KLAUS ROHDE: SCIENCE, POLITICS AND ART

Just another Blog.une.edu.au weblog

POSTS

Compassion and cooperation, not selfishness is at the basis of human evolution, unfortunately missing in neoliberal economics as often practised

Feb 23, 2015 | ,

Lynn Margulis proposed a long time ago that cooperation is at the root of evolution even at the cellular level. That is, evolution is more than a selfish struggle between entities (the survival of the fittest). Indeed, cells of which we are composed, consist of components that were originally separate organisms but found it advantageous to live together supporting each other (in symbiosis). Her idea has been supported by much empirical evidence. Other authors have found evidence for the same principle at the levels of individuals and groups of individuals. Now P. A. Spikins and collaborators have found evidence that compassion with other individuals, cooperation between them, has evolved very early in human evolution, indeed – according to her – a sense of aesthetics and cooperation evolved before higher (human) intelligence and selfish behaviour had evolved. Neanderthal men which lived many thousands, and Australopithecines which lived millions of years ago and are our direct ancestors, apparently (indicated by fossil evidence) showed acts of kindness and cooperation.

See here for evidence:

https://www.york.ac.uk/media/archaeology/documents/staff/staffpersonalfiles/Compassion7.pdf

A summary of the research is given in a recent book:


http://www.amazon.com/How-Compassion-Made-Human-Archaeology/dp/1781593108

One should ask: what is the basis of the widespread assumption in neoliberal economics that if we all live and work with our selfish interest foremost in our minds, an “invisible hand” will lead to the best for everybody? The idea that selfishness is our main characteristic is simply foolish and contradicts evolutionary evidence. We are primarily social beings and our survival depends on compassion and cooperation with others.

Global Divestment Day

Feb 14, 2015 | , ,

“According to a groundbreaking study released in January by the University College London, in order to prevent catastrophic climate change, 92 percent of U.S. coal, all Arctic oil and gas, and a majority of Canadian tar sands must stay “in the ground.”

See here:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/01/07/groundbreaking-study-confirms-we-must-leave-fossil-fuels-ground

“Climate activists worldwide mobilized Friday for what they’re calling Global Divestment Day, which will see more than 400 actions and protests calling on top institutions to pull their financial support for coal, oil, and gas companies.”

See here:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/02/13/global-divestment-day-kicks-call-clean-energy-future

Prime Minister Tony Abbott is wrong: coal is not the future!

Climate change sets stage for droughts of unprecedented proportions

Feb 13, 2015 | , ,

An article in Science Advances published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (link below) predicts that large parts of the United States will this century experience droughts much stronger than previously predicted, unprecedented in American history during the last millenium.

http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/1/e1400082

“Abstract

In the Southwest and Central Plains of Western North America, climate change is expected to increase drought severity in the coming decades. These regions nevertheless experienced extended Medieval-era droughts that were more persistent than any historical event, providing crucial targets in the paleoclimate record for benchmarking the severity of future drought risks. We use an empirical drought reconstruction and three soil moisture metrics from 17 state-of-the-art general circulation models to show that these models project significantly drier conditions in the later half of the 21st century compared to the 20th century and earlier paleoclimatic intervals. This desiccation is consistent across most of the models and moisture balance variables, indicating a coherent and robust drying response to warming despite the diversity of models and metrics analyzed. Notably, future drought risk will likely exceed even the driest centuries of the Medieval Climate Anomaly (1100–1300 CE) in both moderate (RCP 4.5) and high (RCP 8.5) future emissions scenarios, leading to unprecedented drought conditions during the last millennium.”

For a brief summary see also here:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/02/12/climate-change-sets-stage-droughts-unprecedented-proportions

A quote from the latter: “The coming drought age—caused by higher temperatures under climate change—will make it nearly impossible to carry on with current life-as-normal conditions across a vast swath of the country,….”

Similar studies have not been made for Australia, but – considering the generally drier and more extreme conditions in Australia than the US – it seems likely that effects of climate change on drought conditions here will be at least as severe.

Climate models do not overestimate long-term effects of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations

Jan 29, 2015 | ,

The apparent “pause”, i.e. a smaller than predicted increase in air temperature over the last years in spite of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations has led some to believe that climate models are incorrect and that we should not worry too much about global warming. An important study by two leading climate researchers just published in Nature has now shown that the so-called pause is due to short-term chaotic fluctuations and that predictions for long-term trends are correct. We must expect serious global warming in future years. Abstract of the paper, published online 28 January 2015, below:

Jochem Marotzke & Piers M. Forster

Nature
517,
565–570
(29 January 2015)
doi:10.1038/nature14117

Most present-generation climate models simulate an increase in global-mean surface temperature (GMST) since 1998, whereas observations suggest a warming hiatus. It is unclear to what extent this mismatch is caused by incorrect model forcing, by incorrect model response to forcing or by random factors. Here we analyse simulations and observations of GMST from 1900 to 2012, and show that the distribution of simulated 15-year trends shows no systematic bias against the observations. Using a multiple regression approach that is physically motivated by surface energy balance, we isolate the impact of radiative forcing, climate feedback and ocean heat uptake on GMST—with the regression residual interpreted as internal variability—and assess all possible 15- and 62-year trends. The differences between simulated and observed trends are dominated by random internal variability over the shorter timescale and by variations in the radiative forcings used to drive models over the longer timescale. For either trend length, spread in simulated climate feedback leaves no traceable imprint on GMST trends or, consequently, on the difference between simulations and observations. The claim that climate models systematically overestimate the response to radiative forcing from increasing greenhouse gas concentrations therefore seems to be unfounded.

The State of the Earth and the Reaction of France and the Western World to Terrorist Attacks

Jan 18, 2015 | , , , , , ,

The West Antarctic Ice Sheet (about 2.2million cu.km, 10% of the total ice mass of Antarctica) has begun to collapse and may already have passed the point of no return. If all the ice in it will melt, sea levels will rise by about 4.6 m, and this may happen within the next few hundred years if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, flooding large coastal areas, coastal cities and even some cities far inland, such as Washington D.C. For details see here:

http://time.com/96173/antarctic-glacier-loss-is-unstoppable-study-says/

Overfishing, effects of climate change such as acidification, pollution particularly by plastics, etc., threaten the health of our oceans. Effects will be on the world’s food supply, air quality, climate stability, etc. The Global Oceans Commission has outlined a “rescue package” including a limit to gas and oil exploration, capping subsidies for commercial fishing, and creating MPAs, marine protected areas. For details see here:

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/06/24-2

What is largely responsible for all the mess? Our present economic system, in other words neoliberal capitalism with its overexploitation and little consideration of environmental impacts. See here:
”
“That Was Easy: In Just 60 Years, Neoliberal Capitalism Has Nearly Broken Planet Earth”

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/01/16/was-easy-just-60-years-neoliberal-capitalism-has-nearly-broken-planet-earth

However, why worry about all this, humans apparently cannot wait and are trying to speed things up even more.

Consider the recent attacks by some Muslim fanatics on the French satirical magazine Charlie and the reaction of Western governments to it. It seems that the proper reaction of the French government would have been to play things down and not up. But it did exactly the opposite, it played things up thus demonstrating “strength” to the electorate (President Hollande’s ratings went up by about 15%!!) and demonstrated to potential terrorists how to successfully challenge the west. It seems that the reaction was exactly what the terrorists wanted. Things were made even worse by millions of copies of the magazine with a cartoon of Mohammed on the front page distributed in various languages, causing uproar among muslims in many if not all countries (see attacks in Niger, planned attacks in Belgium, and the reaction of governments of various Muslim countries). Even the Pope, in strong terms, objected to the obvious insults against the Prophet and indeed any religion. – We are seeing, it seems to me, an ever increasing disregard for the rights of others, of the future of mankind, all in the name of short-term gains for the few who own the riches, and the political class which is trying to hold on to power whatever the long-term costs.

Australia has one of the worst extinction records of any country

Jan 15, 2015 | ,

A team of scientists recently went to Bramble Cay off northern Australia to search for the Bramble Cay melomys, a small rodent recorded only there and not seen for about seven years. They failed to find any trace of the species, suggesting that it is extinct. Since European colonisation, 30 mammals (more than 10% of Australia’s mammal species) have become extinct, demonstrating that Australia has one of the worst extinction records of any country.

“More than 1,850 animals and plants are listed as threatened under Commonwealth legislation (the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act).”

Full article here:

https://theconversation.com/another-australian-animal-slips-away-to-extinction-36203?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+15+January+2015+-+2303&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+15+January+2015+-+2303+CID_cdc9a19de26c1a4b01b7c8b0360cf71f&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Another%20Australian%20animal%20slips%20away%20to%20extinction

In the global context (from a recent article in Science:http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2015/01/14/science.1259855)
About 10 species per million species a year are lost even without human influence. At present extinction rates are 100-1000 times higher. Which means that we may be undergoing one of the great mass extinctions of Earth just now.

