Thursday, September 29, 2016

Is there climate change? I'm going to speculate on an answer.

My guess: No.
...because I am thinking it has already happened.

Please allow me to explain my possibly brain-damaged answer.

First, let's discuss if it is possible, and if it is likely.  You look up in the sky on a clear day and you see blue that seems to stretch out to infinity.  You learned of course that "out there" there is the blackness of space, but unless you are one of the few space travelers in the world, having never been there you really have no gut-level clue exactly where and how far away it is.  Mankind has dreamed of traveling upwards for many centuries, yet have mostly been earthbound.  Only the stories of modern day explorers and scientists can convince you that indeed, there is a space out there.

So you have this gut-level instinct that tells you the sky is big, very big.  Furthermore, you've traveled in jets at nearly the speed of sound, and it has taken you many hours just to traverse a small section of the earth. You couldn't have helped to notice that the earth's surface is big, very big.

So knowing that the sky is so big, it really seems ridiculous to think the efforts of those tiny creatures on the surface called man can have an effect on the atmosphere, let alone enough of an effect to change it permanently.

So indulge me for a minute and consider the scientific facts about this.  I know, I know, science can't do everything.  But you do trust the science that let's folks pump hundreds of volts of electricity into your home at night while you sleep, test the food and water you drink, develop the vaccines you've had, verify the safety of planes, trains, and automobiles you've ridden in.  I don't have time to list all the things about science you take for granted and use every day, so please let's just pretend for a minute you at least believe in some science.

The first thing we have to do is to burst that illusion that the atmosphere is big, very big.  Just because the sky seems big, that doesn't mean the atmosphere is as big.  Did you know that at 18,000 feet the air pressure is only half what it is down here (at sea level)?  True, look it up.  It is at half the pressure because half of the air is gone.  So much so that the FAA mandates that pilots stay below 12,000 feet unless they have supplemental oxygen or a pressurized cabin.  By about 12,000 feet the air is so thin that people can't breathe enough oxygen to keep their brain cells working, and basically they go nuts and can't fly a plane (or even talk or see clearly) after a while.

So 18,000 feet sound like it's really far up there.  It's 3.4 miles up there. It's not that far.  On the surface, even a small healthy kid over toddler age can walk that far.  It's almost certain that you have walked that far at least one day in your life.  So think about that for a minute.  Your long-held belief that the sky and atmosphere is very big isn't so true, half of the air is within 3.4 miles of you on the ground.  Imagine if you will then that if all of the molecules of air were evenly distributed, and half of the air is within 3.4 miles, then all of the air would be within about 6.8 miles.

So when you start to imagine the atmosphere here on earth, think not of a huge, nearly infinite expanse of air, think of a thin layer of air that is less than 7 miles thick.  Now, think of how much less volume of air that is, and imagine that thousands of factories and power plants and trucks and cars and lawn mowers and barbecues and forest fires and candles and all those things that create carbon dioxide and related greenhouse gasses, put into the air day and night, week after week, year after year.

Time is a powerful amplifier of effects.  Think of how slow an ocean liner travels.  Even better, think of how slow old ships in the 1600's traveled with only wind power.  Even at their slow pace, it only took them weeks and months to travel vast expanses over the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

Think of how your kids, your nephews, your neighbors kids or even trees grow slowly over time.  You don't see them change every day as you look at them, but look at them after a year of not seeing them, or look at a single year ago in a picture, and you can see the progress.  It only takes a few years of very slow change to make a great change.  You seldom see grass getting taller under your feet, but just wait a week and most certainly your lawn needs another mowing.

Time is also an amplifier of change in the (small) atmosphere.  Greenhouse gasses are being dumped into the atmosphere non-stop all hours of the day and night.  If you want metric tonnage then look it up, but we aren't going to do math here. And it is going on pretty much all over the earth.  We've been doing this for decades - well - actually for more than a century now in massive quantities.  Imagine how much volume that can be, and imagine that it has been happening to only a thin layer of air barely 7 miles thick.  OK, so maybe now on a gut-level you can begin to understand that man-made changes to the atmosphere isn't quite so crazy silly.  It's real, it's here. It's happening now.  If you want the math then figure if it's only changing ONE foot per year, then all the 36,000 feet of air has been changed already.

PART II
I recall reading many years ago, back in the 1980's about climate change. A larger percentage of scientists were just starting to come online with the theories.  Some of the experts calculated, and calculated, and built up crude models of the atmosphere to predict what exactly would happen. The basic lesson learned is that global warming didn't mean that everybody everywhere was going to get the same effect of the climate remaining the same and getting just a degree or two warmer.

Scientists predicted that the climate patterns would change. Some areas would get warmer, some more sunny, some wetter, and some dryer.  Of course I don't remember where on the map all this would occur, but I did make a note to look at the area I lived in to see what they had in store for me.  Here in the northeast of USA, the prediction was for somewhat warmer and a lot wetter. I remember thinking at least we will not suffer major droughts here, and at least I have a chance of having a source of water.

