Sept meeting (Iran/nuclear threat) and aftermath

Our meeting was held Tuesday Sept. 21. From the announcement:

"It has been estimated Iran will have an operational nuclear weapon in 9 months to 1 and 1/2 years. The speculation runs that Israel will likely attack the Iranian nuclear facilities. This is a excellent time to dig into the issues and likely actions and their outcomes.

Readings: "Two papers, one is...a very well balanced analysis of the situation and the other is a geopoitical study of Iran through history"

• The Atlantic, The Point of No Return (Sept 2010)
• STRATFOR, The Geopolitics Of Iran: Holding the Center of a Mountain Fortress (July 2008)
  

---

Followups, reactions, recommendations from participants:

* Boston Globe - Some interesting background articles on Palestine-Israel conflict, from political and theological history; by James Carroll. Check his biography...Distinguished Historian, Writer, Educator, etc New book coming out soon, "Jerusalem."

1. In this corner ("Anti-Semitism and colonialism have trapped Israelis and Palestinians.")
2. Pursuit of the holy land ("Amid long histories of exile and despair, return and triumph, all eyes are on Jerusalem.")
3. Enter Christianity ("The ghosts in the room during the Mideast peace process have a long history in another region.")
4. Onward, Christian Zionists ("Deep-rooted Christian tradition has put its mark on British and US policies in the Mideast.")
5. New talks haunted by old wounds ("Until a mutual understanding of Israeli and Palestinian traumas is reached, peace will be elusive")
   
6. Teetering on the apocalypse

* Tuesday's PBS NewsHour had Examining the Effects of Economic Sanctions on Iran

...Ray Takeyh of the Council on Foreign Relations. The other's name (Stuart Levey?) I didn't catch . Here are some of the points they made:

• The new sanctions are "just beginning to bite" in Iran.
• They "hogtie" Iran's ties to the US Financial System, and those of Europe and several other countries who have joined them. No financial services will be given to Iran if those possibly could provide funds for developing nuclear capability.
• Some companies have frozen dealings with Iran -- Toyota, Lloyd's of London.
• Financial freezes prevent oil industry from getting credit to buy new equipment, insurance for their ships, etc..
• Rafsanjani (opposition leader) says Iran has never been faced with so many such serious sanctions
• Iran is "not a normal nation state. It is an ideological state." Decisions are not made with rational cost/benefit analysis. Decisions will be made by powerful elite led by Khomeni
• Many of the people do not want the isolation of resisting world opinion and the lost jobs, opportunities etc.. that that entails. Elite leaders don't care.
• Conclusion: No one can predict the way the leaders will react.

* Re the question as to whether or not Iran would use their nuclear weapon -
One way of viewing the issue is to be not concerned as to why, but look at the possible results. Using the idea of expected value (used in both operations research and financial analysis) you can look at the cost (or benefit) of an event happening and the probability of it happening. The results will be the expected value and suggest whether you should do something about the event, either prevent it from happening or prepare a response to it. I think most of us would agree that the possibility of a million casualties and the resulting turmoil in the world, even though extremely small, is something to worry about.

* Christian Science Monitor, Reality check: Iran is not a nuclear threat ("Forget the neoconservative hype. The facts show Iran is not and has not been a nuclear threat to either the United States or Israel.")
...wish I had seen this article before the last meeting. I think that part of the problem is that bad news seems to be more interesting that reassuring news.

* How the Millennium Development Goals can live up to their promise - NYTimes.com

"The M.D.G.’s are possibly the most visionary deal that most people have never heard of. In the run-up to the 21st century, a grand global bargain was negotiated at a series of summit meetings and then signed in 2000. The United Nations’ “Millennium Declaration” pledged to “ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world’s people,” especially the most marginalized in developing countries. ..."

* Today (Sept 21) is the United Nations International Day of Peace celebrated around the world during the week opening the UN General Assembly in New York. There are many interesting sites to view. Please do. (International Day of Peace programs at http://www.PeaceDay.tv -and- http://www.ThePeaceAlliance.org )

* Let's start a local movement for a return to sanity.