Hundreds of Professors of Stanford University sign an open letter urging the University to fully divest fossil fuels

Jan 13, 2015 | ,

About 300 professors of Stanford University, one of the most prestigious universities in the US, including two Noble prize winners (physics and chemistry) and a winner of the Field medal (mathematics) signed an open letter to the President and Board of their University urging them to fully divest fossil fuels. “The letter notes that in order to stay beneath the scientifically designated 2-degree warming threshold, beyond which we face cataclysmic climate disruption, scientific consensus says we must cap fossil fuel emissions at 565 gigatons of carbon dioxide. Current fossil fuel companies claim holdings sufficient to produce 2795 gigatons.” Similar letters were earlier signed by 226 members of Harvard University, and members of the University of California, Berkeley.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/01/12/something-momentous-happening-hundreds-stanford-professors-call-full-fossil-fuel

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/interactive/2015/jan/11/stanford-fossil-fuel-divestment-letterHundreds of professors of Stanford University sign letter to urge

The end of the university?

Jan 13, 2015 | , , ,

This is what Terry Eagleton, the noted Catholic-Marxist literary critic, has to say about the university today in an interview in Times Higher Education http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/interview-terry-eagleton/2017733.fullarticle

“What I would say about the university today,” he says, “is that we’re living through an absolutely historic moment – namely the effective end of universities as centres of humane critique, an almost complete capitulation to the philistine and sometimes barbaric values of neo-capitalism.”

He sums it up in a nutshell!

Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is a Pending Disaster

Jan 8, 2015 | , , ,

There are worrying trends towards an ever increasing concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a few. The negotiations about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) point in the same direction. Here are excerpts from a relevant article in Commondreams, January 7, 2015, by Robert Reich, one of the USA’s leading experts on the economy, Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, who has served in three US administrations. Time Magazine has named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century.
Full article here: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2015/01/07/why-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-pending-disaster

Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is a Pending Disaster

“For three decades, free trade worked. It was a win-win-win.
But in more recent decades the choice has become far more complicated and the payoff from trade agreements more skewed to those at the top.

Tariffs are already low. Negotiations now involve such things as intellectual property, financial regulations, labor laws, and rules for health, safety, and the environment.

It’s no longer free trade versus protectionism. Big corporations and Wall Street want some of both.

They want more international protection when it comes to their intellectual property and other assets. So they’ve been seeking trade rules that secure and extend their patents, trademarks, and copyrights abroad, and protect their global franchise agreements, securities, and loans.

But they want less protection of consumers, workers, small investors, and the environment, because these interfere with their profits. So they’ve been seeking trade rules that allow them to override these protections.

Not surprisingly for a deal that’s been drafted mostly by corporate and Wall Street lobbyists, the TPP provides exactly this mix.

What’s been leaked about it so far reveals, for example, that the pharmaceutical industry gets stronger patent protections, delaying cheaper generic versions of drugs. That will be a good deal for Big Pharma but not necessarily for the inhabitants of developing nations who won’t get certain life-saving drugs at a cost they can afford.

The TPP also gives global corporations an international tribunal of private attorneys, outside any nation’s legal system, who can order compensation for any “unjust expropriation” of foreign assets.

Even better for global companies, the tribunal can order compensation for any lost profits found to result from a nation’s regulations. Philip Morris is using a similar provision against Uruguay (the provision appears in a bilateral trade treaty between Uruguay and Switzerland), claiming that Uruguay’s strong anti-smoking regulations unfairly diminish the company’s profits.

Anyone believing the TPP is good for Americans take note: The foreign subsidiaries of U.S.-based corporations could just as easily challenge any U.S. government regulation they claim unfairly diminishes their profits – say, a regulation protecting American consumers from unsafe products or unhealthy foods, investors from fraudulent securities or predatory lending, workers from unsafe working conditions, taxpayers from another bailout of Wall Street, or the environment from toxic emissions.

The administration says the trade deal will boost U.S. exports in the fast-growing Pacific basin where the United States faces growing economic competition from China. The TPP is part of Obama’s strategy to contain China’s economic and strategic prowess.

Fine. But the deal will also allow American corporations to outsource even more jobs abroad.

In other words, the TPP is a Trojan horse in a global race to the bottom, giving big corporations and Wall Street banks a way to eliminate any and all laws and regulations that get in the way of their profits.

At a time when corporate profits are at record highs and the real median wage is lower than it’s been in four decades, most Americans need protection – not from international trade but from the political power of large corporations and Wall Street.

The Trans Pacific Partnership is the wrong remedy to the wrong problem. Any way you look at it, it’s just plain wrong.“

Unusually heavy flooding in parts of Malaysia not due to illegal logging, according to the Kelantan government. Australian bush fires not due to climate change

Jan 6, 2015 | , ,

The recent flooding in large parts od Southeastern Asia (Sri Lanka, southern Thailand, Malaysia, western Indonesia) were unusually heavy, although floods are common during the monsoon season. In Malaysia, more than 250,000 people were displaced and about two dozen killed. ‘The National Security Council (NSC) confirmed the massive flood that hit Kelantan (in the Northeast of peninsuar Malaysia) was the worst in the history of the state.’ – See more at: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/worst-floods-in-kelantan-confirms-nsc#sthash.4jtKhJEI.dpuf

A number of reasons have been given, illegal logging,”God’s wrath or climate change or PAS or Umno Baru”……. “neglect and under-investment by the government – both state and federal. It is also the people’s lack of will to force Putrajaya to provide the badly needed national funds to build flood defences and develop the state.”

According to http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/01/04/shahidan-says-uncontrolled-logging-in-kelantan-the-cause-of-flooding/, uncontrolled logging is the major cause of the excessive flooding. However, according to http://www.mysinchew.com/node/104775?tid=4

“KOTA BAHARU, Jan 4 (Bernama) — The Kelantan government has denied uncontrolled logging in Hulu Kelantan as a major cause of the massive flooding in the state.

Menteri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yakob said the disaster was due to continuous heavy rain in Gua Musang from Dec 21 to 23.

“I firmly refute the allegation as logging has been frozen in the Lojing Highlands since 2006.

“The unusually heavy rain for three days which recorded the highest rainfall distribution at 1,295mm was equivalent to the distribution of rainfall for 64 days,” he said in a statement, here, today.

“It is the power of Allah to bring such heavy rain in such a short time.

“I am calling on the people in the state to take this as a sign from Allah,” he said.

Ahmad said at the present stage, all parties should help to restore all areas destroyed and assist the flood victims who lost their homes and belongings.”

It seems that the Kelantan authorities use the same logic as the Australian Prime Minister, who said that particularly strong bush fires in Australia were not due to climate change but the Australian way of life. Did it occur to the Kelantan authority who made above claim that particularly heavy rains might be a consequence of logging? Concerning the reference to Allah, there are disturbing similarities with some Australian reactions as well. Cardinal George Pell, as Archbishop of Sydney (a good friend of the Prime Minister and self-declared climate expert), wrote in one of Murdoch’s tabloids that “some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness…belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect…In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans to placate capricious and cruel gods.Today they demand reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.” (for further details see K. Rohde ed. 2013: The Balance of Nature and Human Impact. Cambridge University Press).

A footnote, unfortunately not from a comic strip: the Australian government has replaced “climate change” by “climate variability” in its official terminology.

Two ways to mislead the public

Jan 3, 2015 | ,

Australian media are highly concentrated, two thirds of the printed media are controlled by Rupert Murdoch’s News Cop. (of America’s Fox News fame), about one quarter by Fairfax. TV channels and radio also are heavily biased towards the political right, balanced to a small degree by the public broadcasters ABC and SBS. Murdoch media are almost ridiculously one-sided, favouring the Abbott government (Liberals/Nationals coalition). For example, it is almost impossible to find scientifically correct information on climate change in The Australian and The Daily/Sunday Telegraph, two of Murdoch’s principal newspapers, but a lot on the views of so-called climate change sceptics/deniers, such as Lord Monckton, which reflects the views expressed by the prime minister and various ministers. The Sydney Morning Herald, one of Fairfax’s main newspapers, gives more balanced views, which means that it publishes some excellent articles on economics, current political events, the science of climate change, etc., but also the views of right-wing ideologues.

The way how regular contributors to the Daily Telegraph, such as Piet Akermann (formerly a Vice-President of Fox News in the USA), and Amanda Devine, both climate sceptics, present their “information”, is straightforward, they ridicule the science of climate change as “socialism in disguise”, and propagate political issues from the angle of extreme right-wing economics, i.e., measures that favour the rich at the expense of the poorer. – The Abbott government acknowledged the contribution made by these right-wing commentators to its winning the election, by inviting them to a tête-à-tête soon after their election victory, and by doing its best to reduce the influence of ABC and SBS by cutting their funding and threatening direct interference in their political direction.

