ThinkingShift

Good old evolutionist, Charles Darwin, has been digitised. Well, not Darwin himself but his letters and correspondence. As we know, Darwin spent five happy years voyaging around the world on The Beagle. Apparently, he described this episode of his life as a “magnificent scheme” allowing him to spend time “larking round the world“.

Cambridge University has chronicled Darwin’s voyages in the Darwin Correspondence Project, which digitises around 5,000 letters and summarises a further 9,000, some of which Darwin wrote at 12 years of age. There are some personal gems amongst the letters. Writing to his sister, Caroline, Darwin confesses that he only washed his feet once a month, which he confessed was “nasty”. Hate to think about the personal hygiene issues on The Beagle!

Whilst busy working on his theory of evolution, Darwin nevertheless found the time to exchange 2000 letters during his lifetime (1809-1882). Perhaps surprisingly, pigeon fanciers were amongst his correspondents. Pigeon breeding was a widespread activity in Darwin’s time and the network of pigeon fanciers provided a good opportunity to study a species under domestication. Included in the collection are letters between Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, who independently formulated a theory of evolution by natural selection. In one letter to Wallace, Darwin observed: “I can plainly see that we have thought much alike and to a certain extent have come to similar conclusions“.

The site launched on May 17 2007 and is freely available. Darwin Online features a remarkable field notebook of the Galapagas Islands in which Darwin made detailed observations that informed his theory of evolution. The notebook was stolen in the 1980s and is still missing, but has been reconstructed from a microfilm copy. What a great resource for serious scholars or for those of us simply fascinated by history. I’ve pinched the photo accompanying this post from the Darwin Online site as it’s a classic!

Back in the Jurassic Park days of youth, I was pretty obsessed with astronauts and space. It was a close call - did I want to be an astronaut or an archaeologist when I grew up? somehow, I ended up in information and knowledge management (after a long stint in law) - not sure of the connection between KM, astronauts and archaeology - probably has to do with the unknown: digging up artefacts from long lost cultures; flinging yourself off into black space inside a metal capsule to go where no person has gone before; surfacing the deep contextual knowledge of corporate employees (harder if you ask me than flinging yourself into space).

I’ve retained a life-long love for history/archaeology and anything to do with space. So each day I look forward to getting, via my RSS feeds, the NASA image of the day. I love the image accompanying this post (you can access larger version here), which came in the other day. It is a 1960 photograph that looks like a poster for some Hollywood movie about tough guys surviving in the desert. Well, not far off what the photo is all about actually. It shows the seven original Mercury astronauts participating in U.S. Air Force survival training exercises. Pictured from left to right are: L. Gordon Cooper, M. Scott Carpenter, John Glenn, Alan Shepard, Virgil I. “Guss” Grissom, Walter Schirra and Donald K. Slayton. Portions of their clothing have been fashioned from parachute material, and all have grown beards from their time in the wilderness. The purpose of their training was to prepare astronauts in the event of an emergency or faulty landing in a remote area. Love the look on Shepherd’s face (centre of photo).

John Glenn was the first American to orbit Earth and thirty-six years after his first space flight, he was a member of the crew of the space shuttle Discovery (mission STS-95). Glenn also entered politics and was Senator John Glenn of Ohio from 1974-1999. Shepherd was the only one of the seven Mercury astronauts to go to the Moon, he was the first American in space (1961) and I think was the only astronaut to play golf on Earth’s desolate satellite. Schirra died in May 2007 at the age of 84. Grissom was apparently told privately that he’d be the first man to walk on the Moon and unfortunately died in 1967 in the Apollo 1 fire at Cape Kennedy. Carpenter was the fourth American in space and the first to eat solid food in space.

Mmm…ever wonder how astronauts answered the call of nature? well, Prince Phillip (naturally) asked this profound question recently while on tour in the US. Apparently, it all has to do with air flow, which carries away waste products. This is one of NASA’s most frequently asked questions (my question would be: can I still apply lipgloss while floating around the cabin?!)

If you look at the image closely, you have to wonder what stuff these men were made of. Most had been pilots in WWII and seemed to have no fear about launching into space in ‘flying experiments’. Did they ever suspect they might not come back? Did they ever wonder whether the technology and early computers were advanced enough to bring them safely back to Earth? It combines adventure with suspense that’s for sure. Have a read of Deborah Cadbury’s great book, Space Race, to get a sense of the calibre of these early space voyagers and the political paranoia sparked by the superpower rivalries of the former USSR and the US, which led to a space race. Or check out Hansen’s First Man, the life of Neil Armstrong, the first man to step foot on the Moon in 1969.

