I vantaggi del riscaldamento globale

Nascondere la testa nella sabbia è diventato molto più facile ora che mezzo mondo è diventato un deserto.

Se vi dicessi il titolo, finirebbe la sorpresa.

validità generale....................................... 

Parlerò allora di qualche piccolo trucco del mestiere, che potreste trovare utile.

Per esempio, se qualcuno fa un discorso, come si fa a capire di che cosa sta parlando, se quello che dice è fondato o meno?

E’ molto semplice. Fate come i bambini.fategli delle domande ingenue, come farebbe un bambino, ma pertinenti; domande intelligenti, e cioè profonde, interessanti, oneste, franche, dirette, non cose complicate e vedrete che quel tale andrà immediatamente nel pallone.

E, se è onesto, vi dirà che non è in grado di rispondere.

E’essenziale riconoscere l’importanza di questa cosa.

Vorrei illustrare ora un aspetto non scientifico del mondo, che se fosse più scientifico sarebbe molto meglio per tutti.
Ha a che fare con la politica.

Supponiamo che due candidati alla presidenza stiano facendo la loro campagna elettorale in una zona rurale.

A uno viene posta la domanda: <<Che cosa intende fare per i problemi dell’agricoltura? >> e lui spara subito la sua risposta, bang bang bang.

Poi arriva l’altro candidato <<Che cosa intende fare per i problemi dell’agricoltura? >>.

<<Beh, non saprei. Io ero un generale, e non so niente d’agricoltura. Ma non dev’essere una cosa tanto facile, perché negli ultimi dodici quindici, venti anni tutti ci hanno provato e di risultati se ne sono visti pochi.
Per cercare di risolvere il problema credo che la cosa migliore sia di riunire intorno ad un tavolo degli esperti, gente che ne sappia qualcosa, e studiare insieme cos’è stato fatto in passato.
Ci vorrà del tempo, ma poi arriveremo ad una conclusione ragionevole.
Non chiedetemi di dirvi in anticipo quale sarà.
Posso solo dirvi che in linea di massima cercheremo di  non peggiorare la condizione dei singoli contadini, di tener conto di tutte le situazioni particolari, eccetera, eccetera.>>

Ora da noi un politico così fa poca strada,credo; e comunque nessuno ci ha mai provato.La gente vuole delle risposte, e chi è in grado di dargliene è meglio ai suoi occhi di chi non gliene dà, mentre nella maggior parte dei casi è proprio vero il contrario.
E così i politici, in campagna elettorale ostentano certezze e si spingono a fare promesse che, è matematico, non possono mantenere.
Così alla fine nessuno ci crede più, ed ecco allora il rifiuto della politica, e una generale mancanza di rispetto per chi magari, i problemi cerca di risolverli davvero.
Sarà pure una visione semplicistica la mia, ma mi pare innegabile che all’origine di molti nostri guai ci sia quest’ansia della gente di volere una risposta, invece che di cercare chi ha un metodo per arrivare alla risposta.Ora passiamo ad un altro punto........................................

Provate ad indovinare chi è l'autore di questo stralcio da una serie di tre conferenze.Pubblicate in un libro solo l'anno scorso.

Ha vissuto tanto quanto quasi tutto il cosidetto "secolo breve".
E ha partecipato ad uno dei più impressionanti progetti mai realizzati dall'umanità.

Un umano finissimo.

Uno di quelli che occorrerebbero in questo secolo che potrebbe diventare quello finale. 

Marco Sclarandis 
 

Lo stesso effetto

Non fa lo stesso effetto

sfiatar da dietro a Capodanno

in un hangar o Aula Magna desolati

o farlo in ascensore a Ferragosto

lo capisce una birba di prima elementare

e tu che c’hai la barba e la ruga stiracchiata

più non lo ricordi né comprendi

finchè di sfintere si colpiva

in singolar tenzone con il toro

l’oca ed il maiale

un ligio ordine regnava

ora sgasiamo di marmitta e ciminiera

con nembi e cumuli in competizione

ed ansimiamo prima che sia Estate

non stiamo scherzando  a Carnevale

da soli come fessi ci asfissiamo

bimbi lasciati a giocare incauti e soli

con buste di nylon della spesa a fare

gli astronauti in atmosfere d’altri mondi.

Marco Sclarandis

Cthulhu: perché no?

Perché accontentarsi del male minore?

