Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Links: political psychology, gay marrage

The more educated Republicans/conservatives are, the more they reject science.
True of liberals? Apparently not: they start out with an anti-nuclear bias, but more education on the subject lessens their worries, moving them closer to the scientific consensus, rather than further away, as with conservatives and global warming.

Medicalization of anti-authoritarianism.

Jeb Bush: "I used to be a conservative" http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73242.html

gay marriage passes Maryland's Democratic legislature, referendum likely
Initiative in Maine likely, to overcome the anti-marriage referendum three years ago
(No links, just heads up.)

Santorum more scary than you thought:

See the comment count unavailable DW comments at http://mindstalk.dreamwidth.org/308098.html#comments



Feb. 25th, 2012 07:21 pm (UTC)
A gullible blogger reporting the claims of an old and corrupt scientist isn't much of a challenge. But let's get down to business:

in the second century AD the Romans grew grapes in Northamptonshire, where they won't grow even now

I wonder what these vineyards in Northamptonshire are doing, then: http://www.englishwineproducers.com/midsvineyard.htm#nhants
None of those have good websites, but http://eglantinevineyard.web.officelive.com/default.aspx does, and it specifically mentions their own vines, not buying grapes to make wine with (which I've never heard of, but I'm being thorough) and it's in Nottinghamshire, exactly two counties due north of Northamptonshire.

Also http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/english-vineyards-again/ and http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/medieval-warmth-and-english-wine/

I could also note that one small region being warm doesn't mean the whole planet was warm, or other objections, but why bother? The 'fact' that you say you base your convictions that it's "so much bullshit" on is false. The grapes grow there. The grapes grow further north. There's a vineyard in Yorkshire, even further north.

Apparently your focus on history missed the existing booming English wine industry. Fair enough; that happens. Now you know more than you did; will you judge differently? Or will you act out the offending article by dismissing this somehow and preserving your beliefs unchallenged?
Feb. 25th, 2012 08:15 pm (UTC)
Apparently you like to ascribe any motive that suits you to anyone who has a good reason to disagree with you. I admit I didn't know about these vineyards, pioneer work of the last few years; the last I'd heard of was in Cheshire, I think some ten years ago, and it was then the northernmost in Britain. That - with modern techniques and new breeds of vines - the production has now reached the area which the Romans had colonized with their Mediterranean breeds of grape in eighteen hundred years ago can hardly be brought as triumphant evidence of unheard-of heat. What is more, it is certain that the wine grape has not been grown commercially in Britain for more than a few decades; vineyards in Kent and good winde from Sussex are still news to most connoisseurs. It is in my lifetime that the first light white bubblies have come to compete with the oceans of French and German product that used to be - and still is - exported to a previously grapeless Britain. But the Romans grew grapes here.
Feb. 25th, 2012 08:58 pm (UTC)
What motive?

Did you look at the links? http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/07/medieval-warmth-and-english-wine/
It seems England hasn't been grapeless since the Norman invasion. "Commercial" I can't speak to, but a low point of only 8 vineyards is described.

Cheshire is... further north than Northampthonshire, though also on the western coast.

"can hardly be brought as triumphant evidence of unheard-of heat"

I wasn't the one who brought up English wine; *you* were, claiming an absence of grapes for 1800 years as the foundation of your disbelief in global warming. I disproved that. I make no strong claims otherwise based on that; as the link points out, viticulture is a crappy proxy for global warming, being sensitive to skill at finding microclimates, varieties, and trade economics. (Though the fact that English wine is booming even while in free competition with cheap wine from around the world, vs. being a desperation measure in a time of expensive and erratic trade, is suggestive.)

Let me emphasize that. You have a belief, in AGW not being real. You implied this is based heavily on a 'fact' of grapes not growing in England, which *you* brought up. The fact is false. Rationally, that should at least weaken your confidence in your belief: you had a foundation, which has been knocked away. Instead, you seem to be regrouping and attacking arguments I didn't even make, just as the alternet article suggested: the belief must be defended, no matter the logic!

Production seems to have taken off in the 1950s, I don't know if 60 years ago is a few decades for you. 124 vineyards by 1977.

"However, one can conclude that those who are using the medieval English vineyards as a ‘counter-proof’ to the idea of present day global warming are just blowing smoke (or possibly drinking too much Californian). If they are a good proxy, then England is warmer now, and if they are not…. well, why talk about them in this context at all? "

"Current theories of climate change do not rely on whether today’s temperatures are ‘unprecedented’. Instead they examine the physical causes of climate change and match up what we know about their physical effects and time history and see which of the multiple drivers or combination can best explain the observations. For the last few decades, that is quite clearly the rise in greenhouse gases, punctuated by the occasional volcano and mitigated slightly by the concomittant rise in particulate pollution."

Edited at 2012-02-25 09:20 pm (UTC)
Feb. 26th, 2012 10:27 am (UTC)
You insist on arguing on stuff you know nothing about. It is evident from what you say that you have never had anything to do with wine-making - and it so happens that I have. Growing grapes in a country is no guarantee that you will be able to make wine. You have to be sure of regular harvests, and of harversts of suitable quality. Commercial wine making in Britain was in its infancy in the seventies, in spite of the widespread use of hardy northern varieties grown for the Rhineland and the Alps - an advantage the Romans did not have. Please stop embarrassing yourself.
Feb. 27th, 2012 01:03 am (UTC)
Were the Romans growing Mediterranean varieties, or or Gaulish ones? The Romans were around for few centuries, might they have bred varieties more adapted to Britain? Was their British wine any good, or was it just good enough people preferring wine to ales and facing expensive shipping?

Post Norman England apparently never had fewer than 8 vineyards, albeit perhaps producing lousy wine.

Anyway, take your own advice. This whole discussion isn't even relevant any more for AGW, as has been explained, starting with the reason "microclimates".
Feb. 27th, 2012 07:10 am (UTC)
OH, what the Hell. I've got other things to do. Surrree you're right. We're all going to boil to death in our own CO2. And pigs fly, New York City bridges can be bought for moderate prices from guys in trenchcoats, and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN was the best movie on the year it was awarded. Why not?
Feb. 28th, 2012 04:02 am (UTC)
boil to death in our own CO2

How can you argue effectively if you can't even represent what your opponent says? The actual claims are about shifting weather patterns (like rain and temperature ranges for crops), loss of glacial water supplies (for cities and crops), increased evaporation (drying out crops), increased storm intensity, and sea-level rise. Also acidification of the oceans, though that's less about temperature and more about CO2 absorption by the oceans.

One better thing to do would be to read here:


Damien Sullivan

Latest Month

June 2019


Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner