Arquivo da tag: Enquadramento

Sobrevivência com créditos de carbono (Terramérica)

Carbono
28/5/2012 – 09h57

por Fabíola Ortiz*

c17 300x240 TERRAMÉRICA   Sobrevivência com créditos de carbono

O cacique Almir Suruí (E) em sua aldeia. Foto: Divulgação Povo Paiter-Suruí.

Os paiter-suruí,  do Estado brasileiro de Rondônia, na Amazônia, preveem arrecadar pelo menos US$ 40 milhões nos próximos 30 anos com o serviço ambiental de restaurar e fazer uso sustentável da selva.

Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, 28 de maio de 2012 (Terramérica).- O povo nativo paiter-suruí, no coração da Amazônia brasileira, não tinha contato com o mundo ocidental até 45 anos atrás. Hoje, aposta nos complexos mercados de carbono para garantir sua sobrevivência. Habitantes do território Sete de Setembro, quase 250 mil hectares localizados entre os Estados de Rondônia e Mato Grosso, perto da fronteira com a Bolívia, os paiter-suruí viveram uma história vertiginosa nas últimas décadas.

Apenas três anos depois de seu primeiro contato com o “homem branco”, em 1969, quase chegaram à extinção: a população de cinco mil pessoas caiu para apenas 300 devido à mortandade causada pelas doenças trazidas pelos invasores. Hoje são cerca de 1.350 e estão determinados a perdurar. Suruí é o nome que os antropólogos lhes deram. Porém, entre si, eles se chamam paiter, “o povo verdadeiro, nós mesmos” na língua tupi-mondé que falam.

O negócio que pretendem é parte do Projeto de Carbono da Floresta Suruí, aprovado em abril, que prevê mecanismos para neutralizar as emissões de dióxido de carbono, como evitar o desmatamento, mantendo esse elemento na massa florestal, e absorvendo-o da atmosfera, mediante o reflorestamento. Estas ações estão previstas no regime de Redução de Emissões provocadas pelo Desmatamento e pela Degradação das Florestas (REDD+), impulsionado pela Organização das Nações Unidas (ONU) como instrumento para mitigar a mudança climática.

A compra e venda de direitos de emissão de carbono, ou certificados de carbono, está prevista nos sistemas de controle da mudança climática para que empresas ou países grandes emissores de gases-estufa paguem a outros que possuem mecanismos para reduzi-las. Após décadas resistindo ao embate dos madeireiros, caçadores e colonos, desde 2005 os paiter-suruí plantaram 14 mil exemplares de 17 espécies, entre elas cacau e café, árvores de madeira nobre como mogno, cerejeira e ipê, e frutíferas como açaí, pupunha e babaçu.

“Queremos beneficiar nosso povo e nos desenvolvermos de acordo com nossa necessidade da região, valorizando produtos florestais. Uma política econômica verde é justamente um planejamento de uso sustentável”, disse ao Terramérica o líder deste povo, Almir Suruí, que também integra a Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira. O cacique Almir, de 38 anos, sempre está com seu corpo pintado e usa colares de sementes nativas feitos pelas mulheres de seu povo. E também veste roupa ocidental quando tem compromissos fora de sua aldeia, mas que não escondem totalmente a pintura corporal.

Antes de ficar conhecido no Brasil, obteve reconhecimento internacional por denunciar na Organização dos Estados Americanos (OEA) a exploração ilegal de madeira nas terras de seu povo e por defender os direitos e a integridade dos grupos em isolamento voluntário, além de lutar contra a construção de represas hidrelétricas nos rios de Rondônia. Para conseguir seus objetivos de sustentabilidade, os paiter-suruí trabalham associados com várias organizações não governamentais e instituições estatais, como o governamental Fundo Brasileiro para a Biodiversidade (Funbio), que facilita a criação de mecanismos financeiros e ferramentas que garantam renda para os paiter-suruí.

O projeto Carbono Suruí tem duração de três décadas para a conservação de uma área com mais de 12 mil hectares, segundo Angelo dos Santos, um dos coordenadores da Funbio. “Todos os anos os paiter-suruí asseguram um volume de carbono não emitido que será oferecido ao mercado”, explicou Angelo ao Terramérica. “Nos próximos 30 anos, a quantidade que o povo paiter-suruí acumulará pelo desmatamento evitado será de oito milhões de toneladas de dióxido de carbono. E assim se pagará aos indígenas por não desmatarem”, acrescentou. As estimativas indicam que podem arrecadar US$ 40 milhões pela cotação atual do mercado, que está em US$ 5 para cada tonelada de carbono.

Segundo Angelo, há várias formas de comercializar os certificados de carbono. Uma delas é que sejam comprados por empresas interessadas em neutralizar ou compensar suas próprias emissões desse gás-estufa. “Isto é uma grande inovação”, ressaltou. Os recursos obtidos pela venda de certificados serão destinados ao Fundo de Gestão Paiter-Suruí, oficializado no começo de maio para incentivar um plano de desenvolvimento e tornar viáveis formas de gerar renda sem destruir a selva.

Já são produzidas mais de quatro mil toneladas por ano de café orgânico e cerca de dez mil toneladas de castanha amazônica, contou o cacique. As duas produções já contam com planos de negócios. Enquanto isso, “o Fundo Paiter-Suruí vai arrecadar recursos próprios com doações de bancos multilaterais e empresas, e pela venda de certificados de carbono”, detalhou Angelo. A meta é captar US$ 6 milhões nos próximos três anos. E em seis anos o Fundo será completamente administrado pelos paiter-suruí, que já estão se capacitando para isso.

É, sob todos os aspectos, um caso excepcional. Trata-se do primeiro mecanismo financeiro criado para um povo indígena que quer garantir sua sobrevivência e a de sua cultura. Estas iniciativas valeram ao cacique Almir o 53º lugar entre as cem pessoas mais criativas para negócios em 2011, um ranking preparado pela revista norte-americana Fast Company. Não por acaso, Almir foi convidado este mês para falar sobre inovação para dirigentes empresariais e pesquisadores, em um encontro organizado pela revista britânica The Economist.

* A autora é correspondente da IPS.

A corrupção acadêmica e a crise financeira (Guardian)

CHARLES FERGUSON

DO “GUARDIAN”

Muitas pessoas que viram meu documentário “Trabalho Interno” (2010) acharam que a parte mais perturbadora é a revelação sobre amplos conflitos de interesses em universidades e institutos de estudos e entre pesquisadores acadêmicos. Espectadores que assistiram às minhas entrevistas com eminentes professores universitários ficaram estarrecidos com o que saiu da boca deles.

Mas não deveríamos ter ficado surpresos. Nas duas últimas décadas, médicos já comprovaram de modo substancial a influência que o dinheiro pode exercer num campo supostamente objetivo e científico. De modo geral, as escolas de medicina e os periódicos médicos vêm reagindo bem, aderindo às exigências de transparência.

Os cursos de pós-graduação em economia, as faculdades de administração, as de direito e as de ciência política vêm reagindo de modo muito diferente. Nos últimos 30 anos, parcelas importantes do mundo acadêmico americano foram deterioradas, convertendo-se em atividades do tipo “pay to play” (pague para participar).Hoje em dia, se você vir um célebre professor de economia depondo no Congresso ou escrevendo um artigo, são boas as chances de ele ou ela ter sido pago por alguém com grande interesse no que está em debate. Na maior parte das vezes esses professores não revelam esses conflitos de interesse. Além disso, na maior parte do tempo suas universidades se fazem de desentendidas.

Meia dúzia de firmas de consultoria, vários birôs de palestrantes e diversos grupos de lobby de setores diferentes mantêm grandes redes de acadêmicos de aluguel, com o objetivo de defender os interesses desses grupos em discussões sobre políticas e regulamentação.

Os principais setores envolvidos são energia, telecomunicações, saúde, agronegócio e, sem dúvida, o setor de serviços financeiros.

Alguns exemplos: o economista Glenn Hubbard virou reitor da Columbia Business School em 2004, pouco depois de deixar o governo George W. Bush (2001-09), no qual trabalhou no Departamento do Tesouro e foi o primeiro presidente do Conselho de Assessores Econômicos do presidente, entre 2001 e 2003.

Boa parte de seu trabalho acadêmico é dedicado à política fiscal. Num resumo justo de suas posições intelectuais, pode-se dizer que ele jamais viu um imposto que tenha gostado de ver aprovado e em vigor. Em novembro de 2004, ele escreveu um artigo espantoso em coautoria com William C. Dudley, então economista-chefe do banco de investimentos Goldman Sachs.

O artigo em questão, “Como os Mercados de Capitais Elevam a Performance Econômica e Facilitam a Geração de Empregos”, merece ser citado. Vale lembrar que estamos em novembro de 2004, com a bolha já bem encaminhada:

“Os mercados de capital têm ajudado a tornar o mercado imobiliário menos volátil. ‘Arrochos de crédito’ do tipo que, periodicamente, fecharam a oferta de recursos aos compradores da casa própria […] são coisas do passado.”

Hubbard se negou a dizer se foi pago ou não para escrever o artigo. E se negou a me fornecer sua declaração mais recente de conflitos de interesse financeiros com o governo, documento que não pudemos obter de outra forma porque a Casa Branca o destruiu.

Hubbard recebeu US$ 100 mil para depor na defesa criminal dos dois gerentes do fundo hedge (de alto risco) Bear Stearns, processados por envolvimento com a bolha; eles foram absolvidos. No ano passado, Hubbard se tornou assessor econômico sênior da campanha presidencial de Mitt Romney, o pré-candidato republicano à Presidência dos EUA.

RABO PRESO

Outro economista, Larry Summers, já ocupou quase todos os cargos governamentais importantes na área econômica. Secretário do Tesouro sob o presidente Bill Clinton (1993-2001), em 2009 ele se tornou diretor do Conselho Econômico Nacional na administração Barack Obama.

Embora seja sensato em relação a muitas questões, Summers cometeu uma sucessão bem documentada de erros e concessões. E seus pontos de vista sobre o setor financeiro dificilmente seriam distinguidos dos de, digamos, Lloyd Blankfein (chefe do Goldman Sachs) ou Jamie Dimon (presidente do banco JPMorgan).A maior parte de nossas informações sobre Summers vem de sua declaração obrigatória de conflitos de interesse, exigida pelo governo. De acordo com a declaração dada em 2009 por Summers, sua fortuna líquida estava calculada entre US$ 17 milhões e US$ 39 milhões. Seus recebimentos totais no ano antes de ingressar no governo chegaram a quase US$ 8 milhões. O Goldman Sachs pagou a Summers US$ 135 mil por um discurso.

Larry Summers é um homem com o rabo preso, que deve a maior parte de sua fortuna e boa parte de seu sucesso político à indústria de serviços financeiros e que esteve envolvido em algumas das decisões de política econômica mais desastrosas da última metade de século. Na administração Obama, Summers se opôs à adoção de medidas fortes para punir banqueiros ou limitar a receita deles.

A universidade de Harvard ainda não exige que Larry Summers divulgue seus envolvimentos com o setor financeiro. Tanto Harvard quanto Summers negaram meus pedidos de informação.

O problema da corrupção acadêmica hoje está tão profundamente entrincheirado que essas disciplinas e essas universidades importantes estão gravemente comprometidas, e qualquer pessoa que pensasse em se opor à tendência ficaria racionalmente muito assustada.

COMEDIMENTO

Considere a seguinte situação: você é estudante de doutorado ou um membro júnior do corpo docente que estuda a possibilidade de fazer pesquisas sobre, digamos, as estruturas de pagamento aos profissionais que assumem riscos nos serviços financeiros, ou sobre o impacto potencial das exigências de divulgação pública de informações sobre o mercado de “credit default swaps” –instrumentos financeiros que funciona como um seguro contra calotes. O reitor de sua universidade é… Larry Summers. O chefe de seu departamento é… Glenn Hubbard.

Ou você está no MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) e quer estudar o declínio dos pagamentos de impostos de pessoas jurídicas. A reitora do MIT é Susan Hockfield, que faz parte do conselho de direção da General Electric, uma empresa que vem conseguindo evitar o pagamento de quase todos os impostos corporativos há vários anos.

Até que ponto essas forças de fato afetam as pesquisas acadêmicas e as políticas das universidades? As evidências das quais dispomos sugerem que o efeito é grande.
Os comentários sobre a crise financeira proferidos por economistas na academia têm sido bastante comedidos. É verdade que existem algumas exceções notáveis. Na maior parte do tempo, porém, o silêncio tem sido ensurdecedor.

Como é possível que um setor inteiro seja estruturado de modo que funcionários sejam encorajados a saquear e destruir suas próprias firmas? Por que a desregulamentação e a teoria econômica fracassaram tão espetacularmente?

O lançamento do documentário “Trabalho Interno” claramente mexeu com sensibilidades que foram tocadas por essas questões. Fui contatado por estudantes e docentes em grande número, e houve debates em grande número.

Algumas escolas, incluindo a Columbia Business School, adotaram exigências de divulgação de informações pela primeira vez.

Mas a maioria das universidades ainda não faz essas exigências, e poucas ou nenhuma impõem qualquer limitação à existência de conflitos de interesse. O mesmo se aplica à maioria das publicações acadêmicas.

Repórteres de jornais são proibidos terminantemente de aceitar dinheiro de qualquer setor econômico ou organização sobre o qual escrevam matérias. O mesmo não acontece no mundo acadêmico.

Houve um avanço positivo importante. No início deste ano, a Associação Americana de Economia passou a exigir uma declaração de conflitos de interesse para os sete periódicos que edita.

Mas a maioria das instituições ainda se opõe à divulgação de mais informações, e, quando eu estava fazendo meu filme, se negou até mesmo a tratar do assunto.

Tradução de Clara Alain

Rio+20: ruptura ou ajuste? (Mundo Sustentável)

Se você entende que há alguma razão para a mudança, manifeste-se. A Rio+20 é uma obra em construção. Ainda há tempo.

Diante do risco de a mais importante conferência do ano se transformar em uma “terapia de grupo”, onde o falatório e a papelada possam resultar em um novo acordo político genérico, convém prestar atenção desde já no posicionamento dos diferentes segmentos que marcarão presença na Rio +20.

Reunidos na PUC-RJ durante a conferência, aproximadamente 500 cientistas deverão compartilhar novas avaliações sobre o estado de fragilidade e degradação dos ecossistemas que  fornecem água, matéria-prima e energia à humanidade. De lá deverá surgir mais um grito de alerta em favor da vida sem nenhuma conotação política ou religiosa. Quem usa a ciência para medir os estragos causados pelo atual modelo de desenvolvimento é basicamente um cético: se orienta apenas e tão somente pelas evidências que a metodologia científica lhe revela.

Os povos indígenas causarão enormes constrangimentos aos organizadores da Rio+20. Representantes das etnias que sobreviveram a sucessivos massacres no Brasil e no exterior denunciarão o absurdo do uso insustentável da terra.

Os empresários engajados exibirão os resultados contábeis da ecoeficiência e assumirão novos compromissos em defesa da inovação tecnológica e da redução do desperdício. Haverá entre eles os que fazem maquiagem verde (falam de “sustentabilidade”, mas não praticam), os neo-convertidos, que ajustaram procedimentos mais por conveniência (do que por convicção) e os que, de fato, estão convencidos da necessidade de mudanças e conseguem enxergar mais além do lucro imediato.

A constelação das ONGs deverá confirmar o tamanho e a diversidade das múltiplas correntes de pensamento que não cabem na moldura da ONU, mas que emprestam densidade e legitimidade a uma das pautas mais importantes da Rio+20: governança. Os tomadores de decisão já reconhecem a força do terceiro setor num mundo onde as articulações em rede robustecem a democracia, oxigenam as instituições e promovem a transparência e a justiça.