 

Resisto

Leggo per te che non hai legge

e poco carattere possiedi

faccio di conto per te che niente conti

e meno d’uno vali per certe colte menti

imparo più che posso e poso sulle mensole

per te che vivi di mense e stando al sole

resisto a farmi servo dell’impero

perché tu non sei impuro per il fango

ma per sorriso finto nellla smorfia

resisto in questo mondo a perdere

fluttuante in lotte futili inutili battaglie

non tolgo sughero a bottiglia

ancora non giunta a riva col messaggio

non sapendo più perché lo faccio

ma sentendo quale sinistro rombo

sia quanto m’attira il buio della fossa

distoglimi dal quel gelido silenzio

regno di luminescenti mostri

tu che analfabeta vivi e sopravvivi

tra sospiri pur di raggiungere l'omega.

Marco Sclarandis

Post Scriptum to "Our Warming World" : A Broader Analytic Framework for Consideration

The various systems of Earth listed below are under ongoing stress from changes in several key variables all of which are anthropogenic.

The first is increases in temperature which was described and explained in the earlier post.  

The second is diminishing fossil fuels and other resources (peak oil, peak uranium, but also peak various other minerals and etc.)  (it is explained in a number of peak oil articles by various experts)

The third is the increase in human population;  (well explained by demographers)

The fourth is increasing pollution and the degrading of the environment through assorted micro pollutants (various toxins in both the atmosphere, the land and the oceans and macro pollutants such as trash in the oceans and etc.)  (and much literature exists on this too) (but including also carbon dioxide and other gases which cause the increases in temperature)

So the basic and main stressors are increasing temperature, diminishing resources, increasing population and increasing pollution.

Each of these factors stresses each and every one of the following systems and the effects of each factor are of course interactive with the effects of all the others.  

And all the systems being stressed are characterized by some of the same properties of all complex systems and namely by complex internal feedback loops of both an amplifying nature and a dampening nature and by generally non-linear and interactive dynamics and by phenomena such as phase transitions, collapse, certain types of singularities and others. (Any good general systems theory book observes these characteristics in the empirical world and then explains them)

On the current Earth three categories of systems exist and each has several categories or subsystems within it:

PHYSICAL SYSTEMS  (created by and in the different phases and periods of cosmic evolution; and these are subject to the laws of physics and other sciences)

-Geophysical systems
-Geochemical systems
-Geobiological systems

BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS  (created by biological evolution)

-Single organism systems

-Ecological multi-organism systems (with both macro and micro and flora and fauna organisms as their constituent elements; typically the organisms in these multi-organism systems co-evolved in complex webs once cosmic evolution progressed to the point where biological evolution could begin; their ecology and reciprocal relationships are therefore in a sense "locked in" biologically)

-Partial or regional or Biosphere-wide systems composed of several ecological systems (and so called habitats) also in ongoing interaction

SOCIAL SYSTEMS  (created by man and each based on various institutions)

-Economic Systems
-Social and Cultural Systems
-Political Systems

Each of the sub-systems under each main category of systems above interacts with all the others in that category

Each main category also interacts with the other main categories.

All the main categories of systems and their sub-systems react to changes in the four key anthropogenic variables listed at the beginning and namely:

-Temperature  (increasing)
-Resources  (decreasing)
-Population  (increasing)
-Pollution  (increasing)

Naturally the above main categories and sub-categories of systems are simply the way man has chosen to break down the overall single organic system which is the total actual indivisible interactive reality of physical, biological, and social systems that exist on planet earth,  into "mind-sized" human academic disciplines and their respective theories and "models"

A superior intelligence from outer space probably would not choose to create artificial disciplinary boundaries but would instead consider the overall earth system as a single organic and interactive whole.

By doing so, he/she probably would make fewer mistakes in describing, explaining and anticipating its behavior.

Bearing in mind that fully anticipating the behavior of the entire system is actually impossible because of certain characteristics of complex systems.

Namely certain conditions and drivers of the system only arise unpredictably at certain points in time and then have significant causal effects.  It is impossible to determine what those effects will be before their (in turn unpredictable) causes even have arisen and developed sufficiently to have effects.  Multiply this phenomenon a thousand or a million fold and one then easily understands why articulating anything but the broadest and most general scenarios is impossible.  (also mathematically and logically)

But in rough terms it is actually quite easy to predict that there will be significant changes and that the overall organic system is not stable and also non-linear in its behavior.  