These guys seem to be heroes of an era long gone. Maybe they were created by the turmoil of the mid-20th Century - WWII and the Cold War. Maybe we create a different sort of hero today. But I’m not sure what these heroes look like or where they are. Any suggestions?

This is a shocker of a story. I can’t imagine the sorts of cruel morons who would be doing this to poor animals. A deserted rickety wooden boat has been found drifting off the coast of China with (wait for it), 5,000 (yes, you read correctly) rare, endangered, hunted, smuggled animals (take your pick) on board. Most of the animals were dead or close to death, having succumbed to dehydration under the hot sun.

I can hardly bring myself to tell you what was discovered:

• 21 bear paws wrapped up in newspaper
• pangolins, Asian giant turtles and lizards, crushed and squashed inside crates
• 1,130 Brazilian turtles
• 2,720 monitor lizards

And what was the destination of this vessel? The restaurants and markets of China’s southern province of Guangdong, which is famous for its exotic cuisine. China is the main market for illegally traded exotic species and China’s appetite is growing, which only further threatens populations of endangered animals and impacts on global conservation efforts. I’ve reported on this barbarity before.

Pangolins are apparently in great demand because their meat is considered a delicacy and their scales are thought to help mothers breastfeed their babies. And as a result, the pangolin populations of China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia have been wiped out. The pangolin’s last habitats are in Java, Sumatra and the Malaysian peninsula but as illegal smugglers and hunters move south, these populations are under serious threat.

China’s vigilence of illegal trade and activity is slack to say the least. Fines are usually so minimal that traders happily risk being fined as the rewards are so great. The price of 1kg of pangolin served in Guangdong or Yunnan is between 600 and 800 yuan per kilo (between £43 and £50). One recent raid on a restaurant in Guanghzou turned up 118 pangolins, 60kg of snakes and 400kg of toads. A waitress was reported as saying that the pangolin “..is very big - about 10kg.We serve it in hotpot. That is the tastiest way.“

And then there’s the way these poor defenseless creatures are killed: “We keep them alive in cages until the customer makes an order. Then we hammer them unconscious, cut their throats and drain the blood. It is a slow death. We then boil them to remove the scales. We cut the meat into small pieces and use it to make a number of dishes, including braised meat and soup. Usually the customers take the blood home with them afterwards.”

Frankly, I am at a loss as to what to say. I really can’t believe that people treat fellow species in this manner. Whilst we’re busy worrying about global warming, we should be placing rigorous sanctions on illegal trading and perhaps putting traders on the same sort of rickety vessel floating abandoned under a boiling hot sun.

I often wonder what the world will look like in 100 or 500 years’ time. I used to be optimistic about the future; now I think that archaeologists will dig up dusty DVDs and old films of animals such as cheetahs, tigers, pangolins and so on; people will gather around to watch, perplexed, because they’ve never in their lives seen such beautiful creatures - because their world is devoid of rich vegetation and diversity of animals. And they’ll ask pointedly: what were 21st Century people thinking? how could they eat fellow species and kill them in such a depraved manner? they will think of us rather like I suppose we think of Neanderthals - brutish, barbaric, primitive, low intelligence. Actually, that’s being pretty unfair to the Neanderthals!

Whoa! Have I lost the plot or has reality TV gone too far this time? Beware: rant ahead. I admit to a number of quirks: suspicion of CCTV cameras and any form of surveillance; intense dislike of people talking loudly into their mobile phones in public places so everyone suffers from hearing their dramas; and reality TV. In fact, the other day on my two hour train journey home: if I was into identity theft, I’d now be a 40 something-year-old woman called Rochelle, who was applying for a mortgage. Really, all her personal details, bank account numbers, address, date of birth and so on - she announced to the whole train carriage in a series of mobile phone calls. If I was on the shady side, I would have been scribbling down all the details in eager anticipation of masquerading as someone whose salary I even know (and it’s way more than mine!).