Caberá às organizações civis e às mídias (todas as mídias, de todos os tamanhos) aquecer a panela de pressão onde os chefes de estado vão cozinhar o texto final da Conferência. Sem isso, será mais do mesmo. Obnubilados pelos afazeres e interesses mais imediatos, de curtíssimo prazo, os chefes de estado não conseguirão justificar mudanças estruturais de longo prazo sem que haja uma boa razão para isso. Se você entende que há alguma razão para a mudança, manifeste-se. A Rio+20 é uma obra em construção. Ainda há tempo.

André Trigueiro

14.mar.2012

Artigo publicado na edição de março 2012 da Revista GQ

Resilient People More Satisfied With Life (Science Daily)

ScienceDaily (May 23, 2012) — When confronted with adverse situations such as the loss of a loved one, some people never fully recover from the pain. Others, the majority, pull through and experience how the intensity of negative emotions (e.g. anxiety, depression) grows dimmer with time until they adapt to the new situation. A third group is made up of individuals whose adversities have made them grow personally and whose life takes on new meaning, making them feel stronger than before.

Researchers at the Basic Psychology Unit at Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona analyzed the responses of 254 students from the Faculty of Psychology in different questionnaires. The purpose was to evaluate their level of satisfaction with life and find connections between their resilience and their capacity of emotional recovery, one of the components of emotional intelligence which consists in the ability to control one’s emotions and those of others.

Research data shows that students who are more resilient, 20% of those surveyed, are more satisfied with their lives and are also those who believe they have control over their emotions and their state of mind. Resilience therefore has a positive prediction effect on the level of satisfaction with one’s life.

“Some of the characteristics of being resilient can be worked on and improved, such as self-esteem and being able to regulate one’s emotions. Learning these techniques can offer people the resources needed to help them adapt and improve their quality of life”, explains Dr Joaquín T Limonero, professor of the UAB Research Group on Stress and Health at UAB and coordinator of the research.

Published recently in Behavioral Psychology, the study included the participation of UAB researcher Jordi Fernández Castro; professors of the Gimbernat School of Nursing (a UAB-affiliated centre) Joaquín Tomás-Sábado and Amor Aradilla Herrera; and psychologist and researcher of Egarsat, M. José Gómez-Romero.

Wearing Two Different Hats: Moral Decisions May Depend On the Situation (Science Daily)

ScienceDaily (May 23, 2012) — An individual’s sense of right or wrong may change depending on their activities at the time — and they may not be aware of their own shifting moral integrity — according to a new study looking at why people make ethical or unethical decisions.

Focusing on dual-occupation professionals, the researchers found that engineers had one perspective on ethical issues, yet when those same individuals were in management roles, their moral compass shifted. Likewise, medic/soldiers in the U.S. Army had different views of civilian casualties depending on whether they most recently had been acting as soldiers or medics.

In the study, to be published in a future issue of The Academy of Management Journal, lead author Keith Leavitt of Oregon State University found that workers who tend to have dual roles in their jobs would change their moral judgments based on what they thought was expected of them at the moment.

“When people switch hats, they often switch moral compasses,” Leavitt said. “People like to think they are inherently moral creatures — you either have character or you don’t. But our studies show that the same person may make a completely different decision based on what hat they may be wearing at the time, often without even realizing it.”

Leavitt, an assistant professor of management in the College of Business at OSU, is an expert on non-conscious decision making and business ethics. He studies how people make decisions and moral judgments, often based on non-conscious cues.

He said recent high-profile business scandals, from the collapse of Enron to the Ponzi scheme of Bernie Madoff, have called into question the ethics of professionals. Leavitt said professional organizations, employers and academic institutions may want to train and prepare their members for practical moral tensions they may face when asked to serve in multiple roles.

“What we consider to be moral sometimes depends on what constituency we are answering to at that moment,” Leavitt said. “For a physician, a human life is priceless. But if that same physician is a managed-care administrator, some degree of moral flexibility becomes necessary to meet their obligations to stockholders.”

Leavitt said subtle cues — such as signage and motivation materials around the office — should be considered, along with more direct training that helps employees who juggle multiple roles that could conflict with one another.

“Organizations and businesses need to recognize that even very subtle images and icons can give employees non-conscious clues as to what the firm values,” he said. “Whether they know it or not, people are often taking in messages about what their role is and what is expected of them, and this may conflict with what they know to be the moral or correct decision.”

The researchers conducted three different studies with employees who had dual roles. In one case, 128 U.S. Army medics were asked to complete a series of problem-solving tests, which included subliminal cues that hinted they might be acting as either a medic or a soldier. No participant said the cues had any bearing on their behavior — but apparently they did. A much larger percentage of those in the medic category than in the soldier category were unwilling to put a price on human life.

In another test, a group of engineer-managers were asked to write about a time they either behaved as a typical manager, engineer, or both. Then they were asked whether U.S. firms should engage in “gifting” to gain a foothold in a new market. Despite the fact such a practice would violate federal laws, more than 50 percent of those who fell into the “manager” category said such a practice might be acceptable, compared to 13 percent of those in the engineer category.

“We find that people tend to make decisions that may conflict with their morals when they are overwhelmed, or when they are just doing routine tasks without thinking of the consequences,” Leavitt said. “We tend to play out a script as if our role has already been written. So the bottom line is, slow down and think about the consequences when making an ethical decision.”

What-If and What-Is: The Role of Speculation in Science (N.Y.Times)

SIDE EFFECTS

MPI/Getty Images

An illustration from about 1850 of a dog with a small travois in an Assiniboine encampment.

By JAMES GORMAN – Published: May 24, 2012

Woody Allen once said that when you do comedy, you sit at the children’s table. The same might be said of speculation in science.

And yet speculation is an essential part of science. So how does it fit in? Two recent publications, both about the misty depths of canine and human history, suggest some answers. In one, an international team of scientists concludes that we really don’t know when and where dogs were domesticated. Greger Larson of the University of Durham, in England, the first of 20 authors of that report, said of dog DNA, “it’s a mess.”

In the other, Pat Shipman, an independent scientist and writer suggests that dogs may have helped modern humans push the Neanderthals out of existence and might even have helped shape human evolution.

Is one right and the other wrong? Are both efforts science — one a data-heavy reality check and the other freewheeling speculation? The research reported by Dr. Larson and his colleagues in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is solid science, easily judged by peers, at any rate. The essay by Dr. Shipman is not meant to come to any conclusion but to prompt thought and more research. It, too, will be judged by other scientists, and read by many nonscientists.

But how is one to judge the value of speculation? There are a few obvious ways. The questions readers ought to ask when confronting a “what-if “as opposed to “what-is” article are: Does the writer make it clear what is known, what is probable, and what is merely possible?

Dr. Shipman was careful to make these distinctions in her essay inAmerican Scientist, and in an interview, when I asked her to walk me through her argument.

First, she said, we know that modern humans and Neanderthals occupied Europe at the same time, from about 45,000 to 25,000 years ago, and that the fortunes of the modern humans rose as those of the Neanderthals fell. Somehow the modern humans outcompeted the Neanderthals. And here we are now, with our computers, our research, and our beloved dogs, which, scientists agree evolved from wolves.

Second, and this point is crucial, Dr. Shipman thinks dogs were very probably around during this time period, although she recognizes that others disagree. She tells us about the research that convinced her, so we can check it ourselves, if we like: a 2009 report of three skulls, the oldest dating to 32,000 years ago, by Mietje Germonpré of The Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences in The Journal of Archaeological Science.

The skulls are clearly of members of the canid family, but that includes wolves, jackals and foxes. Dr. Germonpré and her colleagues concluded that the skulls belonged to dogs. That’s where things get sticky.

The rest of Dr. Shipman’s essay is clear enough. If the humans had dogs, the dogs must have been helping somehow, in hunting or pulling travois. And they may have been so helpful that they gave modern humans an edge over the Neanderthals (unless the Neanderthals had dogs, too). If they helped in hunting, they might have watched human eyes for clues about what was going on, as they do now. Other researchers have suggested that the white of the human eye evolved to foster cooperation because we could more easily see where others were looking, than with plain brown eyes.

If dogs were watching us too, that would have added survival value to having a partly white eye and thus played a role in our evolution. Fair enough, but the dogs had to be there at that time when humans and Neanderthals overlapped. I asked Dr. Larson about Dr. Shipman’s essay, and I confess I expected he might object to its speculative nature. Not so. “I love speculation,” he wrote back, “I do it all the time.” And, he said of Dr. Shipman’s essay, “it’s a lovely chain of reasoning.”

But, he said, “it begins from the premise that the late Pleistocene canid remains are dogs. And they are not.”

He wrote, “there is not a single piece of (credible) evidence to suggest that the domestication process was under way 30,000 years ago.” He cited an article in press in The Journal of Archaeological Science that is highly critical of the Germonpré paper. The article, written by Susan J. Crockford at the University of Victoria and Yaroslav V. Kuzmin at the Siberian branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, suggests that the skulls in question came from short-faced wolves and do not indicate that the domestication process had begun. Dr. Crockford, who had read Dr. Shipman’s paper, thought it “too speculative for science.” But she did not view the case of early domestication as completely closed.

She said in an e-mail: “We simply need more work on these ancient wolves before we can determine if these canids are incipient dogs (in the process of becoming dogs, although not there yet) or if they simply reflect the normal variation in ancient wolves. At present, I am leaning strongly towards the later (normal variation in wolves).”

Perhaps the way to judge the scientific value of speculation would be to see if it prompts more research, more collecting of fossils, more study. Until then, only proximate answers will exist to the question of where dogs came from.

Mine came from a shelter? How about yours?

Mudando para que nada mude (Cineclube Ciência em Foco)

SEXTA-FEIRA, 25 DE MAIO DE 2012

 “A exaustão dos recursos naturais não será resolvida enquanto os padrões de subjetividade ocidentais não forem incluídos como parte fundamental do problema. […] A insatisfação crônica do cidadão ocidental, e a forma irresponsável com que se relaciona com as coisas […] são coisas tão importantes quanto a discussão sobre matrizes energéticas”.

 

Renzo Taddei – Doutor em Antropologia pela Univ. de Columbia, pesquisador da Coordenação do Núcleo Interdisciplinar de Estudos Contemporâneos da ECO-UFRJ e palestrante do Ciência em Foco de 2 de junho.

1) O personagem central do filme Árido Movie é um profissional que apresenta diariamente a previsão do tempo para o Brasil em uma rede de TV em São Paulo. Ao voltar para sua terra natal no sertão nordestino, ele se vê deslocado na fissura entre estes dois “nordestes”: o da previsão do tempo, distante e virtual, e o concreto. Diante dos vários contrastes com os quais se defronta, como podemos pensar seu deslocamento?

Essa fissura não se limita à questão do “nordeste”, mas é ainda mais importante, ainda que menos saliente, na própria questão do clima. Somos levados a crer todo o tempo que o clima que importa está em algum outro lugar, e que só é acessível através da mediação de especialistas e equipamentos. Obviamente isso ocorre de fato, mas há efeitos deletérios nessa alienação entre os indivíduos e o meio ambiente: a questão passa a ser entendida como problema distante, vivido apenas de forma abstrata. Isso gera a atitude caracterizada pela ideia de que “eu não tenho nada com isso” – o que é exatamente o que o personagem do filme diz à avó quando percebe que esta espera que ele vingue a morte do pai. De certa forma, ele vivia a sua própria relação familiar de forma alienada, como algo abstrato, virtual, e as contingências da vida o obrigam a enfrentar a incontornável materialidade dos contextos locais. A crise ambiental atual nos confronta com esta materialidade incontornável. Se o personagem vivesse as suas relações familiares de forma mais integral, talvez o destino de todos ali fosse outro. Há responsabilidades que nos implicam, mas que não escolhemos – algo difícil de aceitar no contexto liberal em que vivemos. Mas a analogia acaba por aqui: felizmente não há morte alguma a ser vingada na questão climática (ou haverá?).

2) O fenômeno climático da seca é recorrente na filmografia brasileira. Pode-se dizer que o cinema traz representações do meio ambiente que muitas vezes nos forçam a pensar seus elementos a partir de sua relação com a sociedade e a cultura. Sem entregar muito de sua fala, poderia comentar algo em torno desta relação? Qual a importância destas perspectivas e seu papel no cenário das discussões oficiais?

Mais do que a seca propriamente dita, o elemento que povoou a imaginação de escritores e artistas foi o “sertão”. Hoje, especialmente para as audiências do sudeste urbano, sertão é quase sinônimo de nordeste rural, mas no passado a situação era diferente. Há debates acadêmicos sobre de onde vem a palavra sertão: uma das hipóteses é que tem origem na palavra desertão, sugerindo a ideia de área remota e desolada; outra, sugere que a palavra vem de sertus, termo do latim que significa entrelaçado, enredado. Na história do Brasil, o sertão sempre foi o espaço refratário à penetração do poder oficial, das instituições de controle do Estado. Um dos lugares onde isso é mais claro é na obraGrande Sertão: Veredas, de Guimarães Rosa. A obra se ambienta toda em Minas Gerais, em uma região que não é semiárida como o sertão nordestino, e numa época onde sequer existia o “Nordeste”, mas tudo o que ficava acima da Bahia era considerado “Norte”. No início, o Brasil todo era sertão; com a expansão do Estado ao longo do século XX, houve uma redução considerável do território que pode ser considerado sertão, nos sentidos mencionados acima: praticamente toda a região sudeste, por exemplo, se “dessertaniza” à medida que o espaço passa a ser ocupado por cidades e atividade agrícola em larga escala.

Desta forma, na imaginação artística o sertão funcionou, ao longo dos últimos dois séculos, como o “outro mundo” onde há liberdade em contraposição aos controles que marcam as sociedades urbanas, e onde há mais autenticidade, o que pode ser encarado por um viés romântico (como vemos em José de Alencar, por exemplo) ou onde coisas impensáveis podem ocorrer, numa espécie de mirada conradiana [referente a elementos da obra do escritor britânico Joseph Conrad (1857-1924), autor de Coração das trevas]. Mesmo com o Cinema Novo, onde há uma sociologização mais intensa do sertão, esse não deixa de ser espaço de liberdade e experimentação, como vemos em Deus e o Diabo na Terra do Sol, de Glauber Rocha. Mas é preciso que se diga que isso tudo marca uma perspectiva de quem olha de fora. O sertão não é uma coisa, são muitas.

O que a seca faz, em certo sentido, é ressertanizarmomentaneamente um território dessertanizado, porque ela tem o potencial de desorganizar processos políticos e sociais locais, inclusive no que diz respeito às instituições oficiais de poder. Em lugares onde as variações climáticas (como as secas) são recorrentes, como no nordeste brasileiro, em geral as relações de poder locais existem de forma associada às epidemias de sofrimento trazidas pela seca. A infame indústria da seca é um exemplo disso. Mas há limites em quanto as sociedades e instituições locais conseguem se ajustar à variação do clima: secas muito intensas podem efetivamente colocar toda uma sociedade em situação de crise, como se vê atualmente nos sertões de Pernambuco e da Bahia.