But there is another – more indirect and seemingly more persuasive – way, such as that taken by Paul Sheehan in the Sydney Morning Herald (Fairfax). An example in the Sydney Morning Herald January 1, 2015: “It’s high time to put aside bad news and focus on the good”. He points out that average household wealth in Australia is now close to $ one million, that Australia has “one of the world’s most stable, transparent and sophisticated financial sectors”, the “eigth largest share-market in the world despite having the 53rd largest population”, and among large economies with more than 10 million people, the third or fourth highest per capita income. My comment: All this, and the fact that the previous Labor government left a budget in much better shape than that of most other advanced economies, shows that the government’s claim that we are in an emergency situation and urgently require severe cuts to various welfare programs, foreign aid etc., is a lie. Nevertheless, Paul Sheehan goes on to make a comparison with Europe and Angela Merkel: “…..Angela Merkel…..likes to offer a set of basic facts to those constantly calling on government to do more, and thus spend more, in the name of fairness….Europe has 7 per cent of the world’s population. It produces 25% of the worlds economic output. But it represents 50 per cent of the world’s spending on social welfare. – In other word’s, Europe is on an unsustainable path, already reflected in high unemployment rates, stagnant growth, pervasive youth unemployment and demographic decline.”… Sheehan then continues that Australians do not “want to heed Merkel’s warnings.” They are “not willing to halt the growth in social spending….Australians are clearly willing to rip off their grandchildren,……”

In toto, Sheehan justifies the present government’s attempts to introduce budget measures that harm the less well off, although he does not mention specific ones (no unemployment benefits for a certain period, introduction of fees for seeing a doctor even for the poor, deregulation of university fees, etc.etc.). He does not mention that the rich are already heavily favoured by capital gains discounts, negative gearing, and other rules. He does not mention that the government’s could easily bring the budget back to surplus if the richer would be only slightly more heavily (but not only nominally) burdened, and he also forgot to mention that the government did not follow up on the rule introduced by the previous Labour government to cut down on tax avoidance schemes by large multinational companies which would have earned the government about $600 million. Last not least, he forgot to mention that Merkel’s comments refer to a much higher “starting point”: in Germany education from Kindergarden (preschool) to University is free, Germany does not send refugees including (until recently) children to camps on small islands overseas (Nauru, Manus Island) or to Cambodia, which has no facilities to absorb large numbers of refugees, but spends enormous funds to accommodate them decently, etc.

Perhaps even the poor would be willing to accept cuts in order not to rip off their offspring, if the rich would be asked to do the same. One should not forget, eminent economists have shown that an increase in inequality reduces economic performance!

World events and economics from a socialdemocratic perspective

Dec 31, 2014 | ,

With this post I wish to draw attention to a blog by Professor John Qiggin. Professor John Qiggin is an economist in the School of Economics and the School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland, Australian Research Council Federation Fellow, Laureate Fellow at the University of Queensland, and a member of the Board of the Climate Change Authority of the Australian Government. You will find interesting discussions on current world and particularly Australian political events in his blog. Among other topics, he argues that nuclear energy is not viable (in Australia) and that we need more efficient energy use and development of renewable energies: http://johnquiggin.com/2014/12/15/tell-em-theyre-dreaming/

http://johnquiggin.com/

Destructive changes to shareholder rights

Dec 31, 2014 | , ,

Josh Frydenberg, a former Federal Court Judge, has blasted as “destructive” the Abbott government’s intention to remove rules that force companies to hold extraordinary meetings of shareholders if requested by at least 100 shareholders. Reasons given by the government are to remove red tape, supposedly “abused” by unions, environmental and advocacy groups such as GetUp! which stand up for labour standards and protest against logging and the abuse of poker machines, etc. (SMH 31 December 2014).

Another step in concentrating economic and political power in the hands of a small elite.

Big business, the rights of the poor and the Abbott government

Dec 27, 2014 |

A company run by some of the very rich and influential in Australia has bought up government-owned housing and sold it shortly afterwards for about twice the price. Elderly tenants were offered cash settlements and told to leave. Some did not accept the cash but decided to fight it out in the courts, on the basis that they had guarantees protecting them from eviction. At about the same time or somewhat earlier the government cut the funds to several bodies that previously had given legal help to such tenants, by $250 million.

Reference: Sydney Morning Herald, December 27-28, 2014

Hockey lets corporate tax avoiders off hook

Dec 17, 2014 | ,

Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey, the prime minister and treasurer, had repeatedly announced (recently at the G20 meeting in Brisbane) that they would cut down on tax avoidance by large multinational companies. It now turns out that this was all cheap propaganda.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald 17.12.14., the government now announced that it would not proceed with legislating a package to combat tax minimisation introduced by the former Labor government under Julia Gillard, which would have brought in Aust.$ 600 million. Also according to that newspaper, “one of the loudest opponents of the plan to abolish deductions was liberal party donor Paul Ramsay…..”. At the same time, the treasury announced that job cuts to the public sector would be more severe (thousands more) than forecast, and the OECD “slams Australian budget as unsustainable”.

Any doubts left what this government stands for and that the budget lacks all fairness?

Climate change policy and media control under the Abbott government. Two quotes from the Sydney Morning Herald, November 29-30, 2014

Nov 29, 2014 | ,

1)Title page:
“Exclusive Fears of political interference.
Plan to control ABC”
“The government would gain new powers to set out what it expects from the ABC under a recommendation of the confidential Lewis Review, raising fears of political interference in the national broadcaster”

2) Ross Gittins in “Parko signs off with a look at challenges”
“One of Tony Abbott’s first acts on becoming Prime Minister was to sack the secretary of the Treasury, Dr. Martin Parkinson. Parkinson’s crime was to believe – as did the government he had been serving – that we need to take effective action against climate change.
Abbott also sacked Parkinson’s obvious successor at Treasury, Blair Comley, for the same crime. It was a disgraceful, vindictive way to treat loyal and proficient public servants.”

See my previous posts on the same topics.

Climate change policy and economics

Nov 28, 2014 | , ,

Scientists almost unanimously agree that human induced climate change will have serious effects on humans. They agree that action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, especially CO2 is urgently needed. Why then is it so difficult to convince governments to take efficient steps to tackle the problem? The answers seem to be: 1) humans have evolved to react to short-term changes in the environment but not to changes that may happen in the distant future, where distant is defined as something exceeding a few years or perhaps decades (the prime minister of Australia, Tony Abbott, for example, recently declared that what happened in 16 years does not interest him), 2) governments (in particular conservative governments) argue that switching to renewable energies would have serious consequences for the economy, reducing the average income of the population. By doing this, they play on the greed of people, who, they believe, like themselves do not care about the future of their children and grandchildren sufficiently to sacrifice some of their income. To get their policies through, they ignore or ridicule the science of climate change, and propagate the falsehood that economics is a “science” whose mathematical equations give an unequivocal answer to what economic policies must be followed, and that alternatives do not exist. These policies include 1) keep the budget always balanced or in surplus, 2) keep taxes low, 3) don’t worry about inequality, because a “secret hand” will always make sure that the rich will invest their wealth in ways best for everybody, 4) private business can do things always better than state-owned ones, 5) in toto: don’t interfere with the workings of the “secret hand”. These extreme neo-liberal ideas are based on Milton Friedman. Any ethical considerations aimed at removing inequality, or intrusions of the state for example by stimulating the economy in economic crises, are disallowed. In Australia, for example, the former Labor government was ridiculed and accused of wasting public money by financing government programs to avoid a recession as experienced by several states during the recent financial crisis. And programs supporting renewable energy programs (such as wind- and solar power) were scaled back as soon as the Liberal/National government took over in September 2013, for the reason that the Prime-Minister and many of his ministers did not believe in the “crap” of climate change. Policies favouring renewable energies were claimed of being “socialism in disguise”.

How then can we set things right? Stuart Kauffman, well known for his work on self-organization in evolution (The Origins of Order, At Home in the Universe) has extended his important findings to economics (Stuart Kauffman: On Ethical and Intellectual Failures in Contemporary Economics, In: Entangled Political Economy, Advances in Austrian Economics 18, 259-282). I give a brief outline of his most important findings.

Stuart Kauffman refers to “contemporary Anglo-American Economics” (as opposed to “Austrian Economics”) and criticises two major points, 1) that economics “at least since Milton Friedman” is supposed to be a positive mathematizable science free of normative issues” (i.e. does not consider ethical questions), and 2) that it does not consider the most important factor responsible for economic growth, i.e., the enormous increase in “goods and production capacities”. Thus, whereas there may have been 1,000 to 10,000 of these 50,000 years ago, today there are “perhaps 10 billion”. Concerning the first point, Kauffman discusses the Edgeworth Box and the Contract Curve, pointing out that there is no economic theory which explains on which part of the latter we settle, and that prices cannot resolve the matter, because different points of the curve correspond to different prices. Kauffman uses game theory to show that “fairness” usually determines on which part of he Contract Curve we settle, provided we must not trade with each other. But fairness cannot be mathematized, it is determined by our evolution. We are social animals like monkeys and apes. Give each of a group of monkeys 10 grapes a day, and they are all peaceful and harmonious, but give one of them suddenly some bananas and the rest the usual grapes, the latter will become agitated and throw the grapes at you. They believe to be unfairly treated. More important perhaps is the second point. As in the evolution of the biosphere and unlike physics, no laws exist which “entail” the evolution of the “econosphere”. In other words, we cannot foresee (or decribe by laws/differential equations) how the economy will develop, how it will increase its diversity. Economic development, like biological evolution, creates its own unforeseeable opportunities. This is simply ignored by “Anglo American Economics”, but shows how important diversification is for economies (The Australian Prime Minister Abbott’s policy to invest even more in coal and actively reduce development of renewable energy sources, seen in this context, is extreme economic vandalism and stupidity).