Back to reality TV: I’ve never really understood the appeal. Australia’s Next Top Model - a parade of very young stick insects being great role models (not) to young girls; Extreme Makeover - a mindless show that encourages people not to accept what they were born with. Why do that when you can put yourself through the pain and trauma of plastic surgery for that supermodel-style nose or Pamela Anderson sized chest? And then there’s The Biggest Loser showing once again that our society is intolerant of individuals who carry a bit more flesh than stick insects. And why isn’t there a show called The Biggest Gainer - it’s not only heavy people who suffer from health and discrimination issues. There are people who can’t for the life of them gain kilos.

And now we have…..The Big Donor Show. Before you get excited, this is not a reality show about entrepreneurs giving away money. No, this is a show about people competing for a woman’s kidneys, yes really. Dutch broadcaster, BNN, will air a show featuring a woman only identified as Lisa, 37 years. Sadly, Lisa is dying of cancer but her kidneys will not be affected. Lisa will select a recipient, who is suffering degenerative kidney disease, based on their history, profile and conversations with their families and friends. The winner will receive one of Lisa’s kidneys. Throughout the 80-minute show, viewers will be invited to send Lisa text messages to advise her. OMG! what the???

Despite a barrage of complaints calling the show unethical, the Dutch broadcaster will go ahead with the show “to highlight the difficulties of searching for kidney donors”. I’m sure a documentary interviewing doctors, donors and recipients would suffice to make the point. But BNN’s Chairman says that the reality show would increase by a third the participants’ chances of getting a new kidney (no idea what he’s basing this gem of wisdom on).

The Dutch are pioneers of reality TV but viewers have been turning away from such mindless drivel as:

• Spuiten en Slikken (or Shooting and Swallowing) in which the presenters experiment with drugs and a range of sexual exploits.
• Patty’s Fort - saw minor Dutch celebs led by former pop singer, Patty Brard, gather for a colonic irrigation session, with the scatological results shown to the audience (Gee, shame I missed that one!).

Fortunately, we were spared attempts in 2005 to launch a sperm donor show, in which a woman was to select a father for her baby in front of the cameras. Mass public outcry put a stop to this.

What can I say? Gutter TV. And shows the ongoing manifestation of our contemporary society’s lowest common-denominator intelligence; obsession with Hollywood; and attraction for the macabre (usually at the expense of another person’s pain and dignity).

POSTSCRIPT: June 2: seems this was all a hoax, but I’m still suspicious. Producers have now admitted the show was a hoax, designed to call attention to the plight of kidney disease sufferers. Lisa was revealed in the last minutes of the show as a healthy actress; the contestants, however, were genuine kidney patients. Dutch embassies received complaints from people expressing their shock over the show - no joke! The cynical amongst us might ask whether the TV station in question was suffering from declining ratings; the sane amongst us might suggest that drawing attention to kidney disease in this manner would actually do more harm than good. I still maintain that it shows the depths to which reality TV has plummeted.

Last year, I watched the Eurovision song contest, which is held amongst 42 active members of the European Broadcasting Union (since when did Turkey and Israel become part of Europe?). Australia doesn’t compete in Eurovision but I know of Australians who have Eurovision parties when the competition is broadcast and they take it all very seriously. So in 2006, I decided to settle down for a few hours and watch it. I came away very confused!

The Finnish heavy-metal band, Lordi, won in 2006 with a song entitled Hard Rock Hallelujah. I thought I was experiencing some sort of 70s flash back because Lordi looked a lot like Kiss to me (albeit a more horrifying version). You can see them on You Tube if you’re so inclined. Apparently, this was the first time Finland had won in over 40 years of participating. Eurovision seemed very kitsch and the theatrics, glittering costumes and drag queen spectacle of Eurovision appears to be more important than the national songs. ABBA was the Eurovision winner back in 1974 and went onto world glory and of course Australia’s Olivia Newton-John also participated in 1974 but was eclipsed by the ABBA phenomenon. I think Spanish swooner, Julio Iglesias, competed during the 60s or 70s (Eurovision’s been held since 1956) and Celine Dion won in the 1980s. So there’s some truth to suggesting that good music results from Eurovision - although I haven’t quite forgiven Celine for My Heart Will Go On or that white suit worn backwards at the Oscars with matching fedora. Lordi will soon inflict themselves on cinema screens with their flick, Dark Floors. Members of Lordi include Amen the Unstoppable Mummy, Awa the Vampire Countess, Ox the Hellbull and Kita the Alien Manbeast (not sure what a Hellbull or Alien Manbeast is all about!).