I remember parts of the central US would be drier, and in particular the southwest.  I'm sure you can find much newer, more accurate maps created with much more powerful computers running much more powerful predictions today.

So this article I remember reading was in Science80 magazine. Great rag. The article referenced an earlier ground-breaking book called The Tipping Point if my memory serves me well.  It discussed how chaotic systems (which the weather obviously is) seem to have a characteristic where they flop around somewhat randomly, and after enough outside influence (energy) to that system is applied, the random characteristics tend to change abruptly to a new random pattern that is markedly different from the first.  This scientist / author (sadly I can't give him credit) dubbed this feature the tipping point.  He and/or the writer of the article I read suggested that the climate will not gradually change like grass gradually grows, but will reach a tipping point and then suddenly shift to a new pattern.

The best example I can recall is the chaotic dripping of a leaky faucet.  At low flow rates we get a steady drip-drip-drip pattern. Try it and you'll see. As you increase the flow rate slightly (just crack the valve a wee-tiny bit), you will eventually start to see occasional double-drips, maybe a few triple-drips, and then it evolves into a random cacophony of drips.  It's at that point the water flow is now a chaotic system.  Very minute changes of water flow can then make a big difference in the pattern of seemingly random drips.

So as you might have surmised, the scientists and/or authors from back in the 80's predicted a sudden shift they called the tipping point in the global climate. Kind of like pushing a bowling pin on the top until you reach a point where it doesn't remain upright - it tips over.  Hold that thought.

As I grew and aged, living in various times and places here in Pennsylvania, I had the unfortunate task of mowing lawns, first at my parents house, then for others, then my own house.  It was actually enjoyable in the spring getting outside for the first few weeks, but with the heavy spring growing season, it got old quickly. Then by June and July it started to get hot, very hot. Making it through July and August was brutal.  But at least there was one factor that made it less brutal. I remember year after year, for most of 40 years or so, by late July and through August it was hot and dry and the grass didn't grow much.  Some years it even turned brown. I could go sometimes for two or even three weeks between mowings in the hot summer sun.

More lately though, I remember four years ago, we had a long, wet summer.  That darned grass kept growing and growing and growing.  Bad luck. Then three years ago it happened again.  Two years ago the same thing.  As it happened again last year I began to think something was up.  Sure enough, each summer - even though some are below average rainfall - it seems my lawn needs to be mowed.  And no, I am not using any kind of amazing fertilizer or anything.

Now I realize that by no means is mowing a lawn a scientific way to gauge the atmosphere, and even if it was it was scientifically ignorant to consider only one point on the geographic map.  But that is good enough for me to express a hunch that maybe those scientists from the 1980 were right. When I consider all the other evidence I read about the global climate change and how the basic prediction from 30 years ago seems to still hold water, I am just bold enough to make a prediction that possibly...just possibly...the climate has already reached the tipping point and shifted.

Of course we will not be able to say this definitively for at least another decade or so because of the chaotic nature of weather, so while I can't prove I'm right, you can't prove I'm wrong either.  Only time will tell.  Statistics will be a valuable tool in determining exactly when that tipping point will occur - or has occurred.  I did declare that it was just a hunch of mine that the climate has shifted already, so if I'm wrong then I won't feel too badly.  But if I'm right, and my thoughts are recorded here on this day and can be retrieved in ten years or so, I stand a chance of being considered a fellow with an amazing insight!

So here I go:  September 29, 2016.  The climate has changed already.



Wednesday, November 4, 2015

NASCAR is no longer entertaining. They are loosing me.

I have been a long time fan of NASCAR, and many forms of motorsports in general.  I have always had a special place for NASCAR, partly because I suppose they seem more like "real" cars, and because I always had fond memories of my dad taking me to the local races in Hershey, PA back in the 1960's where they raced "real" cars several times a week in the summers.

For many years I was only able to watch the races that were broadcast on the networks.  These were the 'big' races, such as the Daytona 500 and a few other Winston Cup races.  In the last 5 years though, with my better cable package I have been able to watch every race throughout the seasons, so in 2010 I started watching pretty much every NASCAR Sprint Cup race, and some (but not all) Nationwide races (now Xfinity races).  Not a lot of truck races though - I do have a life to live.

I am fortunate to be able to get to the races in Dover, and the Pocono's, but most of the other tracks are just too far for a weekend trip.

I have even given up football more recently.  By late in the NASCAR season, I'm too invested in the chase for the championship to switch to football with all those BORING commercial breaks!

But this season has been very frustrating.  NASCAR has really screwed the pooch this time around, with their hippocracy and erratic rule making.  I wasn't a major fan of the change to the 3-race elimination rounds, seems to me they are going for superficial bling and not looking for a true champion driver anymore.  They only want ratings it appears.  Yea, I will stick out the last few races to see who will win the championship, but I don't think I'll stick around for next year, probably get back into football again.