His conclusion (I quote): “The failures above are likely to play major roles in the lapse to mere greed in our major financial institutions, and in our inadequate capacities to help drive growth in much of the povery-struck world”.

Important references
Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the Uinverse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kauffman, S. 2014. On ethical and intellectual failures in contemporary economics. In Entangled Political economy. Advances in Austrian Economics 18, 259-282.
Longo, G., Montevil, M. and Kauffman, S. (2012a). No entailing laws, but enablement in the evolution f life. Physics ArXiv posted
Longo, G., Montevil, M. and Kauffman, S. (2012b). No entailing laws, but enablement in the evolution of he biosphere. In Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on genetic and evolutionary computation conference companion 1379-1392

Australian fascism?

Nov 25, 2014 | , ,

Anyone can chose her/his own way to hell, and each country can chose its own way to fascism. In a number of countries, such as Italy, Spain, Germany and various American countries, fascism in the 20th century was “achieved” along different routes, but they had a few things in common, first of all concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a ruling elite made possible by suppression of a genuinely free press and labor unions.

In a number of posts prior to the Australian elections in September 2013, I gave examples which demonstrate a distinct fascist trend in the then opposition led by Tony Abbott
(https://krohde.wordpress.com/article/on-the-way-to-fascism-climate-change-xk923bc3gp4-138/).
The opposition won the election, supported by the right-wing (mainly Murdoch-run) media, and mainly on the basis of a campaign that the Labor government under Julia Gillard had broken the election promise of not introducing a carbon tax aimed at reducing carbon emissions, i.e., global warming. My earlier post had suggested what would happen if the Liberal-Nationals would win the election, but what actually did happen was far worse.Tony Abbott, just prior to the election, promised that he would not reduce funding for education, the public broadcasters (ABC and SBS), health, that there would be no changes to pensions and no new taxes, to mention only the most important ones. (http://www.phonytonyabbott.com/content/broken-promises). All these promises have been broken or attempts are underway to break them. Just recently, the government announced cuts to the ABC of more than Austr.$ 250 million, and to the SBS of about Austr.$ 50 over five years. These cuts are very substantial and may severely affect the functioning of the broadcasters. Today, Mark Scott, the chairman of ABC, announced that about 400 jobs, mainly from the News services, would be cut. But the main emphasis of the attack on the public broadcasters is to cut the editorial powers of the Managing Director. The government intends to ensure that board members of the ABC, appointed by the government, become directly involved in broadcasting policy, in order to guarantee a “more balanced” program. To date ABC and SBS are the only broadcasters that have given a balanced view on politics, climate change etc..This has been a thorn in the eyes of Abbott and ministerial colleagues for a long time. For example, the minister of agriculture, Barnaby Joyce, declared that the ABC should give more time to climate “sceptics”, in other words those who base their views not on scientific evidence but on what is good for mining magnates. Abbott stated that there are two world views, one presented by the Murdoch media, which control about two thirds of the printed media, and the other by ABC, and that his view is the former. Abbott, at least until recently, was a “climate sceptic”, in line with the beliefs of his friend and co-religionist George Pell, until recently Archbishop of Sydney.

Aims of the Abbott government, some still in the process of being accepted by parliament, include deregulation of university fees, i.e. allowing universities to increase or introduce fees for courses, which would disproportionately disadvantage students from poorer backgrounds, introduction of a $7 co-payment fee for doctor visits (for all patients, including the poorest), giving the go-ahead for new harbours on the Great Barrier Reef, cancellation of security measures introduced by the Labor government for financial advisors to give advice in the best interest of the client (introduced because some scandals ruined thousands of people who had followed advisors’ advice for investments that was given to maximise profits to the advisor), scaling back the Gonski reforms aimed at making education more equitable, removing school positions for confession-free ethical instruction but not for chaplains at schools, reducing the clean energy targets, which make clean (solar and wind) energy less profitable), etc.

Abbott’s views are further documented by his statements that coal was good for Australia, that Australia had too many national parks (which led the recent Brooker price winner to declare that he was ashamed to be Australian), that the ABC was un-Australian, and by his welcome address at the recent G20 meeting in Brisbane, in which he listed the achievements of his government as turning back the boats of asylum seekers, intention of introducing doctor fees, deregulating university fees, abolishing the carbon and mining taxes, etc.

All this indicates quite strongly that there are indeed strong fascist trends: the poorer become more disadvantaged, the wealth and power of a few mining magnates becomes even greater, endangering the very survival of humans, and the press becomes more concentrated and ruled by a handfull of people (mainly Rupert Murdoch).

Finally, many of the measures mentioned above are claimed to be necessary to return an economy, allegedly mismanaged by the previous Labor government, to surplus. In fact, Labor handed one of the soundest economies on Earth over to the Liberals/Nationals. And this in spite of the fact that they had to stimulate the Australian economy in order to avoid a recession experienced by many countries. They were lauded for doing this by leading international economists, including for example the Nobel prize winning American economists Stieglitz and Krugman. – This raises the question: is the government well aware of the basically sound state of the Australian economy, and are all the measures allegedly taken to get the economy back on a sound footing nothing but a lame excuse for getting the “essentials” through, i.e., keeping the population dumb by giving the right-wing press a monopoly and permitting an ever increasing concentration of the wealth of the nation in a few hands?

The Impossibility of Growth Demands a New Economic System

Jun 1, 2014 | , ,

George Monbiot, well known for his books “The Age of Consent: a manifesto for a new world order” and “Captive State: the corporate takeover of Britain” has published an important article in Common Dreams: “The Impossibility of Growth Demands a New Economic System. Why collapse and salvation are hard to distinguish from each other”. Some excerpts in the following, link to full article below.

“Let us imagine that in 3030BC the total possessions of the people of Egypt filled one cubic metre”…….. and “that these possessions grew by 4.5% a year.” How big would that stash have been by the Battle of Actium in 30BC? ……..It’s 2.5 billion billion solar systems…….. ”
“It was neither capitalism nor communism that made possible the progress and the pathologies (total war, the unprecedented concentration of global wealth, planetary destruction) of the modern age. It was coal, followed by oil and gas”

“The trajectory of compound growth shows that the scouring of the planet has only just begun”.

“The inescapable failure of a society built upon growth and its destruction of the Earth’s living systems are the overwhelming facts of our existence.”

A particularly interesting example from the article: the government of Ecuador has decided to go ahead with oil drilling in its high diversity Yasuni national park. It had offered to leave the oil in the ground if it could raise 3.6 billion Dollars from foreign donors, about half the value of the oil. It could just get 13 million. Ecuador is very poor, Australia is rich. For how much would Australia leave its coal, oil and gas in the ground, or protect its Tasmanian forests from logging?

Full article here:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/05/28-0

United States will introduce an emission trading (cap-and-trade) scheme for controlling human induced climate change

Jun 1, 2014 | , , ,

In two previous posts https://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2012/11/19/global-warming-obama-wants-to-take-action/ https://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2013/05/19/the-results-of-misinformation-about-climate-change-in-the-u-s/I drew attention of President Obama’s intention to do something about climate change, but that nothing yet had happened. It now seems that significant action will be taken in the USA by introducing an emission trading scheme as also supported by the Greens and Labor for Australia. See here: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/29/obama-unveil-historic-climate-plan-carbon-pollution

Excerpt:
“The rules……… will put America on course to meet its international climate goal, and put US diplomats in a better position to leverage climate commitments from big polluters such as China and India, Obama said in a speech to West Point graduates this week.

“I intend to make sure America is out front in a global framework to preserve our planet,” he said. “American influence is always stronger when we lead by example. We can not exempt ourselves from the rules that apply to everyone else.””

Is here hope that this might lead to change in attitude of the present Australian government? The outlook seems dim if one considers that Abbott had earlier referred to human induced climate change as “crap”, that among the first actions of the new Australian government were declarations that renewable energy targets would be reduced, that one of he first actions of the government after the election was removing the Climate Council, that investment in climate science at the CSIRO will be substantially reduced, and that even economically profitable renewable energy projects are targets for discontinuation. But miracles have happened before.

Thomas Piketty and David Harvey, a new look at what is wrong with our economic system

May 29, 2014 | , ,

Two distinguished economists, Thomas Piketty and David Harvey, in two recent books, have critically examined the basic assumptions according to which economies are run today. Both arrive at the conclusion that an ever increasing inequality in income distribution is inherent in the capitalist system and needs to be urgently addressed.

