Comments on: Existence, uplift, and science news

By: Mr.X

Mr.X — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:12:18 +0000

You need politics to interfere with politics, in order to stop politics from interfering with science by means of public policy, and by means of science we might be able to interfere scientifically with politics, and by extension with public policy, thus enabling us to use science instead of politic to solve our problems, without needing any partisans.

Btw: People often compliment me on my lucid prose.

By: Nyk

Nyk — Sun, 13 Jan 2013 16:07:31 +0000

I thought fellow singularitarians would be against stopping the economy in order to prevent environmental degradation which will be fixed cheaply in 50+ years using nanites and advanced intelligent machines. This kind of partisan liberal alarmist thought should really have no place here. Science and technology will be the ones to solve our problems, not politics and public policy.

By: Issac Davis

Issac Davis — Sat, 17 Nov 2012 16:24:13 +0000

I agree with many of these comments–skip the political diatribe–we can click on Drudge or whatever floats your boat. Please Mr. Brin, more of your scientific insights. Too tempting to comment on politics on this one.

By: pt

pt — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 05:31:09 +0000

“Maybe that would explain the failure of global temperatures to rise for the last 15 year”

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111205191724.htm

“After removing these known short-term fluctuations, the researchers,
statisticians and climate experts from Tempo Analytics and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, showed that the global temperature has increased by 0.5°C in the past 30 years. In all of the five global data sets, 2009 and 2010 were the two hottest years. In the average over all five data sets, 2010 is the hottest year on record.”

I’m sorry, what was that? Or are all science journals lies and witchcraft?

By: David

David — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 08:50:41 +0000

For the rest of you who are interested in real science (unlike David Brin), please google “The Ocean Is Not Getting Acidified.”

By: Ed

Ed — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 02:13:52 +0000

I enjoyed the book. My take away was “do not let others determine your agenda”. Even if they pretend to know what they are talking about.

By: ErikSMeyer

ErikSMeyer — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:58:35 +0000

Apart from the issue of the noise being potentially greater than the signal on the topic of ocean acidification, Mr. Brin nowhere even argues that increasing atmospheric CO2 leads to increased ocean acidification. Are we supposed to just assume that? Why should it? Could they not be unrelated? Inversely related?
And what is this nonsense about tort law? Does believing in the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) make the planet cooler? Maybe that would explain the failure of global temperatures to rise for the last 15 years… so many people on the internet whp Want to Believe!

By: Vernon

Vernon — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 03:09:07 +0000

If this political drivel keeps invading Kurzweilai articles, I will stop visiting the site. I go to other sites for political issues. Keep it out of here.

By: Jonathan Cole

Jonathan Cole — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 20:55:29 +0000

I am undecided on the issues you mention (deniers, Koch) but why did you stop reading after you saw some words you did not like? Couldn’t that approach fall into a category of ‘simplistic nonsense’?

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 19:32:41 +0000

its not noise if it moves only in one direction. that will show as a change in the average, and though sea life might be able to tolerate temporary changes in their environment, as we handle changes in our weather, but if any variables average shifted we would see huge changes in our environment and the ability for the ecosystem to keep up.

I mean the ice melts and refreezes in Antarctica, but you cant just take a picture of it in the winter and say “what global warming?” without considering the overall trend.

By: sgtmac_46

sgtmac_46 — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 18:26:29 +0000

Yeah, Craig, I had the same reaction……I found it interesting and compelling…….Right up until the ideologically driven mentality that the author was condemning reared it’s ugly head right there in the middle of his article.

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:23:55 +0000

Brin seems awfully smug about his knowledge of ocean acidification but is apparently unaware of the Scripps study from earlier this year:

““On both a monthly and annual scale, even the most stable open ocean sites see pH changes many times larger than the annual rate of acidification,” say the authors of the study, adding that because good instruments to measure ocean pH have only recently been deployed, “this variation has been under-appreciated.”

According to Matt Ridley, is means “Over coral reefs, the pH decline between dusk and dawn is almost half as much as the decrease in average pH expected over the next 100 years. The noise is greater than the signal.”

Are the scientists at Scripps to be sneered at as deniers as well?

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:15:46 +0000

Normally I love reading the Kurzweil newsletter but at the references to ‘deniers’ and the Koch brothers I stopped.

There’s enough simplistic nonsense in the world without having to read it here as well.