Well: Rustle, Tingle, Relax: The Compelling World of A.S.M.R.

A few months ago, I was on a Manhattan-bound D train heading to work when a man with a chunky, noisy newspaper got on and sat next to me. As I watched him softly turn the pages of his paper, a chill spread like carbonated bubbles through the back of my head, instantly relaxing me and bringing me to the verge of sweet slumber.

It wasn't the first time I'd felt this sensation at the sound of rustling paper — I've experienced it as far back as I can remember. But it suddenly occurred to me that, as a lifelong insomniac, I might be able to put it to use by reproducing the experience digitally whenever sleep refused to come.

Under the sheets of my bed that night, I plugged in some earphones, opened the YouTube app on my phone and searched for "Sound of pages." What I discovered stunned me.

There were nearly 2.6 million videos depicting a phenomenon called autonomous sensory meridian response, or A.S.M.R., designed to evoke a tingling sensation that travels over the scalp or other parts of the body in response to auditory, olfactory or visual forms of stimulation.

The sound of rustling pages, it turns out, is just one of many A.S.M.R. triggers. The most popular stimuli include whispering; tapping or scratching; performing repetitive, mundane tasks like folding towels or sorting baseball cards; and role-playing, where the videographer, usually a breathy woman, softly talks into the camera and pretends to give a haircut, for example, or an eye examination. The videos span 30 minutes on average, but some last more than an hour.

For those not wired for A.S.M.R. — and even for those who, like me, apparently are — the videos and the cast of characters who produce them — sometimes called "ASMRtists" or "tingle-smiths" — can seem weird, creepy or just plain boring. (Try pitching the pleasures of watching a nerdy German guy slowly and silently assemble a computer for 30 minutes.)

Two of the most well-known ASMRtists, Maria of GentleWhispering (more than 250,700 subscribers) and Heather Feather (more than 146,500 subscribers), said that although they sometimes received lewd emails and requests, many of their followers reached out to them with notes of gratitude for the relief from anxiety, insomnia and melancholy that their videos provided.

Some say the mundane or monotonous quality of the videos lulls us into a much-needed state of serenity. Others find comfort in being the sole focus of the A.S.M.R. actor's tender affection and care. Or perhaps the assortment of sounds and scenarios taps into pleasing childhood memories. I grew up falling asleep hearing the sounds from my father's home office: A computer engineer, he was continually sorting through papers, tapping keys  and assembling and disassembling PCs and MACs.

Dr. Carl W. Bazil, a sleep disorders specialist at Columbia University, says A.S.M.R. videos may provide novel ways to switch off our brains.

"People who have insomnia are in a hyper state of arousal," he said. "Behavioral treatments — guided imagery, progressive relaxation, hypnosis and meditation — are meant to try to trick your unconscious into doing what you want it to do. A.S.M.R. videos seem to be a variation on finding ways to shut your brain down."

So far, it seems to work for me. Like many insomniacs, I have over the years tried natural remedies like valerian root or melatonin, vigorous exercise regimens and strong sleeping pills like Ambien and Lunesta. But sleep rarely came. Nothing has worked as well and consistently as watching a man in an A.S.M.R. video sort through papers and his collection of Titanic paraphernalia.

But locating the neurological underpinnings of this trippy sensation won't be easy. Many of the scientists I reached out to shied away from the subject, saying the area is pseudoscience with a lack of published studies.

Bryson Lochte, a post-baccalaureate fellow at the National Institute on Drug Abuse who looked into A.S.M.R. for his senior thesis as a neuroscience major at Dartmouth College last year, has submitted his paper for publication in a scientific journal. Mr. Lochte said, "We focused on those areas in the brain associated with motivation, emotion and arousal to probe the effect A.S.M.R. has on the 'reward system' — the neural structures that trigger a dopamine surge amid pleasing reinforcements, like food or sex.

He compared A.S.M.R. to another idiosyncratic but well-studied sensation called musical frisson, which provokes a thrilling ripple of chills or goose bumps (technically termed piloerection) over one's body in emotional response to music. Mathias Benedek, a research assistant at the University of Graz in Austria who co-authored two studies on emotion-provoked piloerection, says A.S.M.R. may be a softer, quieter version of the same phenomenon. "Frisson may simply be a stronger, full-blown response," he said. And like A.S.M.R., the melodies that ignite frisson in one person may not in another.

Robert J. Zatorre, a professor of neuroscience at the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital at McGill University who has also studied musical frisson, said that "the upshot of my paper is that pleasurable music elicits dopamine activity in the striatum, which is a key component of the reward system" in the brain. Writing in The New York Times last year, in an article titled "Why Music Makes Our Brain Sing," he notes, "What may be most interesting here is when this neurotransmitter is released: not only when the music rises to a peak emotional moment, but also several seconds before, during what we might call the anticipation phase."

Perhaps the everyday experiences that A.S.M.R. videos capture — whispering, crinkling, opening and closing of boxes — evoke similar anticipatory mechanisms, sparking memories of past pleasures that we anticipate and relive each time we watch and listen.

"The whole topic is still very much unknown," Mr. Lochte said. "I would be very interested to see what other traits correlate with A.S.M.R sensitivity, whether it is an inherited attribute and what sort of physiological effects the sensation has on the body. All of these questions will be easy to answer with quick follow-up studies. Our study, we hope, will help lay the groundwork."

A version of this article appears in print on 07/29/2014, on page D6 of the NewYork edition with the headline: A Tingly Feeling, Then Zzzzzz.

15.50 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: New Approach to Being There: ‘Fan-bots’ Will Cheer Korean Baseball Team

Starting with childhood visits to dusk summer softball games in East Greenwich, R.I., and then a couple of memorable trips to Fenway Park, baseball always had a visceral feel for me that was never matched on a television screen.

Now television is looking visceral compared to the latest innovation — "fan-bots" set in the somewhat depopulated stadium of a Korean baseball team, the Hanwha Eagles. (Here's a BBC report and a darkly amusing CBS Sports commentary.) Through your smartphone you will be able to cheer on your favorite players, even customize your surrogate by adding your own features to its glowing "face."

Watch the promotional video above and ponder William Gibson's famous remark: "The future is already here – it's just not evenly distributed."

Let's hope this is just one future.

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: Fresh Focus on Siberian Permafrost as Second Hole is Reported

Photo Scientists recently inspected a hole discovered in the Siberian tundra. It's a natural feature that will likely become a lake like the one at left.Credit Press service of the Governor YaNAO

Photo A hole in the Siberian permafrost probably formed when gas pressure built in a mix of water, ice and soil beneath, scientists say.Credit Press service of the Governor YaNAO

I had a Skype chat Wednesday about Siberian permafrost in the context of climate change with Marina Leibman, a top Russian permafrost expert who had just returned from examining the unusual crater spotted on the Yamal Peninsula in Siberia late last week.

We talked just before fresh reports circulated about reindeer herders finding another such hole in the region. I hope you'll watch our chat, which I regret I have not yet had time to transcribe (if you are in the mood, I'd be grateful for help; it's just 15 minutes long):

A Top Russian Permafrost Scientist on Siberian Holes and Climate Change

Photo Marina Leibman, one of Russia's leading permafrost researchers, during a recent visit to a spot where a large hole appeared in the Siberian tundra.Credit Press service of the Governor YaNAO

Leibman, the chief scientist at the Earth Cryosphere Institute of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, has studied permafrost since 1973 and has a remarkable publication record.

She describes how the first hole (and presumably the new one) appear to have formed as methane is released from a warming mix of ice, water and soil, building up pressure that explosively pushed out the top of the hole, heaving chunks of earth many yards in some directions. She said there were no signs of combustion, that the hole had to be at least a year old because there was fresh greenery from this summer season with no overlying layer of mud or the like.

Leibman stressed that there were no indications that such events were more than the normal process of lake formation in the area and predicted that the hole she inspected would end up being a lake in coming years.

She also stressed that she sees no signs of current or imminent warming producing a great destabilization of permafrost in the Arctic: "You can't say in 20 years it will be 2 degrees warmer so permafrost will be thawing. It will make it 2 degrees warmer, but not thawing – at least in the far north.

"In the south, where you have only patches of permafrost, the response may be a little bit more active," she said. "But what we see now is permafrost with minus 1 degree temperature [Celsius] now — after a climate warming of 1 and a half degrees — permafrost temperature is minus 0.1 degree, but not above zero."

I encourage you to listen to our conversation and learn more.

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: Scientists Begin to Demystify Hole Found in Siberian Permafrost

After a flood of speculation — meteorite collision, methane explosion related to gas drilling, UFO — following the discovery of a gaping crater in the permafrost near big gas fields on the Yamal peninsula in Siberia, scientists are starting to offer more informed views.

Photo A view from the edge of a crater – about 100 feet across – that has opened in Siberian permafrost.Credit Marya Zulinova, press service of the Governor YaNAO

The Siberian Times, the source of initial aerial images and video, has posted the first article citing scientists at the scene. Here are some excerpts.

Photo Scientists are studying a hole discovered in Siberian permafrost.Credit Marya Zulinova, press service of the Governor YaNAO

The crater is smaller than initial reports:

Andrey Plekhanov, Senior Researcher at the State Scientific Centre of Arctic Research, said: "The crater has more of an oval than a circular shape, it makes it harder to calculate the exact diameter. As of now our estimates is about thirty metres."

Here's more from Plekharov, on a possible connection to the warming climate:

"Could it be linked to the global warming? We have to continue our research to answer this question. Two previous summers – years 2012 and 2013 were relatively hot for Yamal, perhaps this has somehow influenced the formation of the crater. But we have to do our tests and research first and then say it more definitively."

He also rebutted speculation that the black marks around the perimeter indicated a fiery explosion had taken place (one example):

"For now we can say for sure that under the influence of internal processes there was an ejection in the permafrost. I want to stress that it was not an explosion, but an ejection, so there was no heat released as it happened."

Earlier scientists were sure there was burning visible on the sides of the crater.

"I also want to recall a theory that our scientists worked on in the 1980s — it has been left and then forgotten for a number of years. The theory was that the number of Yamal lakes formed because of exactly such natural process happening in the permafrost.

Such kind of processes were taking place about 8,000 years ago. Perhaps they are repeating nowadays. If this theory is confirmed, we can say that we have witnessed a unique natural process that formed the unusual landscape of Yamal peninsula."

Photo A diagram from the British Society for Geomorphology explains the formation of a pingo, a hill formed around a buried lump of ice in regions with frozen ground, or permafrost.Credit British Society for Geomorphology

Chris Fogwill, an Australian paleoclimatologist and geologist, offers some helpful context in the Sydney Morning Herald on the process by which "pingos," ice formations in permafrost landscapes, transform into lakes.

The British Society for Geomorphology has produced a helpful diagram (at right) showing how this works. Click here for a larger version.

Addendum | Other big holes — mostly familiar sinkholes — have made the news off and on, including the giant hole generated when a salt mine collapsed in Louisiana, one that swallowed some vintage Corvettes in Kentucky and the extremely unnerving orifice in Guatemala City that I covered in 2010. Here's an aerial view of that hole:

Photo A sinkhole formed in Guatemala City in 2010.Credit Government of Guatemala

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: Scientists Begin to Demystify Hole Found in Siberian Permafrost

After a flood of speculation — meteorite collision, methane explosion related to gas drilling, UFO — following the discovery of a gaping crater in the permafrost near big gas fields on the Yamal peninsula in Siberia, scientists are starting to offer more informed views.

Photo A view from the edge of a crater – about 100 feet across – that has opened in Siberian permafrost.Credit Marya Zulinova, press service of the Governor YaNAO

The Siberian Times, the source of initial aerial images and video, has posted the first article citing scientists at the scene. Here are some excerpts.

Photo Scientists are studying a hole discovered in Siberian permafrost.Credit Marya Zulinova, press service of the Governor YaNAO

The crater is smaller than initial reports:

Andrey Plekhanov, Senior Researcher at the State Scientific Centre of Arctic Research, said: "The crater has more of an oval than a circular shape, it makes it harder to calculate the exact diameter. As of now our estimates is about thirty metres."

Here's more from Plekharov, on a possible connection to the warming climate:

"Could it be linked to the global warming? We have to continue our research to answer this question. Two previous summers – years 2012 and 2013 were relatively hot for Yamal, perhaps this has somehow influenced the formation of the crater. But we have to do our tests and research first and then say it more definitively."

He also rebutted speculation that the black marks around the perimeter indicated a fiery explosion had taken place (one example):

"For now we can say for sure that under the influence of internal processes there was an ejection in the permafrost. I want to stress that it was not an explosion, but an ejection, so there was no heat released as it happened."

Earlier scientists were sure there was burning visible on the sides of the crater.

"I also want to recall a theory that our scientists worked on in the 1980s — it has been left and then forgotten for a number of years. The theory was that the number of Yamal lakes formed because of exactly such natural process happening in the permafrost.

Such kind of processes were taking place about 8,000 years ago. Perhaps they are repeating nowadays. If this theory is confirmed, we can say that we have witnessed a unique natural process that formed the unusual landscape of Yamal peninsula."

Photo A diagram from the British Society for Geomorphology explains the formation of a pingo, a hill formed around a buried lump of ice in regions with frozen ground, or permafrost.Credit British Society for Geomorphology

Chris Fogwill, an Australian paleoclimatologist and geologist, offers some helpful context in the Sydney Morning Herald on the process by which "pingos," ice formations in permafrost landscapes, transform into lakes.

The British Society for Geomorphology has produced a helpful diagram (at right) showing how this works. Click here for a larger version.

Addendum | Other big holes — mostly familiar sinkholes — have made the news off and on, including the giant hole generated when a salt mine collapsed in Louisiana, one that swallowed some vintage Corvettes in Kentucky and the extremely unnerving orifice in Guatemala City that I covered in 2010. Here's an aerial view of that hole:

Photo A sinkhole formed in Guatemala City in 2010.Credit Government of Guatemala

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Well: A Vasectomy May Increase Prostate Cancer Risk

Men with vasectomies may be at an increased risk for the most lethal form of prostate cancer, researchers have found. But aggressive cancer nonetheless remains rare in these patients.

Earlier studies had hinted at a connection between vasectomies and prostate cancer. Many experts have dismissed the idea of a link: Men who have vasectomies may receive more medical attention, they said, and therefore may be more likely to receive a diagnosis. The new study, published this month in The Journal of Clinical Oncology, sought to account for that possibility and for other variables.

Researchers at Harvard reviewed data on 49,405 men ages 40 to 75, of whom 12,321 had had vasectomies. They found 6,023 cases of prostate cancer among those men from 1986 to 2010.

The researchers found no association between a vasectomy and low-grade cancers. But men who had had a vasectomy were about 20 percent more likely to develop lethal prostate cancer, compared with those who had not. The incidence was 19 in 1,000 cases, compared with 16 in 1,000, over the 24-year period.

The reason for the increase is unclear, but some experts have speculated that immunological changes, abnormal cell growth or hormonal imbalances following a vasectomy may also affect prostate cancer risk.

Dr. James M. McKiernan, interim chairman of the department of urology at Columbia, said the lack of a clear causal mechanism was a drawback of the new research.

"If someone asked for a vasectomy, I would have to tell them that there is this new data in this regard, but it's not enough for me to change the standard of care," he said. "I would not say that you should avoid vasectomy."

The lead author, Lorelei A. Mucci, an associate professor of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, emphasized that a vasectomy does not increase the risk for prostate cancer over all. "We're really seeing the association only for advanced state and lethal cancers," she said.

She agreed with Dr. McKiernan that the new data are not a reason to avoid a vasectomy. "Having a vasectomy is a highly personal decision that men should make with their families and discuss with their physicians," she said. "This is one piece of evidence that should be considered."

A version of this article appears in print on 07/18/2014, on page A13 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Study Links Vasectomies to Lethal Cancer Risk.

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Well: A Vasectomy May Increase Prostate Cancer Risk

Men with vasectomies may be at an increased risk for the most lethal form of prostate cancer, researchers have found. But aggressive cancer nonetheless remains rare in these patients.

Earlier studies had hinted at a connection between vasectomies and prostate cancer. Many experts have dismissed the idea of a link: Men who have vasectomies may receive more medical attention, they said, and therefore may be more likely to receive a diagnosis. The new study, published this month in The Journal of Clinical Oncology, sought to account for that possibility and for other variables.

Researchers at Harvard reviewed data on 49,405 men ages 40 to 75, of whom 12,321 had had vasectomies. They found 6,023 cases of prostate cancer among those men from 1986 to 2010.

The researchers found no association between a vasectomy and low-grade cancers. But men who had had a vasectomy were about 20 percent more likely to develop lethal prostate cancer, compared with those who had not. The incidence was 19 in 1,000 cases, compared with 16 in 1,000, over the 24-year period.

The reason for the increase is unclear, but some experts have speculated that immunological changes, abnormal cell growth or hormonal imbalances following a vasectomy may also affect prostate cancer risk.

Dr. James M. McKiernan, interim chairman of the department of urology at Columbia, said the lack of a clear causal mechanism was a drawback of the new research.

"If someone asked for a vasectomy, I would have to tell them that there is this new data in this regard, but it's not enough for me to change the standard of care," he said. "I would not say that you should avoid vasectomy."

The lead author, Lorelei A. Mucci, an associate professor of epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, emphasized that a vasectomy does not increase the risk for prostate cancer over all. "We're really seeing the association only for advanced state and lethal cancers," she said.

She agreed with Dr. McKiernan that the new data are not a reason to avoid a vasectomy. "Having a vasectomy is a highly personal decision that men should make with their families and discuss with their physicians," she said. "This is one piece of evidence that should be considered."

A version of this article appears in print on 07/18/2014, on page A13 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Study Links Vasectomies to Lethal Cancer Risk .

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: Technology as a Path to Product Transparency

After I posted yesterday on Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack's push for using scannable codes to provide consumers with information on food ingredients from genetically modified crops, Ben Grossman-Cohen of the anti-poverty group Oxfam International sent a reaction that merits publication as a "Your Dot" contribution. 

In my piece, I wrote about the prospect that scannable codes can lead to far more background on products than simply the role of biotechnology in their production. I mentioned one of my favorite examples — the prospect of charting the origin of the tropical mangoes in a popular Belgian juice line. Grossman-Cohen discusses some noteworthy examples of online information portals, including one created by Oxfam, that can help inform consumers:

Secretary Vilsack is probably right to suggest that the future of labeling and transparency for food products is in some form of a bar code scanner. There are actually a number of groups like OpenLabel, GoodGuide and Buycott that are already exploring the world of apps that allow consumers to scan bar codes to find out what's in/behind the labels of the products they buy. Ultimately somebody will figure out how to do it really well. The main challenge seems to be figuring out how much information to include and then actually making the tools useful and user friendly. 

You mentioned your son's taste for Looza and wondered, "Where does the pulp come from? Are there good labor standards, sustainable farming practices?" Like most brands Looza is actually owned by one of of the giant food companies. These days, it's difficult to find products on our shelves that aren't. In this case I believe Looza is a Tropicana product and thus a subsidiary of PepsiCo. [He's right.]

A great existing resource to know whether PepsiCo/Tropicana are operating sustainably is Oxfam's interactive Behind the Brands rankings, which rate companies for how sustainable and responsible their corporate policies are. Looking at Tropicana's scores you'll see that our assessment of PepsiCo found that their policies on farmers and workers issues are "poor" while they get slightly higher marks for how they address their impacts on climate change and land. If you really want to dig into the details you can read through our massive open data sheet that shows how those scores were created.

It's not a perfect tool, but certainly gives a good overview of some of the key issues related to how the companies that own the brands we buy are operating. We are also exploring how to bring our data to consumers everywhere via a bar code scanner. In fact, the data behind our scorecard is already being used by a group called eLabel in their bar code scanning app for Woolworths customers in South Africa. Hopefully consumers everywhere will have that opportunity someday soon.

15.50 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: Technology as a Path to Product Transparency

After I posted yesterday on Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack's push for using scannable codes to provide consumers with information on food ingredients from genetically modified crops, Ben Grossman-Cohen of the anti-poverty group Oxfam International sent a reaction that merits publication as a "Your Dot" contribution. 

In my piece, I wrote about the prospect that scannable codes can lead to far more background on products than simply the role of biotechnology in their production. I mentioned one of my favorite examples — the prospect of charting the origin of the tropical mangoes in a popular Belgian juice line. Grossman-Cohen discusses some noteworthy examples of online information portals, including one created by Oxfam, that can help inform consumers:

Secretary Vilsack is probably right to suggest that the future of labeling and transparency for food products is in some form of a bar code scanner. There are actually a number of groups like OpenLabel, GoodGuide and Buycott that are already exploring the world of apps that allow consumers to scan bar codes to find out what's in/behind the labels of the products they buy. Ultimately somebody will figure out how to do it really well. The main challenge seems to be figuring out how much information to include and then actually making the tools useful and user friendly. 