Their recent actions read as hippocracy to me for two main reasons.  1) Driver Safety, 2) Fairness in competition.  A couple of weeks ago they announced that they were reducing the number of green-white-checker attempts from three to one.  The original idea was to help the race end with a full-speed race instead of a slow procession under caution.  But they now say that it was changed for driver safety.  Well if it isn't safe, why do you do that in the first place?  How is the start of the race not as dangerous?  Or any other green flag lap?   Maybe eliminate the last 10 laps?  Those can't be very safe!

If they really, really care about safety, why have they took so long to put those softer, safer barriers on the tracks?  It IS a good idea.  But they only did it in "likely" places.  Meanwhile, drivers kept wrecking and finding plain old concrete walls to hit.  So they put in some more.  And still drivers found bare concrete walls.  How long should this go on?  Why are they not at 100% safer barriers yet?

But what pisses me off the most is the recent dust-up between logano and Kenseth.  Kenseth has been very successful this year, winning 5 races and a contender in the competition for the season champion.  He was racing in the lead at Kansas, and logano was in 2nd.  Kenseth was doing all he could to keep him from passing, what a good race driver does to protect the lead.  It's not always about the best car, but the best DRIVER, and protecting the lead is a technique all champion drivers do.

But logano (as all those assinine Penske drivers do) decided he would wreck Kenseth and make sure he didn't win the race and was out of the championship running.  logano of course said he didn't do it on purpose but come on!  He's a professional driver with literally thousands of laps and hundreds of races, and even us idiots know that if you ram the back corner of a car doing about 200 mph at the start of the turn, that car is going into the wall hard.  So any time ANY driver says that he didn't intend to wreck somebody that way is most certainly a liar.

Fine. Whatever.  NASCAR's CEO and president said that was good - it was good racing.  Fast forward two weeks and Kenseth gets even with logano by wrecking him in the NASCAR philosophy of "Boys have at it".  But this time - Kenseth gets kicked out of the next two races!  Interestingly in the EXACT SAME RACE, Danica Patrick was also caught intentionally wrecking another driver - and she was even naive enough to say so over the radio - but she didn't get kicked out, just fined a little bit (in terms of the money they earn, it's a little bit.  For us regulars it's a fortune.)  HOW IS THAT FAIR?

Through most of the race the two Penske drivers were intentionally blocking the front row of the race restarts, holding up the line while #2 lets #22 get ahead - contrary to NASCAR's stated philosophy of insisting all drivers should compete to the utmost (as a fallout of the Richmond race a few years ago.)  So as long as #2 was holding back, he was NOT racing all-out.  The part about #2 that really set me off is that he is the teammate of the #22 logano, and it certainly appeared to me that he intentionally wrecked Kenseth - claiming that his blatant hard-right turn was because of a broken steering/suspension part.  Yea, sure. Those things break all the time with slight body contact.  I've never seen that happen before ever.

To summarize, this is how I stand about watching NASCAR from now on.  Since I am quite worked up about it all, I want to use capitals to emphasize it...it will make me feel better.

LISTEN UP NASCAR
LISTEN UP NASCAR.  YOU DON'T SEEM TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE ALL ABOUT. YOU ARE PLAIN AND SIMPLE AN ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY.  YOU LIVE AND DIE BY THE FANS YOU CREATE AND KEEP.  I WAS ONE OF THEM, BUT NOT ANYMORE.  NO MORE RECOUNTING EXCITING RACES TO FRIENDS AND CO-WORKERS ON MONDAY.  NO MORE NASCAR T-SHIRTS OR DAY TRIPS TO THE RACETRACKS. WHY?

ONE THING I REALLY DON'T LIKE IS UNFAIRNESS.  I WOULD RATHER WALK AWAY ALL TOGETHER.  I'VE SEEN TWO INTERNET POLLS AND TWO FOX SPORTS RACE HUB SURVEYS - THE LAST OF WHICH WAS REPORTED TO HAVE 1.5 MILLION VOTES.  BOTH INTERNET SURVEYS SHOWED BY A CLEAR MARGIN THAT PEOPLE THOUGHT WHAT KENSETH DID WAS OK.  70+% IN FACT.  THE TWO FOX SURVEYS ALSO HAD A >70% MARGIN SHOWING THAT NASCAR SHOULD DO NOTHING, AND THE NEXT DAY SHOWED >70% THAT THE PENALTY WAS TOO HARSH.  SO CLEARLY I AM NOT ALONE.

IF YOU WERE AT THE TRACK OR SEEN THE TV COVERAGE, YOU COULD HAVE EASILY HEARD THE 5+ MINUTES OF CHEERING WHEN KENSETH GOT EVEN. (EXCEPT FOR THE BOOING WHEN lOGANO GOT OUT OF HIS CAR).  HOW COULD YOU HAVE NOT HEARD THE FANS???

NASCAR HAS LOST ALL CREDIBILITY WITH ME, AND WATCHING THESE RACES IS NO LONGER ENJOYABLE FOR ME.  I'M OUT OF HERE. AND I AM TAKING MY CASH WITH ME!

#nascar #kenseth #logano #suspension