Jump to content

The Academics Thread


Pariah

Recommended Posts

On ‎8‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:32 AM, Cancer said:

I survived both Scarlet Letter and Huckleberry Finn, but between Bartleby the Scrivener and Billy Budd Foretopman I will never, ever open Melville again.

 

I remember actually liking "Bartleby" but "Billy Budd" was.....

 

well, it was a good luminous little short story that had been put on a rack and stretched and stretched and streeeeetched until it was a weeping broken wreck the length of a novel.

 

So no way do I plan to ever read Moby DIck. It's probably just as great a story as people say it is. I'm sure it's a great story - that should have been told in about a fifth of the pages it takes up.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Feed it to the palindromedary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pariah said:

In 9+ years with my current district, we've never had a snow day.

 

1 hour ago, Bazza said:

Our city as well. 40 yrs. 

 

Yeah, but it actually snows where I live. "Greatest Snow on Earth", our license plates say.

 

We have a lot of families in our district whose kids are on free and reduced lunch programs. If we don;t have school on a given day, those students may not eat. So the schools stay open for anything less than catastrophic circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rain here in Las Vegas tends to be infrequent enough to bring all of the road oils to the surface, making it dangerously slippery. We get snow about once every 5 years or so, and the last big batch actually stuck around for a few days in 2008, and wrecked the snow removal budget* for Clark County.

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Usually for Mount Charleston and Kyle Canyon, but Summerlin's known for getting some snow in winter, as its elevation is 3500-4400 feet.

9832565_web1_luxorsnowweb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Old Man said:

The last time I was in Vegas, it rained so hard* that the monorail broke down and the Imperial Palace imploded.

 

 

* Like a heavy drizzle.

 

The parking garage was elevated to allow the Flamingo Wash to go underneath during rainstorms. The IP is now known as the Linq.

 

First video is from 2012, second from 2010.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_Qx8o2-LSY

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking with one of the other teachers in my department yesterday at lunch. I was telling him about my Masters program, and he asked what my next class was going to be. I told him it was Climate and Climate Change. 

 

And he said,  "Oh...." With THAT tone of voice. "So," he said, "a bunch of political stuff." 

 

I just wanted to smack him.

 

But I didn't. Because I know from previous conversations he's a hard-core Trump guy,  and it wouldn't have made any difference. 

 

It amazes and saddens me that the political divide in this country is so steep that even among people who should be scientists by nature and training, there are still some who think the climate change is a politically-motivated hoax despite profound evidence to the contrary, just because their party leaders tell them it is.

 

Of course, I've also got an anti-vaxxer in my department, so I guess I shouldn't be all that surprised. Wizard's First Rule, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, a task you should be able to do with easily-available data is show that the 60-year-or-so general increase in atmosphere CO2 content (the Mauna Loa measurements) is within a factor of 2 or so of estimated human contributions.  From economic data, find total tonnage of coal and petroleum production starting in the 1950s.  Assume all the coal is burned, and half the petroleum is (remember to deduct the hydrogen from the total petroleum mass to get the petroleum carbon burned), and take the tonnage of burned fossil carbon, combine it with oxygen, and you'll get a mass for the CO2 generated over that interval from fossil fuels.  Then from the increase in atmospheric CO2 fraction in the Mauna Loa data (which I think is on the order of a couple hundred ppmv), an assumption that the atmosphere is well mixed and that the non-CO2 mass is more or less constant, hydrostatic equilibrium at 1 gee, etc., turn that concentration increase into an added mass of CO2 over that time interval.  Last time I did this, the two amounts were abotu a factor of two different, in the sense that CO2 from burning was bigger than accumulated mass in the atmosphere, which makes sense if some but not all of the CO2 is removed from the atmosphere (probably dissolved in the oceans).

 

Assign teams of students to gather the economic data, then do the sums with the relevant equations in class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Pariah said:

It amazes and saddens me that the political divide in this country is so steep that even among people who should be scientists by nature and training, there are still some who think the climate change is a politically-motivated hoax despite profound evidence to the contrary, just because their party leaders tell them it is.

 

It amazes and saddens me that the political divide in this country is so steep that even among people who should be scientists by nature and training that there are many who seem to think that the only possible motivation to be against the theory of man-made climate change is because "party leaders said so" or because "they believe the propaganda coming out of oil companies" (which is generally the other excuse which is used).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, archer said:

 

It amazes and saddens me that the political divide in this country is so steep that even among people who should be scientists by nature and training that there are many who seem to think that the only possible motivation to be against the theory of man-made climate change is because "party leaders said so" or because "they believe the propaganda coming out of oil companies" (which is generally the other excuse which is used).

 

I hear what you're saying. But he led with politics. There's no question of motivation here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to get through to people like that.  The first impulse is to go to the science--indeed, spectral absorption has been well understood since before the Civil War and is better explained than gravity.  But instead you wind up trying to break down an elaborate conspiracy theory, a theory that is ridiculous on its face given that you can't get two scientist to agree on the color of shite, let alone band together in a worldwide conspiracy to invent global warming for... reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...