Anyway, I vowed not to watch Eurotrash, sorry Eurovision, 2007 but along came the May 14 finale on SBS (Australian TV station) and I succumbed. And this time I think I understood what Eurovision is all about: politics! ThinkingShift European readers can correct me but I noted a distinct tendency towards bloc voting.

But first to the entries: this year, there was an awful lot of cleavage on display (Moldova’s entry for one) amongst the obligatory drag queens sporting more plumage than a peacock (Denmark and Ukraine); swarthy, gyrating Latin boy-bands; and belly-dancing (I think that was Turkey). The Swiss entrant caused a few ruffles with the Satanic sounding entry Vampires are Alive (hoping to duplicate Lordi’s effort I suppose). Serbia’s Marija Serifovic won Eurovision 2007 with a ballad called Molitva, or Prayer, which I actually quite liked but I did think Sweden’s song was the best.

But it was the voting that was most interesting. Neighbouring countries voted for each other. The Scandinavians all stuck together; former Warsaw Pact countries voted for Russia; Serbia benefited from the votes of the former Yugoslavia - Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Slovenia (guess any memories of war have been forgotten); and in a cringe-worthy moment, no-one seemed to be voting for the UK (well, Ireland did vote for the UK, which ended up with 19 votes, embarrassingly behind the resounding 268 Serbia received). This seemed to highlight how Eastern Europe snubbed Western Europe (represented by UK, France, Germany, Spain) - no Western European country ended up in the Top 16. And I’m not sure what to make of Germany giving Turkey 12 points - perhaps they were impressed by the belly-dancing.

This all got me thinking: what if Australia could enter Eurovision (yes, I realise that Australia isn’t in Europe). Would we prop up the UK and give the “mother country” our 12 votes? And what band or singer could be our entry? I can think of no better Australian entrant than the 1970s glam rock band Skyhooks - their debut album was Living in the Seventies, a time warp Eurovision seems to be stuck in. You can see a photo of them here and I reckon they would have given Lordi a run for their money with their spangly costumes and make-up.

But of course, there’s also Maria Venuti who normally displays plenty of heaving cleavage and colourful plumage as she belts out a tune. Australian ThinkingShift readers are invited to submit other suggestions for an Australian entrant for Eurovision; or perhaps we should just go out on our own and have Australvision 2008?!!

Sweden has ABBA and Carl von Linne aka Carolus Linnaeus, the naturalist who can be considered the father of modern taxonomy. Perhaps, the Swedes should also consider adopting Patrick Lambe. May 23 was the 300th anniversary of Linnaeus’ birth in 1707 and Sweden’s illustrious son is remembered for establishing conventions for the naming of living organisms. We probably all remember from school biology classes the Linnaean system, which classified nature according to a hierarchy of kingdoms, classes, orders and so on.

Prior to Linnaeus coming long and giving order to things, cabinets of curiosity allowed gentlemen and scholars to expand their knowledge of the natural world. But usually the cabinets were displays of disorder - higgledly-piggledly arrangements of shells, stuffed animals, gems and other exotica - which really couldn’t be arranged according to a single scheme of order. In rushed Linnaeus to help simplify the task of classifying things and the branching ‘tree structure’ became synonymous with scientific taxonomy. Every former library student can recall lectures on classification where “from the general to the specific” or “from whole to part” was constantly muttered.

Since Linnaeus’ time, we have used taxonomies to organise knowledge. The humble shopping list helps us to arrange our thoughts about shopping items and usually groups related things; the visual representation of the human body, showing arteries and organs, is a system map or taxonomy representation; the organisational chart, showing the CEO at the top and branching out to cascading levels of management is a hierarchical tree structure. These examples are taxonomies in many forms and they help us organise and manage things in our daily lives; they bring order to chaos; they can help organisations find a shared vocabulary; and they can help us make sense of a knowledge domain.

When I was studying librarianship, I became fascinated by taxonomies. Friends and relatives took pity. If you mentioned the word “taxonomy”, people would look at you suspiciously - they couldn’t seem to decide whether you had a secretive job like some CIA agent or whether you were more like a taxidermist, stuffing birds for a display. Although the letter ‘x’ is in the word taxonomy, somehow taxonomies didn’t quite equate to that other word with an ‘x’ in it -sexy. Taxonomists were usually associated with some arcane branch of library science, working away in the dusty back rooms of libraries assigning books to obscure categories.