You mentioned your son's taste for Looza and wondered, "Where does the pulp come from? Are there good labor standards, sustainable farming practices?" Like most brands Looza is actually owned by one of of the giant food companies. These days, it's difficult to find products on our shelves that aren't. In this case I believe Looza is a Tropicana product and thus a subsidiary of PepsiCo. [He's right.]

A great existing resource to know whether PepsiCo/Tropicana are operating sustainably is Oxfam's interactive Behind the Brands rankings, which rate companies for how sustainable and responsible their corporate policies are. Looking at Tropicana's scores you'll see that our assessment of PepsiCo found that their policies on farmers and workers issues are "poor" while they get slightly higher marks for how they address their impacts on climate change and land. If you really want to dig into the details you can read through our massive open data sheet that shows how those scores were created.

It's not a perfect tool, but certainly gives a good overview of some of the key issues related to how the companies that own the brands we buy are operating. We are also exploring how to bring our data to consumers everywhere via a bar code scanner. In fact, the data behind our scorecard is already being used by a group called eLabel in their bar code scanning app for Woolworths customers in South Africa. Hopefully consumers everywhere will have that opportunity someday soon.

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More

Dot Earth Blog: A Darker View of the Age of Us – the Anthropocene

Are we no wiser than bacteria smeared on agar, even as scientists identify an edge to the Petri dish?

I alerted a batch of scholars and scientists focused on climate change and sustainable development to my taped talk on "Paths to a 'Good' Anthropocene" at the annual meeting of the Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences.

Clive Hamilton, a professor of public ethics at Australia's Charles Sturt University and the author of "Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth About Climate Change," reacted bluntly. Read on for his reply to the group, which he also posted on his blog, followed by an initial reply from me. I'm going to edit a version of the video that includes my slides and will weigh in at greater length when that's ready.

Here's Hamilton's critique, which doesn't deal with the core argument of my talk (the need for a shift in goals from numerical outcomes to societal qualities) and instead focuses on my use of the word "good" in relation to an era he clearly sees as awful:

Thanks for sending the link to your talk on "Charting Paths to a 'Good' Anthropocene." Since you ask for responses let me express my view bluntly. In short, I think those who argue for the "good Anthropocene" are unscientific and live in a fantasy world of their own construction.

If we listen to what Earth system scientists, including climate scientists, are telling us, the warming of the Earth due to human causes is a slowly unfolding catastrophe. We already have 2.4 degrees C. of warming locked in and, even under the most optimistic mitigation scenarios, it will be very hard to avoid 4 degrees C. by the end of this century.

According to those best placed to make projections, a world 4 degrees C. warmer would be a very different kind of planet, one unsympathetic to most forms of life, including human life. Apart from climatic change, other manifestations of human impact in the Anthropocene, from interference in the nitrogen cycle to plastics in the oceans, only add to the grim outlook.

The advocates of the "good Anthropocene" do not attempt to repudiate the mass of scientific evidence; instead they choose to reframe it. As you declare so disarmingly in your talk: "You can look at it and go 'Oh my God', or you can look at it and go 'Wow, what an amazing time to be alive!' I kind of choose the latter overall." You are, of course, entitled to put on any kind of glasses you choose, including rose-colored ones; but that does not change what you are looking at.

So it would make no difference if I took the time to document again what you and your fellow "eco-pragmatists" are looking at (the World Bank report is a pretty good overview). Unlike deniers who feel compelled to attack the science, advocates of the good Anthropocene just seem to glide over it.

You believe that "with work … we can have a successful journey this century…. We are going to do OK." Personally, when I think about those toiling, vulnerable masses who are going to suffer the worst consequences of a warming world, I find it offensive to hear a comfortable, white American say, "We are going to do OK." I'm sorry if this seems harsh, but unless the I.P.C.C. has it completely wrong, much of the world's population is not included in your "we."

The eco-pragmatists who embrace the new geological epoch – Michael Schellenberger, Ted Nordhaus, Peter Kareiva, Erle Ellis, Emma Marris, Stewart Brand, Mark Lynas – express an unbounded faith in technology and human ingenuity, and view the natural world as ultimately conformable to human manipulation and resilient enough to bounce back from whatever humans throw at it.