Um segundo ponto da questão menciona a forma como o cinema nos faz pensar o meio ambiente em sua relação com sociedade e cultura. Há duas formas de relacionar natureza e sociedade que parecem ser recorrentes na experiência humana. Por um lado, usamos elementos da natureza para pensar relações sociais, coisa que na antropologia chamamos de totemismo. A forma como usamos figuras de animais para pensar torcidas de futebol (urubu, gaviões, porco etc), ou como destacamentos militares usam símbolos animais (a onça em quartéis na Amazônia), ou ainda quando nos referimos a qualidades pessoais através de imagens animais (ao dizer que alguém “é” uma cobra, um rato, ou uma anta), são exemplos disso. Por outro, projetamos na natureza elementos humanos, culturais e sociais, o que, por sua vez, é conhecido na antropologia como animismo. Desta forma, uma tempestade é “traiçoeira”, ou uma estação chuvosa, como ouvi várias vezes em pesquisa de campo no sertão do Ceará, pode ser “velhaca” (isto é, promete e não cumpre). O cinema naturalmente se utiliza disso tudo como recurso narrativo.

Além disso, nossa percepção do ambiente é visceralmente marcada por nossas perspectivas contextuais. Uma pesquisa que coordenei a respeito das respostas sociais e culturais às secas do ano de 2005 – um ano em que houve secas na Amazônia, no Nordeste e no sul do Brasil – mostrou que as populações locais não pensam o meio ambiente como algo desconectado das demais dimensões da vida; como tais dimensões são variáveis, a percepção do ambiente o é também. Os resultados da pesquisa foram publicados no livroDepois que a chuva não veio, disponível em texto integral na Internet. O problema é que os governos centrais, como o federal, no Brasil, têm a tendência a homogeneizar tudo com o qual se relacionam, ignorando os contextos locais; e a ciência climática tende a pregar que o contexto local e o clima não têm relação causal direta (especialmente quando estão contestando a capacidade do conhecimento tradicional de produzir previsões climáticas válidas). No que diz respeito às relações entre sociedade e clima, vivemos uma situação verdadeiramente neurótica. O meio ambiente pode inclusive ser uma forma de eufemizar uma discussão demasiadamente sensível em termos políticos e sociais. Um manual de infoativismo editado na Inglaterra, por exemplo, sugere que personagens em forma de animais sejam usados em campanhas públicas em que questões politicas sensíveis dificultem a comunicação através de exemplos humanos.

As discussões oficiais são, infelizmente, demasiadamente economicistas e unilineares, presas a um utilitarismo frustrante, para levar qualquer dessas questões a sério.

3) No mês de junho, o Rio de Janeiro sediará a Rio+20, a conferência das Nações Unidas em torno do desenvolvimento sustentável, que articulará líderes mundiais em discussões que convidam à cooperação mundial para a melhoria de problemas sociais. Tendo em vista o cenário de mudanças climáticas, como abordar a participação social nestas discussões, face às diferenças culturais que estão em jogo?

As diferenças culturais não devem ser entendidas como obstáculo às ações relacionadas à crise ambiental. Pelo contrário, são recursos importantes. É interessante observar como a biodiversidade é hipervalorizada, ao ponto de ser fetichizada, e ao mesmo tempo a diversidade de formas humanas de ser e estar no mundo é desvalorizada – por exemplo, quando se acredita, com as melhores intenções, que é preciso “educar” as pessoas que praticam queimadas para plantio, por exemplo, para que “entendam” os efeitos deletérios de algumas de suas práticas cotidianas. Projetamos o problema sobre os outros, sem perceber que esse nosso foco em informação e no pensamento, ou seja, ao diagnosticar tudo como “falta de informação” ou diferentes “formas de pensar”, é parte fundamental do problema. Tudo ficou cibernético demais, de forma que as questões morais e éticas nos escapam muito facilmente.

A ideia de que diferenças culturais dificultam a construção de um entendimento mundial sobre as questões ambientais em geral, e sobre a questão climática, em particular, me assusta. A própria ideia de “entendimento mundial” em torno do meio ambiente evoca perigosamente um centralismo pouco democrático. Nunca na história da humanidade houve uma tentativa tão articulada para a criação de um discurso único sobre o meio ambiente. A polarização política que se vê nos Estados Unidos, em torno da questão climática, é uma farsa: o comportamento do partido republicano mostra com clareza que se trata de uma disputa pelo poder, onde os envolvidos se comportam estrategicamente e defendem qualquer posição que maximize suas chances de vitória. E, acima de tudo, apresentam o problema climático como se houvesse apenas duas alternativas – aceitar ou negar o efeito das ações humanas nas mudanças climáticas –, mas as duas são validadas dentro do mesmo paradigma ocidental, exacerbadamente materialista e utilitarista. E as outras formas de pensamento e de vida, outras epistemologias e ontologias? Como diz o antropólogo Eduardo Viveiros de Castro, é preciso aprender a pensar “com” os outros. Segundo o pensamento ameríndio, por exemplo, ao invés de tomar os humanos como excepcionais em sua humanidade, há a ideia de que a humanidade é a essência comum de todos os seres vivos. Que tipo de ética e moralidade decorre dai, na relação entre humanos e não humanos? Não se trata de romantizar as formas indígenas de vida, mas apenas de mostrar como outros pensamentos são extremamente interessantes na abordagem dos problemas ambientais.

No meu entender, o que sobressai nesta questão da participação social e da multiplicidade cultural é o fato de que é preciso que os ocidentais, e nós, ocidentalóides, entendamos que há dimensões do problema que transcendem a materialidade e o utilitarismo. A exaustão dos recursos naturais, por exemplo, não será resolvida enquanto os padrões de subjetividade ocidentais não forem incluídos como parte fundamental do problema. Não adianta criar esquemas institucionais para evitar a “tragédia dos comuns”, por exemplo, sem lidar com os temas da satisfação e da responsabilidade. A insatisfação crônica do cidadão ocidental, e a forma irresponsável com que se relaciona com as coisas (ao pagar os governos municipais para “sumir” com o nosso lixo, sem que nenhuma pergunta seja feita, de modo que não precisemos pensar mais nele, por exemplo), são coisas tão importantes quanto a discussão sobre matrizes energéticas.

4) Contraplanos – expresse em poucas palavras (ou apenas uma) sua sensação com relação aos sentidos e problemáticas evocadas pelas seguintes palavras:

– tempo e clima: clima é um ponto de vista[1]; tempo é a vista (a partir) de um ponto[2] (notas: [1] Clima é “ponto de vista” no sentido de que trata-se de uma construção abstrata, resultante de cálculos estatísticos sobre medições de indicadores atmosféricos em intervalos amplos de tempo, e onde as técnicas estatísticas, o termômetro e outros mediadores técnicos têm tanta importância quanto a vibração das partículas que o termômetro busca medir; [2] tempo, no sentido dado ao conceito pela meteorologia, é o fenômeno atmosférico que existe num prazo de tempo mais curto, e portanto tende a fazer referência ao fenômeno em si, enquanto singularidade experiencial, ou seja, coisas que vivemos e lembramos, porque nos afetam num tempo e espaço específicos, e desta forma são a experiência a partir de um ponto).

 – sustentabilidade: o que exatamente se está tentando sustentar? Precisamos pensar a “mutabilidade” tanto quanto sustentabilidade. É muito difícil mudar o (insustentável) sistema econômico em que nos encontramos, e é preciso atentar para o fato de que, sob a fachada de “sustentabilidade”, há um esforço imenso de mudar apenas o que é necessário para que nada mude no final. O mercado de carbono é o exemplo paradigmático disso. Ou seja, em geral os debates sobre sustentabilidade (e sobre adaptação, resiliência etc.) são conservadores e insuficientes.

– construção social: já não há mais muita clareza a respeito do que significa tal associação de termos (o que é bom). Se tudo é construção social, a ideia deixa de ser relevante, porque não explica muita coisa. Tudo está em fluxo; se é “construção”, e se é “social”, depende de qual jogo semântico se está jogando. A expressão diz mais a respeito de quem usa a expressão do que sobre o fenômeno em questão. Tenho a impressão que dizer que o clima, por exemplo, é uma “construção social” constitui uma forma de evitar levar o clima a sério – e aqui estou repetindo ideias de autores como Bruno Latour ou Roy Wagner, por exemplo.

– ciência e cultura: há muito menos clareza a respeito do que significam tais termos (o que é melhor ainda). Num sentido mais propriamente filosófico, são duas ideias que morreram no século XX. Ou seja, tanto a Ciência como a Cultura, assim com “c” maiúsculo, que constituíam o santo graal do pensamento acadêmico Europeu dos séculos XIX e grande parte do XX se mostraram quimeras, principalmente em função dos trabalhos de gente como Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Wittgenstein, Gadamer, dentre muitos outros. Sobraram “ciências” e “culturas” com “c” minúsculo, ou seja, tais conceitos se transformaram em problemas empíricos. Puxando a sardinha pro meu lado (risos), se tornaram problemas antropológicos.

5) Roteiros alternativos – espaço dedicado à sugestão de links, textos, vídeos, referências diversas de outros autores/pesquisadores que possam contribuir com a discussão. Para encerrar essa sessão, transcreva, se quiser, uma fala de um pensador que o inspire e/ou seu trabalho.

No meu blog Uma (In)certa Antropologia (http://umaincertaantropologia.org) mantenho um arquivo de notícias e materiais acadêmicos sobre as relações entre cultura, sociedade e o clima. Há lá uma gravação em áudio de uma apresentação do antropólogo Eduardo Viveiros de Castro que toca no tema das mudanças climáticas como crise do Ocidente, e como outros povos e outras culturas se relacionam com isso, que vale a pena ser ouvida. Ela está no link http://www.taddei.eco.ufrj.br/ViveirosdeCastro_IFCS_20111123.wav.

O livro Depois que a chuva não veio, mencionado acima, está disponível no link http://www.taddei.eco.ufrj.br/DQACNV.htm.

O documentário “10 tacticts for turning information into action”, também mencionado acima, está no site http://informationactivism.org/original_10_tactics_project#viewonline, com subtítulos em português – o exemplo de uso de animais como personagens está na tática número 3.

Há um vídeo provocativo do Slavok Žižek, cujo título éEcology as Religion, que evoca discussões importantes sobre como o meio ambiente existe no senso comum e nas discussões políticas. O video está reproduzido em https://umaincertaantropologia.org/2012/04/12/slavoj-zizek-on-ecology-as-religion-youtube/

6) Como conhecer mais de suas produções?

Há uma lista de artigos acadêmicos e também escritos para jornais e revistas em meu website, no link http://www.taddei.eco.ufrj.br/Textos.htm

Heart Rules the Head When We Make Financial Decisions (Science Daily)

ScienceDaily (May 21, 2012) — Our ‘gut feelings’ influence our decisions, overriding ‘rational’ thought, when we are faced with financial offers that we deem to be unfair, according to a new study. Even when we are set to benefit, our physical response can make us more likely to reject a financial proposition we consider to be unjust.

Conducted by a team from the University of Exeter, Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit and University of Cambridge, the research is published in the journal Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioural Neuroscience.

The research adds to growing evidence that our bodies can sometimes govern how we think and feel, rather than the other way round. It also reveals that those people who are more in tune with their bodies are more likely to be led by their ‘gut feelings’.

The study was based on a well-known psychological test, the Ultimatum Game. 51 participants were presented with a series of financial offers, based on different ways of dividing £10. Players frequently reject unfair offers in this game even though it leads to personal financial loss — an ‘irrational’ decision from an economic perspective.

The researchers measured participants’ physical responses to each offer by recording how much they sweated through the fingertips and how much their heart rate changed. How accurately participants could ‘listen’ to their bodies was measured on a different task by asking them to count their heartbeats and comparing their accuracy to their actual heart rate recording. Those people who showed a bigger physical response to unfair offers were more likely to reject them, but this was only the case if individuals were also able to accurately ‘listen’ to what their bodies were telling them.

The findings show that individuals who have a strong ‘gut-reaction’ and are in tune with their own physical responses are more likely to reject unfair financial offers, even if this decision results in personal losses.

Lead researcher Dr Barney Dunn of Psychology at the University of Exeter said: “This research supports the idea that what happens in our bodies can sometimes shape how we think and feel in our minds. Everyday phrases like ‘following your heart’ and ‘trusting your gut’ can often, it seems, be accurate.”

“Humans are highly attuned to unfairness and we are sometimes required to weigh up the demands of maintaining justice with preserving our own economic self-interest. At a time when ideas of fairness in the financial sector — from bankers’ bonuses to changes to pension schemes — are being widely debated, it is important to recognise why some individuals rebel against perceived unfairness, whereas other people are prepared to accept the status quo.”

Educational Games to Train Middle Schoolers’ Attention, Empathy (Science Daily)

ScienceDaily (May 21, 2012) — Two years ago, at a meeting on science and education, Richard Davidson challenged video game manufacturers to develop games that emphasize kindness and compassion instead of violence and aggression.

With a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the University of Wisconsin-Madison professor is now answering his own call. With Kurt Squire, an associate professor in the School of Education and director of the Games Learning Society Initiative, Davidson received a $1.39 million grant this spring to design and rigorously test two educational games to help eighth graders develop beneficial social and emotional skills — empathy, cooperation, mental focus, and self-regulation.

“By the time they reach the eighth grade, virtually every middle-class child in the Western world is playing smartphone apps, video games, computer games,” says Davidson, the William James and Vilas Research Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at UW-Madison. “Our hope is that we can use some of that time for constructive purposes and take advantage of the natural inclination of children of that age to want to spend time with this kind of technology.”

The project grew from the intersection of Davidson’s research on the brain bases of emotion, Squire’s expertise in educational game design, and the Gates Foundation’s interest in preparing U.S. students for college readiness-possessing the skills and knowledge to go on to post-secondary education without the need for remediation.

“Skills of mindfulness and kindness are very important for college readiness,” Davidson explains. “Mindfulness, because it cultivates the capacity to regulate attention, which is the building block for all kinds of learning; and kindness, because the ability to cooperate is important for everything that has to do with success in life, team-building, leadership, and so forth.”

He adds that social, emotional, and interpersonal factors influence how students use and apply their cognitive abilities.

Building on research from the Center for Investigating Healthy Minds at UW-Madison’s Waisman Center, the initial stage of the project will focus on designing prototypes of two games. The first game will focus on improving attention and mental focus, likely through breath awareness.

“Breathing has two important characteristics. One is that it’s very boring, so if you’re able to attend to that, you can attend to most other things,” Davidson says. “The second is that we’re always breathing as long as we’re alive, and so it’s an internal cue that we can learn to come back to. This is something a child can carry with him or her all the time.”

The second game will focus on social behaviors such as kindness, compassion, and altruism. One approach may be to help students detect and interpret emotions in others by reading non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, tone of voice, and body posture.

“We’ll use insights gleaned from our neuroscience research to design the games and will look at changes in the brain during the performance of these games to see how the brain is actually affected by them,” says Davidson. “Direct feedback from monitoring the brain while students are playing the games will help us iteratively adjust the game design as this work goes forward.”

Their analyses will include neural imaging and behavioral testing before, during, and after students play the games, as well as looking at general academic performance.

The results will help the researchers determine how the games impact students and whether educational games are a useful medium for teaching these behaviors and skills, as well as evaluate whether certain groups of kids benefit more than others.

“Our hope is that we can begin to address these questions with the use of digital games in a way that can be very easily scaled and, if we are successful, to potentially reach an extraordinarily large number of youth,” says Davidson.

Inpe e Rede Clima lançam cartilha educativa para a RIO+20 (Fapesp)

Publicação apresenta os temas que serão discutidos durante a Conferência das Nações Unidas sobre Desenvolvimento Sustentável e os cenários de mudanças climáticas projetados para o Brasil (reprodução)

23/05/2012

Agência FAPESP – O Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (Inpe) e a Rede Brasileira de Pesquisa sobre Mudanças Climáticas Globais (Rede Clima) produziram uma cartilha educativa, intitulada O futuro que queremos – economia verde, desenvolvimento sustentável e erradicação da pobreza.

