Image: Photograph by Gary Comer, courtesy of MIT Press
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The Fate of Greenland: Lessons from Abrupt Climate Change
by Philip W. Conkling, Richard Alley, Wallace Broecker and George Denton. MIT Press, 2011
Spanning more than 600,000 square miles, Greenland’s ice sheet is the largest outside Antarctica. But it is melting fast, with the thunderous sounds of icebergs calving off glaciers filling the air. This is not the first time Greenland has undergone abrupt climate change. Comparatively balmy temperatures in the 10th century allowed Norse settlers to colonize the area; the ensuing Little Ice Age coincided with their disappearance. In this book, illustrated with dramatic color photographs, four leading climate experts chronicle Greenland’s climate history and discuss what the current warming means for this frozen place and for the rest of the world.
The Book of Universes: Exploring the Outer Limits of the Cosmos
by John D. Barrow. W. W. Norton, 2011
Universes that spin, ones that occupy black holes, ones that permit time travel—these are but a few of the bizarre types of universes that modern physics tells us exist parallel to our own. John D. Barrow, professor of mathematical sciences and director of a public outreach math program at the University of Cambridge, takes readers on an armchair tour of these exotic corners of the cosmos and explains how they might all be part of a single “multiverse.”
The Compass of Pleasure: How Our Brains Make Fatty Foods, Orgasm, Exercise, Marijuana, Generosity, Vodka, Learning, and Gambling Feel So Good
by David J. Linden. Viking, 2011
Pleasure takes many forms—from runner’s high to the rush from winning big at the casino—each of which activates pleasure circuitry in the brain. Neuroscientist David J. Linden of Johns Hopkins University examines the neurobiology of pleasure and explains, among other things, how the brain’s reward system can backfire, leading to addiction.
A Hole at the Bottom of the Sea: The Race to Kill the BP Oil Gusher
by Joel Achenbach. Simon and Schuster, 2011
It is one of the worst ecological disasters in U.S. history: on April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded, killing 11 workers and unleashing a gusher of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico. By the time engineers plugged the Macondo well on September 19, nearly five million barrels of crude had fouled the Gulf. Washington Post writer Joel Achenbach looks at what went wrong and how engineers eventually figured out how to kill Macondo.
ALSO NOTABLE
Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science,
by Philip Mirowski. Harvard University Press, 2011
A Planet of Viruses,
by Carl Zimmer. University of Chicago Press, 2011
Bottled Lightning: Superbatteries, Electric Cars, and the New Lithium Economy,
by Seth Fletcher. Hill and Wang, 2011
The Quantum Story: A History in 40 Moments,
by Jim Baggott. Oxford University Press, 2011 ($29.95)
EXHIBITS
The World’s Largest Dinosaurs. April 16, 2011–January 2, 2012, at the American Museum of
Natural History in New York City.
Suited for Space. April 6–September 25 at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.
This article was originally published with the title Recommended.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
10 Comments
Add CommentSo . . . where did the balmy temperatures come from in the 10th century? From all the big corporation's pollution I suppose. Is it any wonder that the public's view of so-called scientists is a bit shabby these days?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQuizzical Says: So . . . where did the balmy temperatures come from in the 10th century?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrent Says: Your presume facts that are not in evidence.
Please take a look at these reconstruction of the past 1,200 years of the Earth's climate. Note that you are looking at a spaghetti graph of a dozen different reconstructions using different proxies and methodologies, put together by multiple researches.
Quizzical Says: From all the big corporation's pollution I suppose.
Trent Says: Logic Fail. Just because high temperatures have happened in the past does not mean that humans can not be responsible for rises in temperatures now.
Quizzical: Is it any wonder that the public's view of so-called scientists is a bit shabby these days?
Trent: Please speak only for your self.
To Trent:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI thought this whole global warming issue was based on so-called records of the past.
What do you mean, "Your presume facts that are not in evidence." ?
Besides your comment being a non-sentence, if the so-called evidence of the past can not be trusted, how does anyone know the globe is warming at all? How can a global average temperature rise of only a degree or two over the past few centuries be reliably detected?
