Adult Onset Atheist

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Canaan's Ark

We have had enough soaking storms lately to turn the neglected parts of my lawn green. The storms have not been gentle either. One of the last one whipped up electrical pyrotechnic displays, and generated weather service severe storm warnings. In celebration of this “Utah is not like California in a good way” situation I rented the movie “Noah” from RedBox.

Yesterday brought flooding to everywhere in the country making nowhere like California. A couple mountains in Southern California managed to scrape a deluge from the humidity passing overhead, but in general it is very dry in California this year, very dry.

“The National Weather Service had not, as of Monday morning, issued any official flash flooding watches or warnings. But as sure as an "R" designates the seemingly eternal political affiliation of a super-majority in the Utah Legislature, Utah’s slot canyons, usually dry washes and burn scars are at risk for inundating storms.” – Bob Moms for the Salt Lake Tribune “Utah forecast: The monsoon strikes back” 11 August 2014

Recently I have been told that Noah’s biblical flood is best explained as some sort of local phenomenon, and that “40 day’s simply means “quite a long time” in biblical speech. It sounded like some sort of reductionist-apologetic dancing; if it could be right in some small way the bible could still be true, but they were trading away relevance.  Some confusion is understandable if god really did come to earth a couple pages of Genesis later and “confound all the world’s languages” as the bible suggests. I would think it difficult to have any cogent history until a couple generations after The Tower of Babel; let alone a tediously specific train of begats.

However, it does little good for god to promise not to destroy the earth again if he never really did so in the first place. And if god was promising not to have any big local flooding like the localized version of Noah’s flood then… well there are some folks who will be returning to their cars in low lying long-term parking lots at Baltimore Washington International airport that may have some questions for god.

Darren Aronofsky has added a narrative clarity to the story of Noah that was impossible before the invention of CGI. He captures the general nastiness of old-testament life by filming almost everything on treeless landscapes (until god magics up some trees from Methuselah’s trufula seed to generate wood for Noah’s ark) and color is hard to come by. Darren even creates some baby killing Abrahamic tension to make some indistinct old testament morality tension, and he makes all of the wives of Noah’s sons primary relations to multiply the magnitude of incest needed to repopulate the earth. It is like Darren said unto his script writers “Bringeth forth some evil old-testament plot elements to createth dramatic tension”, “And the evil old-testament plot elements did cometh forth”.

“ And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.” – Genesis 22:10-12 KJB

However, Darren muddled up one of the most evil old-testament plot elements in the entire old-testament. An evil story that actually occurs to Noah and his family. Darren ignored –mostly- the curse of Canaan.

“Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard. When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father naked and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father’s naked body. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father naked. When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, he said,

“Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers.”

He also said,

“Praise be to the LORD, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
May God extend Japheth’s[b] territory;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be the slave of Japheth.””
-- Genesis 9:20-27 NIV

The curse of Canaan is a bit severe. For many generations it has been used to justify the existence of dark skinned people, and using them as slaves. I was a teenager in the 1970s, and as a young child this story was used to explain the creation of black people to me; a liberal minded lay pastor told that the curse was a bit capricious, and that it might be ok to raise voice against the use of water cannons being used every evening on the nightly news to knock the descendants of Ham back to their rightful place in society.

Instead of a curse Darren pens regret into Noah’s alienation from his son Ham. Ham holds a grudge for his father’s refusal to save a woman he was fond of from a bear-trap facilitated drowning. There is no talk of slavery… Ham just heads off into the draining horizon .

I also like the way Darren re-wrote god’s specific instructions to Noah. In the bible “god says”, and in the movie Noah hallucinates.

I think Hollywood screenwriters should re-write the whole bible; at least the old testament.

Or, perhaps we could just agree on a cannon of film noir movies to show our children. Nothing after the invention of color, except maybe the wizard of Oz.

Thursday, July 31, 2014

Antarctic Ocean Ice

It looks like we are headed towards an historic record maximum ocean ice extent in Antarctica. It will likely beat the previous record of 19.47 million square kilometers (7.51 million square miles) set in September of 2013. The 2013 record beat the 2012 record of 19.44 million square kilometers. All of these records are somewhere in the neighborhood of a million square kilometers above the accepted average.

“The paradox of expanding Antarctic sea ice has troubled scientists for many years. Although climate models predict southern sea ice should shrink, it has stubbornly refused to do so.” -- Julia Rosen from the LA Times

Our planet’s annual tilt races towards its autumnal minimum, and the length of day in the southern hemisphere increases more and more each day. It is still cold –very cold- in Antarctica, but it is averaging little less very cold each day. It will soon be springtime in Antarctica, but right now it is still winter. Winters in Antarctica are VERY cold. Even if greenhouse warming increased Antarctic temperatures by several degrees Celsius the Antarctic winters would still be freezing cold; literally. The lowest temperature ever recorded was -89.2C at the Antarctic Vostok station in 1983.

