The one hundred doctors analogy (re: global warming)

Imagine your doctor diagnoses you with lung cancer. You might want to get a second and third opinion, just in case.

What if you got a hundred opinions from doctors specializing in cancer and ninety-seven of them agree? They don't agree on precisely how much longer you have to live or the exact treatment, but they agree on the diagnosis.

Would this propel you to act?

When it comes to global warming and the proposal that it's man-made, ninety-seven percent of those that are most expert on that subject — climatologists — agree. (See link and quotes below). Their agreement is not completely unanimous, but close.

Wouldn't this propel people to act?

If ninety-seven percent (or eighty, or seventy ...) of your doctors agreed regarding your lung cancer, would you take that seriously, or would you suspect a hoax? Would you instead listen to friends of yours who feel uncomfortable with the diagnosis? Would you choose to listen to experts working for the tobacco industry?

It's been repeated often that the denial of the obvious is caused by people's unwillingness to change their comfortable ways, plus specific conflicts of interest. I'm not sure that really explains it. Is it a problem with the lack of dissemination and repetition of information? Or is it the inability to connect world health with personal health? Maybe it's the "gatekeeper syndrome" which is what I call the phenomenon of hearing uncomfortable news and then a respected person tells you not to worry about it.

From news.mongabay.com

A new poll among 3,146 earth scientists found that 90 percent believe global warming is real, while 82 percent agree that human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures.

The survey, conducted among researchers listed in the American Geological Institute's Directory of Geoscience Departments^*, "found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role". The biggest doubters were petroleum geologists (47 percent) and meteorologists (64 percent). A recent poll suggests that 58 percent of Americans believe that human activity contributes to climate change.

"The petroleum geologist response is not too surprising, but the meteorologists' is very interesting," said Peter Doran, University of Illinois at Chicago associate professor of earth and environmental sciences who conducted the survey late last year with former graduate student Maggie Kendall Zimmerman. "Most members of the public think meteorologists know climate, but most of them actually study very short-term phenomenon."

Doran said wide support among climatologists does not come as a surprise.

"They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it."

Geographic anomalies

Tijuana, Mexico is farther north than Savannah, Georgia.

New York City is farther south than Barcelona, Spain and Rome, Italy.

Toronto, Canada is farther south than Milan, Italy.

Both Cuzco, Peru and Santiago, Chile are farther east than New York City

Rio de Janeiro's and Buenos Aires's time zone is only two hours west of London's (in the winter, in summer the time zones are 4 hours apart).

In Panama, the Atlantic is north of the Pacific. The Panama Canal runs south-east from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean.

Halifax, Canada has the same time zone as Santiago, Chile (in winter).

In New York City, Central Park is farther east than Brooklyn Heights (Brooklyners feel east of Manhattan).

Communism as a failed diet which blames the dieter.

Communism resembles the symptoms of unsuccessful diet programs. It has been tried by many countries: Russia (and its satellite states), China, Vietnam, Cuba, and others. In each case there were initial successes which addressed the failings of previous systems, but soon an inner corruption grew, which ultimately contradicted the initial ideals. Advocates for communism often claim that it was never properly applied or taken over by opportunists or that people weren't "ready" (see: the new man). In some ways this pattern is like a diet in which the dieter is blamed for not sticking to the program.

Imagine a diet which demands the dieter eat very little and exercise a lot for as long as necessary. This is, in fact, a good diet if you stick to it. But the vast majority of people won't and of those who will, many will relapse quickly. The proponent of the diet could argue that the problem lies with the dieters, however, the test of a good diet isn't whether it would work IF people apply it correctly, but whether people ACTUALLY apply it. Statistics matter here. Does it work en masse?

Communism isn't a system that most people are willing or able to stick to. Blaming human lack of discipline or corrupt individuals misses the point. An alternative to capitalism in present form, well worth working towards, has to address its own long term practical functionality, not just its idealistic intention in opposition to existing problems. It has to be a system that improves and corrects itself organically, because of, not in spite of human nature.

In the meantime we've tried modified versions of socialism, or its more reasonable cousin, social democracy, in the West, including in the Americas. They work amazingly well. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that we have SOME systems that actually work, imperfectly of course, but close to the level of what was only a dream 150 years ago, when aristocracy, slavery, indenture, child labor were still the norm. Neither the self-defined socialists are happy about the present conditions, nor its vocal opponents ( they have the confusion between communism and social democracy defined as a menace to take advantage of for just about any issue), but in practice, socialism has made the world somewhat better, let's admit that.

(Note: Capitalism, at least in its more cruel adaptations, also blames individuals instead of the system for its failings. Just think of the accusations re: "personal responsibility," "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps," "relying on government handouts," whenever a larger number of people fall between the cracks. When large scale corruption occurs, such as the savings and loan scandal or the recent banking meltdown, we tend to accuse particular individuals, organizations, or industries, instead of the general system that not only allowed it but invited it.)

Europe used to copy itself across the world, via colonialism. Now it copies its colonies, via tourism.

Comedians are often atheists because they can recognize a funny hypothetical situation.

Religion is a game of telephone mistaken for a direct line.

Every positive word about war helps ensure the next one.