There are just 9 types of systems responding to 4 types of variables.

Just keeping that in mind may help to steer (or at least understand) the overall system better.

Recapitulating the 9 systems are:          And the 4 stressing variables are:

Geophysical         Temperature
Geochemical         Resources
Geobiological                  Population
Biological                  Pollution
Ecological
Multi-ecological
Economic
Social & Cultural
Political

Displayed as was done above it is easy to see how each key variable will affect each system and how all the systems continually interact with one another.

All one has to do is draw a matrix of two way arrows between the variables on the right and those on the left and another set of two way arrows vertically next to each set of variables (those to the left and those to the right) to indicate their own interactivity among themselves.

And Donella Meadows article on "Leverage Points" at the following link http://www.sustainer.org/pubs/Leverage_Points.pdf  is one of the best papers on systems theory in existence regarding how one can go about trying to steer an overall complex system by intervening in time and at the right leverage points- (intervening late or on the wrong leverage points presents an entirely new situation and so Yes, "the boat CAN be missed") to try to guide the overall system in directions which presumably are more desirable in the short term. (to humankind)

And “presumably” only because it cannot be a foregone ex-ante axiomatic conclusion that preventing a 95% collapse of human population on earth in the next 50 or 100 years (if that even proves to be possible) may not in fact be the very  best thing for the longer term survival of humanity.

Assuming that that too could be an axiomatic objective, a view that amoebas, paramecium, bacteria and grasshoppers and fish and grass and algae and oak trees could well beg to differ with?

Our Warming World: Temperature Trends, Indicators and Impacts: Part of the future is already here; more is to come

PAST TEMPERATURES

                                                           RECENT TEMPERATURES

                                                          FUTURE TEMPERATURES





















                                                           PHYSICAL INDICATORS

IMPACTS

Sea Level Rises:

Below follow the other most significant impacts to geophysical, biological and social systems as drawn from a Wikipedia article on the effects of climate change:


GEOPHYSICAL SYSTEMS:

-Biogeochemical Cycles: Climate change can have an effect on the carbon cycle in an interactive feedback process; Unanimous agreement was found among the models that future climate change will reduce the efficiency of the land and ocean carbon cycle to absorb human-induced CO2.

-Gas Hydrates: Future warming at intermediate depths in the world's oceans, as predicted by climate models, will tend to destabilize gas hydrates resulting in the release of large quantities of methane

-Sea Ice: As the climate warms, snow cover and sea ice extent decrease.

-Glaciers: Warming temperatures lead to the melting of glaciers and ice sheets. IPCC found that, on average, mountain glaciers and snow cover had decreased in both the northern and southern hemispheres. This widespread decrease in glaciers and ice caps has contributed to observed sea level rise.

-Oceans: The role of the oceans in global warming is a complex one. The oceans serve as a sink for carbon dioxide, taking up much that would otherwise remain in the atmosphere, but increased levels of CO2 have led to ocean acidification. Furthermore, as the temperature of the oceans increases, they become less able to absorb excess CO2. Global warming is projected to have a number of effects on the oceans. Ongoing effects include rising sea levels due to thermal expansion and melting of glaciers and ice sheets, and warming of the ocean surface, leading to increased temperature stratification. Other possible effects include large-scale changes in ocean circulation

- Ocean Acidification: It is estimated that the oceans have absorbed around half of all CO2 generated by human activities since 1800 (118 ± 19 petagrams of carbon from 1800 to 1994). In water, CO2 becomes a weak carbonic acid, and the increase in the greenhouse gas since the Industrial Revolution has already lowered the average pH (the laboratory measure of acidity) of seawater by 0.1 units, to 8.2. Predicted emissions could lower the pH by a further 0.5 by 2100, to a level probably not seen for hundreds of millennia and, critically, at a rate of change probably 100 times greater than at any time over this period.

-Thermohaline Circulation: There is some speculation that global warming could, via a shutdown or slowdown of the thermohaline circulation, trigger localized cooling in the North Atlantic and lead to cooling, or lesser warming, in that region. This would affect in particular areas like Scandinavia and Britain that are warmed by the North Atlantic drift.

-Extreme Weather:

   -In increase in global mean temperature of about 0 to 2 °C by 2100 relative to the 1990–2000
    period would result in increased fire frequency and intensity in many areas.

   -Increased areas will be affected by drought

   -There will be increased intense tropical cyclone activity

   -There will be increased incidences of extreme high sea level


BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS:

-Hundreds of studies have documented responses of ecosystems, plants, and animals to the climate changes that have already occurred. For example, in the Northern Hemisphere, species are almost uniformly moving their ranges northward and up in elevation in search of cooler temperatures.

-By the year 2100, ecosystems will be exposed to atmospheric CO2 levels substantially higher than in the past 650,000 years, and global temperatures at least among the highest of those experienced in the past 740,000 years. Significant disruptions of ecosystems are projected to increase with future climate change. Examples of disruptions include disturbances such as fire, drought, pest infestation, invasion of species, storms, and coral bleaching events. The stresses caused by climate change, added to other stresses on ecological systems (e.g., land conversion, land degradation, harvesting, and pollution), threaten substantial damage to or complete loss of some unique ecosystems, and extinction of some critically endangered species.

-Climate change has been estimated to be a major driver of biodiversity loss in cool conifer forests, savannas, mediterranean-climate systems, tropical forests, in the Arctic tundra, and in coral reefs. In other ecosystems, land-use change may be a stronger driver of biodiversity loss at least in the near-term. Beyond the year 2050, climate change may be the major driver for biodiversity loss global

SOCIAL SYSTEMS:

-The impacts of climate change can be thought of in terms of sensitivity and vulnerability. "Sensitivity" is the degree to which a particular system or sector might be affected, positively or negatively, by climate change and/orclimate variability. "Vulnerability" is the degree to which a particular system or sector might be adversely affected by climate change.

-The sensitivity of human society to climate change varies. Sectors sensitive to climate change include water resources, coastal zones, human settlements, and human health. Industries sensitive to climate change include agriculture, fisheries, forestry, energy, construction, insurance, financial services, tourism, and recreation.

-General circulation models project that the future climate change will bring wetter coasts, drier mid-continent areas, and further sea level rise. Such changes could result in the gravest effects of climate change through sudden human migration. Millions might be displaced by shoreline erosions, river and coastal flooding, or severe drought.

-Migration related to climate change is likely to be predominantly from rural areas in developing countries to towns and cities. In the short term climate stress is likely to add incrementally to existing migration patterns rather than generating entirely new flows of people. It has been argued that environmental degradation, loss of access to resources (e.g., water resources), and resulting human migration could become a source of political and even military conflict.

ABRUPT OR IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES:

Physical, ecological and social systems may respond in an abrupt, non-linear or irregular way to climate change. This is as opposed to a smooth or regular response. A quantitative entity behaves "irregularly" when its dynamics are discontinuous (i.e., not smooth), nondifferentiable, unbounded, wildly varying, or otherwise ill-defined. Such behaviour is often termed "singular." Irregular behaviour in Earth systems may give rise to certain thresholds, which, when crossed, may lead to a large change in the system. Some singularities could potentially lead to severe impacts at regional or global scales.

 PART OF THE FUTURE IS ALREADY HERE:

Climate change is already damaging global economy, report finds

Economic impact of global warming is costing the world more than $1.2 trillion a year, wiping 1.6% annually from global GDP

• Fiona Harvey, environment correspondent
• guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 26 September 2012 04.00 BST

Bangladeshi villagers rebuild an embankment after cyclone Aila hit in 2009. Bangladesh faces total losses of about 3-4% of GDP due to climate change. Photograph: Munir Uz Zaman/AFP/Getty Images

Climate change is already contributing to the deaths of nearly 400,000 people a year and costing the world more than $1.2 trillion, wiping 1.6% annually from global GDP, according to a new study.

The impacts are being felt most keenly in developing countries, according to the research, where damage to agricultural production from extreme weather linked to climate change is contributing to deaths from malnutrition, poverty and their associated diseases.

Air pollution caused by the use of fossil fuels is also separately contributing to the deaths of at least 4.5m people a year, the report found.

The 331-page study, entitled Climate Vulnerability Monitor: A Guide to the Cold Calculus of A Hot Planet and published on Wednesday, was carried out by the DARA group, a non-governmental organisation based in Europe, and the Climate Vulnerable Forum. It was written by more than 50 scientists, economists and policy experts, and commissioned by 20 governments.

By 2030, the researchers estimate, the cost of climate change and air pollution combined will rise to 3.2% of global GDP, with the world's least developed countries forecast to bear the brunt, suffering losses of up to 11% of their GDP.

Sheikh Hasina, prime minister of Bangladesh, said: "A 1C rise in temperature [temperatures have already risen by 0.7C globally since the end of the 19th century] is associated with 10% productivity loss infarming. For us, it means losing about 4m tonnes of food grain, amounting to about $2.5bn. That is about 2% of our GDP. Adding up the damages to property and other losses, we are faced with a total loss of about 3-4% of GDP. Without these losses, we could have easily secured much higher growth."

But major economies will also take a hit, as extremes of weather and the associated damage – droughts, floods and more severe storms – could wipe 2% of the GDP of the US by 2030, while similar effects could cost China $1.2tr by the same date.

While many governments have taken the view that climate change is a long-term problem, there is a growing body of opinion that the effects are already being felt. Scientists have been alarmed by the increasingly rapid melting of Arctic sea ice, which reached a new record minimum this year and, if melting continues at similar rates, could be ice free in summer by the end of the decade. Some research suggests that this melting could be linked to cold, dull and rainy summers in parts of Europe – such as has been the predominant summer weather in the UK for the last six years. In the US, this year's severe drought has raised food prices and in India the disruption to the monsoon has caused widespread damage to farmers.

Connie Hedegaard, the European Union's climate chief, warned that extreme weather was becoming more common, as the effects of climate change take hold. "Climate change and weather extremes are not about a distant future," she wrote in a comment for the Guardian last week. "Formerly one-off extreme weather episodes seem to be becoming the new normal."

Michael Zammit Cutajar, former executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said: "Climate change is not just a distant threat but a present danger – its economic impact is already with us."

                                          

Medio Evo nel Wisconsin

h/t Luca Lombroso

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) for the United States

Vedere anche su questo link sul quale si trovano le pdf files per gli NGSS organizzate nei due modi indicati sotto:

 http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards

Se questi nuovi standards verranno applicati dovrebbero avere un'effetto rivoluzionario sull'educazione scientifica negli Stati Uniti e credo anche in qualsiasi altro paese dove saranno magari poi anche adottati ed applicati.  

The Next Generation Science Standards are now available.  Twenty-six states and their broad-based teams worked together with a 41-member writing team and partners throughout the country to develop the standards.

• NGSS Front Matter
• NGSS Structure
• Appendices to the NGSS:
  
  1. Conceptual Shifts
  2. Responses to May Public Feedback
  3. College and Career Readiness (Coming Soon)
  4. All Standards, All Students (Coming Soon)
  5. Disciplinary Core Idea Progressions
  6. Science and Engineering Practices 
  7. Crosscutting Concepts 
  8. Nature of Science 
  9. Engineering Design in the NGSS
  10. Science, Technology, Society, and the Environment
  11. Model Course Mapping in Middle and High School (Coming Soon)
  12. Connections to CCSS-Mathematics (Coming Soon)
  13. Connections to CCSS-ELA Literacy (Coming Soon)
• Commonly Used Abbreviations
• Why Standards Matter
• Public Attitudes Toward Science Standards
• Video: Why NGSS?

Download PDFs of the NGSS:

Arranged by Disciplinary Core Idea (DCI)

Arranged by Topic

Interactive versions of the standards will be available soon.

The NGSS are composed of the three dimensions from the NRC Framework. Click on the links to the left to learn more about the standards

Certo che l'0rtocerchio.............

Ed ora vi dico dell'ortocerchio.

Immaginiamoci d'essere ospitati a bordo d'un lanciatore per satelliti geostazionari.

A trentaseimila chilometri d'altezza la Terra ci apparirebbe in tutto il suo splendore, con un'estensione che la Luna piena non potrebbe eguagliare.

Eppure, se gli Evadamitici si sparpagliassero equamente dappertutto, non li potremmo comunque vedere e non vedremmo come sarebbero tutti a distanza di poche decine di passi uno dall'altro.
Più invisibili di formiche s'un marciapiede viste da un quinto piano.
A meno che ognumo di noi non accendesse un piccolo falò, vanitoso o meno.
Allora, questa piccola biglia di ferro e d'argilla, velata d'aria e d'acqua salsa, risplenderebbe d'un chiarore fantasmagorico.
Cosa che già succede, ma ha un aspetto di ragnatela luminescente, che potrebbe far pensare a qualche sparuto abitante entomomorfo, dalle strane abitudini notturne. 
Cinquantuno miliardi di ettari e sette miliardi d'individui portano aritmeticamente a questa conclusione:
Sette ettari e spiccioli pro-capite, una casella di duecentosessantacinque metri di lato, o un cerchio inscritto dello stesso diametro, a testa,di questo scacchiere sul quale giochiamo come pedine da qualche milione di anni anche noi.

Casella, oltretutto, per due terzi liquida e abissale, e per un terzo non tutta ospitale perché innalzata in atmosfere rarefatte, gelide, e aride.
Questa la visione ragionieristica delle cose.
Che sappiamo, conduce facilmente a vagoni blindati, camere  a gas e forni crematori industriali.

Ma non necessariamente.

L'orto-cerchio, perchè, in fondo di un orto abbiamo sempre bisogno per nutrirci, e cerchio per i fatti sopra esposti, di poche centinaia di passi di diametro e di qualche migliaio d’aree d’ombra d’umano a mezzogiorno d’estensione, è questo.
All’epoca della grande eruzione del Toba, settantamila anni fa, era centomila volte più grande, visto che si suppone che noi ci si era ridotti a centomila volte di meno.

E migliaia di volte meno indaffarati di adesso.

Avevamo una doppia Val d’Aosta a testa.Seppure, ricordiamocelo, fatta come un arcipelago.Adesso, che l’ortocerchio è diventato grande una piazza d’armi, e prima che diventi angusto come un cortile di seminario, possiamo ancora deciderci che cosa fare di noi.Possiamo supplicare le femmine di non duplicarci o lasciare che i maschi replichino i nefasti di cui sono tanto abilmente capaci.Questi nefasti hanno il vantaggio di risolvere tanti problemi con una sola mossa e per un certo tempo.Ma esigono sacrifici da ecatombe.In questo momento, solo il bis, o bi-pensiero o ancora, duo-logo, mi salva dall’ottenebramento della ragione.E’però una pratica difficile e pericolosa.A lungo termine porta all’insanità mentale, perché vivere costantemente nel dover pensare ad una cosa e al suo opposto, come se fossero equivalenti e interscambiabili, è troppo faticoso.

Esiste il dialogo.Meno faticoso, ma che necessita talvolta di enorme quantità di pazienza.E come il coraggio, la pazienza non ha surrogati.

Post scriptum.

L’universo conosciuto, senza neanche tenere conto dell’espansione inflazionaria dello spazio, è profondo in ogni direzione quasi quattordici miliardi d’anni luce.

E siccome ogni anno luce è circa novemila miliardi di chilometri, l’umile aritmetica ci dice che l’universo, visto come un ortocerchio per una singola coppia evadamitica, ha una superfice di circa dieci alla quarantaseiesima chilometri quadrati.Dieci volte di più o di meno non farebbero una grande differenza, a questo punto.E, naturalmente, si tratta del cerchio, non della sfera dell’universo.

Il confine dell’universo quadruplicherebbe il calpestabile.E la sfera aggiungerebbe altri ventitrè zeri al conto.

E sarebbero ancora chilometri cubi, non solo quadrati.

Cui prodest, tutto questo spazio “Affittasi” ?

Com’è che siamo finiti stipati sulla superfice della Terra?

Ci è andata bene che l’ortocerchio terrestre, se la Terra fosse stata piatta come ancora alcuni credono, sempre perché ce lo dice l’aritmetica, è quattro volte di meno della superfice dell’ortosfera.Ma se la Terra fosse stata tutta abitabile come una gruviera per una nidiata di topi, per un po’avremmo avuto locali dove allargarci.

Invece no, rivolgere gli occhi al cielo rischia di farci imbestialire ammirando tanto scialo di orizzonte per nulla.Siamo costretti a guardarci negli occhi.

E vedere che tutti gli altri occhi viventi ci guardano e forse si chiedono perchè mai noi siamo giunti in mezzo a loro.

Marco Sclarandis.

"Socrates’ Lesson to his Pupils on April 1st, Anno-Pre-Dominis 383

Due to unbelievable (i.e. definitely NOT believable) popular demand from the entire Anglophone World I decided to translate the original of this Lesson in Italian that I had posted on this blog a few days ago,  also into English... and I am now posting the translation (with a very few and very minor "updates") here below:

"Socrates’ Lesson to his Pupils on April 1st,  Anno-Pre-Dominis 383

Socrates:  Guys  today I’d like to have a little chat with you, and obviously also ask you a few little questions,  about the world of the future 2,396 years from now, on April 1st 2013.