For them the Anthropocene is not proof of humankind's shortsightedness or rapacity, let alone the product of a power structure defended vigorously by fossil energy interests. There are no planetary boundaries that limit continued growth in human population and economic advance. Humans can adapt and prosper in a hotter world because history proves our flexibility. In this view, as we enter the Anthropocene the only barrier to a grand new era for humanity is self-doubt and the "pessimism" of gloomy scientists. Like you, Ellis, Kareiva and the Breakthrough crowd see the new epoch as "an amazing opportunity," humanity's transition to a higher level of planetary significance.

It is not surprising that the eco-pragmatists attract support from conservatives who have doggedly resisted all measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions, defended the interests of fossil fuel corporations, and in some cases worked hard to trash climate science. These are the same people now drawn to geoengineering, especially solar radiation management, as a substitute for reducing emissions. For them, resorting to geoengineering justifies and entrenches the prevailing system, which is their overriding goal.

So the "good Anthropocene" is a story about the world that could have been written by the powerful interests that have got us into this mess and who are fighting so effectively to prevent us from getting out of it. In the long term this kind of thinking will prove more insidious than climate science denial.

If, against all the evidence, the eco-pragmatists choose to say "What an amazing time to be alive" we can understand the choice as a kind of coping strategy. Those who cope this way acknowledge and accept the facts about global warming up to a point, but they blunt the emotional meaning of the facts. But it is a maladaptive coping strategy, one that provides a balm for feelings of anxiety, fear and helplessness, yet impedes the appropriate action.

Many among the general public cope with global warming by "de-problematising" the threat using inner narratives such as "Humans have solved these sorts of problems before" and "Technology will always provide a solution." The eco-pragmatists provide an intellectual justification for this kind of wishful thinking. Tacking "good" onto "Anthropocene" may be an effective emotional reframing, but it is without scientific foundation.

It has been shown that humans can benefit from what psychologist Shelley Taylor calls "benign fictions", unrealistic stories about ourselves and the world that lead us to predict what we would prefer to see, rather than what is objectively most likely to happen. Yet these healthy illusions that can spur us on against the odds can become dangerous delusions when they continue to be held despite evidence from the outside world telling us we must change course.

In the end, grasping at delusions like "the good Anthropocene" is a failure of courage, courage to face the facts. The power of positive thinking can't turn malignant tumors into benign growths, and it can't turn planetary overreach into endless lifestyle improvements. Declaring oneself to be an optimist is often used as a means of gaining the moral upper hand: "Things may look bad but, O ye of little faith, be bold and cheerful like me."

Things are bad, and if we carry on as we are things will be very bad. It is the possibility of preventing bad turning into very bad that motivates many of us to work harder than ever. But pretending that bad can be turned into good with a large dose of positive thinking is, even more so than denying things are bad, a sure-fire way of ending up in a situation that is very bad indeed.

This was my initial e-mailed reply to Hamilton and the copied group (with shorthand tidied in a couple of spots):

Great input. What you take as conscious "framing," to me is much deeper than that (see Kahan et al's "cultural cognition" work; think about McKibben and Monbiot's reactions to Fukushima as another example).

I actually think we are in line on the importance — the primacy in fact — of limiting impacts form climate-related extremes on the world's poorest. I've made that point that that needs to be disconnected from work on emissions mitigation because the drivers of that vulnerability are far faster than climate change itself.

See my piece on the 2009 Shanahan et al paper as one example: "Debate Over Climate Risks – Natural or Not."

On your other points, too, I think there's more commonality than you infer. I've never embraced geo-engineering (except for work on enhanced air capture of CO2 as a long-haul imperative). I've written that it's unlikely we'll ever see solar-radiation management because no one will ever agree where to se the thermostat and no country will have such a direct national interest that it will proceed unilaterally.

See "Who Gets to Set the Global Thermostat?"

There's much more to say. For instance, I reject Hamilton's assertion that I'm expressing "an unbounded faith in technology and human ingenuity." I've actually expressly rejected that simple techno-fixes will win the day.

I also trust that while Hamilton and those who championed his view on Twitter clearly dislike the notion of a "good" Anthropocene, that doesn't mean they're hoping for a "bad" one. [Line added, 2:00 p.m.]

In the end, I think the best starting point remains the talk, with the slides. Stay tuned. If you can't wait, watch the barebones version here:

15.49 | 0 komentar | Read More