Timing an Ignite presentation

I am in the process of preparing an Ignite presentation on climate change, expressing the basic point that the amount of climate change we experience will depend primarily on what proportion of the world’s fossil fuels we burn.

The Ignite format is an odd and challenging one. Each person speaks for five minutes. At the same time, each has a set of 20 slides which automatically advance every 15 seconds. These factors make it challenging to express yourself clearly and effectively.

The earliest drafts of my presentation suffered from my natural tendency towards digression. I am moving forward now more confidently, having timed myself reading four examples of text for five minutes each. Two were written by me, two were speeches written by others.

I found that I read text similar to that in my presentation at a rate just over 180 words per minute. That translates to about 45 words per slide. To compensate for any issues with shuffling notes or distractions, I will write 40 words of pre-prepared comments to accompany each slide, reducing the risk that the unusual Ignite format will leave me unable to express my point fully.

[Update: 5 May 2010] You can see my final presentation on BuryCoal.com.

Psychological dualism

There is a distinction drawn in theories about the human mind between ‘monist’ and ‘dualist’ understandings of how it works. Dualists, like Descartes, see the mind as essentially separate from the body. Monists believe that “the mind is what the brain does,” and that there is no distinction between the two.

The position of the two views in society is an odd one, as an excellent Paul Bloom lecture discusses. We can readily understand situations that presume dualism: the continued life of the soul after death, the idea that the mind of one person could be transferred into another person or animal, etc.

Hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, Homer described the fate of the companions of Odysseus who were transformed by a witch into pigs. Actually, that’s not quite right. She didn’t turn them into pigs. She did something worse. She stuck them in the bodies of pigs. They had the head and voice and bristles and body of swine but their minds remained unchanged as before, so they were penned there weeping. And we are invited to imagine the fate of again finding ourselves in the bodies of other creatures and, if you can imagine this, this is because you are imagining what you are as separate from the body that you reside in.

Clearly, we are able to imagine minds that would remain essentially unchanged, even when altered into a radically different physical form.

At the same time at dualism seems to make intuitive sense to people, all the physical evidence we have is on the side of a monist view, in which ‘mind’ arises from the physical properties of body:

Somebody who hold a–held a dualist view that said that what we do and what we decide and what we think and what we want are all have nothing to do with the physical world, would be embarrassed by the fact that the brain seems to correspond in intricate and elaborate ways to our mental life.

Somebody with a severe and profound loss of mental faculties–the deficit will be shown correspondingly in her brain. Studies using imaging techniques like CAT scans, PET, and fMRI, illustrate that different parts of the brain are active during different parts of mental life. For instance, the difference between seeing words, hearing words, reading words and generating words can correspond to different aspects of what part of your brain is active. To some extent, if we put you in an fMRI scanner and observed what you’re doing in real time, by looking at the activity patterns in your brain we can tell whether you are thinking about music or thinking about sex. To some extent we can tell whether you’re solving a moral dilemma versus something else. And this is no surprise if what we are is the workings of our physical brains, but it is extremely difficult to explain if one is a dualist.

The lecture includes many other examples showing why monism and the world as we observe it seem to mesh.

To me, the importance of this seems to go beyond settling scientific and/or metaphysical questions. It certainly seems plausible that beings that intuitively perceive themselves as essentially independent from physical reality will develop high-level theories about the world that take that into account, in areas as diverse as their religious, political, and moral views. By the same token, if one view really is far more defensible than the other, on the basis of observations and experiments we perform, that quite possibly has moral and political implications. It is all quite interesting, in any case, and I recommend that people consider watching the lecture series. The videos, transcripts, and slides are all available for free online.

Four days in Montreal

I will be spending the Easter long weekend visiting my brother in Montreal and playing around with a rented 10-22mm EF-S lens. As such, I am unlikely to be adding anything here before Tuesday or so. In compensation, there should be some interesting and unusual photos appearing next week.

In the mean time, perhaps readers can ponder the following question. BuryCoal.com has gotten off to a good start in terms of content, with a large number of good quality posts from several contributors. What it has largely been lacking so far is discussion and community. How can such things be effectively encouraged? Has anyone ever considered posting a comment on either a climate change entry on this site or on BuryCoal, but then decided against it? If so, why?

Sherlock Holmes and Huckleberry Finn

During the past week or so, I listened to my first two audiobooks ever. Previously, I had been quite skeptical. To me, podcasts and the like seem to require too much concentration for use when doing anything complicated, but to not really be engaging enough to hold your attention when you are doing nothing else.

Both issues have been problematic sometimes, when listening to the free copies of Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn that I got from the excellent iTunes U section of Apple’s music store. I sometimes had to rewind (what an anachronistic term!) and re-listen when something distracted me. Much more rarely, I found the contents insufficiently engrossing, though Ernest Hemingway is surely correct to say that the last few chapters of Huckleberry Finn are a severe disappointment.

Both books are part of the University of South Florida’s Lit2Go collection, and they are well (though I think not professionally) read. Each is read by a single person, without much attempt made at voices or radio-play style effects. I found that both books lent themselves well to this treatment, owing perhaps to their relative simplicity and the charming datedness and foreignness of the voices in them. The books can be downloaded here and here, as well as through iTunes.

I doubt that the audiobook treatment would be as well suited to something really complex and intellectual, of the sort where you frequently need to make notes or refer back and forth through the book. Nonetheless, the audiobook medium does seem like a good one for the casual enjoyment of relatively light fiction.

