Global Dimming on Nova, April 18

[central scrutinizer]

No, this is not about No Child Left Behind. And it is not about Dim Son, it is about the sun dimming.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sun/

excerpts from some of the links:

Like most films that we at DOX Productions make for NOVA, "Dimming the Sun" is a coproduction between a U.K. broadcaster and WGBH, Boston. So we are well used to creating two slightly different versions, one for the British audience and one for the American. Often the difference is simply one of language, those little Britishisms and Americanisms that cause so much innocent amusement (you say "tomato", we say "genetically modified organism"). But "Dimming the Sun" posed an interesting and unusual challenge: how to deal with the fact that British and American viewers are, so to speak, in a different place when it comes to global warming.

In general, Americans seem rather more skeptical about the idea that human activity is changing the climate than we British are. This impression, which led us to adopt a subtly different approach in the two versions, got me thinking about the whole question of why so many people still reject an idea that must be one of the most intensively studied and widely accepted in modern science, and why Americans seem more resistant to it than Europeans are.

[phantom power]

1. "why Americans seem more resistant"

I doubt there's any one reason, but I'll give you my list.

1) Our education system produces too many scientifically illiterate adults. And by that I don't just mean uneducated in the various sciences, but ignorant of what "doing science" means, and why it's conclusions are relevant. Conclusions produced by observation and the scientific method are put on equal footing with opinions, religious texts and various forms of bullshit.

2) We all grow up immersed in various American myths. Things like "Americans can solve any problem." or "Our natural resources are boundless." I think these myths still reign in America because our era of great expansion across the continent is still in relatively recent history. Europe has been pretty thoroughly colonized for many centuries now. Europeans bumped up against the limits of their land and resources a long time ago, and I think the realities of limitation have sunk much deeper into the European psychology, culture, etc.

3) American corporations like Exxon spend a lot of money funding think-tanks to sow FUD about global warming. Why? I'm not sure, but it probably has to do with the fact that American corporations were founded by Americans: see (1) and (2).

4) Our current government is run by Americans, and bought off by American corporations. See (1) (2) and (3).

[NNadir]

3. That's a pretty fair analysis.

I would add another point: 5) Americans are not balanced, and increasingly see things in black or white. They are trained to do this by their media, from which they cannot divorce themselves.

[xchrom]

2. they say global warming, we say global climate change.

i'm being a little snarky here -- but it's partially the truth -- the correct phrase is global climate warming -- ''change'' is coming from that occurrence.

[Viking12]

4. Well, if you want to get technical...

;)

The correct phrase is "altering the atmospheric chemistry", warming is only one of several non-linear responses resulting from that alteration.

[xchrom]

5. lol -- c'mere an i'll alter a thing or two!

:toast:

[Viking12]

7. Hey thanks...

One more hour and I'm out of here for the weekend. I believe I will alter my chemistry a little as I enjoy a sunny 75 degree April day in NorthEast Wisconsin (to keep on topic, the normal temps are in the low 50s).

:beer: :beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:

ahhh....

[xchrom]

8. enjoy!

the rain has finally let up in norcal and it is gorgeous!

[oneighty]

6. God would not let

that happen to his earth and to us his beloved children created in his very own image.

There is nothing to worry about but worry its veryownself.

puff puff.

180

[phantom power]

9. From current events...

"Death of science by multiple organ system failure"

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/death_of_science_by_multiple_o.php