The extent of ocean ice at the poles is not limited by whether-or-not the temperature drops below the freezing-point temperature; it will likely do that every year regardless of the amount of greenhouse warming the planet experiences (by all estimates). An increased temperature will decrease the length of the year where temperatures are below freezing, and decrease the overall rate at which energy is removed from the freezing portion of the sea.  In other words –all else being equal- one expects an increase in temperature to decrease the amount of ocean ice.

We are seeing average temperatures increasing in the Antarctic. They have increased by as much as 2C since 1970 at some stations. Ocean ice in Antarctica has also increased during that period.  An alternative hypothesis for the relationship between temperature and ocean ice in the Antarctic region is needed.

Some data re-analysis has called into question the amount of sea ice increase, but it has not called into question the fact that the amount of ocean ice has been increasing. Geographically there is nothing around Antarctica to physically impede the growth of ocean ice. The ocean ice can continue to form without ever running out of open ocean to form in. This is not the case in the Arctic. Small changes in the large expanding margin of the Antarctic ocean ice extent can result in large changes in the official amount of ocean ice.

I have written several posts concerning the extent of Arctic ocean ice; using this metric as a measure for the extent of warming in our current state of global climate change. I do think it is a good measure, but I often neglect to point out that the melting of Arctic ocean ice will have little effect on human civilization. In fact all of the Arctic ocean ice could melt and –if it were not for the other effects of the factors causing the melt- we might not notice much difference.

The main threat to humanity from melting ice is from rising sea levels. Ocean ice does not contribute to this threat. Ocean ice is already floating in water, and melting it all would result in no major change in sea level. In order to increase sea level the ice on land must melt, and most of that land ice on the planet is in Antarctica. So much land-ice is in Antarctica that it accounts for almost 70% of the total fresh water on the planet. The fact that ice is frozen fresh water, as opposed to frozen seawater, is important.

Ocean salt water has an average concentration of about 35 grams per liter of salt; as low as 30 near the deltas of large rivers. Freshwater is pretty-much anything with less than a third of a gram of salt per liter. There is a lot of water on the planet, but only a tiny amount (2.5%) of it is fresh. The average depth of the oceans is four and a quarter kilometers; so putting all the freshwater into the oceans at once would only raise them by a little over 100 meters. Melting all of Antarctica would only raise the level of the ocean by about 70 meters. This is enough to cause big problems for the majority of the world’s population, but not me; I live over a thousand meters above current sea level.

Salt water requires much lower temperatures to freeze. There is a direct relationship; increase the saltiness of water, and it has to be that much colder for the water to freeze. Partially freezing salt water in a container will result in a separation; the ice will be mostly fresh, and the remaining unfrozen water will be saltier than the water sample was before freezing.

I use the term “ocean ice” (though I use ocean ice interchangeably with sea ice in other posts) to mean ice that is floating in the ocean. This could be ice that broke off from the land or ice that froze out at sea. The later is the species of ice that is properly termed “sea ice”.

The species of ice called sea-ice begins forming as hair-like crystals of freshwater freezing out of the salty ocean water. When these coalesce into blocks of ice they typically trap little droplets of salty liquid brine. These trapped brine droplets make new sea ice taste salty. As the sea ice ages the droplets of brine will slowly melt down through the ice, giving the sea ice characteristic microscopic vertical striations. The saltiness of water in which sea ice forms therefore affect both its rate of formation, and, until most of the brine ages out of it, its stability once formed.

This means that if you were able to decrease the salty of a water body… say by melting a sizeable portion of 70% of the world’s fresh water into it… it would actually freeze as fast as undiluted salt water exposed to lower temperatures.

Ocean salinity measurements around Antarctica show a steady decrease in overall salinity of as much as 0.03 grams per liter every decade. These lower salinity data are the result of the mixing of huge amounts of freshwater from some source with vast amount of saltier ocean water. There has to be a huge source of fresh water to make sense of these data. A further decrease in salinity is expected as one physically approaches the source, and the water has had less time to dilute by mixing into the ocean water. The temperature difference in freezing points for seawater at river deltas whose salinity is around 30 grams per liter (5 grams per liter less than the open ocean) is about 1.78 degrees Celsius. This is close to the increase in temperature observed in Antarctica since 1970.

Once ice has formed in seawater it is fairly stable until the temperature rises considerably. Ice that is floating in seawater that is cold enough to start the sea-ice formation process will not melt. A patch of ocean is considered “covered” by sea ice if it is really at least 15% covered. The forces of diffusion facilitated by wind and weather would move ice away from areas of rapid formation/ high concentration to more open ocean. In this way smaller areas of substantially lower salinity could create many square kilometers of sea ice.

Land ice does not just melt into the sea. The gigantic glaciers –huge rivers of ice- flow into the sea in solid form. When the glaciers meet the ocean seawater cuts under them, and float off massive chunks as icebergs. These icebergs in turn break into smaller blocks, which in turn float off in a multitude of directions. This floating former land-ice contributes to the high Antarctic ocean ice coverage values.

A better direct measurement of the effect of greenhouse warming in the Antarctic would be a measurement of land-ice. How much is left? How thick is it? Unfortunately these direct data are extremely hard to acquire. Sea ice coverage is a much easier measurement to obtain.

Antarctic ocean ice coverage values appear on first blush to not provide direct evidence for global warming. However, if this hypothesis is correct, they do appear to provide direct evidence for a significant impact of global climate change, and these may be more valuable data. There is no real need to use satellite imagery metrics as a huge thermometer as we have data from actual thermometers showing warming trends; although I do like the gigantic data sets because they are impressive, and changes in them melodramatic.

Because the changes observed in the Antarctic may be evidence of actually bad things happening to the planet as a result of global warming they may even be worthy of more attention that the Arctic data.

Thursday, July 24, 2014

Rainbow Explosion

Over the weekend my daughters and I bought some chain at a local farm-supply store in town. The store is not necessarily cheaper than Home Depot, but it is a fifth the distance, and the people who work there are amicable enough; even when confronted by some of my more bizarre answers to “what are you going to do with this stuff?” The chain and cold forged links were for a rather mundane task of hanging a heavy bag in my garage so the checker’s banter turned to more interesting possibilities.

“Who you going to chain up with that?” She asked.

“I had not really thought about chaining anyone up… Perhaps it would help keep my daughters in line!?” I replied while turning to them implying the question.

“I wish I had chained up my son” The checker added. “He got drunk and started fighting up at Country Explosion. Now he is in jail. I guess that will keep him out of trouble.”

Monday morning saw the last steady trickle of camper-trailers leaking out of what had, over the weekend, been “Country Explosion”. Organizers of the three-day music festival claim to have brought “thousands” to Tooele for “Utah’s largest music festival”.

It is hard to find coverage of any problems associated with the participants of “Country Explosion”. Fights, shots fired, at least one death, and a woman with severe head injuries who leapt out of a car that was traveling at 40 mph. Local law enforcement is quoted as saying that “There is always 10 percent who make trouble”, which would make for a couple hundred offenders given the reported number of participants. There appears to be no desire to publically catalog the offenses, or to identify the offenders.

Facebook is awash with “Country Explosion” pictures of duck faced girls boasting large cans of beer, but the duck-faced selfie is not a legal crime.

About two weeks ago a similar trickle of trailers was passing through Heber; another small rural Utah town. Every news channel in the state had been providing nightly coverage of the event leading up to that exodus. The Rainbow Family of Peace and Light had been gathering in the Uinta foothills outside of Heber. One local station even created a mosaic picture comprised of a couple dozen mugshots they had gathered from local police. Police spoke with concern about potentially overflowing jails in interviews.

There were problems. There was a fight a few days before the event started that involved a knife, and one person died of “Natural Causes”, and several marijuana possession citations.

Overall the number of criminal problems with the Rainbow Family gathering appears to have been  similar to, or less than, the Country Explosion gathering just two weeks later. The level of media coverage of the problems was very different.

Facebook also suffered a tide of pictures from the Rainbow Family gathering. Instead of girls and boys posing with beer in the hopes of appearing to be underage drinkers the Rainbow Family pictures feature people from many generations who appear to smile at nothing in particular. I saw several pictures featuring people with wind teased hair smiling right out of the pictures at me; they could have been mouthing the words “welcome home”.

I had wanted to take my daughters to the Rainbow Family gathering. Unfortunately the media did its job, and scared me off. I was afraid of open drug use, and what tales of open drug use might do to the strained parenting relationship I have with my daughters’ mother. Some days I feel like I have a huge custodial parent target painted on my chest at which is aimed any number of threadbare accusations of misconduct. I second-and third- guess the spontaneity out of most days.

I did, however, get myself a new pair of sandals.

Sandals that I may or may not wear with socks.

Rainbow-striped socks.