Voltada ao público em geral, a publicação apresenta os conceitos de economia verde e sustentabilidade e a importância da erradicação da pobreza, que são temas que serão discutidos durante a Conferência das Nações Unidas sobre Desenvolvimento Sustentável (RIO+20), que será realizada de 13 a 22 de junho no Rio de Janeiro.

A cartilha também traz um histórico das conferências anteriores relacionadas ao meio ambiente e o conceito de “pegada ecológica” (metodologia usada para medir os rastros deixados pelos humanos no planeta a partir de seus hábitos).

A publicação apresenta ao leitor os cenários de mudanças climáticas projetadas para o Brasil para o século 21, as atividades do Centro Nacional de Monitoramento e Alertas de Desastres Naturais (Cemaden) e outros projetos e programas nessas áreas, apoiados pelo Inpe.

A cartilha está disponível para download em versão para internet em www.inpe.br/noticias/arquivos/pdf/RIO+20-web.pdf.

O arquivo digital com resolução para impressão pode ser solicitado pelo e-mail maira.morais@inpe.br.

CLIMATE CHANGE: Understanding Rio+20 (Integrated Regional Information Networks)

Photo: Jason Gutierrez/IRIN. We have to take action now to sustain life in the coming years

JOHANNESBURG, 3 April 2012 (IRIN) – A Nobel laureate, a Swedish environmentalist’s idea, the “doughnut” concept, Scandinavia’s sense of social capital, measuring the quality of life, and valuing the oceans are just some of the things trending in the run-up to the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development due to be held on 20-22 June 2012.

Rio+20 will look at how economies have grown at the expense of natural resources and human capital since the last Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, when the concept of “sustainable development” gained currency.

The idea of growth meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” has not gained much traction since the 1992 conference – largely because countries continued to equate development with economic growth, and sustainable development languished as a fringe environmental concern, says a UN-commissioned study.

Twenty years later, “sustainable development remains a generally agreed concept, rather than a day-to-day, on-the-ground, practical reality,” says a report by the UN High-level Panel on Global Sustainability.

Since 1992, alarm bells on several interconnected factors with a far-reaching impact on growth, resources and the quality of life – accelerated man-made climate change, population growth, increasing numbers of hungry people, rapidly depleting and more expensive fossil fuels, and a decline in food production – have been ringing louder.

“Achieving sustainability requires us to transform the global economy. Tinkering on the margins will not do the job,” said the UN Panel’s report.

Optimists in the scientific and aid community hope Rio+20 will develop from an opportunity to reflect into a collective effort to plot the world’s future growth path.

IRIN aims to make the conference more relevant and accessible by examining some of the ideas circulating ahead of it.

1. Elinor Ostrom: Fast emerging as the moral and academic compass of the conference, Ostrom’s work, which won her the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2009, shows that growth combined with the sustainable use of natural resources is achievable. Ostrom looked at certain rural communities in Asia, Africa and Europe which have for centuries successfully managed in a sustainable way their common resources – grazing land, water and forests.

“When the Scandinavian countries had to set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they did not consider the markets… but went ahead because they value the well-being of humans and environment…”

2. Planetary Boundaries and Future Earth: The concept of Planetary Boundariesproposed in 2009 by Johan Rockstrom of the Stockholm Resilience Centre and 28 scientists, posits that there are nine critical Earth-system processes and associated thresholds that we need to respect and keep within, in order to protect against the risk of irreversible or even catastrophic environmental change on a continental or global scale.The communities developed while preventing problems such as overgrazing, misuse of forests or over-consumption of water. The fact that Ostrom took a multidisciplinary approach (rooted in economics, environment and social capital, successfully combining the three pillars of sustainable development), makes her the expert everyone wants to hear from. She was the chief scientific adviser to the recent Planet Under Pressure conference – an attempt by the scientific community to set the agenda for Rio+20.

Doing so would create a safe operating space for humanity. According to the concept’s authors, three of the nine suggested thresholds have already been crossed (climate change, biodiversity and the nitrogen cycle). The threshold for the phosphorus cycle (linked, within the concept, to the nitrogen cycle) has also been crossed, according to a scientific paper in 2011.

The status of the concept grew after being mentioned in the UN Panel report. The Boundaries concept has inspired the “nexus approach” between food, water and energy, which was also noted by the UN panel. “All three [food, water and energy] need to be fully integrated, not treated separately if we are to deal with the global food security crisis,” said the report.

Rockstrom, last week announced the launch in Rio of Future Earth, a 10-year collaborative initiative which will provide the knowledge to help societies meet their sustainable development goals. The International Council for Science, the Belmont Forum (a high-level group of donors who fund climate research), the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), the UN University, and the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) are all part of the initiative.

Tom Mitchell, head of climate change at the UK’s Overseas Development Institute (ODI), was a bit skeptical about how “10 years of science inquiry” would help. He said countries needed solutions now – embedded in governments and designed to cater for national requirements.

3. The doughnut: In February 2012, Kate Raworth, a senior researcher with Oxfam, pointed out that human growth was glaringly absent from Rockstrom’s concept. She combined social boundaries (such as access to water, health services, food, jobs, energy and education for all) within the planetary boundaries – highlighting the need for an environmentally safe space which needed to be compatible with poverty eradication and rights for all. Between the planetary ceiling and the social foundation lay an area – shaped like a doughnut – which is a “safe and just space for humanity to thrive in”, her paper said.

Raworth said well-designed policies can promote both poverty eradication and environmental sustainability. She told IRIN the objective was to be able to take care of everyone’s minimum needs, while re-defining the meaning of prosperity, which is equated with material wealth and associated with over-consumption (e.g. food, vehicles). “Governments need to look beyond taking care of people’s material needs and focus on quality of life, qualities of social relationships.”

Multilateral processes to make life on earth sustainable such as the UN talks on climate change have been moving at a snail’s pace.

The concept has picked up a lot of momentum.

“The concept of Planetary Boundaries is almost pure science,” noted Andrew Scott, researcher with ODI, while the “doughnut” concept was grounded in human reality and the need to agree on a minimum standard of living, whilst guarding against over-consumption. This calls for the need to review UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which were not very ambitious to begin with, he said. “Instead of calling for the eradication of poverty it [the MDGs] settled for the halving of poverty by 2015.”

Felix Dodds, eminent author and head of the Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future, also enthused about the “doughnut proposal” in the Planet Under Pressure conference, and suggested the world should strive to turn everyone into a member of the middle-class.

4. Sustainable agriculture: After years of lobbying for an agriculture system which would respect the biosystem and at the same time increase the production of quality food to keep the numbers of malnourished down, scientists feel they are making headway. The proposed draft outcome document of the Rio+20 conference makes note of their concerns. But is that good enough – will that force a change and make sustainable agriculture a part of mainstream policy in countries?

Kenyan scientist Judi Wakhungu, a member of the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, says attitudes are changing on the ground: Sustainable agriculture is now being taught in universities in developing countries; donors particularly in Scandinavian countries are more willing to fund such initiatives tailored by developing country governments; and at government levels, sectors such as water, energy and agriculture have begun to talk to each other.

Christopher Barrett, who teaches economics and agriculture at Cornell University in the USA, said: “The central issue is high-level political commitment to enacting the necessary policies.” He said the “lofty rhetoric” of the L’Aquila G-8 summit, or earlier summits such as Gleneagles, have “not been matched by significant new investments or policy innovations by the world’s major economies”. Progress towards sustainable agriculture was “incremental and dwarfed by the fiscal and employment challenges faced by the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] countries,” he added, and we should “not hold our breath for any great breakthrough” at Rio+20.

5. Social capital versus market-based approaches: Academically, social capital is a concept which places value on social relations and the role of cooperation to get collective results. The concept is making waves among development experts and the scientific community in the Rio+20 context, particularly as it forces societies to reflect on their value systems.

“It [social capital] is too technical a word,” says Oxfam’s Raworth, but essentially the concept is about valuing quality of life and interpersonal relations more than material wealth. Brazilian scientist Carlos Nobre, a member of the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change, explained: “It is a concept followed by Scandinavian countries – where human well-being is more important than the market value of a particular resource.

“For instance when the Scandinavian countries had to set targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they did not consider the markets and industries but went ahead because they value the well-being of humans and environment more than anything else.”

But the reality is that most countries value markets more than human and environmental well-being, say experts, so a value has to be attributed to a natural resources to make people take care of it. As UNEP head Achim Steiner says, “we have to place ecology in economics.”

“We need to create markets around natural resources such as provision of environmental services,” said ODI’s Mitchell. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change did that with trees and carbon, but the process has not got very far.

Both Raworth and Nobre said that to achieve real change, attitudes to wealth needed to be changed, but this could only happen from the bottom up. “Market-based mechanisms to control and exploit the use of our natural resources should be seen as a means to get to a state of well-being and not as the goal,” said Nobre.

Richard Norgaard, one of the founders of ecological economics, said at the Planet Under Pressure conference that instead of markets dictating and shaping our economies, “we need to ask what kind of economy we want to live in and then design incentives for the markets.”

6. Measuring wellness: Putting a value on the quantity of natural resources that had to be exploited to achieve certain outcomes could help in terms of sustainability, argued Pablo Muñoz, an economist working on the Inclusive Wealth Report (IWR) project, a joint initiative of UN Univeristy-International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Climate Change (IHDP) and UNEP, aiming to measure, among other forms of wealth, the Natural Capital of countries. The report will be released at Rio+20.

“A country can exhaust all its natural resources while posting positive GDP [Gross Domestic Product] growth,” said Muñoz. The world needs “an indicator that estimates the wealth of nations – natural, human and manufactured and ideally even the social and ecological constituents of human well-being,” he added.

Some findings of the reports were released at the Planet Under Pressure conference.

Between 1990 and 2008, the wealth of Brazil and India in terms of per capita GDP rose 34 percent and 120 percent respectively. Natural capital, the sum of a country’s assets, from forests to fossil fuels and minerals, declined by 46 percent in Brazil and 31percent in India, according the new indicator. Brazil’s “Inclusive Wealth” rose by 3 percent and India’s rose by 9 percent over that time. But do not expect countries to start using the new indicator any time soon. “It took years for countries to come round to using GDP – so it will be a few years yet,” said Muñoz.

7.Valuing the oceans: Attempts to put a value on the exploitation of natural resources are ongoing globally. A new book by the Stockholm Environment Institute calculates the impact of climate change on the economic value of the oceans. It says climate change (in the last 200 years the oceans have absorbed 25-30 percent of the global accumulated emissions of carbon dioxide) alone could reduce the economic value of the oceans by up to US$2 trillion a year by 2100.

Interview with Nobel prize winner Elinor Ostrom on climate change (Integrated Regional Information Networks)

Photo: Indiana University. Elinor Ostrom: A champion of people power

JOHANNESBURG, 25 April 2012 (IRIN) – The governance of natural resources like land, the oceans, rivers and the atmosphere, can affect the impact of some of the world’s biggest crises caused by natural events like droughts and floods. How best to manage those resources has been at the heart of the work by Nobel Prize winner (economics) Elinor Ostrom.

She has been looking at how communities across the world, from developing and rural economies like Nepal and Kenya to developed ones like the USA and Switzerland, manage their commonly shared resources such as fisheries, pasture land and water sustainably.

Ostrom’s faith in the ability of the individual and community to be able to trust each other, take the right course of action and not wait for governments to make the first move is pivotal to her thinking.

Ostrom works with the concept of “polycentrism”, which she developed with her husband Vincent Otsrom. She advocates vesting authority in individuals, communities, local governments, and local NGOs as opposed to concentrating power at global or national levels.

Ostrom recently suggested using this “polycentric approach” to address man-made climate change. She talked to IRIN by email about “polycentrism”, Rio+20, climate change, trust and the power of local action.

QYou have suggested a polycentric approach as opposed to single policies at a global level to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Could you explain how that would work? Do you think a similar approach would work to get all countries and their people to believe in, and adopt, sustainable development?

A: We have modelled the impact of individual actions on climate change incorrectly and need to change the way we think about this problem. When individuals walk a distance rather than driving it, they produce better health for themselves. At the same time that they reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that they are generating. There are benefits for the individual and small benefits for the globe. When a building owner re-does the way the building is insulated and the heating system, these actions can dramatically change the amount of greenhouse gas emissions made. This has an immediate impact on the neighbourhood of the building as well as on the globe.

When cities and counties decide to rehabilitate their energy systems so as to produce less greenhouse gas emissions, they are reducing the amount of pollution in the local region as well as greenhouse gas emissions on the globe. In other words, the key point is that there are multiple externalities involved for many actions related to greenhouse gas emissions. While in the past the literature has underplayed the importance of local effects, we need to recognize – as more and more individuals, families, communities, and states are seeing – that they will gain a benefit, as well as the globe, and that cumulatively a difference can be made at the global level if a number of small units start taking action. We have a much greater possibility of impacting global change problems if we start locally.

“the solutions that are evolved by local people have a chance of being more imaginative and better ways of solving these problems…”

Q: The earth is our common resource system – yet many countries including China and India feel they also have a right to grow, burn coal to get to where the developed world is – how do you get them out of that frame of mind without compromising the question of equity?

A: We may not be able to convince India and China of all of this. Part of my discouragement with the international negotiations is that we have gotten riveted into battles at the very big level over who caused global change in the first place and who is responsible for correcting [it]. It will take a long time to resolve some of these conflicts. Meanwhile, if we do not take action, the increase to greenhouse gas collection at a global level gets larger and larger. While we cannot solve all aspects of this problem by cumulatively taking action at local levels, we can make a difference, and we should.

Q: Do you think sustainable development did not gain much currency as it was directed at governments and a top-down approach? You think the world is about to repeat that mistake (if you would call it that?) at Rio+20? What would you do – would you ever call such a gathering of governments?

A: Yes, I do think that directing the question of climate change primarily at governments misses the point that actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions must be taken by individuals, communities, cities, states, residents of entire nations, and the world. Yet, it is important that public officials recognize that there is a role for an international agreement and that they should be working very hard on getting an agreement that establishes international regimes that has a chance to reduce emissions across countries.

Q: You are a great believer in ordinary people’s ability to organize and use their commonly shared resources wisely, but I take it that does not work all the time? But ultimately collective action at the grassroots can force change at the top?

A: I am a believer of the capabilities of people to organize at a local level. That does not mean that they always do. There are a wide variety of collective action problems that exist at a small scale. The important thing is that people at a small scale, who know what the details of the problems are, organize, rather than calling on officials at a much larger scale.

Officials at a larger scale may have many collective-action problems of their own that they need to address. They do not have the detailed information about problems at a small scale that people who are confronting those every day do have. Thus, the solutions that are evolved by local people have a chance of being more imaginative and better ways of solving these problems than allowing them to go unsolved and eventually asking a much larger scale unit to solve it for them.

Q: This approach probably works better in a rural setting where there is a sense of community and of a shared responsibility to take care of their common resources. But how do you get that sense of ownership of the planet in an urban setting?

A: To solve these delicate problems at any scale requires individuals to trust that others are also going to contribute to their solution. Building trust is not something that can be done overnight. Thus, the crucial thing is that successful efforts at a local scale be advertised and well known throughout a developing country.

Developing associations of local communities, where very serious discussions can be held of the problems they are facing and creative ways that some communities, who have faced these problems, have adopted solutions that work. That does not mean that the solutions that work in one environment in a particular country will work in all others, but posing it as a solution that fits a local environment and that the challenge that everyone faces is to know enough about the social-ecological features of the problems they are facing that they can come up with good solutions that fit that local social-ecological system.