For two reviews see here:

http://chronicle.com/article/Capital-Man/146059/

http://chronicle.com/article/Mapping-a-New-Economy/146433/

Excerpts:

Piketty: “The Economist declared that Piketty’s book may “revolutionize the way people think about the economic history of the past two centuries” and the “British magazine Prospect added Piketty to its annual list of the most influential world thinkers.”
Piketty’s claims that “inequality is intrinsic to capitalism, and, if not forcefully combatted, is likely to increase—to levels that threaten our democracy and fail to sustain economic growth. “For much of modern history, he contends, the rate of return on capital has hovered between 4 and 5 percent, while the growth rate has been decisively lower, between 1 and 2 percent,” which means that “in a slow-growing economy, accumulated wealth grows faster than income from labor……. the rich….. will get richer, while those who depend mostly on income from their jobs, will be lucky to keep up with inflation.”
“……… Piketty’s remedy for inequality: a progressive global wealth tax on fortunes over 1-million euros.”

Harvey: Harvey’s argument is based on “the conflict between use values and exchange values, particularly in housing, and the way that people have been deprived of homes because real estate has become a speculative investment. “For this reason, many categories of use values that were hitherto supplied free of charge by the state have been privatized and commodified—housing, education, health care and public utilities have all gone in this direction in many parts of the world,” he writes. “The political choice is between a commodified system that serves …….. and a system that focuses on the production and democratic provision of use values for all without any mediations of the market.”
“At some point……the system can’t continue. “The longer it goes on,” Harvey says …….. “the less I think that there is a possibility that it will be a peaceful transition.”

In Australia, the present government does not only not try to reduce inequality but does the opposite, the austerity measures (co-payment for visiting the doctor, deregulation of university fees, etc.) of the new budget increase the burden on the poor, whereas the rich are hardly affected. These measures will not put Australia’s economy back on a secure and sustainable footing, as claimed by the government, all they will do is make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Don’t let our children pay for our sins

May 3, 2014 | , ,

The Treasurer Joe Hockey, in a talk to the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce on 2.5.2014, stated that we have to get the budget back into surplus or at least reduce the debt. If we do not do it now, our children will have to pay, which nobody wants. “Australians born after 1965 will have to work until they are 70 before they are eligible for the age pension under changes announced by Joe Hockey, while the Treasurer has also warned there is “no such thing” as a free visit to a doctor or free welfare”. Expenditures for public service will also be cut (SMH 2.5.14). Very commendable not to burden our children, of course, but what about the environmental mess due to climate change, deforestation etc. we will leave behind if we don’t take urgent action on reducing human impact on the environment now? Lack of action will lead to a far greater burden for future generations than (according to leading economists) wildly overestimated debts.

Concerning climate change politics and deforestion, the position of the government is clear.

Not long after becoming Prime Minister, Tony Abbott expressed his intention to reduce renewable energy targets. Among other things, he declared that he wants to see another investigation on the health effects of wind-turbines (although one had just been completed and had found no such effects). And, according to SMH 3.-4.5.14, “Joe Hockey has attacked wind farms as “utterly offensive and “a blight on the landscape” in the latest sign that the Abbott government intends to cut back on renewable energy targets”.

Deforestation: in a talk in Tasmania before the state elections there, Tony Abbott declared that we really have too many national parks and that loggers are the best conservationists. Even the Indonesian government and the local authorities in Aceh are not so dumb as to claim that the large scale logging going on at this moment in Northern Sumatra, wiping out the few remaining habitats for Sumatran rhinoceros, orang utans and other endangered species, is done by loggers acting as good conservationists. http://www.smh.com.au/world/acehs-leuser-ecosystem-pays-a-high-price-for-the-peace-dividend-20140501-zr1qh.html

Climate change. Effects on small island states, and the view of the Australian Attorney-General

Apr 17, 2014 | , , , ,

An article recently published in the Trinidad Express, a newspaper of a small Caribbean island state, deals with the latest climate assessment by the IPCC emphasizing the impact of climate change on food security, particulary in small island states:

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/featured-news/Climate-change-vs-food-security-255590621.html

Excerpts:
“Climate change ……… has a direct bearing on food security……. the IPCC warned that all aspects of food security including availability of food, stability of food supply and utilisation of food, are potentially affected by climate change.”……. “our climate is warming at a pace unparalleled in the history of the planet and that we no longer have the luxury of pretending that climate change is not happening.”

“Small island developing states are particularly at risk because of their small size, their geographic location. Because of their low-lying nature, sea level rise will inundate coastal areas,”.

At the same time, George Brandis, the Australian Attorney General, has the following to say, in line with views expressed by several others in the Abbott government:

“George Brandis has compared himself to Voltaire and derided proponents of climate change action as “believers” who do not listen to opposing views and have reduced debate to a mediaeval and ignorant level.”

Full article here:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-proponents-using-mediaeval-tactics-george-brandis-20140418-zqwfc.html

Barnaby Joyce, the leader of the Nationals and Minister for Agriculture in the Abbott government, has complained that the ABC does not give time (or sufficient time) to climate change “sceptics” (20 March 2014).

Future of the Earth

Mar 26, 2014 | , , , ,

The pending climate change report will emphasize the choice we have, to face catastrophic climate change or take immediate action.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/03/25-3

“The world’s leading climate scientists gathered in Japan on Tuesday to begin hashing out the final details of a “grim” climate report, which both leaked drafts and those familiar with its contents say will call on policy makers to take immediate action or face a climate future that will otherwise be marked by widespread ecological and human catastrophe.”

Any chance that the Australian government, which has consistently played down the effects of climate change, supports increased coal mining, dredging on the Great Barrier Reef, and wants to reduce renewable energy targets, will do anything substantial to reduce human induced climate change?

But there are of course other important issues: we now have Australian dames and knights! I would suggest to make Rupert Murdoch a knight; little chance that he will get a knighthood in Britain.

2nd book review of Klaus Rohde ed.: The Balance of Nature and Human Impact. Cambridge University Press 2013

Dec 17, 2013 | , , , , , ,

The review, by Professor W.E.Williams, was published a few weeks ago by Choice Reviews, copyright American Library Association.

For copyright reasons only short extracts are included here. For a previous review see https://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2013/11/10/review-of-klaus-rohde-ed-the-balance-of-nature-and-human-impact-cambridge-university-press-2013/

……… specifically addressing two questions: the extent to which equilibrium processes, particularly competition,…..describe natural ecological systems, and whether ……..human disturbances–climate change, land-use change, introduction of invasive exotics, and so on–primarily upset existing equilibria or instead amplify disequilibria already present. Twenty-four papers and three concluding chapters examine these questions in widely different ecosystems, ….. plankton, coral-reef fishes, Australian birds, animal parasites, and many more. There are 29 contributors to the volume, ………Each chapter contains its own extensive list of references, and the book’s index is quite good……….. the book will appeal primarily to academic ecologists, although some essays are general enough to be useful to those more broadly interested in human ecological impacts. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates, graduate students, researchers/faculty, and professionals.

The end of capitalism? How to combat climate change.

Dec 15, 2013 | , , , , ,

We are rapidly approaching collapse of the present economic system, which cannot cope with the challenges of human induced climate change. An interesting article in Spiegel International deals with this problem: Harald Welzer, “Climate Summit Trap: Capitalism’s March toward Global Collapse”:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/warsaw-climate-conference-shows-capitalism-root-of-climate-failure-a-937453.html

Some extracts:

” Capitalism Triumphant

………. The primacy of economics has prevailed. It no longer seems to matter how we………. get through…….this century if the world grows warmer by three, four or five degrees Celsius. National economies require an ever-growing dose of energy if their business models are to continue functioning, and, in the face of this logic, all scientific objections to the contrary are just as powerless as the climate protest movements, ……..

Two approaches to escape from this trap have recently been developed:

1. ” ‘Economy for the Common Good’

Imagine, for example, what might happen if a large number of businesses make the improvement of the common good — instead of an increase in their profits — the goal of their commercial efforts.

There are ….. already more than 1,400 companies,…….. in German-speaking countries that have made a commitment to the concept of the “economy for the common good,” …….

In the medium term, the “economy for the common good” movement aims to make such accounting legally binding. The principle is that the more common-good “points” a business achieves, the more legal benefits it should enjoy.”

2. “The Argument for Divestment

Another, even more effective, instrument for creating this sort of change is the “Fossil Free” divestment campaign launched last year by American environmental activist Bill McKibben……… based on the simple idea that entire industries’ commercial foundation can be destroyed if funds are withdrawn from them.

Such initiatives are now active at nearly 400 American schools, colleges and universities. Four colleges and 10 cities, including Seattle and San Francisco, have made the decision to divest. The campaign has also spread to Europe, where University College London just joined the movement.”

Call to strip ABC of Australia Network

Nov 22, 2013 |

Tony Abbott said earlier something like that there are two views of the world, one held by News Ltd.(i.e., Murdoch), the other by ABC, and that he shared the former view. Was this a hint at what would follow? Do we now see the first steps of the government’s policy to reimburse Murdoch for his support during the election campaign? See below:

“Call to strip ABC of Australia Network

CHRISTIAN KERR
The Australian
November 22, 2013 12:00AM

THE government has been urged to review the ABC’s contract to provide the Australia Network international television service in the wake of the outrage sparked by its revelations of Australian phone tapping in Indonesia.

