Here's an idea, humanity's greatest scientific achievement
is the discovery of global warming.
So before we get started, I want to be clear
that we're not going to be discussing
the controversial reality of global warming.
We are starting with the premise that global warming
is real, caused by people, and verifiable with data.
We need that starting point in order
to make some other points about the culture,
politics, and science surrounding climate change.
If you want to argue that global warming isn't a thing
or is an error in simulations or is a thing
but isn't caused by human beings, then by all
means, please do that.
Just doing it on this other video.
All right, so now that that's taken care of, let's
talk about how the earth has gotten
1.5 degrees Fahrenheit warmer since the beginning
of the 20th century.
It's so hot!
2/3 of that warming have occurred in the last 30
some years, and we can say with some sciencey certainty
that it's going to keep getting toastier
until we figure out a way to stop.
Now at first it might seem like identifying
that the globe is getting warmer is some kind of trivial thing.
Like all you do is record the temperatures everyday, average
them, compare them, and after a while you start to notice,
hey, these numbers are getting bigger.
No big deal.
Scienced.
But is it really that easy?
I don't think so.
Like strangers in an elevator, let's talk about the weather.
The weather isn't a snowstorm in Tokyo,
a drought in northern Europe, some lightening in Arizona,
some hail in Russia, or the rains down in (SINGING) Africa.
It's all of those things and a million others,
from tornadoes to the San Diego-like sensation
of no weather, all combining to make one huge global system.
Not to mention, you can have hot years and cold years,
stormy seasons and still ones all within the phenomenon
of climate and how it changes.
This is the difference between weather,
a kind of momentary snapshot, and climate, a broader,
more complete portrait.
All of these systems which fit together to make weather
are fickle.
They are constantly changing.
Climate, by comparison, is massive and unwieldy,
a portrait of weather over a generation.
Its gradual changes exist on a scale too large,
both physically and temporally, for any one group
of people to behold directly.
Climate is bigger than both the Beatles and wrestling combined.
It is, in a phrase, an epistemological nightmare,
and so much more than just--
Warm out today.
Warm yesterday.
But we love a challenge, and in our infinite desire
to grok all of the things, we never
let complexity get us down.
We recorded, have recorded, wind speed, temperature, humidity,
barometric pressure, you name it.
Gathered in person, from sensors, from satellites,
from weather balloons over Roswell, New
Mexico-- (WHISPERING) the truth is out there.
And we've done it across the globe
for over a century, which of course, comes
with its own problems.
I mean, besides the sheer amount of data,
imagine how different it must be.
The methods for recording this stuff
change about as often as the weather.
Sorry.
Instruments, methods, political interferences,
even the development of objectivity in the sciences
plays a role here.
In his book "A Vast Machine," Paul N. Edwards
describes the process of building a complete climate
picture as though you were trying to make a movie out
of still photographs shot by a million different photographers
using thousands of different cameras.
Can we reconcile the differences?
He asks.
Yes we can, scientists believe.
But it isn't easy and is never finished.
So once we do standardize, which is a huge undertaking,
trivialized massively by the mere 31 words we have time
for it here, we are still left with a massive amount of data.
160 years ago, zeta bites of collected data
might have been useful for cobblestones, door stops,
and footstools, but today-- and I really
do mean very recently, like today-- we
have enough computing power to turn it into something
sensible and useful.
We create realistic models and simulations
that themselves produce climate knowledge out
of just a mishmash of numbers and readings and data.
We turn massive amounts of weather data
into climate information, information which is useful
because it makes not only scientific impacts,
but also cultural and political ones.
It has influenced people to change their way of life.
It has even birthed an entire industry.
A whole other can of worms might be the intersection
between capitalism and climate change,
but we're not going to go there right now.
It has even become a kind of litmus test
for a person's partisan leanings, in America, at least.
Though admittedly not as sexy as the moon landing, the internet,
or the sequencing of the human genome,
climate science and the discovery of global warming
seems in perfect company.
It is the product of the willing scientific participation
of countless people over five generations using
all manner of technology and infrastructure.
It exhibits a confluence of all of our major systems,
economic, political, cultural, scientific, technological,
on a global scale.
Which by itself would be impressive,
but is made even more so when you
consider the gravity of the knowledge we have gained.
The very future of humanity hanging
in the balance of the weather, the thing
we talk about when we are bored or uncomfortable.
If turning that into a just cause
isn't a massive accomplishment, I don't what it.
What do you guys think?
Is climate science and the discovery of global warming
our greatest scientific achievement?
Let us know in the comments.
And it's OK if you all want to subscribe
and once, we can weather the storm.
How weird would it be if the Larry Bird of video games
turned out to be Larry Bird?
Let's see what you guys had to say about eSports.
James Colvin points out that the only thing stopping
competitive gaming from being a large spectator sport
is the number of people involved and seems
to suggest that as more people grow up
playing video games there will be more
spectators for the sport, which is a very fair point. viola385
and a bunch of other people point out
that the reason they watch competitive games
is not for the narrative or story,
but because they can learn how to become better gamers.
Which I think is the sort of fundamental decision
that competitive gaming is going to have to make,
whether or not it's for gamers or for everybody.
Which I think is probably-- it's the problem
that it's dealing with right now.
Relatedly, Samir Dewan and a bunch of other people
point out that many of the things we claim
are missing from competitive gaming are there,
they're actually there.
And I would say that while there definitely
are stories and narratives and helpful technological features
to help people understand the game, that many of those things
are put in place and behave in a way that is friendly to gamers
and people who already know the game
and not to people who are trying to figure it out
or want to get in, that they are not exceptionally inviting.
Maybe that's just me, I don't know.
I mean, I've played League of Legends, I know how it works,
but I still find the competitive gaming aspect of it
to be very hard to follow.
It doesn't feel like I'm invited in.
I don't know, maybe that's-- maybe this is my brain is
broken.
Cthuullu Fhtagn points out that movies like "King of Kong"
are a really great example of what competitive gaming,
the kinds of stories and drama that can
happen in competitive gaming.
I agree.
It's, that's an amazing movie.
Cayce Duda says that while they were watching the MLG streams
this weekend that they tried to choose
a favorite player for every match
and that their experience with greatly improved because of it.
Yes.
AlgebraiCat makes a very interesting point
and says that it is not the narratives or stories
of the human beings playing the games that are interesting,
but rather the characters within the game.
So you are not rooting for a flesh and blood
person controlling a computer, but rather the character
in the fictional universe.
I don't know if that will catch on,
but that is a very interesting idea.
To Mr. MorRobots, your Tweet probably just implanted itself
into my unconscious.
So thank you, we will use that idea for an episode last week.
The Donner party is approaching the river.
What are they going to do?
They gonna caulk the wagon or ford the river?
They're going to caulk the wagon.
A bold move.
We're going to see how this one plays out.
This week's episode was brought to you
by the sweaty work of these are very hot individuals
and the Tweet of the week comes from Phedran
who points us towards the Binding of Isaac League.
It is so good.