Quizzical Says: I thought this whole global warming issue was based on so-called records of the past.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrent Says: The evidence is much more extensive than you suspect. The evidence for human induced climate change lays mainly in the physics. Are you aware that based on the physics that human induced climate change was predicted as far back 1896? These predictions of what increasing the CO2 content of the atmosphere have a unique signature. Back in 1896 five predictions were made can you them?
Quizzical Says: What do you mean, "Your presume facts that are not in evidence." ?
Trent Says: In your first post you said "where did the balmy temperatures come from in the 10th century." The presumption here is that is that the 10th century was balmy. We do not have convincing evidence for balmy global temperatures.
Quizzical Says: Besides your comment being a non-sentence,..."
Trent Says: How is it a non-sentence?
Quizzical Says: " ...if the so-called evidence of the past can not be trusted,..
Trent Says: Once again your premise is in error. You have simply asserted that all records are in error without presenting evidence. You have asserted that the 10th century was balmy. If the records are unreliable how can you assert anything about the past climate?
Quizzical Says: ..., how does anyone know the globe is warming at all?
Trent Says: For a few centuries these nifty devices called thermometers have been around. You should look into it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is hard to determine which side of this debate you are on.
You seem to be confused about the difference between "evidence" and "predictions." Actually, your statement that says, "We do not have convincing evidence for balmy global temperatures." agrees very well with my point. I make no presumptions about balmy global temperatures in the 10th century. Kate Wong, the article's author makes that statement in her first paragraph. Check it out.
Hmmm . . . I have heard of those things called thermometers. But making reliable records of average global temperatures requires a whole lot more than a few widely and thinly scattered thermometers of dubious calibration and linearity. Did you ever see the global maps that show areas of warmer and cooler temperatures? A few primitive thermometers scattered across Europe would hardly provide the precision claimed by some.
I had asked, [What do you mean, "Your presume facts that are not in evidence."?]
Then I mentioned that this was a non-sentence.
You asked, "How is it a non-sentence"?
I now ask, "How IS it a sentence?"
I won't bother to try to correct your poor grammar and/or missing words.
I just keep wondering how all the claimed calamities attributed AGW are being caused by a mere 0.6 degree C warming over the past century. It doesn't compute.
Quizzical Says: You seem to be confused about the difference between "evidence" and "predictions."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrent Says: How so? I have pointed out you that in late 19th century predictions were made for which we now have evidence for. Is this another questions which you are going to ignore? Why is it you refuse to answer questions?
Quizzical Says: We do not have convincing evidence for balmy global temperatures." agrees very well with my point. I make no presumptions about balmy global temperatures in the 10th century. Kate Wong, the article's author makes that statement in her first paragraph. Check it out.
Trent Says: Oh, I see. I did not recognize the hypocrisy of you asking that question. You know asking a question about past climates when you do not believe that we have records of past climates. My bad. The mistake was mine in thinking that you were one of those nut jobs who insist the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today. My apologies for not recognizing your disingenuous rhetoric.
Quizzical Says: But making reliable records of average global temperatures requires a whole lot more than a few widely and thinly scattered thermometers of dubious calibration and linearity. d you ever see the global maps that show areas of warmer and cooler temperatures? A few primitive thermometers scattered across Europe would hardly provide the precision claimed by some.
Trent Says: Perhaps it is time you learned about the Global Historical Network that has kept a continuous record of the Earth's land surface temperature since the mid-19th century. GHCH: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ghcnm/
Then again, maybe you still insist that it impossible to have a record of the Earth's temperature. Well then it is you job then to present multiple peer reviewed article supporting that position. The burden of evidence is upon you.
Quizzical Says: had asked, [What do you mean, "Your presume facts that are not in evidence."?]
Then I mentioned that this was a non-sentence.
You asked, "How is it a non-sentence"?
I now ask, "How IS it a sentence?"
I won't bother to try to correct your poor grammar and/or missing words.
