Banner
Could High Quality Masks Solve China's COVID Problems? Idea For A Randomized Control Trial Of Masks In Households To Find Out

This is a suggestion for a way to resolve questions such as: How effective are the best...

Why Doesn't NASA Respond To Public Concerns On Its Samples From Mars Environmental Impact Statement? (short Version For Experts)

First for anyone who doesn't know, NASA’s perseverance rover is currently collecting small...

Why Doesn't NASA Respond To Public Concerns On Its Samples From Mars Environmental Impact Statement?

First for anyone who doesn't know, NASA’s perseverance rover is currently collecting small...

This Is Your Opportunity To Tell NASA You Want To Keep Earth Extra Safe During Their Samples From Mars Mission

For those who don’t know the background, NASA’s Perseverance rover is gathering...

User picture.
picture for Ilias Tyrovolaspicture for Helen Barrattpicture for Steve Schuler
Robert WalkerRSS Feed of this column.

I'm Robert Walker, inventor & programmer. I have had a long term special interest in astronomy, and space science since the 1970s, and most of these blog posts currently are about Mars and space... Read More »

Blogroll

Do be careful, masks, distancing, get vaccinated, ventilation, avoid crowded places, test, trace, isolate, quarantine. #DOITALL - BE CAREFUL

I am posting this after Boris Johnson announced - to much celebration - that the UK will end its mask mandate again because cases of Omicron are falling.

This is not about the economy. Wearing masks has zero economic impact - who is going to be impacted economically by you wearing a mask in public transport or in a shop? It seems to be more about a concept of freedom that some have, that we are more free if we don't use masks to protect others from a sometimes deadly disease. How is that freedom?

Some news stories suggest that if Omicron is mild it is a “blessing in disguise”. Should we let everyone get it as fast as possible? It might seem it would help - if Omicron is indeed a little milder, this may reduce pressure on the health system for a few weeks. However, large numbers of cases can still overwhelm us very rapidly - if it's half the severity, just one doubling of cases (which might take < 3 days) overcomes all that advantage for the health systems.,

There is nothing even remotely resembling collapse of civilization in the IPBES or IPCC reports. So why do so many people say that’s what they are about?

I think it may be at least partly a misunderstanding of what the IPCC mean by “transformative change”, a misunderstanding which sadly is promoted in many articles in the mainstream media. If anyone says this, they haven't read the reports themselves, or at least not carefully.

The IPCC’s “transformative change” is not a collapse. Nor is it austerity. It’s positive, it’s growth in everything we value.

From time to time we get larger solar storms. One of the last major ones was the one in March 1989 geomagnetic storm which caused a nine hour power cut in Quebec. That happened because they weren’t prepared for it. Modern power supplies are hardened against this, making such events much less likely.

There were earlier studies suggesting widespread damage to transformers which could cause months to years to repair, widespread power supply problems that would take a long time to resolve, and trillions of dollars of damage, so a large economic impact.

This is for people who worry that the Democrats in the USA will never come to agreement on their climate policies. It’s tough work for them, because they have to get agreement of 50 senators, even one abstention and they will lose the vote.

IMHO this is also a strength- the bill is getting intense scrutiny. Everyone’s concerns need to be listened to. Joe Manchin seems genuine and he represents centrist politicians in the USA - a bill is more likely to work if he is behind it too.

How to motivate your self, and others to act on climate change, biodiversity or anything else - tips from psychology

This talk may help you if you are thinking about how to motivate both yourself and others, and also governments, to act on climate change, biodiversity loss or indeed anything. The way you might do it instinctively, to focus on all the negatives that need to be fixed, is actually not the best approach. Psychologists call this negative framing.

Psychology says, in order to create engagement, we should present, on balance, three positive or supportive framings for each climate threat we mention.

Epsen Stokes, 8:49 into this video.