Pupils:  But Teacher how can one know today what the world in more than 2000 years will be like?  In such a distant time?

S:    Don’t worry guys, with my Method one can manage to understand and know many things.

P:    O.K. Teacher, please go ahead, we’re listening

S:    Today as you can see we’re all sitting here nicely and peacefully  in the shade of this magnificent tree, we can see the sea and the  sun and the olive trees,  and in a while the fishermen will bring  us some fish and we can talk about philosophy for hours and hours.

P:    And won’t it still be this way in 2013?

S:    Not exactly guys.  The sea will be polluted,  there will be very few fish, the air of Athens will be un-breathable, there will be  billions of people around doing nonsense,  everyone will be quarrelling with everyone else and almost nobody will be talking about  either ethics, metaphysics,  epistemology, or   about how better to govern society.

P:    Good god and wiser Athena Teacher , what an ugly world !  But how come it will be like that?  Surely they will have read all  the books that we Greeks have written or will write and will leave for them?

S:    Yes, but either they won’t understand a damned thing or  they couldn't care less about any of it.

P:    Teacher but how could they possibly be such impoverished, uncivilized and uncultivated beings?

S:    It’s a long story guys but I’ll summarize it for you and then we’ll move on to examine the problems of that future society and how maybe those people of the future could have solved them.

P:    O.K. great Teacher, please go ahead and we’ll be listening, this seems like a truly interesting story!

S:    After us Greeks, various empires and various religions cropped up and did their thing.  Our texts unfortunately were forgotten  for a couple of millennia until finally there was some sort of a renaissance.  But right after that more empires, kings, aristocracies, heads of religions and a whole bunch of other dickheads cropped up again.  When finally a bit of our democracy returned,  those guys started burning all the coal  and  petroleum in sightand continued to have children non-stop until they became seven billions and there wasn’t any more room for anybody. And they even stole the ideas of  our good old friend Democritus, split the atom,  and built a  whole bunch of atomic bombs to threaten each other with,  and also set some off every once in a while over the cities of their various enemies.

P:    It really seems like a very ugly society Teacher by any aesthetics and any ethics that you taught us but then how did  they manage to go back to living a bit better?  Was it possible  or had they already destroyed everything that matters and is important to the point that they couldn’t do anything about it at all anymore?

S:    Regrettably guys, my Method also has some limits and I am not able to foresee beyond 2,396 years from now, but I can tell you that they had a whole bunch of problems.  But if about certain of their problems and various related things I am not able to answer you, you can always go over and ask Cassandra.

P:    O.K. fine, but what problems Teacher?

S:    Well, besides the millions of problems some of which I had  generally speaking already mentioned to you a while ago, they had three big problems quite a bit bigger than the others but they were so busy with various nonsense that they were not even able to see them.

P:    Really stupid people Teacher those people of the future, but then what were (or what will be) those three big problems of the future that they won’t even be aware of and be able to see and analyze by our Hellenic methods?

S:   That’s pretty easy to explain to you guys.  One was peak petroleum, another was climate change and the third was limits to growth.

P:   Teacher but how come those were problems?  And what exactly is this petroleum stuff and why were they using it, and how come the climate was changing and what limits to what growth?

S:    Guys it’s a bit difficult for you now to understand those things because we are few, there is lots of space and even if we gorge ourselves until we drop over or waste a lot of things it doesn’t matter much because there are many others.   I can only tell you that those guys using some of our own ideas developed a  whole bunch of science and technology, they started to use a lot of resources, and after a while there were hardly any left.  It’s a bit hard for me to explain climate change to you but trust me and just believe me that in 2396 years it will be there.

P:    O.K. fine Teacher we have a lot of trust in you and in your Method and if you tell us there will be climate change we believe you.  But those people 2396 years from now, will they too believe their teachers of the future when they will tell them that there will be tremendous storms, fires and other terrible things if they don’t change their habits?

S:    Unfortunately not, guys

P:    But how come Teacher that those three problems will be so difficult to solve?  To us they seem fairly easy.

S:    They seem that way guys, but they aren’t.

P:    Teacher, you are always able to summarize with your theory of the essences that you told us you later also would explain to Plato and to Aristotle and you also always know how to come  to the essentials quickly.  Please tell us in a few words what might have been the solution to each one of those big problems. simple.  As concerns peak petroleum all they had to do was use a lot less petroleum.  With respect to climate change all they had to do was use the energy of the same sun which you see shining up there now.  And to solve limits to growth they only had to reduce their own growth and produce and consume less stuff.