So when Thinkingshift old friend, Patrick Lambe, told me he was busy scribbling away in Ireland on a book about taxonomies, I had my doubts. And I don’t mean Patrick is old, just that I’ve known him for many years :)- You might be thinking that with Google and digitised information that we don’t need taxonomies because you might consider they’re more about rigidity than allowing for emergence or serendipity. This is where Patrick’s book, Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness, allows us to understand that taxonomies are in fact deeply embedded in our digital world as, for example, folksonomies or social/democratic tagging and they allow for rich serendipidity, fossicking and foraging.

Patrick has brought sexy back to taxonomies! through a series of lively case studies (including the appalling Victoria Climbie incident) Patrick shows how taxonomies are used in the real world as decision-making frameworks; to help discover risk and opportunity; and to bring a shared vocabularly to an organisation. The very clear point to Patrick’s book is that taxonomies articulate knowledge and far from being the tree structures we perhaps associate with the concept, taxonomies are dynamic, fluid and ultimately can contribute to organisational effectiveness.

So Happy Birthday Linnaeus and congratulations to Patrick on the publication of his new book. And whilst it’s traditional to give people flowers on special occasions, to Patrick, ThinkingShift gives him a flower clock, fittingly invented by Carolus Linnaeus.

In an earlier post, I explored curiousity and asked whether we are still curious in our contemporary world stuffed full of information and abundance. And has our natural inquisitiveness been squelched by living and trying to survive in a world fraught with terrorism, crime, violence and choice, choice, choice?

In my research and wanderings, I come across stories that I find curious, bizarre or touching. So I’ve decided to collect these for a new, regular ThinkingShift feature - How Curious! if you’re not a curious person, then read no further. But for those who want to learn about how our world can still be a haven for the inquiring mind or can still delight us, read on! And feel free to leave a comment if you know of a curious story.

First up, a bird who brings new meaning to the word hatchback. A very confused seagull in Inverness, Scotland has decided that the roof of a car, parked in the airport’s long-term carpark, makes a very good nesting place. Apparently, a French car (Citroen) provides a comfortable flat surface for incubating eggs. No word on whether the owner of the car has returned to find a seagull happily ensconced.

Are you descended from Genghis Khan? well, maybe not. But 16 million Asian men can lay claim to being descended from the Mongul conquerer - but nyet Russian men. Geneticists found an interesting cluster of Y-chromosomes in 18 nations across North Eurasia and discovered closely-related lines, which fanned from a common ancestor. The cluster originated in Mongolia about 1000 years ago and its distribution pattern was within the boundaries of the Mongol Empire. Based on this evidence, researchers have concluded that there is a Genghiside dynasty but for some reason men from the Genghis Khan clan left no genetic trace in Russia. Very curious indeed!

Being a chocoholic, my curiousity was well and truly piqued by news that chocolate toothpaste can fight tooth decay. Wouldn’t it be great to hear your dentist say “now, floss and eat plenty of chocolate.” Apparently, an extract of cocoa powder that occurs naturally in chocolate might be an effective natural alternative to fluoride in toothpaste. The extract is a white crystal powder whose chemical makeup is similar to caffeine and helps harden tooth enamel. A peppermint flavoured prototype, with the cavity-fighting cocoa extract added, is being tested. I’d sure be a willing guinea pig for the chocolate flavoured variety!

For the history buffs: when President Abraham Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address in 1863, he may have been in the early stages of a life-threatening illness. The current issue of the Journal of Medical Biography has a report by two researchers at the University of Texas, who have concluded that Lincoln suffered from a serious form of smallpox, a disease that was rampant in the United States at the time. Lincoln appeared to present with the clinical features of variola major - high fever, weakness, severe head and back pain, prostration, skin eruptions. Possibly Lincoln’s physicians kept the severity of the disease from the President so that ultimately the public would not be alarmed during the turmoil of the American Civil War. Lincoln recovered and led the country through to the conclusion of the conflict, before being assassinated in 1865. When Dr Washington Chew Van Bibber (love the name!) finally told Lincoln that he had “a touch of the varioloid” (old-fashioned name for smallpox), Lincoln is said to have quipped: “How interesting“.