The Gillard government scrapped a competitive tender for the $223 million, 10-year contract for the right to provide the service, Australia’s most important vehicle for soft diplomacy, in controversial circumstances and handed it to the ABC in a move later lashed by the Auditor-General.
– See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/call-to-strip-abc-of-australia-network/story-e6frg996-1226765667657#sthash.NXYtrJO8.dpuf”

Any attempt towards greater media concentration would be highly dangerous for democracy in Australia. Even now, Murdoch run printed media account for about two thirds of metropolitan circulation.

Partners in Crime, Canada and Australia now Brethren in Arms on Climate Change Policy

Nov 14, 2013 | , , ,

The right-wing Canadian government (keen to sell Canada’s huge reserves of tar-sands oil, which is highly toxic and leads to high greenhouse gas emissions) has lauded Australia for abolishing its carbon tax. This may have serious consequences for global warming.

See here:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/13/canada-climate-australia-carbon-tax

Recent developments in Australia, according to the Sydney Morning Herald (14.11.13): “Labor struggles to seal carbon deal……repeal legislation revealed funding of Australia’s $3 billion renewable energy agency would be slashed by $435 million……The independent agency was established to support renewable energy projects and research.”

So, do not only ignore research on climate change and ways to combat it, but gag it! All the way with big business supported by the right-wing (Murdoch and others) media!

Climate change politics after the Australian elections

Nov 13, 2013 | , , , , ,

We now have a new government (for those from overseas:”Liberals” plus “Nationals”, i.e., right-wing) under Prime-Minister Tony Abbott, a practising Catholic and apparently friend of Cardinal George Pell, both climate change “sceptics” (see my post “On the road to fascism? Climate change and media concentration“). Abbott is on record as having earlier referred to climate change science as “crap”, although he now says that he believes in climate change and human contribution to it. Among the first actions of this new government was the dissolution of the Climate Council headed by Professor Flannery, a scientific body that had advised the previous government and the Australian public on climate change. Further actions were funding cuts to public services leading to the reduction by hundreds of staff of the CSIRO, the major Australian research organisation which – among many other projects of vital importance to the country – has done much work on climate change.

Miranda Devine in the Murdoch tabloid Sunday Telegraph November 10, 2013 illuminates the attitude of he new government on climate change politics very well. She writes in an article headed “Change is in the wind on climate”: “What a delicious decision of the Abbott government not to send a minister to the latest UN climate-change conference… Environment Minister Greg Hunt can’t go to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change talks in Poland. He’ll be too busy…repealing the carbon tax! Oh, to have been a fly on the wall at the other end of the RSVP.”……. “Howard’s” (an earlier liberal Prime Minister of Australia) “takeaway is that politicians should not allow themselves to be browbeaten by the alleged views of experts….laws affecting the daily lives, including sensitive social issues, should never be made other than by politicians.” (Devine’s comments are not meant to be sarcastic, they reflect what she has expressed in numerous earlier articles in the Murdoch press).

Some articles by various commentators in other newspapers on recent events illuminating the government’s approach to climate change and related environmental issues in the following.

Southeastern Australia recently experienced particularly wide-spread and seasonally early bushfires that caused considerable damage. Christiana Figueres, head of the UN climate change negotiations, was in Australia at about that time. She drew a link between the strength of the bushfires and climate change. The Sydney Morning Herald (25.10.13), a Fairfax newspaper, reported about the reactions of the Prime Minister Tony Abbott and the Environment Minister Greg Hunt to this statement as follows: “Hunt taps Wikipedia for bushfire backing…Greg Hunt says” (in an interview with the BBC World Service)” Wikipedia, the online answer to everything, provides evidence that the unseasonal bushfires plaguing NSW are not linked to climate change…..Mr Hunt has been at the centre of a storm about climate change since Prime Minister Tony Abbott accused the head of the United Nations’ climate change negotiations, Christina Figueres, of talking “through her hat” on the issue.” “The fires are certainly not a function of climate change, they are a function of life in Australia, Mr.Abbott said.”…”The rebuke prompted Ms.Figueres, the executive secretary of the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, to release another statement in which she pointed out that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had already found a causal link between climate change and bushfires and its next report in 2014 would build on that.” … In the Sydney Morning Herald October 26-27: “Professor Will Steffen, who co-authored the soon-to-be-released bushfire report by the Climate Council, was responding to Mr. Abbott’s assertion in a newspaper interview with the leading climate sceptic Andrew Bolt that drawing a link between the savage bushfires now plaguing NSW and climate change was “complete hogwash”…”The Climate Council report, a summary of which was revealed by Fairfax Media on Friday, found a clear link between rising temperatures and a longer, more dangerous bushfire season in south-eastern Australia”….”The Climate Council, which was reformed as an independent body after Mr.Hunt abolished it on his second day in the job, will release the report in full next month”….

Interesting that Peter Hatcher, the international editor of the SMH, concluded in the same issue of the Sydney Morning Herald, that Tony Abbott really meant the same thing as Christina Figueres. (???? difficult to believe).

In the election campaign, Abbott made abolishment of the carbon tax, which was introduced by the previous Labour government, a key issue. He wants to replace it with a “direct action” policy, paying polluters to pollute less. The Sydney Morning Herald contacted 35 economists and found that 33 of them supported carbon pricing, rejecting the Direct Action policy. However, Abbott rejects any form of carbon pricing and will not make any binding commitments above a 5% reduction by direct action by 2020 “in he absence of very serious like-binding commitments in other countries….” (SMH 13.11.13).

Review of Klaus Rohde ed.: The Balance of Nature and Human Impact. Cambridge University Press 2013.

Nov 10, 2013 | , , , ,

This review, by Aldina M.A. Franco, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, was published online (Advance Access) in “Integrative and Comparative Biology”, October 22, 2013, pp.1-3.
For copyright reasons, only short extracts are included here.

“Human impact on the natural environment has reached unprecedented levels. Humans are present on all continents; almost all ecosystems have been modified by human activities through habitat loss and fragmentation, overexploitation, pollution, and invasive species. More than 35% of the land area is used for agriculture and built-up areas, 40% of the terrestrial productivity is appropriated by humans, 50% of all coral reefs are lost or degraded, 70% of recognized marine fisheries are fully exploited, over- exploited or depleted; humans use more than 50% of the available runoff of fresh water. In addition, human emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants have been associated with global climatic changes. The scale of the human impact on the planet now has global consequences; thus, many scientists argue that the world has entered a new era designated the Anthropocene.
This book summarizes ecological responses to global environmental change; it is relevant to interested readers of different backgrounds trying to understand why scientists are worried about current environmental change. Evidence shows that in geological times species have appeared and disappeared as the climate and ecosystems changed. Ecosystems are dynamic and adapted to those changes, however, as clearly demonstrated in Chapter 13, past climatic changes have occurred over large temporal scales, while human-induced impacts are occurring at a much faster rate. The question then is: will populations, communities, and ecosystems be able to respond to these fast changes in the environment or will the earth lose a large part of its biological diversity? This is discussed in detail in Part V, which is particularly interesting to students and the general public; it gives an overview of the impacts of human activities for a range of taxonomic groups.”

………..

“Part VII—The overall view
This section includes two last chapters that are written for a wide audience. Chapter 25 summarizes previous chapters and the main messages of the book. Chapter 26 presents a wide variety of facts on how the Australian press and TV have misrepresented the debate on climatic change. It is clearly argues that powerful individuals (corporations) dictate the general public’s views on important scientific debates that need a societal discussion (e.g., global climatic change and our ethical responsibility toward preventing other species’ extinction and the deterioration of ecosystem services). The main message of this book is that understanding equilibrium and disequilibrium conditions is fundamental to better predict the consequences of global environmental change on natural systems and, I think, this is ultimately needed to guarantee human long-term persistence on earth.”

The Silence of Animals

Jun 9, 2013 | ,

John Gray’s Godless Mysticism: On “The Silence of Animals”, as interpreted by Simon Critchley, see here:

http://lareviewofbooks.org/article.php?type=&id=1722&fulltext=1

A conclusion? “What will define the coming decades? I would wager the following: the political violence of faith, the certainty of environmental devastation, the decline of existing public institutions, ever-growing inequality, and yet more Simon Cowell TV shows. In the face of this horror, Gray offers a cool but safe temporary refuge.”

The results of misinformation about climate change in the U.S.

May 19, 2013 | , , , ,

Inspite of recent announcements by the American president, nothing important has yet happened with regard to climate change. Large sections of the American public remain unconvinced that human activities are responsible. Why? Lack of scientific evidence certainly is not the reason. See here:

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2013/05/201351865032465413.html

A quote from this article:

“The disinformation campaign can only survive for so long. We saw, as in the case of tobacco, there was a similar disinformation campaign decades ago to obscure the science and the scientific link between the use of tobacco products and lung cancer. But eventually the truth of what the science had to say became accepted. There are some positive signs that we are moving in that direction; the rest of the world is moving increasingly towards renewable energy …. We are lagging behind but we are slowly making progress ourselves.”