Regarding the march in Washinton to restore sanity ...CS Monitor has a good summation on the Rally to Restore Sanity, proposed by Jon Stewart of the Daily Show - Rally to Restore Sanity battles March to Keep Fear Alive

The Rally will take place in Washington DC on October 30. It is intended as a counter to the outrageous claims and nonsense that have permeated electoral politics in USA2010.

My sense is many of us will agree political discourse has entered the realm of the absurd, but participating in a rally in WDC is not practical. Maybe you are tired of extremists dominating the news and would like to show your support for a more moderate dialog.

Interested in exploring the possibility of organizing a local version of the Rally to Restore Sanity in our community October 30?

Aug 5 Global Economics study group meeting, more references&links

Here (fixed, it now links to his 2010 talk) is the "Hans Rosling on global population growth" (and economic development) TED talk I mentioned, using very cool Gapminder data presentation.

I'm curious what the "anti-tech-fix" folk would make of Krugman's April NYT Environmental Econ 101 piece Building a green economy.

Eva mentioned the New Economics Foundation
("Economics as if people and the planet mattered"; "We are unique in combining rigorous analysis and policy debate with practical solutions on the ground, often run and designed with the help of local people. We also create new ways of measuring progress towards increased well-being and environmental sustainability.")

Dave mentioned the Monkeynomics TED talk - that monkeys show similar economic behavior to ours. (?)

Other links?

Also recommended: the Econ blogs of UCBerkeley's Brad DeLong and Princeton/NYTimes's Paul Krugman.

Not recommended: the Freakonomics blog, and Bjorn Lomborg

UNA Climate links for Earth Day

You - and your children - will be living in the world we create with our decisions today.

Climate change is a national security issue, "a threat multiplier in already fragile regions, exacerbating conditions that lead to failed states — the breeding grounds for extremism and terrorism."

The longer we delay action, the more wrenching the transition will need to be - and the less likely we are to avoid the worst-case climate impacts.


Buying green and changing personal behavior won't save the planet.


Imagery and data:

Yes, the earth is warming.
(a mountain of evidence and infographics)

It's happening now, we're causing it, and if we just hide our heads in the sand, things could get very bad - Katharine Hayhoe presentation (~25pp pdf, images and graphs) to Republicans for Environmental Protection



Economists weigh in on actions to take:

Read Building a Green Economy (aka Climate Economics 101; read this. Please.) from Paul Krugman.
("... [in summary] We know how to limit greenhouse-gas emissions. We have a good sense of the costs - and they’re manageable. All we need now is the political will.")


Surprise—Economists Agree!
A consensus is emerging about the costs of containing climate change.
There is general consensus among economists and policy analysts that [putting a price on] CO2 emissions ... should be a central element of any domestic climate policy."

"Action on climate is justified, not because the science is certain, but precisely because it is not."
- The Economist - Spin, science and climate change


Consensus that it's human caused:

Man-graph image illustrating the consensus among climate scientists

Doubting climate scientists "remain a group small enough to fit into a typical American home bathroom."

Long list of organizations and their statements regarding the climate consensus


If you're a doubter...


Compare standard doubter's claims against what the science says, at skepticalscience.com
(with iPhone app)

Could you be wrong? Would you really bet your children's security that you're not?



Beware of confirmation bias. Beware of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

"If you're only learning from deviant views, you're probably going to be misled"; so take a college climate science course (videos) or see high school science teacher Greg Craven's YouTube videos.


The disinformation effort:

Most "skeptics" aren't, really. Real skeptics "seek answers and scrutinize arguments before accepting the current state of scientific knowledge as fact. [Fake skeptics] dismiss sound arguments, solid data, and experimental evidence in favour of propositions that have long been shown to be flawed."
(What, If Anything, Can [real] Skeptics Say About Science? "Most of us are laymen who don’t have the professional experience and analytical skills to properly evaluate the data and the methods. To pretend we do (or to reject it on a hunch) separates us from the very scientific enterprise we [real] skeptics purport to value.")

Book in press exposing the climate disinformation effort:
Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, by UCSD's Oreskes and Conway
(video)

For countering disinformation, try the UCSD Scripps climate FAQ or John Cook's SkepticalScience site