And for the archaeology buffs: in a wonderful piece of serendipity, Belgian archaeologists have “accidentally” found the tomb of an Egyptian courtier who lived around 4000 years ago. While excavating a later burial site at the Deir al-Barsha necropolis near the Nile Valley town of Minya, south of Cairo, the archaeologists stumbled onto the tomb of Henu, an estate manager and high-ranking official during the first intermediate period (2181-2050 BC). Henu’s preserved mummy was still wrapped in linen, inside a large wooden coffin and sarcophagus, decorated with hieroglyphic texts addressed to the Egyptian gods Anubis and Osiris.

And finally: if you happen to have a stuffed whippet, the Lowry gallery at Salford Quays, UK would love to hear from you. The gallery is hosting an exhibition on the myths of northern life and is missing one vital element - a stuffed whippet. Say what?? Apparently, the exhibition is a tongue-in-cheek review featuring terraced streets, smoking chimney, driving rain, flat caps and whippets. Perhaps some UK ThinkingShift readers could enlighten us as to the curious meaning of whippets in this?

I love a cookie with macadamia nuts throughout. I also would love to find a search engine without cookies - those irritating small text files that track your search history or monitor your search behaviour. Regular ThinkingShift readers will know of my dislike for anything that smacks of surveillance. Hakia has come to my rescue - it’s a new “meaning-based” search engine that will not place an insidious cookie on your PC when you search the site. At last, a search engine that respects privacy!

Hakia is also breaking away from the pack by using natural language technology. Search results try to provide a true representation of how the human mind thinks when foraging for information. Hakia does not rely on popularity or indexes like many other search engines. So the power is in the hands of the user and not the search engine.

Hakia prompts you to ask a question rather than type in a keyword or two. Compare these results for the question “what is cancer?” from Ask.com and Hakia to see the difference - Hakia arranges the search results as one might think about the topic ie what are the symptoms? what are the types of treatments? what research and statistics are available? Here’s the same search using the perennial favourite, Google.

Mmmm…could have done with Hakia four weeks ago - see this post for the reason. You can learn more about Hakia over at Read/WriteWeb.

Not great news today I’m afraid: scientists now have evidence that the Southern Ocean is losing its appetite for carbon dioxide. The ocean’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide (major greenhouse gas) has weakened by 15% per decade since 1981. The Southern Ocean is a major carbon dioxide sink and if it is less efficient, then this will lead to higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Scientists have been studying this particular sink for four years and have concluded (now, here’s a surprise) that the finger of blame can be pointed at human activity.

Human-induced climate change has resulted in the wind strength across the ocean increasing. Fierce winds may be caused by the ozone hole over the South Pole and global warming. Apparently, increased wind strength can influence the processes of mixing and upwelling in the ocean and this all causes an increased release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. And the ocean simply can’t cope with absorbing it all. Up to now, the Southern Ocean has been able to absorb 15% of carbon emissions, which was a healthy appetite, but now she’s struggling.

The scientific team examined atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements taken from points around the world during the past 24 years and found that carbon dioxide emissions have increased by 40% in the past few decades. Scientists had expected to see a corresponding increase in the levels of carbon dioxide mopped up by the oceans surrounding Antarctica, but instead, found they just weren’t keeping pace. Of course, this means we now have greenhouse gases swirling around with nowhere to go.

Bummer…

New Scientist has done a fabulous job of putting together a climate change guide for the skeptical or perplexed amongst us. I’ve looked before at some of the alternative arguments to global warming and it is important that we critically scrutinise the for and against positions, especially as the global warming debate becomes increasingly politicised. New Scientist has gathered 26 climate myths and misconceptions and also has a guide to assessing the evidence, which is extremely helpful considering that there are many amateurs (and a considerable number of whackos) out there purporting to have scientific credentials, yet offer merely opinion, rather than peer-reviewed scientific papers. To the layperson, pseudo-scientific blogs and articles look “scientific” but in reality are merely cuckoo science.

Of course, peer review spots some, but not all, flaws in argument. A paper in Science in the early 1990s claimed there was a striking correlation between variations in the solar cycle length and temperature between 1880 and 1980, which suggested that greenhouse gases may not be the major culprit. But the correlation hasn’t held up since 1980 and, despite being discredited, the graph is still trotted out as evidence against human-induced global warming. See The Great Global Warming Swindle entry in Wikipedia for more background.