Q: I have been covering the recent drought in Niger – I came across people who were going to pack up and leave their village for good… Would that motivate people, countries, governments to take action to reduce emissions? But how do you make people in Europe, the US or Asia think about the people in Niger as their own?

A: There is no simple answer to this question. It is here that churches and NGOs can play a particular role in knowing about the problems being faced by villagers in Niger and other developing countries and trying to help. They can then also write stories about these problems in a way that people in Britain, Europe, and the US may understand better. It is a problem in some cases that officials in developing countries are corrupt, and direct aid to the country may only go into private bank accounts. We have to rethink how we organize governance at multiple scales so as to reduce the likelihood of some individuals having very strong powers and capability of using their public office primarily for private gain.

Q: Do you see the world moving in unison towards sustainability in the next five years? Do you think the world is prepared to take on this question and specially now when we are in a recession?

A: No, I do not see the world moving in unison. I do see some movements around the world that are very encouraging, but they are nowhere the same everywhere. We need to get out of thinking that we have to be moving the same everywhere. We need to be recognizing the complexity of the different problems being faced in a wide diversity of regions of the world. Thus, really great solutions that work in one environment do not work in others. We need to understand why, and figure out ways of helping to learn from good examples as well as bad examples of how to move ahead.

New Classroom Science Standards Up for Review (Dot Earth, N.Y.Times)

May 18, 2012, 11:46 AM

By ANDREW C. REVKIN

The first substantial update to national science teaching standards in roughly 15 years — and the first including the science of human-driven climate change — is open for public comment through this month. Here’s a short video description:

The effort has been directed by Achieve, an organization created by states and corporate backers eager to boost student performance and prospects as science and technology increasingly drive economies. The final (optional) standards will help guide states in shaping science curricula and requirements.

The foundation for the standards was laid in a National Academy of Sciences report. Other groups involved in the effort are the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Science Teachers Association and theCarnegie Corporation of New York, which has provided much of the money.

The standards were drafted by a team of 41 writers from 26 states, range from Bob Friend, a Boeing aerospace engineer, to Ramon Lopez, a physics professor at the University of Texas at Arlington to Rita Januszyk, an elementary school teacher from Willowbrook, Ill.

Click here for middle school standards on weather and climate and here for a section for high schools on managing human environmental impacts, including greenhouse-gas emissions. I like the way each such section links directly to the relevant section of the underlying National Academy of Sciences report — “A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas.”

The National Science Teachers Association has posted heaps of valuable background and context.

Juanita Constible, a wildlife ecologist who’s spent time in Antarctica, has a piece summarizing the climate context at the Web site of the Climate Reality Project. Here’s an excerpt from Constible’s post:

The Next Generation Science Standards lay out core ideas K-12 students should understand about the basics of science – from biology, to physics and chemistry, to earth science. The last national standards were released back in 1996, and manmade climate change wasn’t mentioned. However, the new standards recognize that students need to know human activities are changing our climate. They also recognize that schools are training the next generation of engineers and scientists who can help solve the problem.

In the standards for middle school, for example, one of the core ideas is that “human activities, such as the release of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, are major factors in the current rise in Earth’s mean surface temperature (‘global warming’).” The standards for high school note that “changes in the atmosphere due to human activity have increased carbon dioxide concentrations and thus affect climate.” [Read the rest.]

Explore the standards and weigh in with your reaction, both on the Nextgenscience.org site and here.

Conflict abounds in climate education (The Daily Climate)

Teachers are loath to teach climate science because it exposes them to charges of politicizing the classroom. They have reason to be cautious.

By Lisa Palmer
For the Daily Climate

The battles over teaching climate change science in schools are diverse, myriad and, like teaching evolution, being fought mostly district by district, classroom by classroom.

No-150Unlike evolution, climate change doesn’t have a U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring that teaching efforts be accurate.

Some recent conflicts around the nation:

  • This spring the Tennessee Legislature passed a bill, with broad, bi-partisan support, to protect teachers who do not agree with accepted climate science and want to teach alternative explanations. Gov. Bill Haslam, acknowledging the veto-proof majority in a press release, allowed the bill to become law without his signature but noted that the measure won’t change state education standards.
  • Last year the southern California town of Los Alamitos, the school board passed but then rescinded a policy identifying climate science as a controversial topic requiring special instructional oversight.
  • Earlier this year an Oklahoma House committee approved a bill permitting teachers to review “scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories” such as evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning. It remains stuck in the Senate, with the Legislature adjourning this week.
  • A 2007 study found that 20 percent of Colorado’s earth science teachers disagreed that “recent global warming is caused mostly by things people do,” while nearly half agreed that “there is substantial disagreement among scientists about the cause of recent global warming.” Meanwhile in Mesa County, in western Colorado, tea party activists tried to prohibit the teaching of manmade climate change.
  • An earth science teacher in Clifton Park, N.Y., taught a global warming unit but inserted his own view that climate change is not caused by humans. A parent complained, pointing to the New York State Regents science standards, considered among the best in the nation. The teacher relented after the school’s science administrator clarified what was expected according to the standards.

Earlier this year the National Center for Science Education stepped into the climate arena, announcing it would apply techniques it honed in the evolution wars to defend and promote climate science education.

McCaffrey-150“It’s one thing to have climate in the standards and assessments, and another thing altogether to make sure the teachers are well prepared, are not teaching the debate, if they teach about climate change at all, and are using effective practices,” said Mark McCaffrey, the center’s program director. 

The Oakland-based nonprofit’s effort hit a snag in February after Peter Gleick, a prominent scientist recruited to help advise the organization’s climate education effort, disclosed that he had improperly obtained internal strategy documents from the Heartland Institute, a libertarian think tank. Gleick withdrew his nomination to the NCSE’s board a few days before his term was scheduled to begin.

But the Heartland memos show that the institute, known for undermining climate science in political and scientific arenas, is working to influence climate education in schools, too. The budget memos Gleick obtained indicated the group had raised an initial $100,000 for a “global warming curriculum” designed by a part-time consultant at the Department of Energy.

The curriculum, designed for grades 10 through 12, according to the Heartland memos, would emphasize that climate change is a “major scientific controversy” and that models underlying the science are questionable.

Lisa Palmer is a freelance reporter in Maryland. Her work has appeared in Scientific American, Nature Climate Change, Fortune, and The Yale Forum, among other outlets. DailyClimate.org is a foundation-funded news service that covers climate change.

Photos: “No” icon created by Paula Spence for the National Center for Science Education. Photo of Mark McCaffrey courtesy NCSE.

Heartland Institute facing uncertain future as staff depart and cash dries up (The Guardian)

Free-market thinktank’s conference opens in Chicago with president admitting defections are hurting group’s finances

, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 May 2012 17.09 BST

Leo blog : The Heartland Institute conference billboard in Chicago

The billboard ads comparing climate change believers to the Unabomber Ted Kaczunski. Photograph: The Heartland Institute

The first Heartland Institute conference on climate change in 2008 had all the trappings of a major scientific conclave – minus large numbers of real scientists. Hundreds of climate change contrarians, with a few academics among them, descended into the banquet rooms of a lavish Times Square hotel for what was purported to be a reasoned debate about climate change.

But as the latest Heartland climate conference opens in a Chicago hotel on Monday, the thinktank’s claims to reasoned debate lie in shreds and its financial future remains uncertain.

Heartland’s claims to “stay above the fray” of the climate wars was exploded by a billboard campaign earlier this month comparing climate change believers to the Unabomer Ted Kaczynski, and a document sting last February that revealed a plan to spread doubt among kindergarteners on the existence of climate change.

Along with the damage to its reputation, Heartland’s financial future is also threatened by an exodus of corporate donors as well as key members of staff.

In a fiery blogpost on the Heartland website, the organisation’s president Joseph Bast admitted Heartland’s defectors were “abandoning us in this moment of need”.

Over the last few weeks, Heartland has lost at least $825,000 in expected funds for 2012, or more than 35% of the funds its planned to raise from corporate donors, according to the campaign group Forecast the Facts, which is pushing companies to boycott the organisation.

The organisation has been forced to make up those funds by taking its first publicly acknowledged donations from the coal industry. The main Illinois coal lobby is a last-minute sponsor of this week’s conference, undermining Heartland’s claims to operate independently of fossil fuel interests.

Its entire Washington DC office, barring one staffer, decamped, taking Heartland’s biggest project, involving the insurance industry, with them.

Board directors quit, conference speakers cancelled at short-notice, and associates of long standing demanded Heartland remove their names from its website. The list of conference sponsors shrank by nearly half from 2010, and many of those listed sponsors are just websites operating on the rightwing fringe.

“It’s haemorrhaging,” said Kert Davies, research director of Greenpeace, who has spent years tracking climate contrarian outfits. “Heartland’s true colours finally came through, and now people are jumping ship in quick order.”

It does not look like Heartland is about to adopt a corrective course of action.

In his post, Bast defended the ads, writing: “Our billboard was factual: the Unabomber was motivated by concern over man-made global warming to do the terrible crimes he committed.” He went on to describe climate scientist Michael Mann and activist Bill McKibben as “madmen”.

The public unravelling of Heartland began last February when the scientist Peter Gleick lied to obtain highly sensitive materials, including a list of donors.

The publicity around the donors’ list made it difficult for companies with public commitment to sustainability, such as the General Motors Foundation, to continue funding Heartland. The GM Foundation soon announced it was ending its support of $15,000 a year.

But what had been a gradual collapse gathered pace when Heartland advertised its climate conference with a billboard on a Chicago expressway comparing believers in climate science to the Unabomber.

The slow trickle of departing corporate donors turned into a gusher.

Even Heartland insiders, such as Eli Lehrer, who headed the organisation’s Washington group, found the billboard too extreme. Lehrer, who headed the biggest project within Heartland, on insurance, immediately announced his departure along with six other staff.

“The ad was ill advised,” he said. “I’m a free-market conservative with a long rightwing resumé and most, if not all, of my team fits the same description and of us found it very problematic. Staying with Heartland was simply not workable in the wake of this billboard.”

Heartland took down the billboard within 24 hours, but by then the ad had gone viral.

Lehrer, who maintains the split was amicable, said the billboard had undermined Heartland’s claims to be a serious conservative thinktank.

“It didn’t reflect the seriousness which I want to bring to public policy,” Lehrer said in the telephone interview. “As somebody who deals mostly with insurance I believe all risk have to be taken seriously and there certainly are some important climate and global warming related risks that must be taken account of in the insurance market. Trivialising them is not consistent with free-market thought. Suggesting they are only thought about by people who are crazy is not good for the free market.”

Other Heartland allies came to a similar conclusion. In a letter to Heartland announcing he was backing out from the conference, Ross McKitrick, a Canadian economist wrote: “You can not simultaneously say that you want to promote a debate while equating the other side to terrorists and mass murderers.”

A number of other experts meanwhile began cutting their ties with Heartland, according to a tally kept by a Canadian blogger BigCityLiberal.

Meanwhile, there was growing anger that Bast failed to consult with colleagues before ordering up the Kaczynski attack ads.

Four board members told the Guardian they had not been consulted in advance about the ad. “I did not have prior approval of the billboard and was in favor of discontinuing the billboard when I was made aware of it,” Jeff Judson, a Texas lobbyist and board member wrote in an email.

Could the turmoil and discontent at Heartland eventually prove its undoing? Campaigners would certainly hope so. “We are watching the consequences of organisation that acts quite randomly and that is actually an extremist organisation in the end,” said Davies. “They are not built to be at the hump of the climate denial movement.”

But while more mainstream corporate entities are deserting Heartland, others are stepping into the breach, including the coal lobby and conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation.

Both the Illinois Coal Association and Heritage stepped in to fund this week’s conference, after other corporate donors began backing out in protest at the offensive Kaczynski ad.

Meanwhile, a Greenpeace analysis of the other smaller conference sponsors suggests they have collectively received $5m in funds from Exxon and other oil companies.

The Coal Association and Heritage were not listed on the original conference sponsor list, but appeared to come in about a week or so after the appearance of the offending Kaczynski ad.

Phil Gonet, the chief lobbyist for the 20 coal companies in the association, said he had no qualms about stepping in to fund the Heartland conference.

“We support the work they are doing and so we thought we would finally make a contribution to the organisation,” he said, calling criticism of the ad “moot”, “pointless” and “absurd”.

Gonet went on: “I made a contribution mainly in support of a conference that is designed to make balanced information available to the public on the issue of global warming … In general, the message of the Heartland Institute is something the Illinois Coal Association supports.”

Perspective: Troubled by Interdisciplinarity? (Science)

Career Advice

By Stephanie PfirmanMelissa Begg

April 06, 2012

Do program managers and senior faculty tell you “that idea is not really in my bailiwick, and I’m not sure where else to send you”? Do you spend more time choosing a publication venue than writing your paper? Are you asked to be on committees and panels to provide a “fresh perspective” — and then told you spend too much time on service? Is your e-mail full of correspondence about how to handle overhead, subawards, and subcontracts on collaborative proposals?

If any of these descriptions apply to you, you may be suffering from the pain and inconvenience of interdisciplinarity, one of the fastest-growing problems among researchers today. It’s not a problem that goes away on its own. Rather, it festers if it’s not addressed, diminishing creativity and productivity.

Despite the pain and inconvenience, increasing numbers of scientists are pursuing interdisciplinary career paths, and a growing proportion of research funding opportunities from federal granting agencies is interdisciplinary. In May 2011, 30% to 40% of all requests for proposals from the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health explicitly required an interdisciplinary approach.

Interdisciplinarity can be wonderfully rich and rewarding, but there are dangers attendant to choosing this non-traditional route. Interdisciplinary scholars go “out on a limb” and “often must fight for identity, recognition, roles, legitimacy, and standing.” This takes a personal — as well as a professional — toll: While the status of their peers grows with accomplishments within the disciplinary community, interdisciplinary scholars have to “live without the comfort of expertise” and often without the comfort of community. Scholars report that they no longer fit in as well after they leave their disciplinary base.

This connection between research direction and community fit is supported by the 2003 Faculty Worklife Survey conducted by the University of Wisconsin, Madison’s Women in Science and Engineering Leadership Institute. The belief that their colleagues did not perceive their research to be “mainstream” left people feeling more negative about colleagues’ valuation of their research, their respect in the workplace, departmental decision-making, informal departmental interactions, and overall isolation and “fit.”

The messages from a number of recent publications can be distilled to this: Interdisciplinary research doesn’t fit into traditional academic structures. Therefore, if you choose this route, the onus is on you to take additional steps to become aware of the pitfalls and prepare yourself to succeed in this arena.

What kinds of steps are we talking about? Our recommendations include building skills for interdisciplinary collaboration, extending your mentorship team, bolstering your interdisciplinary CV for disciplinary review, and preparing for the complications of writing and submitting interdisciplinary grant proposals.

Recommendations for interdisciplinary scholars

Prepare yourself for new ways of working, thinking, and interacting.

• Specialize within your interdisciplinary research area. Avoid the tendency of many interdisciplinary scholars to branch out too quickly and in too many directions, which can diffuse your impact.

• Focus on your disciplinary strength and skills. It may sound counterintuitive, but in many situations your value as an interdisciplinary colleague is directly proportional to your skills in your own discipline. Keep up with the latest literature and theoretical developments in your disciplinary field so that you will be prepared to apply new knowledge and skills in diverse areas.