Conference on a world more than four degrees warmer

Given our increasingly slim chances of avoiding more than 2˚C of global warming, it makes sense to start thinking about what a world hotter than that could be like.

The University of Oxford recently hosted a conference on the subject: 4degrees International Climate Change Conference: Implications of a Global Climate Change of 4 plus Degrees for People, Ecosystems, and Earth Systems.

32 of the short lectures are available free, via iTunes.

As an aside, posts might be thin here for the next while. Work is busy, and I am concentrating efforts on BuryCoal. If you haven’t had a look at that site yet, please do. Some good discussions on the posts people have already written would be just the thing.

BoingBoing stands up to a SLAPP

It’s nice to see the initiators of a frivolous or abusive lawsuit get their comeuppance. In this case, I am referring to the failed attempt by MagicJack to silence criticism through a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) against BoingBoing and blogger Rob Beschizza. Too often, faced by the high costs of going to court and the danger of losing, people who had been legitimately expressing an honestly held opinion (often one protected by constitutional law) are bullied into withdrawing their statement, or even paying a settlement. This is a particular danger in states that have terrible libel laws, like the United Kingdom. It is sad but understandable when firms take the safe course – such as when SuicideGirls when through their bout of unprovoked self-censorship. When someone has the guts to fight back, they deserve public recognition and support.

As such, kudos to BoingBoing and Mr. Beschizza. The $50,000 in legal costs they recovered aren’t enough for them to break even, but their example may have public value in deterring some future SLAPPs. There are strong positive externalities that result when organizations like BoingBoing take the courageous course and succeed. Such outcomes help to remind others that free expression is a vital aspect of free and democratic societies, and that attempts to suppress it through legal threats are inappropriate and anti-democratic. They also make it clear to potential filers of SLAPPs that they may end up with even more public embarrassment at the end of the process than they started out with.

BuryCoal.com

In brief, I am starting a new group blog at BuryCoal.com. It exists primarily to make the case for leaving coal and unconventional fuels underground, where they cannot harm the climate.

The reading I have done in the last year has highlighted a few important perspectives for me, when it comes to climate change. The most important thing is humanity’s total cumulative emissions. As such, it is not enough just to use fossil fuels more efficiently. We need to stop using them long before they run out: particularly, before the world’s massive reserves of coal and unconventional fossil fuels are tapped. The warming that would arise from burning all the coal, oil sands, shale oil, and methane clathrates would be far greater than that caused by burning conventional oil and gas.

Government plans that include serious restrictions on the use of coal and unconventional fossil fuels have a chance at being compatible with avoiding dangerous climate change, while those that treat this as a side issue do not.

In order to spread the word about the importance of leaving coal and unconventional fossil fuels in the ground, I have launched a new website at BuryCoal.com. It will be accepting submissions on all matters relating to coal and unconventional fossil fuels, including extraction, air and water pollution, climate change impacts, politics and activism, and more. I don’t think there is any other site out there with its main focus on the message that these fuels must be left in the ground, for the sake of improving our chances of experiencing catastrophic or runaway climate change, and on account of the other benefits that accompany moving beyond them. Those include reduced pollution and destruction of habitat, as well as reduced dependence on fossil fuels which will inevitably run out anyhow.

I would really appreciate if visitors to this site would do three things to help with the new project:

  • Please read and comment on the entries on the new site
  • Please let other people know about it
  • If you have something to say on a topic within the subject area, please submit a contribution

The kind of world our grandchildren and great grandchildren end up living in will depend a great deal on what proportion of these fuels we dig up and burn. BuryCoal.com has been established to be the antithesis to “Drill, Baby, Drill” and make a forceful and well-reasoned case for leaving all that carbon safely underground, while moving to a zero-carbon, renewable global energy system that can sustain human prosperity and civilization indefinitely.

Blog on the psychology of denial

Climate Change Denial is a group blog that really impresses me. It is focused on the question of where climate change denial comes from, and why it has been so successful at diminishing public support for effective climate change policies.

One especially good post is about how climate change campaigners may be in denial themselves, about the scope and seriousness of the problem and the difficulty of addressing it in the time we have left.

It is a site I will continue to read with interest.

Climate book offer

Having personally populated a small library full of books on climate change, I can say with some authority that James Hansen’s book Storms Of My Grandchildren makes a substantial contribution to the debate, partly because of the clarity of his thinking and expression.

As such, and in the interests of improving debate here, I am willing to make the following offer:

Basically, if you are an active member of this community and you will read the book, I will send you a copy.

More specifically:

  1. People requesting a copy must have actively and constructively participated in past discussions on this site (to be judged by me alone)
  2. They must also be willing to read the book, or pay me back for the book and shipping in the event that they do not.
  3. Copies will probably be shipped to people via the US, Canadian, or UK versions of Amazon. I may send them by another means, if a cheaper alternative is available, however.
  4. Any copies shipped outside those places will be shipped at the expense of the recipient.
  5. To begin with, I will pay for no more than eight copies.
  6. I reserve the right to cancel the offer at any time.

People who can afford to are encouraged to buy the book themselves, rather than take advantage of this offer. Hardcover copies are on Amazon for $19.44 Canadian.

[Update: 5 February 2010] My review of Hansen’s book is online.