Anyway, back to the myths: I won’t list all 26 as you can check them out yourself, but let’s look at a summary of some of the key ones:

• It’s been warmer in the past, so what’s the big deal? even though I firmly believe that the world is heating up, I’ve wondered about the occurence of warm spells of weather in the past, particularly in the 1930s (no, I wasn’t alive then!) - the so-called Modern Warming Period. The warmest period in Earth’s history was the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, (PETM) around 55 millions years ago and the Arctic Ocean reached a very subtropical temperature of 23°C/73°F. Mass extinctions resulted. The PETM was caused by a massive build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere resulting from either a catastrophic volcanic eruption or the release of huge amounts of CO₂ from the thawing of methane clathrates in deep ocean sediments. Either way, the Earth then cooled down but as recently as 125,000 years ago, temperatures may have been about 1°C to 2°C degrees warmer and sea levels were 5 to 8 metres higher than today. What is clear from the study of past climate is that many factors can influence it: solar activity, oscillations in Earth’s orbit, greenhouse gases, ice cover, vegetation on land (or the lack of it), the configuration of the continents, dust thrown up by volcanoes or wind, the weathering of rocks and so on. As New Scientist asks: what is the cause of the current warming period? It should not be dismissed as a natural variation just because we’ve had warmer periods in the past. And when sea levels were higher, coastal cities were wiped out. In fact, a number of scientists consider that reports on the current climate crisis are watered-down by Governments who do not wish us to know the frightening reality.

• Global warming is caused by the sun, not humans. I talked about this in an earlier post. Have solar changes contributed to recent global warming? According to solar physicists, the sun emitted a third less energy about 4 billion years ago and has been steadily brightening ever since. Yet for most of this time, Earth has been even warmer than today, a phenomenon sometimes called the faint sun paradox. The reason: higher levels of greenhouse gases trapping more of the sun’s heat. Milankovitch cycles ( (caused by wobbles in the planet’s orbit) have caused fluctuations in solar heating, which in turn have affected cooling and warming during the ice ages and interglacial periods. But scientists have found that there is no correlation between solar activity and the strong warming during the past 40 years. For the period for which we have direct, reliable records (since 1978), the Earth has warmed dramatically even though there has been no corresponding rise in any kind of solar activity.

• The Hockey Stick Graph is Just Plain Wrong. The Hockey Stick graph shows average Northern Hemisphere temperature over the past 1000 years based on numerous indicators such as tree rings. It shows temperatures holding fairly steady until the latter part of the 20^th century and then suddenly shooting up. You can see the graph here. Since 2001, the graph has been the subject of heated debate with accusations of using outdated statistics thrown at it. The US National Academy of Science waded into the fray in 2006 and confirmed that an array of evidence supports the Hockey Stick graph’s temperature reconstructions.

• Mars and Pluto are heating up too. This is one of my personal favourites! This myth tries to prop up the ’sun is to blame’ argument. Apparently, temperatures on Mars and Pluto (recently demoted or ‘plutoed’) have been increasing and this is due to changes in solar activity. Not quite sure why the sun would pick on Mars and poor old Pluto - why not include the rest of the planets in a solar fry-up? And since a year on Pluto lasts 248 Earth years, I’m not sure how conclusions about warmer temperatures have been reached.

• Cosmic Rays are the culprit. Another personal favourite, smacks of 1950s sci-fi films with gamma rays and so on. But the argument goes like this: increased sunspot activity is known to strengthen the Sun’s magnetic field, which deflects more of the galactic cosmic rays entering the solar system and thus reducing the number hitting Earth. This would reduce cloud formation in the atmosphere, trapping heat and leading us to all say “it’s getting hot in here”. You can read more about cosmic rays in an earlier post.

• Well, maybe it’s true, but we can’t do anything about it. This myth is for the passive individuals out there or those who don’t want to acknowledge that An Inconvenient Truth will ultimately disrupt their hedonistic lifestyles. Climate change is happening, we can’t stop it. But we can all go on low carbon diets. The developing world, and particularly the big players India and China, can learn from the stuff-ups of the developed world and work towards reducing our fondness for fossil fuels. Developing countries need to be given technology and incentives to not use chemicals, fossil fuels etc.

If you happen to be talking to a climate change skeptic, as I was the other day, you’ll also find Grist’s How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic indispensable.