– Michael Mann, director of Penn State University’s Earth System Science Center

Linguistic imperialism. Basque, Catalan, Alsatian and Corsican speakers deliver petition to UNESCO in Paris asking for “cultural asylum”

May 19, 2013 | , ,

According to a recent television report, Australia is the world leader in extinguishing languages. There are two reasons for this, the large number of native languages that invite to be extinguished, and the attitude of those who do the extinguishing.

However, Australia is not alone, France -for example- is doing its best to get rid of minority languages in its territory. The only reason why it is not a world leader is that the number of minority languages is rather small. See here: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/05/201351616123286864.html

Austerity economics based on flawed data

Apr 28, 2013 | ,

A study by two American economists (i.e., Harvard economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff), published about three years ago and widely cited, pretended to show that countries with very high rates of debt have considerably reduced economic growth. They “presented empirical evidence from 44 nations over a 200 year time span to demonstrate that countries with a public debt over 90 percent of GDP (the United States is at about 100 percent, Japan at 200 percent) have average growth rates one percent lower than other nations.” It has now been claimed that the data and analysis are severely flawed, “coding errors, selective exclusion of available data, and unconventional weighting of summary statistics lead to serious errors that inaccurately represent the relationship between public debt and GDP growth.” “Adjusting for these errors, the Amherst team contends that “the average real GDP growth rate for countries carrying a public debt-to-GDP ratio of over 90 percent is actually 2.2 percent, not -0.1 percent.” (cited from article linked below).

Misleading information by supposedly distinguished economists may have fatal consequences. For example, austerity measures in the European Union have lead to mass unemployment in several European states. In the U.S. , right wing politicians advocate austerity measures such as cutting down on social security and health benefits, with enormous consequences for large segments of the population.

Interestingly, the two Harvard economists cited above have links to Pete Peterson, a Wall Street billionaire who has been advocating “cuts to Social Security and Medicare for decades in order to prevent a debt crisis he warns will spike interest rates and collapse the economy.”

For full article see here:
http://www.prwatch.org/node/12065

What is cheaper? Paying a tax to prevent disastrous consequences of climate change or waiting for the consequences?

Apr 3, 2013 | , , ,

The heading of a recent article in The Guardian:

“Climate change making extreme events worse in Australia – report

Country faces more frequent and more severe weather events if it fails to make deep and swift cuts to carbon emissions”

Full article here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/02/climate-change-carbon-emissions-australia

A recently published scientific report in Nature Geoscience has shown that forecasts about global warming have been remarkably accurate (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/mar/27/climate-change-model-global-warming?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487)

Interesting, in this context, that Tony Abbott, the leader of the opposition, according to the Sun Herald, has signaled that Professor Tim Flannery’s job as climate commissioner would go if the Coalition wins government. “It does sound like an unnecessary position given the gentlemen in question gives us the benefit of his views without needing taxpayer funding.” Also “Mr Abbott said if elected as prime minister on September 14 and given the opportunity to revoke the carbon tax a whole range of climate change bureaucracies would also be axed.”

See here:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/victoria-to-suffer-extreme-weather-warn-climate-scientists/story-e6frf7kx-1226611210510

Of course, Tony Abbott’s views about climate change are well kown (see here: https://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2010/07/26/politics-climate-change-big-business-and-the-press-in-australia/).

See also my article here: http://krohde.wordpress.com/article/on-the-way-to-fascism-climate-change-xk923bc3gp4-138/

Climate Science is a Hoax

Mar 30, 2013 | , , ,

A just published scientific article examines the mind of so-called climate change sceptics.

“
NASA Faked the Moon Landing—Therefore, (Climate) Science Is a Hoax
An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science
1. Stephan Lewandowsky1
2. Klaus Oberauer1,2
3. Gilles E. Gignac1
1. 1University of Western Australia
2. 2University of Zurich
1. Stephan Lewandowsky, School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia E-mail: stephan.lewandowsky@uwa.edu.au
Psychological Science March 26, 2013, 0956797612457686

Abstract
Although nearly all domain experts agree that carbon dioxide emissions are altering the world’s climate, segments of the public remain unconvinced by the scientific evidence. Internet blogs have become a platform for denial of climate change, and bloggers have taken a prominent role in questioning climate science. We report a survey of climate-blog visitors to identify the variables underlying acceptance and rejection of climate science. Our findings parallel those of previous work and show that endorsement of free-market economics predicted rejection of climate science. Endorsement of free markets also predicted the rejection of other established scientific findings, such as the facts that HIV causes AIDS and that smoking causes lung cancer. We additionally show that, above and beyond endorsement of free markets, endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories (e.g., that the Federal Bureau of Investigation killed Martin Luther King, Jr.) predicted rejection of climate science as well as other scientific findings. Our results provide empirical support for previous suggestions that conspiratorial thinking contributes to the rejection of science. Acceptance of science, by contrast, was strongly associated with the perception of a consensus among scientists.”

(Cited from http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/03/25/0956797612457686.abstract

The Spiral of Silence. Opinion polls; who checks their accuracy?

Mar 29, 2013 |

Australian elections are approaching. Opinion polls supposedly forecasting the outcome are becoming more numerous. Are the predictions accurate and do the polls contribute to the outcome?

Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, a German political scientist, proposed the theory of “spiral of silence”, according to which an opinion becomes dominant because people “adjust” to the supposed majority opinion, being afraid of speaking out because of the fear of isolation, and other factors. “Mass media can create pluralistic ignorance by focusing on the spread of one opinion and muting the minority opinion, causing people to believe what they believe is what everyone else believes also”, and “in which predictions about public opinion become fact as mass media’s coverage of the majority opinion becomes the status quo, and the minority becomes less likely to speak out” (cit. from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_of_silence).

In Australia opinion polls are published every few weeks or sometimes more frequently, supposedly suggesting that Labour has practically already lost the coming elections due later in the year. To what degree do these polls actually contribute to the outcome? And to what degree are the polls meant to change the outcome?

The Balance of Nature and Human Impact: Book Launch

Feb 24, 2013 | , , , ,

I have drawn attention to this book in an earlier post (see here:

https://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2012/08/10/new-book-the-balance-of-nature-and-human-impact/

Details of the book (contents, contributors, excerpts) can be found here: http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item6964672/?site_locale=en_GB

The book has now been published (Cambridge University Press, February 2013) and the Vice-Chancellor and Head of the School of Environmental and Rural Sciences will launch it on March 11 from 1-2 p.m. in the C.J. Hawkins Homestead foyer – W47.

Homeopathy justified? The Placebo Effect

Jan 25, 2013 |

There seems to be no scientific justification for homeopathy. How can medications that do not contain any or hardly any active molecules have a curative effect? If so, why do insurance companies which are not known for their benevolence and free-spending activities cover the costs of homeopathy in some countries?

Can the placebo-effect give an explanation? Is it possible that, if people strongly believe in something, they may feel relieved and the insurance companies have to pay less for a relatively cheap homeotherapeutic treatment than for a “proper” one? After all, even in generally accepted treatments based on well established, scientifically “approved” procedures a placebo effect may be at least partly involved.

See this article, which describes experiments to find the physiological basis for the placebo effect:

http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/01/the-placebo-phenomenon

some excerpts here:

.”…….. researchers have found that placebo treatments—interventions with no active drug ingredients—can stimulate real physiological responses, from changes in heart rate and blood pressure to chemical activity in the brain, in cases involving pain, depression, anxiety, fatigue, and even some symptoms of Parkinson’s.”

“The study’s results shocked the investigators themselves: even patients who knew they were taking placebos described real improvement, reporting twice as much symptom relief as the no-treatment group. That’s a difference so significant, says Kaptchuk, it’s comparable to the improvement seen in trials for the best real IBS drugs.”

“This suggested that placebo treatments spurred chemical responses in the brain that are similar to those of active drugs, a theory borne out two decades later by brain-scan technology. ”

Homeopathic treatment has also been shown to be effective for domestic animals, in particular horses. See here: http://www.spiegel.de/gesundheit/diagnose/homoeopathie-wieso-es-einen-placeboeffekt-bei-tieren-gibt-a-974333.html This effect is explained by “placebo by proxy”: the owner is aware of the treatment and slight behavioural changes of the owner affect the animal.

Why are the Chinese so clever, and why will they become even cleverer? A perhaps astonishing aspect of Communist politics. And 100 other problems that might and should worry or inspire students and others

Jan 15, 2013 | , , , ,

Chinese have had a long history of “eugenic” selection, by putting those in positions of influence who had passed rigorous state examinations. It seems that this policy has now been brought up to date by incorporating findings of modern science. How has the “West” responded?

See this very interesting article by an evolutionary psychologist. And see many other responses to the question of what one should worry about most.

http://edge.org/responses/q2013

The Cuban Missile Crisis. The Truth.