• Build core competencies that sustain interdisciplinary research by taking courses or learning on your own. For example, you could take courses that use the case study method to enhance interdisciplinary skills or include practice reviewing interdisciplinary papers and proposals.

• Attend seminars and workshops in other disciplines. Participating in research seminars outside your own department is a great way to expand your thinking, add a new batch of colleagues to your network, and develop expertise in new research areas.

• Seek new mentorship. The old model of one scholar, one mentor is fast becoming a distant memory. Find a mentor or two from beyond your field to help broaden your mindset and approaches.

When preparing manuscripts and grant applications, enhance your credibility as a successful researcher whose work crosses traditional disciplinary boundaries.

• Include a cover letter with your paper or proposal that highlights its interdisciplinary nature and suggests reviewers with complementary expertise so that all of your research aims receive appropriate review.

• Frame research aims to satisfy the needs of both disciplinary-leaning reviewers and interdisciplinary-eager granting agencies. Incorporating conceptual models and grounding your ideas within the disciplines establishes common ground with diverse reviewers.

• Involve respected colleagues with expertise in the techniques you plan to use.

• Try to have at least one publication in each field in which you propose to work. If the work requires an area you haven’t published in, get a letter of support from a well-known investigator in that field offering assistance.

• Start early on budget preparation for collaborative proposals. Most interdisciplinary endeavors are collaborative — and collaborative grant activities have financial implications, with potential revenue losses to departments due to diversion of overhead costs to other units. It may sound like a minor issue, but the most aggravating problem identified in the 2004 report of the National Academies Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research (CFIR) was the logistics of interdisciplinary research: budget control, institutional cost recovery, space, unit reporting, and award agreements. More than 40% of scholars and provosts picked one of these as the top impediment to interdisciplinary projects. A recent study found that faculty and administrators at universities with overhead-sharing policies reported satisfaction with their policies, and most felt that they indeed helped to foster interdisciplinary science.

• Use the Kulage study to support budget negotiations. Your colleagues and administrators may be resistant at first to innovations like overhead sharing, so showing them evidence of the effectiveness of overhead sharing may help you close the deal and reach an agreement that recognizes and rewards the contributions of the interdisciplinary collaborators involved in your proposal.

It’s never too early to start thinking about tenure and promotion. You need to plan for a portfolio that withstands the scrutiny of discipline-oriented review committees while also allowing you to pursue interdisciplinary interests. You can take steps to prepare yourself for rigorous evaluation by disciplinary and interdisciplinary reviewers.

• Annotate your CV to explain your contributions to collaborative publications and grants. While this task may seem onerous, if you don’t do it, people have to guess, and they often guess wrong. Increasingly, journals require people to clarify their roles in publications, and some institutions now require that CVs articulate not only specific roles but also the percentage of effort devoted to various activities. Use such policies to your advantage.

• Ground your research statement. As with proposals, incorporating conceptual models and explaining connections to key disciplinary theories and approaches helps to contextualize your work for reviewers with diverse backgrounds.

• Seek a spectrum of reviewers. If asked to suggest reviewers to evaluate your work and advise your tenure or promotion review panel, be sure to include experts from multiple departments or from outside of the institution. Choose experts who can address the particular research areas you work in. For example, you might propose one letter writer who could attest to your disciplinary strength. Another might emphasize how another field is using your research. This could broaden the perspective of the review panel and permit consideration of less traditional CVs.

If you’re on the job market, look for institutions and departments that really value interdisciplinarity. In 2004, more than 10% of scholars identified “strategic plans” as the top impediment to interdisciplinary research. Seven years later, some institutions are finally tackling this: Take a look at the case studies of Ohio University and Macalester College in the National Council for Science and the Environment report. Fostering interdisciplinarity is a strategic decision at the institutional level, but integration of interdisciplinarity into departmental missions is key. Check to see if these pieces are in place at the institution you’re thinking of working for. You can use the NIH template for interdisciplinary offer letters as a mental checklist as you discuss expectations with the chair of the search. You don’t want to come across as too demanding, but having this model letter in mind will help you think of questions to ask about the position.

When push comes to shove, department chairs and supervisors often look askance at activities they perceive to be “extra-departmental.” As noted in a 2011 article in the Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences,

There is a significant and growing need for interdisciplinary … scholars to develop, teach, and apply successful problem-solving approaches and to educate the next generation of scholars and professionals. Yet such professionals often work in departments where most of their colleagues are disciplinarians and the reward and incentive system is based on disciplines or is at best multidisciplinary. They need diverse strategies and support to overcome the many difficulties that they face day to day in research, teaching, and administration, as well as over the course of their careers.

Increasingly, institutions are addressing what is perhaps the single most vexing problem identified by the 2004 CFIR report: promotion criteria, which 15% of provosts and faculty members identified as the top impediment. Some institutions have turned to using the Boyer criteria of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, rather than focusing mainly on discovery (often with passing reference to teaching). Beyond these traditional criteria, Boyer’s “integration” criterion, in particular, is important in the evaluation of interdisciplinary research. “Application” can also be important. These are all positive signs that smoother sailing may be ahead.

Interdisciplinary research is laudable and undeniably enriching. But until academia’s reward system catches up to its desire for interdisciplinary collaboration, researchers — especially early-career investigators — must take additional steps to prepare for and protect themselves from choppy waters ahead.

References

Boyer E.L. (1990) Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Jossey-Bass, New York

Clark, S.G., M.M. Steen-Adams, S. Pfirman, R.L. Wallace (2011) Professional Development of Interdisciplinary Environmental Scholars, Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences.

Collins, J.P. (2002). May you live in interesting times: Using multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary programs to cope with change in the life sciences. BioScience 52:75-83.

Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research (2004). Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine.

Heemskerk, M., K. Wilson, and M. Pavao-Zuckerman. 2003. Conceptual models as tools for communication across disciplines. Conservation Ecology 7(3): 8. [online]

Kulage, K.M., E.L. Larson, and M.D. Begg (2011). Sharing facilities and administrative cost recovery to facilitate interdisciplinary research. Academic Medicine 86: 394-401.

Larson, E.L., T.F. Landers, and M.D. Begg (2011) Building Interdisciplinary Research Models: A Didactic Course to Prepare Interdisciplinary Scholars and Faculty. Clinical and Translational Science (4)1: 38–41.

Lattuca, L.R. (2001). Creating interdisciplinarity: interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Pfirman, S. and P. Martin (2010). Fostering Interdisciplinary Scholars. Chapter in Oxford Handbook on Interdisciplinarity, Editors: R. Frodeman, J. Thompson Klein, and C. Mitcham, Oxford University Press, 624 pp.

Pfirman, S.; Martin, P.; Danielson, A.; Goodman, R.M.; Steen-Adams, M.; Waggett, C.; Mutter, J.; Rikakis, T.; Fletcher, M.; Berry, L.; Hornbach, D.; Hempel, M.; Morehouse, B.; Southard, R. (2011). Interdisciplinary Hiring and Career Development: Guidance for Individuals and Institutions. National Council for Science and the Environment.

Porter, A.L., Cohen, A.S., Roessner, J.D., and Perreault, M. (2007) Measuring Researcher Interdisciplinarity, Scientometrics, 72(1): 117-147

WISELI (2003) Study of Faculty Worklife at the University of Wisconsin-Madison

Stephanie Pfirman is Hirschorn Professor and co-chair of the environmental science department at Barnard College and a member of Columbia University’s Earth Institute faculty, both in New York City. Melissa Begg is Professor and Vice Dean for Education at the Mailman School of Public Health and Co-Director of the Irving Institute for Clinical and Translational Research at Columbia University in New York.
10.1126/science.caredit.a1200040

Bom da Rio+20 é a sociedade, dizem especialistas (O Estado de São Paulo)

JC e-mail 4501, de 21 de Maio de 2012.

A um mês da Rio+20, membros da sociedade civil reunidos em debate ontem (20) em São Paulo disseram que o melhor que se pode esperar da conferência para o desenvolvimento sustentável é que ela sirva para fortalecer a mobilização da sociedade.

“Os temas que estão colocados na Rio+20 – economia verde, governança e erradicação da pobreza – são como recomeçar o mundo. Sem dúvida são coisas que dependem de acordos entre governos, mas temos a sensação de que esses acordos vão demorar cada vez mais. Então é fundamental a sociedade se mobilizar por esses temas, pressionar”, afirmou o pesquisador da USP Pedro Roberto Jacobi, do Programa de Pós Graduação em Ciência Ambiental. Ele falou durante debate no evento Viva a Mata, que celebra o Dia Nacional da Mata Atlântica, no domingo (20).

Jacobi resumiu um sentimento que prevalece na academia, entre organizações não governamentais e até entre os negociadores de alto nível de certo pessimismo que a conferência não resulte em compromissos mais concretos para que o mundo se encaminhe para o tão falado desenvolvimento sustentável.

A comparação inevitável é com a Rio-92, vista como um momento que representou uma mudança de paradigma. “A Rio+20 significa um nada, um vazio. De 92 para cá o que aconteceu foi a não implementação de tudo o que foi acordado. Só que passados 20 anos, temos hoje muito mais dados e certezas de que caminhamos para um desastre ambiental e o que acontece? Nada”, disse João Paulo Capobianco, do Instituto Democracia e Sustentabilidade.

“É uma reunião sem entendimento mínimo sobre o que se espera dela, marcada pela falta de líderes, e que não vai enfrentar nosso pior problema, que é a falta de governança, a incapacidade de implementar acordos que nós mesmos fizemos”,

Para o economista Ricardo Abramovay, também da USP, só uma forte pressão social poderia levar a conferência a alcançar pelo menos uma nova forma de medir e avaliar o crescimento econômico que seja alternativa ao Produto Interno Bruto (PIB). “Precisamos entrar no mérito do que o sistema econômico de fato está oferecendo para a sociedade para podermos julgar se essa oferta aumenta o bem-estar das pessoas ou não e se está comprometendo os serviços ofertados pela natureza ou não.”

Rio+20: ONU lista 56 recomendações para um mundo sustentável (Folha de São Paulo)

JC e-mail 4501, de 21 de Maio de 2012/Folha de São Paulo – 19/5

Documento apresentado no Rio foi preparado por 22 especialistas convocados pelas Nações Unidas.

A ONU lançou, na última sexta-feira (18), no Rio, a versão em português de um relatório com 56 recomendações para que o mundo avance em direção ao desenvolvimento sustentável. O documento, elaborado por 22 especialistas ao longo de um ano e meio, traz sugestões mais ousadas do que aquelas que devem ser acordadas na Rio+20, a conferência da ONU sobre o tema que ocorre em junho na cidade.

Entre as propostas estão o fim dos subsídios aos combustíveis fósseis e a precificação do carbono, com a cobrança, por exemplo, de impostos sobre as emissões de gases do efeito estufa. Espera-se assim estimular a disseminação de tecnologias verdes. “É um relatório com frases e recomendações muito diretas”, diz o embaixador André Corrêa do Lago, negociador-chefe do Brasil para a Rio+20.

Para ele, o documento final do encontro de cúpula da ONU deverá trazer formulações “mais sóbrias”.

Outras medidas sugeridas são a criação de um fundo apoiado por governos, ONGs e empresas para garantir acesso universal à educação primária até 2015 e a inclusão dos temas consumo e desenvolvimento sustentáveis nos currículos escolares.

As recomendações são divididas em três grupos, de acordo com seus objetivos principais. O primeiro visa a capacitar as pessoas a fazerem escolhas sustentáveis; o segundo, a tornar a economia sustentável; e o terceiro, a fortalecer a governança institucional para o desenvolvimento sustentável.

“As pessoas participaram desse painel a título pessoal, ou seja, elas não estavam representando governos. Isso dá mais força [ao documento], porque o painel pode dizer certas coisas que não são consenso [entre os mais de 190 países da ONU]”, diz Corrêa do Lago.

O coordenador do relatório, porém, disse esperar que as recomendações sejam levadas em consideração pelos negociadores da Rio+20. Janos Pasztor citou o estabelecimento de metas numéricas para o desenvolvimento sustentável como uma sugestão que pode ser adotada no curto prazo. O tema está em discussão na Rio+20.

A ex-primeira-ministra da Noruega Gro Brundtland, considerada “mãe” do conceito de desenvolvimento sustentável, participou da elaboração do relatório.

O documento completo pode ser acessado pelo link http://www.onu.org.br/docs/gsp-integra.pdf.

The Beginning of the End of the Census? (N.Y.Times)

By 

Published: May 19, 2012

THE American Community Survey may be the most important government function you’ve never heard of, and it’s in trouble.

This survey of American households has been around in some form since 1850, either as a longer version of or a richer supplement to the basic decennial census. It tells Americans how poor we are, how rich we are, who is suffering, who is thriving, where people work, what kind of training people need to get jobs, what languages people speak, who uses food stamps, who has access to health care, and so on.

It is, more or less, the country’s primary check for determining how well the government is doing — and in fact what the government will be doing. The survey’s findings help determine how over $400 billion in government funds is distributed each year.

But last week, the Republican-led House voted to eliminate the survey altogether, on the grounds that the government should not be butting its nose into Americans’ homes.

“This is a program that intrudes on people’s lives, just like the Environmental Protection Agency or the bank regulators,” said Daniel Webster, a first-term Republican congressman from Florida who sponsored the relevant legislation.

“We’re spending $70 per person to fill this out. That’s just not cost effective,” he continued, “especially since in the end this is not a scientific survey. It’s a random survey.”

In fact, the randomness of the survey is precisely what makes the survey scientific, statistical experts say.

Each year the Census Bureau polls a representative, randomized sample of about three million American households about demographics, habits, languages spoken, occupation, housing and various other categories. The resulting numbers are released without identifying individuals, and offer current demographic portraits of even the country’s tiniest communities.

It is the largest (and only) data set of its kind and is used across the federal government in formulas that determine how much funding states and communities get for things like education and public health.

For example, a question on flush toilets — one that some politicians like to cite as being especially invasive — is used to help assess groundwater contamination for rural parts of the country that do not have modern waste disposal systems, according to the Census Bureau.

Law enforcement agencies have likewise used the data to predict criminal activities like methamphetamine production.

Their recent vote aside, members of Congress do seem to realize how useful these numbers are. After all, they use the data themselves.

A number of questions on the survey have been added because Congress specifically demanded their inclusion. In 2008, for example, Congress passed a lawrequiring the American Community Survey to add questions about computer and Internet use. Additionally, recent survey data are featured on the Web sites of many representatives who voted to kill the program — including Mr. Webster’s own home page.

The legislation is expected to go to the Senate this week, and all sorts of stakeholders are coming out of the woodwork.

“Knowing what’s happening in our economy is so desperately important to keeping our economy functioning smoothly,” said Maurine Haver, the chief executive and founder of Haver Analytics, a data analysis company. “The reason the Great Recession did not become another Great Depression is because of the more current economic data we have today that we didn’t have in the 1930s.”

She added that having good data about the state of the economy was one of America’s primary competitive advantages. “The Chinese are probably watching all this with glee,” she said, noting that the Chinese government has also opted not to publish economic data on occasion, generally when the news wasn’t good.

Other private companies and industry groups — including the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation and the National Association of Home Builders — are up in arms.

Target recently released a video explaining how it used these census data to determine where to locate new stores. Economic development organizations and otherbusiness groups say they use the numbers to figure out where potential workers are.

Mr. Webster says that businesses should instead be thanking House Republicans for reducing the government’s reach.

“What really promotes business in this country is liberty,” he said, “not demand for information.”

Mr. Webster and other critics have gone so far as to say the American Community Survey is unconstitutional. Of course, the basic decennial census is specifically enumerated in the United States Constitution, and courts have ruled that this longer form of the census survey is constitutional as well.

