy questions. Lousy because the most nations are wrestling with these questions but you expect me to provide the solutions. I'm going to fall for your arrogance and provide some answers. As good as anyone has, although once again, I'm expecting pithy retort from you. I'm in the mood to want to insult you but that get no where. I get too emotional sometimes. 

  
  

  Beyond fossil fuels. We begin with diversification on a massive scale. This will: create jobs, enhance education by encouraging an increase in enrollment in these fields, encourage new business models, diversify the economy. Wind, solar, biomass, nuclear, geothermal. China is presently building the worlds largest wind and solar farms. Equivalent to 20 nuclear plants. Thats a good start. If we hadn't been wasting the past 20 years arguing we'd have had a good start. Be realistic about wattage if you please. I'm not starting a spreadsheet. 

  
  

  Population. 12 billion is a straw man. We obviously discourage a 12B population. How? Universal education and rights for children and more importantly women. Its been shown time and time again that without family planning and women's rights the average women bears ~8 children. In almost every study performed birth rates drop to ~2 when women have access to education and the right to tell men no. This is the replacement rate. So we start with implementing this and prevent a population of 12B. 

  
  

  Disease. Globally the most deadly diseases are still spread by water contamination. Clean accessible water by right. Instead of bombing infrastucture lets build some. This also refers to the next question. In terms of food we need to manage the lands we have. Ironically climate change threatens this more than anything. We need to prevent soil erosion. Increase the diversity of the types of crops grown. This means diversifying what we eat and how we eat , as well as food distribution. 

  
  

  Since I'm going to be labelled crazy anyway, remove border control and allow people to move freely to where work, food and water are available. 

  
  

  Utopian and impossible - probably. If we would all just shut up and start working at it I for one know humanity could do it. We choose not to by making the same excuses used not to address climate change. 

  
  

  I knew I never should have started posting here. 

  
  

  Please do not reply to my post. I'm tired of this discussion. I can see the meaningless replies to the nth degree from now and it will all just be a viewed as a waste of time by both sides. 

  
  

  Have a safe and happy life. I know I'll be happier ignoring this thread. 

  
  

  Cheers

  
  

   

• 

  James commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Will South Dakota Schools Teach Kids That Climate Change Isn't Real?

  What we have both left out are the positive feedback mechanisms that occur in response to the initial carbon dioxide increases. These include decreased albedo, increase in methane release, increases in lithospheric carbon dioxide release. I would really like you to reference the 1962 ice free period because I cannot find [quick search] any evidence to support this. Only data I find the rates of decline from about 1965 to today. There would have needed to be a huge increase in sea ice from the ice free period to 1965 for a decline at that point. Also, I was not talking about migration patterns but expanded ranges. I agree humans have damaged wildlife far more but this does not negate the need to be cautious about the future. Food production and plant growth follow a complex distribution dependent on species. It is over simplistic to suggest warmer and wetter benefit. Too warm, too wet, too warm, too dry are all negatives. Higher carbon dioxide levels do not simply support greater rates of growth. Species are adapted to a specific set of conditions. Changes in these conditions stress plants and cause lower productivity. The question isn't as wimple as saying warmer, wetter = more food. I am saying we need to be cautious. We need to move away from fossil fuel use. The threats of not moving away from their use are far greater than the much better controlled and understood economic effects. 

  
  

   

• 

  James commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Will South Dakota Schools Teach Kids That Climate Change Isn't Real?

  continued

  
  

  I'll be the first to state that the Earth laughs at us and continues on. It cares nothing for ecosystem stability, habitat, or life in general. I don't care about peak oil and its implications. We have the technology and innovation to move beyond fossil fuels. I care about feeding 6.5+ billion people. I care about the spread of disease. I care about food production and water availability. Without these, modern civilization is threatened. When food and water is scarce, neighbor kills neighbor. Desertification of the worlds bread baskets and aquatic stability should require us to follow the precautionary principle. The slowing of any economy is minor in comparison to changes in food, wood and fish bearing climates. The soils we grow most of our foods from were laid down from the last ice age. As these regions productivity drops soils will not magically appear farther north. They will require generations to properly form from the process of succession. These potential alterations would be far more damaging to any economy and obviously threaten national and international stability. There is a reason why the Pentagon considers climate change one of its most serious national security threats. 

  
  

  The minor changes to energy production, innovative alternative energy supplies, energy independence, stability to ecosystems are insignificant to the challenges rapid, uncontrolled, climactic changes would cause. 

  
  

  I'm not worried about polar bears or pine trees or coral reefs as individual entities. I worry about the stabilizing effect they provide to ecosystems we require for stable, healthy, civilizations.  

  
  

   

• 

  James commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Will South Dakota Schools Teach Kids That Climate Change Isn't Real?

  I last few comments clearly demonstrate why climate change is too complex for most of us to clearly articulate and understand. Simple claims about the little ice age, global cycles, warming phase, cooling phase are all over simplified and unsatisfactory explanations. It is selfish and unhelpful to simply state that they have been ignored by the scientific community. Every one of those factors have been investigated and been found short of explaining the rapid rate of warming. It is also too easy to label the whole scientific procedure a conspiracy. It is far more difficult and time consuming to actually do science, gather observations, analyze and attempt to explain to the Homo sapien masses, who already are short of time, money and motivation to properly substantiate all sides of the story. It is far easier to cry foul, cry conspiracy, use unsubstantiated rhetoric and hyperbole than actually observe and study. 

  
  

  I have read in too many places lately that there have been no truly observable effects of the 'minimal' rises in temperature ~ .7 degrees C thus far. But the effects on Arctic sea coverage, permafrost stability, tropical disease spread, migration pattern changes, invasive species territorial spread and winter survivability, tropical zone expansion all suggest otherwise. It is important to remember that the average rise appears low, it is the rise on ocean temps, Northern latitudes and altitude changes that are most rapid. These are the ecosystems undergoing the most changes. They also happen to be the least inhabited.