Trent Says: Why is it you refuse to answer questions? How you came to think that your pronouncements are to be taken as holy writ is beyond me. News Flash: When you make assertions: Expect people to demand substantiation. Your not special in this regard.
Referring to Post #4 Trent said, and I quote:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrent Says: "In your first post you said "where did the balmy temperatures come from in the 10th century." The presumption here is that is that the 10th century was balmy. We do not have convincing evidence for balmy global temperatures."
Quizzical responded with:
Actually, your statement that says, "We do not have convincing evidence for balmy global temperatures." agrees very well with my point. I make NO presumptions about balmy global temperatures in the 10th century. Kate Wong, the article's author, makes that statement in her first paragraph. Check it out.
Quizzical says:
Now, to help with the English. The following statement you made in Post #2 is NOT a sentence.
In Post #2 Trent Says: Your presume facts that are not in evidence. (This is NOT a proper English sentence.)
Did you mean to say:
"You're presuming facts that are not in evidence."
OR
"Your presumed facts are not in evidence."
OR
"Your presumed facts are not evident."
OR
"You presume facts that are not in evidence."
Peace, and don't get too heated up over global warming.
We had a rather cold winter this year in many areas.
Remember, in the 60's we were being told that there was an imminent ice age soon to befall us. That was as serious a warning then as global warming is now.
So . . . Who is to know what to believe?
Quizzical Says: I make NO presumptions about balmy global temperatures in the 10th century.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrent Says: We have already covered the fact that you asked a disingenuous question. Just admit it and move on.
Quizzical Says: Post #2 Trent Says: Your presume facts that are not in evidence. (This is NOT a proper English sentence.)
Trent Says: You keep on saying this and as justification simply ask more questions. Why is it you can not justify your assertions in plain declarative sentences?
Quizzical Says: We had a rather cold winter this year in many areas.
Trent Says: We call it global warming for a reason. Every month of this winter for the Northern Hemisphere has been in the top 20 warmest on the instrument record. A record that goes back to the 19th century.
NOAA State of the Climate: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2010/12
See how that works? Facts, they have value.
Quizzical Says: Remember, in the 60's we were being told that there was an imminent ice age soon to befall us.
Trent Says: Your presume facts that are not in evidence. This lie that you have mindlessly repeated has been such a prominent meme that it has been the subject of a peer reviewed paper. In the paper they surveyed the scientific literature of the era and found that contrary to the meme a papers predicting a coming warming period outnumber those predicting a cooling trend by 3:1. Further, during this period the papers predicting warming are cited far more than the cooling ones.
The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0477/89/9/pdf/i1520-0477-89-9-1325.pdf
See what I mean? You presumed a fact that is clearly false. The actual evidence makes a mockery of your gullibility. Clear now?
The first link you have provided - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2010/12 - was quite interesting. Just looking at a few of their maps, I see a lot of warmer here, cooler there, wetter here, dryer there, etc. It looks like the weather always varies a lot from year to year and place to place.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe second link you have provided - http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/1520-0477/89/9/pdf/i1520-0477-89-9-1325.pdf - simply generates the error message, "We are sorry, the page was not found."
Why don't we just forget this whole silly discussion about our mutual misunderstanding of one another? If you prefer to believe that the global weather is out of control due to Human activities, so be it.
It is clear to me that Humans don't control the weather in any way, and are much less able to predict it with any statistical degree of certainty.
Peace, you may believe anything you want to, but I will not be answering any more posts.
What a fun arguement. I was rather enjoying the petty back and forth. Just for the record Trent, for a proper sentence in English just drop the "r" from "Your" and thus have "You presume facts...".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMuch of the global temperature data is geologic in origin rather than direct observation. I have yet to see convincing data to prove anthropogenic global warming but there is plenty of data showing very rapid climate change in the past. The climate is clearly changing because that is what climates do.
Much of what is suggested to fight AGW is a good idea, not because of temperature impact but because of economic and food sustainability impact. Some of it however, is a bad idea from sustainability and economic perspectives.