Some census watchers — like Andrew Reamer, a research professor at the George Washington University Institute of Public Policy — say they do not expect the Senate to agree on fully eliminating the American Community Survey (as well as the Economic Census, which would also be effectively destroyed by the House bill).

Rather, Mr. Reamer suspects, Republicans may hope that when the Senate and House bills go to a conference committee, a final compromise will keep the survey, but make participation in it voluntary. Under current law, participation is mandatory.

If the American Community Survey were made voluntary, experts say, the census would have to spend significantly more money on follow-up phone calls and in-person visits to get enough households to answer.

But Congress also plans to cut the census budget, making such follow-ups prohibitively expensive.

“If it’s voluntary, then we’ll just get bad data,” saidKenneth Prewitt, a former director of the census who is now at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. “That means businesses will make bad decisions, and government will make bad decisions, which means we won’t even know where we actually are wasting our tax dollars.”

Catherine Rampell is an economics reporter for The New York Times.

Ellen Cantarow: “… bizarre weather that seemed to be sending a meteorological message” (Tom Dispatch)

Tomgram: Ellen Cantarow, The New Eco-Devastation in Rural America

Posted by Ellen Cantarow at 5:25pm, May 20, 2012.

When workers drilling tunnels at Gauley Bridge, West Virginia, began to die, Union Carbide had an answer.  It hadn’t been taking adequate precautions against the inhalation of silica dust, a known danger to workers since the days of ancient Greece.  Instead, in many cases, a company doctor would simply tell the families of the workers that they had died of “tunnelitis,” and a local undertaker would be paid $50 to dispose of each corpse.  A few years later, in 1935, a congressional subcommittee discovered that approximately 700 workers had perished while drilling through Hawk’s Nest Mountain, many of them buried in unmarked graves at the side of the road just outside the tunnel.  The subcommittee concluded that Union Carbide’s project had been accomplished through a “grave and inhuman disregard of all considerations for the health, lives and future of the employees.”

Despite the “Hawk’s Nest Incident” and thousands of Depression-era lawsuits against foundries, mines, and construction companies, silicosis never disappeared.  In the decades since, asTomDispatch authors David Rosner and Jerry Markowitz have repeatedly demonstrated, industry worked tirelessly to label silicosis a “disease of the past,” even while ensuring that it would continue to be a disease of the present.  By the late 1990s, the Columbia University researchers found that from New York to California, from Texas all the way back to West Virginia, millions of workers in foundries, shipyards, mines, and oil refineries, among other industries, were endangered by silica dust.

Today, there’s a new silicosis scare on the horizon and a new eco-nightmare brewing in the far corners of rural America.  Like the Hawk’s Nest disaster it has flown under the radar — until now.

Once upon a time, mining companies tore open hills or bored through or chopped off mountain tops to get at vital resources inside.  They were intent on creating quicker paths through nature’sobstacles, or (as at Gauley Bridge) diverting the flow of mighty rivers. Today, they’re doing it merely to find the raw materials — so-called frac sand — to use in an assault on land several states away.  Multinational corporations are razing ancient hills of sandstone in the Midwest and shipping that silica off to other pastoral settings around the United States.  There, America’s prehistoric patrimony is being used to devastating effect to fracture shale deposits deep within the earth — they call it “hydraulic fracturing” — and causing all manner of environmental havoc.  Not everyone, however, is keen on this “sand rush” and coalitions of small-town farmers, environmentalists, and public health advocates are now beginning to stand firm against the big energy corporations running sand-mining operations in their communities.

Ground zero in this frac-fight is the rural Wisconsin towns to which TomDispatch’s rovingenvironmental reporter Ellen Cantarow traveled this spring to get the biggest domestic environmental story that nobody knows about.  Walking the fields of family farms under siege and talking to the men and women resisting the corporations, Cantarow offers up a shocking report of vital interest.  There’s a battle raging for America’s geological past and ecological future — our fresh food and clean water supplies may hinge on who wins it. Nick Turse

How Rural America Got Fracked

The Environmental Nightmare You Know Nothing About

By Ellen Cantarow

If the world can be seen in a grain of sand, watch out.  As Wisconsinites are learning, there’s money (and misery) in sand — and if you’ve got the right kind, an oil company may soon be at your doorstep.

March in Wisconsin used to mean snow on the ground, temperatures so cold that farmers worried about their cows freezing to death. But as I traveled around rural townships and villages in early March to interview people about frac-sand mining, a little-known cousin of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” daytime temperatures soared to nearly 80 degrees — bizarre weather that seemed to be sending a meteorological message.

In this troubling spring, Wisconsin’s prairies and farmland fanned out to undulating hills that cradled the land and its people. Within their embrace, the rackety calls of geese echoed from ice-free ponds, bald eagles wheeled in the sky, and deer leaped in the brush. And for the first time in my life, I heard the thrilling warble of sandhill cranes.

Yet this peaceful rural landscape is swiftly becoming part of a vast assembly line in the corporate race for the last fossil fuels on the planet. The target: the sand in the land of the cranes.

Five hundred million years ago, an ocean surged here, shaping a unique wealth of hills and bluffs that, under mantles of greenery and trees, are sandstone. That sandstone contains a particularly pure form of crystalline silica.  Its grains, perfectly rounded, are strong enough to resist the extreme pressures of the technology called hydraulic fracturing, which pumps vast quantities of that sand, as well as water and chemicals, into ancient shale formations to force out methane and other forms of “natural gas.”

That sand, which props open fractures in the shale, has to come from somewhere.  Without it, the fracking industry would grind to a halt. So big multinational corporations are descending on this bucolic region to cart off its prehistoric sand, which will later be forcefully injected into the earth elsewhere across the country to produce more natural gas.  Geology that has taken millions of years to form is now being transformed into part of a system, a machine, helping to drive global climate change.

“The valleys will be filled… the mountains and hills made level”

Boom times for hydraulic fracturing began in 2008 when new horizontal-drilling methods transformed an industry formerly dependent on strictly vertical boring. Frac-sand mining took off in tandem with this development.

“It’s huge,” said a U.S. Geological Survey mineral commodity specialist in 2009. “I’ve never seen anything like it, the growth. It makes my head spin.” That year, from all U.S. sources, frac-sand producers used or sold over 6.5 million metric tons of sand — about what the Great Pyramid of Giza weighs.  Last month, Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Senior Manager and Special Projects Coordinator Tom Woletz said corporations were hauling at least 15 million metric tons a year from the state’s hills.

By July 2011, between 22 and 36 frac-sand facilities in Wisconsin were either operating or approved. Seven months later, said Woletz, there were over 60 mines and 45 processing (refinement) plants in operation. “By the time your article appears, these figures will be obsolete,” claims Pat Popple, who in 2008 founded the first group to oppose frac-sand mining, Concerned Chippewa Citizens (now part of The Save the Hills Alliance).

Jerry Lausted, a retired teacher and also a farmer, showed me the tawny ridges of sand that delineated a strip mine near the town of Menomonie where he lives. “If we were looking from the air,” he added, “you’d see ponds in the bottom of the mine where they dump the industrial waste water. If you scan to the left, you’ll see the hills that are going to disappear.”

Those hills are gigantic sponges, absorbing water, filtering it, and providing the region’s aquifer with the purest water imaginable. According to Lausted, sand mining takes its toll on “air quality, water quality and quantity. Recreational aspects of the community are damaged. Property values [are lowered.] But the big thing is, you’re removing the hills that you can’t replace.  They’re a huge water manufacturing factory that Mother Nature gave us, and they’re gone.”

It’s impossible to grasp the scope of the devastation from the road, but aerialvideos and photographs reveal vast, bleak sandy wastelands punctuated with waste ponds and industrial installations where Wisconsin hills once stood.

When corporations apply to counties for mining permits, they must file “reclamation” plans. But Larry Schneider, a retired metallurgist and industrial consultant with a specialized knowledge of mining, calls the reclamation process “an absolute farce.”

Reclamation projects by mining corporations since the 1970s may have made mined areas “look a little less than an absolute wasteland,” he observes. “But did they reintroduce the biodiversity? Did they reintroduce the beauty and the ecology? No.”

Studies bear out his verdict. “Every year,” wrote Mrinal Ghose in the Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, “large areas are continually becoming unfertile in spite of efforts to grow vegetation on the degraded mined land.”

Awash in promises of corporate jobs and easy money, those who lease and sell their land just shrug. “The landscape is gonna change when it’s all said and done,” says dairy farmer Bobby Schindler, who in 2008 leased his land in Chippewa County to a frac-sand company called Canadian Sand and Proppant. (EOG, the former Enron, has since taken over the lease.) “Instead of being a hill it’s gonna be a valley, but all seeded down, and you’d never know there’s a mine there unless you were familiar with the area.”

Of the mining he adds, “It’s really put a boost to the area. It’s impressive the amount of money that’s exchanging hands.” Eighty-four-year-old Letha Webster, who sold her land 100 miles south of Schindler’s to another mining corporation, Unimin, says that leaving her home of 56 years is “just the price of progress.”

Jamie and Kevin Gregar — both 30-something native Wisconsinites and military veterans — lived in a trailer and saved their money so that they could settle down in a pastoral paradise once Kevin returned from Iraq. In January 2011, they found a dream home near tiny Tunnel City. (The village takes its name from a nearby rail tunnel). “It’s just gorgeous — the hills, the trees, the woodland, the animals,” says Jamie. “It’s perfect.”

Five months after they moved in, she learned that neighbors had leased their land to “a sand mine” company. “What’s a sand mine?” she asked.

Less than a year later, they know all too well.  The Gregars’ land is now surrounded on three sides by an unsightly panorama of mining preparations. Unimin is uprooting trees, gouging out topsoil, and tearing down the nearby hills. “It looks like a disaster zone, like a bomb went off,” Jamie tells me.

When I mention her service to her country, her voice breaks. “I am devastated. We’ve done everything right. We’ve done everything we were supposed to. We just wanted to raise our family in a good location and have good neighbors and to have it taken away from us for something we don’t support…” Her voice trails off in tears.

For Unimin, the village of Tunnel City in Greenfield township was a perfect target. Not only did the land contain the coveted crystalline silica; it was close to a rail spur. No need for the hundreds of diesel trucks that other corporations use to haul sand from mine sites to processing plants. No need, either, for transport from processing plants to rail junctions where hundreds of trains haul frac-sand by the millions of tons each year to fracture other once-rural landscapes. Here, instead, the entire assembly line operates in one industrial zone.

There was also no need for jumping the hurdles zoning laws sometimes erect. Like many Wisconsin towns where a culture of diehard individualism sees zoning as an assault on personal freedom, Greenfield and all its municipalities, including Tunnel City, are unzoned. This allowed the corporation to make deals with individual landowners. For the 8.5 acres where Letha Webster and her husband Gene lived for 56 years, assessed in 2010 at $147,500, Unimin paid $330,000. Overall, between late May and July 2011, it paid $5.3 million for 436 acres with a market value of about $1.1 million.

There was no time for public education about the potential negative possibilities of frac-sand mining: the destruction of the hills, the decline in property values, the danger of silicosis (once considered a strictly occupational lung disease) from blowing silica dust, contamination of ground water from the chemicals used in the processing plants, the blaze of lights all night long, noise from hundreds of train cars, houses shaken by blasting. Ron Koshoshek, a leading environmentalist who works with Wisconsin’s powerful Towns Association to educate townships about the industry, says that “frac-sand mining will virtually end all residential development in rural townships.” The result will be “a large-scale net loss of tax dollars to towns, increasing taxes for those who remain.”

Town-Busting Tactics

Frac-sand corporations count on a combination of naïveté, trust, and incomprehension in rural hamlets that previously dealt with companies no larger than Wisconsin’s local sand and gravel industries. Before 2008, town boards had never handled anything beyond road maintenance and other basic municipal issues.  Today, multinational corporations use their considerable resources to steamroll local councils and win sweetheart deals.  That’s how the residents of Tunnel City got taken to the cleaners.

On July 6, 2011, a Unimin representative ran the first public forum about frac-sand mining in the village.  Other heavily attended and often heated community meetings followed, but given the cascades of cash, the town board chairman’s failure to take a stand against the mining corporation, and Unimin’s aggressiveness, tiny Tunnel City was a David without a slingshot.

Local citizens did manage to get the corporation to agree to give the town $250,000 for the first two million tons mined annually, $50,000 more than its original offer. In exchange, the township agreed that any ordinance it might pass in the future to restrict mining wouldn’t apply to Unimin. Multiply the two million tons of frac-sand tonnage Unimin expects to mine annually starting in 2013 by the $300 a ton the industry makes and you’ll find that the township only gets .0004% of what the company will gross.

For the Gregars, it’s been a nightmare.  Unimin has refused five times to buy their land and no one else wants to live near a sand mine. What weighs most heavily on the couple is the possibility that their children will get silicosis from long-term exposure to dust from the mine sites. “We don’t want our kids to be lab rats for frac-sand mining companies,” says Jamie.

Drew Bradley, Unimin’s senior vice president of operations, waves such fears aside. “I think [citizens] are blowing it out of proportion,” he told a local publication. “There are plenty of silica mines sited close to communities. There have been no concerns exposed there.”

That’s cold comfort to the Gregars. Crystalline silica is a known carcinogen and the cause of silicosis, an irreversible, incurable disease. None of the very few rules applied to sand mining by the state’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) limit how much silica gets into the air outside of mines. That’s the main concern of those living near the facilities.

So in November 2011, Jamie Gregar and ten other citizens sent a 35-page petitionto the DNR. The petitioners asked the agency to declare respirable crystalline silica a hazardous substance and to monitor it, using a public health protection level set by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. The petition relies on studies, including one by the DNR itself, which acknowledge the risk of airborne silica from frac-sand mines for those who live nearby.

The DNR denied the petition, claiming among other things that — contrary to its own study’s findings — current standards are adequate. One of the petition’s signatories, Ron Koshoshek, wasn’t surprised. For 16 years he was a member of, and for nine years chaired, Wisconsin’s Public Intervenor Citizens Advisory Committee.  Created in 1967, its role was to intercede on behalf of the environment, should tensions grow between the DNR’s two roles: environmental protector and corporate licensor. “The DNR,” he says, “is now a permitting agency for development and exploitation of resources.”

In 2010, Cathy Stepp, a confirmed anti-environmentalist who had previously railedagainst the DNR, belittling it as “anti-development, anti-transportation, and pro-garter snakes,” was appointed to head the agency by now-embattled Governor Scott Walker who explained: “I wanted someone with a chamber-of-commerce mentality.”

As for Jamie Gregar, her dreams have been dashed and she’s determined to leave her home. “At this point,” she says, “I don’t think there’s a price we wouldn’t accept.”

Frac-Sand vs. Food

Brian Norberg and his family in Prairie Farm, 137 miles northwest of Tunnel City, paid the ultimate price: he died while trying to mobilize the community against Procore, a subsidiary of the multinational oil and gas corporation Sanjel. The American flag that flies in front of the Norbergs’ house flanks a placard with a large, golden NORBERG, over which pheasants fly against a blue sky.  It’s meant to represent the 1,500 acres the family has farmed for a century.

“When you start talking about industrial mining, to us, you’re violating the land,” Brian’s widow, Lisa, told me one March afternoon over lunch.  She and other members of the family, as well as a friend, had gathered to describe Prairie Farm’s battle with the frac-sanders. “The family has had a really hard time accepting the fact that what we consider a beautiful way to live could be destroyed by big industry.”