Jan 12, 2013 |

What is the truth behind the Cuban missile crisis? Western media almost unanimously reported that it was resolved by the courageous actions of John Kennedy, who repelled an “unprovoked” Soviet attempt to install nuclear-armed ballistic missiles right under the nose of the USA, in Cuba, thus averting a nuclear war.

The official story as spread by the US government (from link below):

” On October 16, 1962, John F. Kennedy and his advisers were stunned to learn that the Soviet Union was, without provocation, installing nuclear-armed medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Cuba. With these offensive weapons, which represented a new and existential threat to America, Moscow significantly raised the ante in the nuclear rivalry between the superpowers—a gambit that forced the United States and the Soviet Union to the brink of nuclear Armageddon. On October 22, the president, with no other recourse, proclaimed in a televised address that his administration knew of the illegal missiles, and delivered an ultimatum insisting on their removal, announcing an American “quarantine” of Cuba to force compliance with his demands. While carefully avoiding provocative action and coolly calibrating each Soviet countermeasure, Kennedy and his lieutenants brooked no compromise; they held firm, despite Moscow’s efforts to link a resolution to extrinsic issues and despite predictable Soviet blustering about American aggression and violation of international law. In the tense 13‑day crisis, the Americans and Soviets went eyeball-to-eyeball. Thanks to the Kennedy administration’s placid resolve and prudent crisis management—thanks to what Kennedy’s special assistant Arthur Schlesinger Jr. characterized as the president’s “combination of toughness and restraint, of will, nerve, and wisdom, so brilliantly controlled, so matchlessly calibrated, that [it] dazzled the world”—the Soviet leadership blinked: Moscow dismantled the missiles, and a cataclysm was averted. ”

For the truth, as reported by Benjamin Schwarz based on research by the American historian Sheldon M. Stern and others, see here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/01/the-real-cuban-missile-crisis/309190/?single_page=true

Oswald Spengler re-visited. Where will American politics lead us?

Jan 4, 2013 | , , ,

Oswald Spengler’s book “The Decline of the West” (“Der Untergang des Abendlandes”) has influenced influential historians and philosophers. Robert W. Merry, who has written extensively on American history and foreign policy, has given a concise and well argued discussion of the book and its implication for the present state of world affairs and particularly American politics.

Merry’s full article here:

http://nationalinterest.org/article/spenglers-ominous-prophecy-7878?page=show

Can science explain everything?

Dec 25, 2012 | , ,

Among many scientists and the general public the view is widespread that the only justifiable approach to solving problems in nature is the scientific one. Is there a role for philosophy? What is the evidence for the multiverse approach to cosmology and for evolutionary explanations of why our universe seems to be fine tuned to the evolution of life? Can questions of ethics be resolved by science alone? Professor Austin L. Hughes, a distinguished biologist at South Carolina University, has given a penetrating analysis of the problems. See here:

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-folly-of-scientism

The morality of war and ethnic cleansing

Dec 3, 2012 | ,

Has the world learned anything from previous wars? Unlikely!

http://www.thenation.com/article/171484/brutal-peace-postwar-expulsions-germans#

Note: the article may lead to some misunderstanding: the vast majority of Germans driven from their homes were not “Volksdeutsche” but “Reichsdeutsche”, i.e. they lived in provinces (East Prussia, Silesia, parts of Pomerania and Brandenburg) which had been part of Germany for many centuries and were inhabited by close to 100% Germans.

New book: The Balance of Nature and Human Impact

Aug 10, 2012 | , , , , ,

A new book, dealing with effects of climate change, habitat destruction and fragmentation, and invasive species, will be published by Cambridge University Press early next year. I am the editor and about 30 leading scientists from around the world have contributed chapters. A further 20 have contributed by reviewing chapters.

Some examples of chapters are: physics of climate, effects of climate change on Arctic vegetation, amphibian decline, the futures of coral reefs, emerging infectious diseases, effects of climate change on insect populations, alternative stable states of plant communities, the mathematics of species invasions, effects of climate change on North American and Australian birds, and a concluding chapter dealing with measures necessary to conserve biodiversity.

Details can be found here:

http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item6964672/The%20Balance%20of%20Nature%20and%20Human%20Impact/?site_locale=en_GB

Here are some excerpts from the book:

“It is clear that nature is undergoing rapid changes as a result of human activities such as industry, agriculture, travel, fisheries and urbanisation. What effects do these activities have? Are they disturbing equilibria in ecological populations and communities, thus upsetting the balance of nature, or are they enhancing naturally occurring disequilibria, perhaps with even worse consequences? It is often argued that large-scale fluctuations in climate and sea-levels have occurred over and over again in the geological past, long before human activities could possibly have had any impact, and that human effects are very small compared to those that occur naturally. Should we conclude that human activity cannot significantly affect the environment, or are these naturally occurring fluctuations actually being dangerously enhanced by humans? This book examines these questions, first by providing evidence for equilibrium and non-equilibrium conditions in relatively undisturbed ecosystems, and second by examining human-induced effects.”

Contents:

“Preface
Introduction Klaus Rohde
Part I. Nonequilibrium and Equilibrium in Populations and Metapopulations: 1. Reef fishes: density dependence and equilibrium in populations? Graham Forrester and Mark Steele
2. Population dynamics of ectoparasites of terrestrial hosts Boris Krasnov and Annapaola Rizzoli
3. Metapopulation dynamics in marine parasites Ana Perez del Omo, Aneta Kostadinova and Serge Morand

Part II. Nonequilibrium and Equilibrium in Communities:
4. The paradox of the plankton Klaus Rohde
5. A burning issue: community stability and alternative stable states in relation to fire Peter J. Clarke and Mike J. Lawes
6. Community stability and instability in ectoparasites of marine and freshwater fish Andrea Simkova and Klaus Rohde
7. Ectoparasites of small mammals: interactive saturated and unsaturated communities Boris Krasnov
8. A macroecological approach to the equilibrial vs. nonequilibrial debate using bird populations and communities Brian McGill

Part III. Equilibrium and Nonequilibrium on Geographical Scales:
9. Island flora and fauna: equilibrium and nonequilibrium Lloyd Morrison
10. The turbulent past and future of arctic vascular plants: climate change, spatial variation, and genetic diversity Christian Brochmann, Mary E. Edwards and Inger G. Alsos

Part IV. Latitudinal Gradients:
11. Latitudinal diversity gradients: equilibrium and nonequilibrium explanations Klaus Rohde
12. Effective evolutionary time and the latitudinal diversity gradient Len Gillman and Shane Wright

Part V. Effects Due to Invading Species, Habitat Loss and Climate Change:
13. The physics of climate: equilibrium, disequilibrium and chaos Michael Box
14. Episodic processes, invasion and faunal mosaics in evolutionary and ecological time Eric Hoberg and Daniel R. Brooks
15. The emerging infectious diseases crisis and pathogen pollution Daniel R. Brooks and Eric Hoberg
16. Establishment or vanishing: fate of an invasive species based on mathematical models Yihong Du
17. Anthropogenic footprints on biodiversity Camilo Mora and Fernando Zapata
18. Worldwide decline and extinction of amphibians Harold Heatwole
19. Climatic change and reptiles Harvey B. Lillywhite
20. Equilibrium and non-equilibrium in Australian bird communities – the impact of natural and anthropogenic effects Hugh Ford
21. Population dynamics of insects: impacts of a changing climate Nigel Andrew
22. The futures of coral reefs Peter Sale

Part VI. Autecological Studies:
23. Autecology and the balance of nature-ecological laws and human induced invasions Gimme Walter
24. The intricacy of structural and ecological adaptations: micromorphology and ecology of some Aspidogastrea Klaus Rohde

Part VII. An Overall View:
25. The importance of interspecific competition in regulating communities, equilibrium vs. nonequilibrium Klaus Rohde
26. Evolutionarily stable strategies: how common are they? Klaus Rohde
27. How to conserve biodiversity in a nonequilibrium world Klaus Rohde, Hugh Ford, Nigel R. Andrew and Harold Heatwole

Index.”

Cardinal George Pell and Richard Dawkins

Apr 14, 2012 | ,

These two personalities had a discussion on Australian TV on religion and God. I did not see it but read various comments on it in newspapers. Good to hear that the CardinaI would admit atheists into Heaven, if he had a say in it. I have discussed The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins earlier, as well as views on religion by Heisenberg, Max Planck, Karl Marx and some others. See the attached link:

http://krohde.wordpress.com/article/richard-dawkins-the-god-delusion-terry-xk923bc3gp4-60/

Ethics and the responsibility for animals and nature

Apr 13, 2012 | , , , ,

In the current debate on climate change and other human induced effects on the environment it is important to reflect on the moral justification for large scale destruction of habitats and animal species by man. Do we have to consider only the well-being of fellow humans or of animals as well? Schopenhauer was, to my knowledge, the first Western philosopher who spoke out for the rights of animals.
For details see here:
http://krohde.wordpress.com/article/arthur-schopenhauer-ethics-and-theory-xk923bc3gp4-106/