Great observation, Leon. I've noticed how scientists and citizens who recognize the link between land destruction and climate are always careful to make clear that they also recognize the influence of CO2, that it's not one or the other but both. Yet the CO2-only champions never recognize the land-change leg of climate. It's a kind of denial by omission.
Rob, if it’s not too much to ask, could you add a link to the next essay in the series at the end of each? Be easier to share link just to first essay, and those unfamiliar with Substack will be able to flow through to parts 2 & 3. Cheers!
Thanks for researching, thinking and posting this. Appreciated.
I often think there's nobody else who sees more to the future of earth than one gas in the atmosphere. It gives me hope to see that others think that too.
I see more than land and atmosphere. For one thing there's the salt oceans too.
Excellent telling of a complicated scientific subject for the rest of us that are not earth systems scientists.
I think that’s why Milan’s systems analysis of a “two legged” approach of climate study is so compelling yet so overlooked; western thinking is too linear regardless of the subject. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is easier to explain and bad actors (fossil fuels and their byproducts) more easily identified, debated and politicized. Earth science water-cycle effects, soil disturbance, large scale land use changes, industrialization and intensive agriculture - too many subjects in play in the system, not so easy to explain and too many potential bad actors, and thus not so easy to modify or reverse.
Rob, Glad I found your newsletter on SubStack. I find some of the best authors and best subjects via Medium as a backdoor of cross pollination and dog birding comment writers that often have similar subject interests and newsletters.
Fantastic, so interesting, thank you so much!
Thanks, Elisabeth!
This is fantastic, great explanation.
“The modelers didn’t appreciate his insights as to how their models were off, many simply refusing to believe what he was telling them.”
- sounding very much like a sort of climate denial really 😔
Great observation, Leon. I've noticed how scientists and citizens who recognize the link between land destruction and climate are always careful to make clear that they also recognize the influence of CO2, that it's not one or the other but both. Yet the CO2-only champions never recognize the land-change leg of climate. It's a kind of denial by omission.
Rob, if it’s not too much to ask, could you add a link to the next essay in the series at the end of each? Be easier to share link just to first essay, and those unfamiliar with Substack will be able to flow through to parts 2 & 3. Cheers!
Great idea, Leon. Done.
Thanks!
Rob
Thanks for researching, thinking and posting this. Appreciated.
I often think there's nobody else who sees more to the future of earth than one gas in the atmosphere. It gives me hope to see that others think that too.
I see more than land and atmosphere. For one thing there's the salt oceans too.
The number of those who see the climate as integral with life is growing. Thanks for being one of them.
Excellent telling of a complicated scientific subject for the rest of us that are not earth systems scientists.
I think that’s why Milan’s systems analysis of a “two legged” approach of climate study is so compelling yet so overlooked; western thinking is too linear regardless of the subject. Atmospheric carbon dioxide is easier to explain and bad actors (fossil fuels and their byproducts) more easily identified, debated and politicized. Earth science water-cycle effects, soil disturbance, large scale land use changes, industrialization and intensive agriculture - too many subjects in play in the system, not so easy to explain and too many potential bad actors, and thus not so easy to modify or reverse.
Thanks, Michael. Well put.
Rob, Glad I found your newsletter on SubStack. I find some of the best authors and best subjects via Medium as a backdoor of cross pollination and dog birding comment writers that often have similar subject interests and newsletters.