Their fight against Procore started in April 2011: Sandy, a lifelong friend and neighbor, arrived with sand samples drillers had excavated from her land, and began enthusiastically describing the benefits of frac-sand mining. “Brian listened for a few minutes,” Lisa recalls. “Then he told her [that]… she and her sand vials could get the heck — that’s a much nicer word than what he used  — off the farm.  Sandy was hoping we would also be excited about jumping on the bandwagon. Brian informed her that our land would be used for the purpose God intended, farming.”

Brian quickly enlisted family and neighbors in an organizing effort against the company. In June 2011, Procore filed a reclamation plan — the first step in the permitting process — with the county’s land and water conservation department. Brian rushed to the county office to request a public hearing, but returned dejected and depressed. “He felt completely defeated that he could not protect the community from them moving in and destroying our lives,” recalls Lisa.

He died of a heart attack less than a day later at the age of 52. The family is convinced his death was a result of the stress caused by the conflict. That stress is certainly all too real.  The frac-sand companies, says family friend Donna Goodlaxson, echoing many others I interviewed for this story, “go from community to community. And one of the things they try to do is pit people in the community against each other.”

Instead of backing off, the Norbergs and other Prairie Farm residents continued Brian’s efforts. At an August 2011 public hearing, the town’s residents directly addressed Procore’s representatives. “What people had to say there was so powerful,” Goodlaxson remembers. “Those guys were blown out of their chairs. They weren’t prepared for us.”

“I think people insinuate that we’re little farmers in a little community and everyone’s an ignorant buffoon,” added Sue Glaser, domestic partner of Brian’s brother Wayne. “They found out in a real short time there was a lot of education behind this.”

“About 80% of the neighborhood was not happy about the potential change to our area,” Lisa adds. “But very few of us knew anything about this industry at [that] time.” To that end, Wisconsin’s Farmers’ Union and its Towns Association organized a day-long conference in December 2011 to help people “deal with this new industry.”

Meanwhile, other towns, alarmed by the explosion of frac-sand mining, were beginning to pass licensing ordinances to regulate the industry. In Wisconsin, counties can challenge zoning but not licensing ordinances, which fall under town police powers.  These, according to Wisconsin law, cannot be overruled by counties or the state. Becky Glass, a Prairie Farm resident and an organizer with Labor Network for Sustainability, calls Wisconsin’s town police powers “the strongest tools towns have to fight or regulate frac-sand mining.” Consider them so many slingshots employed against the corporate Goliaths.

In April 2012, Prairie Farm’s three-man board voted 2 to 1 to pass such an ordinance to regulate any future mining effort in the town. No, such moves won’t stop frac-sand mining in Wisconsin, but they may at least mitigate its harm. Procore finally pulled out because of the resistance, says Glass, adding that the company has since returned with different personnel to try opening a mine near where she lives.

“It takes 1.2 acres per person per year to feed every person in this country,” says Lisa Norberg. “And the little township that I live in, we have 9,000 acres that are for farm use. So if we just close our eyes and bend over and let the mining companies come in, we’ll have thousands of people we can’t feed.”

Food or frac-sand: it’s a decision of vital importance across the country, but one most Americans don’t even realize is being made — largely by multinational corporations and dwindling numbers of yeoman farmers in what some in this country would call “the real America.”  Most of us know nothing about these choices, but if the mining corporations have their way, we will soon enough — when we check out prices at the supermarket or grocery store. We’ll know it too, as global climate change continues to turn Wisconsin winters balmy and supercharge wild weather across the country.

While bucolic landscapes disappear, aquifers are fouled, and countless farms across rural Wisconsin morph into industrial wastelands, Lisa’s sons continue to work the Norberg’s land, just as their father once did. So does Brian’s nephew, 32-year-old Matthew, who took me on a jolting ride across his fields. The next time I’m in town, he assured me, we’ll visit places in the hills where water feeds into springs. Yes, you can drink the water there. It’s still the purest imaginable. Under the circumstances, though, no one knows for how long.

Ellen Cantarow’s work on Israel/Palestine has been widely published for over 30 years. Her long-time concern with climate change has led her to investigate the global depredations of oil and gas corporations atTomDispatch. Many thanks to Wisconsin filmmaker Jim Tittle, whosedocumentary, “The Price of Sand,” will appear in August 2012, and who shared both his interviewees and his time for this article.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch and join us on Facebook. 

Copyright 2012 Ellen Cantarow

Bill Maher: “… praying away hurricanes is (not) meteorology” (TheHuffington Post)

Bill Maher: Liberty University Is Not A Real School

By  Posted: 05/19/2012 11:10 pm Updated: 05/20/2012 11:18 am

Bill Maher Liberty University

At the end of “Real Time” Friday night, Bill Maher lambasted Liberty University, the Virginia religious university that has become a mandatory stop for Republican presidential candidates. (Watch above.)

“You can’t expect me to believe anything Mitt Romney said last week at Liberty University, because a) he’s a liar and b) Liberty University isn’t really a university,” Maher began. “It’s not like an actual statesman visited a real college. It’s more like the Tupac hologram visited Disneyland and said what he would do as president during the Main Street Electrical Parade.”

Romney delivered Liberty’s commencement speech on May 12.

Maher noted that Liberty teaches “creation science,” and the idea that earth was created 5,000 years ago. “This is a school you flunk out of when you get the answers right,” he joked.

Much as conservatives believe gay marriage cheapens their own vows, “I think a diploma from Liberty cheapens my diploma from a real school,” he continued. “I worked really hard for four years and sold a lot of drugs to get that thing.”

Liberty’s diploma may look real, Maher said, but “when you confuse a church with a school, Maher went on, “it mixes up the things you believe — religion — with the things we know — education. Then you start thinking that creationism is science, and gay aversion is psychology, and praying away hurricanes is meteorology.”

Carta aberta à presidenta Dilma Rousseff – Mudanças climáticas: hora de se recobrar o bom senso

Carta aberta à presidenta Dilma Rousseff
Mudanças climáticas: hora de se recobrar o bom senso
São Paulo, 14 de maio de 2012

CartaAbertaPresidDilmaAR

A Negação das Mudanças Climáticas e a Direita Organizada – Parte 3 – E o Professor Molion?

by Alexandre Araújo Costa on Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 10:45pm.
Postado no Facebook

Ricardo Felício fez aparição meteórica no programa do Jô Soares e, naturalmente, não se sabe que alcance isso pode ter em termos de sua carreira de militante negador. Como mostramos em dois textos anteriores (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=384583481583550 e http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=385757404799491), academicamente trata-se de alguém com atuação evidentemente limitada, trajetória que não demonstra produtividade acadêmica. Desnudamos, porém, sua vinculação com a direita organizada, seja através da MSIa (vide as outras notas), seja via colaboração direta com o site “midia a mais” (idem), que, por sinal, é citado no Lattes de Ricardo Felício como um dos locais em que ele, deixando é claro a conotação acadêmica do termo, “publica”.

Mas evidentemente Ricardo Felicio não é o único negador brasileiro. Atuante há bem mais tempo, com bem mais trânsito na comunidade acadêmica, ainda envolvido de certo modo com a meteorologia, através do Departamento ao qual é vinculado, na UFAL, o principal negador brasileiro continua a ser o velho Luis Baldicero Molion. Aliás, algumas pessoas me indagaram exatamente da maneira como consta no título (“e o Prof. Molion”?) e este texto visa responder a tal pergunta.

Molion é bastante conhecido na comunidade brasileira de meteorologia. Sempre foi afeito a posições excêntricas e teses que cientificamente poderiam ser chamadas, no mínimo, de marginais (como a influência de vulcões submarinos sobre o El Niño-Oscilação Sul). Sempre foi tido como controvertido e polemista na comunidade, mas quero deixar claro que, conhecendo Molion há certamente mais de uma década e meia, isso parecia ser até um traço simpático. Quero, portanto, deixar claro que este texto aqui, longe de pretender atacar a sua figura ponto de vista pessoal, Ele tem como objetivo expor as movimentações de Molion para além do mundo acadêmico, mas que evidentemente levarão à conclusão de que qualquer ilusão de isenção em torno de suas opiniões seria condescendência para com ele.

Sabe-se que o professor da UFAL tem ministrado um sem-número de palestras nos últimos anos, sempre dedicadas ao mesmo tema, isto é, combater o consenso científico em torno do papel antrópico sobre as mudanças observadas no sistema climático. Não é meu objetivo neste breve texto abordar as questões de mérito, o que fiz com um relativo aprofundamento em http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=384584698250095 e em diversos posts em minha página, mas devo frisar que, longe de representar um negador mais sofisticado, Molion também é grosseiro e desrespeitoso em seus ataques ao restante da comunidade e não preza pela coerência científica, fazendo uso da amálgama variada e inconsistente de pseudo-argumentos negacionistas. Num momento, negando todos os dados observados, diz que não há aquecimento, mas resfriamento; noutro, afirma que há aquecimento, mas que este não é antrópico e que – contrariando novamente tudo que foi medido nas últimas décadas – é um efeito do sol; ou ainda, que estamos diante de algo benéfico.

Especificamente essa combinação de isentar os fatores antrópicos e de afirmar que o aumento da concentração de CO2 é benéfica tem caído como uma luva para que Molion transite confortavelmente junto a um público específico: o do agronegócio e do ruralismo. Afinal, se a pecuária não contribui com emissões de metano e se as emissões de dióxido de carbono (e também de metano) associadas ao desmatamento não são um problema, o discurso de Molion representa um tipo de armadura e escudo pseudo-científicos que o agronegócio precisa. Afinal, se ninguém consegue defender os ruralistas dos crimes perpetrados contra trabalhadores rurais e ambientalistas; se a concentração de terra e renda no campo continua sendo uma mácula revoltante desde os tempos das capitanias em um Brasil que nunca fez uma Reforma Agrária de verdade; se o uso massivo de agrotóxicos e o envenenamento cotidiano de nossas mesas também desperta antipatia do grande público… pelo menos com os argumentos “moliônicos”, o agronegócio e os reis do gado e soja ficam livres de acusações quanto à questão do clima…

E de fato, Molion tem falado muito para esse público. Em 24/06/2008, palestrou no “Seminário Cooplantio” (divulgado pela Rádio Rural em http://wp.clicrbs.com.br/radioruralam/2008/06/24/diario-de-gramado-ii-seminario-cooplantio/). Outra entrevista foi divulgada junto ao SINCAL (Assoc. Nacional dos Sindicatos Rurais das Regiões Produtoras de Café e Leite), vide http://sincal.org.br/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=940:prof-molion-desfaz-falsas-acusacoes-contra-a-pecuaria&catid=1:noticias-ultimas&Itemid=19. Em 30/03/2009, outra palestra, ministrada na Fenicafé 2009, com o “tema” “Aquecimento global: mitos e verdades. Quais os efeitos para a agricultura?” No evento afirmou que “o aquecimento global é totalmente questionável e amparado em “imbecilidades” (http://www.redepeabirus.com.br/redes/form/post?pub_id=49547). Em 01/02/2010, concede entrevista divulgada como “Prof. Molion desfaz falsas acusações contra a pecuária” em MFRural, site que se auto-apresenta como “O MF Rural é um site desenvolvido com a finalidade de facilitar as negociações e promover o encontro entre produtores rurais”. Na home, a chamada é “MF Rural – O Agronegócio passa por aqui!”
http://noticias.mfrural.com.br/noticia-agricola/prof.-molion-desfaz-falsas-acusacoes-contra-a-pecuaria-16151.aspx. Em 26/03/2010, ministrou palestra patrocinada pela Câmara especializada de agronomia do CREA-RJ. Na chamada, no site abaixo, diz-se que “o alarmismo ambientalista, assim como o multiculturalismo, o antitabagismo e a “anti-homofobia”, é hoje uma das principais armas utilizadas na construção do poder mundial”
(http://libertadmatters.blogspot.com.br/2010/03/convite-palestra-aquecimento-global.html). Em 11/02/2011, foi a vez do Conselho Federal de Medicina Veterinária (http://www.cfmv.org.br/portal/destaque.php?cod=443). Nele, Molion diz exatamente o que o público quer ouvir, ao afirmar que “a Pecuária, uma das principais atividades econômicas do Brasil, na qual a Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia atuam diretamente, sofre uma penalização excessiva como agente causador de poluição”. O site complementa, afirmando que “De acordo com dados de Molion, a relação não pode ser justificada, já que os rebanhos estão em crescimento, com aumento de 17 milhões de ruminantes ao ano e, no mesmo período, as taxas de metano seguem estáveis”.

Mas imbatível mesmo é o que está por vir em poucos dias. Em 26/05/2012, conforme divulgado em http://fakeclimate.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/palestra_adesg-sp1.png, Molion palestrará na XV Assembléia do “Foro do Brasil”, organização de direita cujos ataques à Comissão da Verdade, à constitucionalidade das cotas, à “ofensiva indigenista” e cuja defesa do agronegócio e do novo Código Florestal não deixam dúvidas de se tratar do mais duro e radical neo-fascismo tupiniquim. O site anuncia, altissonante, que “você terá oportunidade de saber como os conceitos de aquecimento global e poluição pelo CO2 são uma grande farsa que movimenta bilhões de Euros, beneficiando empresas, e ongs” e que “conhecerá muitas das verdades e a história desse crime que está sendo cometido”.

Quem é esse tal Foro do Brasil? Em 31 de Março (atentem para a data), tinha a idéia de fundar o POP – “Partido Ordem e Progresso” (http://forodobrasil.info/fb/?p=2361#comment-122). Refere-se à “Começão da Inverdade”, para defender torturadores e assassinos. Os links do “Foro do Brasil”, claro, não poderiam deixar de incluir a Associação dos Diplomados da Escola Superior de Guerra, o Blog do conhecido direitista, ator Carlos Vereza, o “Cavaleiro do Templo”, o “Levante-se Brasil”, os delirantes do “Verde:A Nova Cor Do Comunismo”, o site da Monarquia e, é claro, o indefectível “Midia sem Máscara” (aquele pessoal maluco que diz que a Globo e toda a mídia são “de esquerda”, que a universidade é toda “comunista”, etc.) e outros desse naipe…

E novamente fica claro. Há sempre algo por trás do discurso negador das mudanças climáticas, da postura de ignorar todas as evidências concretas, de passar por cima de tudo que se conhece até de leis da Física, dos ataques grosseiros e virulentos à comunidade científica e da tentativa de gerar descrédito junto à opinião pública em relação à Ciência e aos Cientistas. Quem trabalha realmente em busca da verdade científica disputa seu ponto de vista fazendo valer o método. Coleta dados, faz experimentos, desenvolve e usa modelos. Escreve artigos que, se estiverem corretos metodologicamente, serão apreciados e podem servir de evidência. Se aquilo que Molion traz ao que ele chama de “debate” realmente fossem hipóteses científicas, ele teria bastante espaço. A comunidade ainda tem por ele, até de forma condescendente, apreço e respeito (pela pessoa, eu tenho, mas pela conduta, não). Molion foi chamado para, 4 dias após acusar a todos nós de farsantes e desonestos num evento da extrema-direita, discutir sobre “Extremos Climáticos, Zona Costeira e Semi-Árido”, num evento em Natal, do qual também participarei, sobre Mudanças Climáticas e Vulnerabilidade (http://www.ccet.ufrn.br/cciv2012/). Molion seria ouvido na comunidade, se sua postura fosse de fidelidade ao método científico. Mas, assim como no caso de Ricardo Felício, a ciência anda longe. Há muito foi abandonada, em nome da agenda política. O agronegócio e os neo-fascistas, claro, aplaudem.