tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post3546150780086206289..comments2023-06-16T06:17:50.870-07:00Comments on Science...well sort of: Science, well sort of… fracking open my brain! Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12864178199156310055noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-67970746195612177372013-04-26T15:50:41.465-07:002013-04-26T15:50:41.465-07:00Oh boy...have you hit on something here...I'd ...Oh boy...have you hit on something here...I'd like to say I allowed my biases to take over because it was the simpler path...it felt good, took little real work and frankly was faster than pushing myself to confront them...having said that, the sources I went to made my easy work easier in that in my judgement they were weak on real data to back up their claims.<br /><br />It's interesting that you mention Buddhism...I've been doing some reading on Zen recently and there are some astounding overlaps on the question of how we come to our beliefs...maybe more on this later...thanks for your commentsAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08716429943841101396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-83052064467167583852013-04-26T15:44:20.200-07:002013-04-26T15:44:20.200-07:00Done and done...I'll be putting up a list of m...Done and done...I'll be putting up a list of my sources and you can test your biases alongside mine...stay tuned...GO BEARS!!!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08716429943841101396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-21249164987696716092013-04-26T15:41:41.392-07:002013-04-26T15:41:41.392-07:00No...what position does it take?No...what position does it take?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08716429943841101396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-91180097665036469212013-04-26T15:40:58.300-07:002013-04-26T15:40:58.300-07:00Thanks Jon...I'll have a look at your cite, bu...Thanks Jon...I'll have a look at your cite, but my guess is I won't be able to follow what it says. I ran across the 2% limit in my reading as well. As always, more research is needed...I think I'll make that my epitaph!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08716429943841101396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-71271512288528853132013-04-26T15:37:47.379-07:002013-04-26T15:37:47.379-07:00Great points...actually I've received a lot of...Great points...actually I've received a lot of feedback on the post along the lines you mention...in essence, show us your work...I didn't before out of concern over length, and frankly, the whole point was to show my journey...the more I dig into it, the more I realize that my objective is not to provide answers to folks, but to give them a sense on how they might approach the challenge deciding on complicated issues...fracking is vexingly difficult because of all the aspects of the question...all that said, I've decided to do an interim post that gives some more details on my sources as well as captures some of the great point made by folks about the complexity of the issue...thanks for commenting!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08716429943841101396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-55773545426560301312013-04-26T13:42:23.053-07:002013-04-26T13:42:23.053-07:00Alex...
I am very interested in the observation t...Alex...<br /><br />I am very interested in the observation that awareness of bias does not really help you overcome it... Why do you think that you were so attached to your pre existing points of view? Do you think that it has to do with your perceived identity... that we are (or at least are seen as) the collection of our believes? Buddhism and other eastern religions are pretty insightful about this tendency of the mind... So it is not really about fracking but about your relationship to the opinions about fracking that matters????Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-60466883594985464092013-04-25T19:30:59.951-07:002013-04-25T19:30:59.951-07:00Alex,
Check this out (if you haven't already)...Alex,<br /><br />Check this out (if you haven't already)--http://www.emotionalcompetency.com/theoryofk.htm<br /><br />It is a fascinating and comprehensive look at the who what where when why and how of beliefs and ensuing emotional competence discussing i.e., theories of knowledge, perception, "authority" vs. expertise, credibility, journalistic license or scientific methodology, power and influences, self-justification, mental and human impairments, group think dynamics, and the powerful, uncomfortable necessity of living with ambiguity.... to name but a few ideas. It's not about fracking though.<br /><br />Regarding this blog beginning with the science of fracking, I too would appreciate a few of your 'believed to be' and trusted reliable references in order to put what you began to desire to discuss into context. Your noble quest to study fracking turned into a self-reflective discourse of your real and potential biases, (well done but perhaps another topic altogether too?) yet gave me little education upon which to better understand fracking. I would like to learn about what you brought forth and then make my own informed decisions, quite possibly biased, yet at the same time trusting in my own mind's ability to assimilate and unravel the information making an intelligent assessment. Easy? No. Complex? Indeed. Impossible? No.<br /><br />Research, learn, simplify, repeat. Fracking? What the frack?<br /><br /><br /><br />Go Bears 007https://www.blogger.com/profile/06175706106183595637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-1376039470978368622013-04-24T21:20:20.262-07:002013-04-24T21:20:20.262-07:00Has anyone seen the documentary "Gas Land&quo...Has anyone seen the documentary "Gas Land"? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-76308470301693704582013-04-24T20:04:27.331-07:002013-04-24T20:04:27.331-07:00Alex,
The methane issue is a serious one, but the...Alex,<br /><br />The methane issue is a serious one, but there is very little measured data, so it's no wonder that you were confused by this. It's likely that the methane emissions are more than what the industry says and probably less than what the more extreme folks say, but we need more measurements!<br /><br />According to this peer reviewed article, if methane emissions are greater than 2% of the total natural gas then natural gas is as bad as coal from a climate perspective (because the short run (25 year) global warming potential of methane is very high): Wigley, Tom. 2011. "Coal to gas: the influence of methane leakage." Climatic Change. vol. 108, no. 3. pp. 601-608. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0217-3]. 2% isn't much, so I'd be surprised if methane leakage WEREN'T higher than that, but we'll just need to await measurements. In the meantime, I suggest using natural gas for utility power plants (where leakage is lower) preferentially to expanding its use in residences.<br /><br />I'd say a similar conclusion is probably justified for your other two issues--we just don't have enough data to say one way or another, but it's worth investigating. We probably know more about the leakage issue than the other two.<br /><br />Good luck,<br />Jon<br /><br />Jonathan Koomeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13831066041906698026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4461967048420881307.post-19552826539389391402013-04-24T19:24:25.265-07:002013-04-24T19:24:25.265-07:00Alex,
I have been awaiting your journey on this s...Alex,<br /><br />I have been awaiting your journey on this subject, because I am interested both in the journey and the endpoint. Okay, and I too need to address the central concern that you state - how to avoid one's preconceived judgments, but to use only a good scientific process. (Okay, further disclosure...I think I have the same predispositions as do you on the subject.)<br /><br />That said, I think this particular blog, with your ending, leads down the well-worn and tragically unscientific path that I also sometimes see in journalism attempting to appear even-handed. You've seen it too: on some subject, where clearly the weight of evidence is on one side, yet the journalist in an appearance of 'balance' says, "On the other hand..." - then makes the lame alternative case - and THEN concludes that the cases are both out there (journalist's job 'done') - and leaves it so that the public audience is supposed to make their 'own' judgment. Yet the entire process of appearing to be even-handed (1) does an injustice to science, or more generally to reasoned argument, and (2) can easily confuse a scientifically undereducated public. As the father says in Fiddler on the Roof, sometimes "there isn't another hand." It is an obligation for the reasoned commentator to point out when the arguments just don't add up in any balanced way; when the weight of scientific evidence clearly falls on one side or another. Please give us the list of arguments; give us the arguments which are not evidentially supported (but give objectors the opportunity to contradict that observation by providing such missing evidence, if they can); if the evidence weighs in one clear direction, then tell us. In the case of fracking, I think you point out that there are roughly a handful of stated objections. There is one generally unchallenged 'fact' that replacing coal should lower GHGs. Give us a list of the scientifically reputable articles that either support or oppose each claim. Of course you can't give us all the evidence, but a few (in your judgment) leading references/studies will fulfill your job. Then you too stand by your conclusion, and evidence, presenting the reader with your synthesis of the available scientific data. (That is valuable scientific effort too.) That I think is how science operates.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com