P:    And who among them could have done these things Teacher?  To us they seem pretty easy things to do if someone wants to do them.

S:    Yes, it’s true, they would have been pretty easy to do if they had wanted to do them.  And those who could have done them are  the governments, enterprises and individuals of those future times.

P:    But did they have (will they have) democratic governments like our own now, or will they have some other kind of governments of an inferior nature and form?

S:    This question is a bit complicated guys.  Let’s just say that in one sense they had democratic governments but in other senses not at all.

P:    Teacher, please explain to us a bit better, we can’t understand.

S:     Guys, let’s just forget about all of that for now, I will try to answer  you about that question later and so let’s just stick to the subject at hand; and please while I am speaking to you please listen to what I am saying and don’t let yourselves be distracted by all those noisy bothersome grasshoppers and crickets up in the tree. (Beppe Grillo’s last name means grasshopper in Italian) As concerns the three big problems that those people could have solved the most important thing you need to understand is that it wasn’t possible because there were political, economic and cultural interests both outside and inside those governments, enterprises and individuals which prevented them from doing it.

P:     Teacher, but then those Interests really screwed them !  Why didn’t they try to do something against them and what could  they have done?

S:     Well about that they couldn’t seem to manage to agree, but in my opinion I think they could have done a couple of things.   Another fairly intelligent person who lived a long time after our own times was a guy who wrote a book about the story of a Prince who knew a thing or two about such stuff.  Had they read it, they could have done a couple of things to those Interests.  Either they could have divided them, put them one against the other, and while they were quarreling and fighting among themselves, go around them and get the governments, the enterprises and the individuals to do what they had to do.  Either that or they could have kicked their butts in the middle of the street.  But at least in the year 2,396 after this one, (Anno post-dominis 2013) either they hadn’t figured that out, or they didn’t know how to do it, or they were afraid to do it.

P:    Teacher, and had they instead done it?

S:    As I already explained to you guys my Method has some limits and I am not able to see beyond 2396 years from now but quite probably those problems could have been resolved and that future civilization even if not too civilized by our own criteria and norms could have managed to survive.  And also since the governments, the enterprises and the individuals  all knew already more or less what they needed to do.

P:      O.K. Teacher we can understand that even you and your Method may have some limits.  But we cannot believe that you don’t have at least a couple of little ideas about all of that.  We beg you, please tell us how that whole thing probably ended!

S:     O.K. guys I’ll tell you but if I don’t hit the bulls-eye please don’t come and tell me later that I am not a good Teacher.  I had already told you that even my Method has some limits just as there are some limits to growth and other limits. I will explain all of this to my friends Plato and Aristotle who afterwards surely will write some great books that both you and those people of the future will be able to read.

P:    But Teacher didn’t you tell us that those guys don’t give a damn about our books?

S:     Yes, but as I also had tried to tell you there are limits to everything including I am not sure about anything.  And if that’s true for me who doesn’t do anything but think from morning until night every day,  imagine what it will be like for those brainwashed turkeys of the future! But fundamentally and simplifying everything a bit, I think only two things could have happened. Either they would be able to kick those interests out and away from around their feet so they could walk properly and also out of their minds so they could think properly, and therefore their governments, their enterprises and they themselves as individuals would consume a  lot less petroleum, would change over rapidly to solar energy and would give up growing forever, or they probably will all croak and will return to live as just a few, more or less like us, but unfortunately with a lot less trees, fish, fresh air and all the other nice things we have now.

P:     Thank you Teacher for having explained to us the situation of  those men and women of the future.  To us it all seems pretty clear.  Do you think it will be clear for them too?

S:     On the first of April of the year 2,396 from now and as far as my Method can see, it still wasn’t very clear.  But maybe it will be clear by their next April 1st.  And besides they too have fun with fish during that period just like us.  (a pesce d’Aprile or April fish means an April fool’s prank in Italian)

P:     O.K. Teacher we have understood everything and thank you so much for this N to the nth power multiplied by pi and added up by sigma, beautiful lesson.  This one today was truly interesting.  When will we see each other again?

S:     Guys, as you know I am always here sitting under this tree thinking almost every day, so you can drop by and visit me anytime you like.