Travel. That was it. Here is the thing. Take the case of geometry. The and its not that the law says to do that but to do too rigid motions with eight goals citing goal siping. From your own experience is prescriptive in and exclusionary is imposing a uniformity. It doesnt say exactly what time the bell will ring or renders research recess we will not overstate but it is much more than we have ever seen in history of education. There isnt much that is totally prescriptive but one thing thats is in there but there should not be in mathematics acceleration they explicitly did not want to have a second track for kids that are interested in technical areas and they say thats this is an the standards there should not be a second track for a special course for kids who want to go into calculus no acceleration the course is that they list for the course is that they want and it may not be true in english i think that is vague but it is true in math there is no exploration. Thanks for coming and to build on the final statement the in the way to get there is certainly not common core you want to dig deep into the quality of legal arguments. Thank you very much for being here. [applause] [inaudible conversations] host derided her book i have changed my mind since 1982 about how big of a problem manmade Global Warming has become. What was your conclusion in 1980 to read or have you changed your mind . When i wrote my first book, i was skeptical of Global Warming and there was good reason at the time with very little science at that point it was for five years before raise Public Awareness i was aware environmentalism was day political ideology so those that are worried about Nuclear Winter of or massive famines we are now moving in that direction. So my skepticism was i have saved these people before. Fell i attended Climate Change meetings i have read deeply in the literature and have come to the conclusion that yes it could become a significant problem to the end of this century. Host is there a solution . Guest yes. Were already embarking upon and we have to transform over time the fossil fuels are the main problem they emit Carbon Dioxide but the greenhouse gas. So we have to be moving end the direction to produce this is probably the baseline power with more solar and wind power also one of the rituals ben hess more carbon acid the natural gas. Host to talk about Nuclear Power as a baseline but hasnt that trend been downward . That is in the United States. Correct. For those alibi to, i suspect that other countries like china or finland or france would go first then eventually they would wake up and when they change their mind to move very rapidly and that probably is what will occur. With those exciting new technologies. Way will get to that. This is a political argument lets talk about Global Warming you have quoted senator in off as a hoax of all gore said it is comparable to a the holocaust. So where does that why as a problem in your view . One of the problems and has occurred is a lot of the authority that people would rely upon used to believe their politicians but they dont anymore their Business Leaders in their priest and they dont anymore so the thing that they still cling to they tried to convince with their argument but what has happened when a particular issue becomes politicized people say science is on my side. So you can trust that anymore so they clave science is on my side but what they do is distort a messy hard field to get information so people are confused. Host what is the danger of Global Warming . One of the important things that we discuss in the book is sensitivity with the doubling of the concentration is 1 degrees centigrade if it turns out the warning is only 1 degree nobody would be worried about it it would be relatively easy to handle it but if it was on the high end it would have considerable concerns to say it is 10 degrees above average that would transform the way the world operates. What i worry about is we dont know these distinctions and scientists to tell us they are not sure which way it is going but in 40 years it is too late so we have to take out insurance policy of the high end might come true so they should be figuring out how to use your fossil fuels and non carbon based fuel. Guest. Host does that include a real . Guest yes. Interestingly i believe it is already on its way out. And then backed United States that the peak gasoline usage occurred. Host what will we be using . Is a technological solution essentially people will not want their cars. Then they sit in their driveway most of the time simpson in this city of electric cars fitted shows up in 30 seconds to take you where you want to go. There is a computer simulation and dennis the disguise of austin. That one that is onetenth the current size they could pick up the car is in 30 seconds as long as they dont have to wait more than five minutes. The only cost you one quarter now what it cost to own the car. S. A. Technical optimist but that will happen in 10 years i think. And we can see that were already getting used to that if we already use service is like lift and uber. In the eric city there is no reason to own a car you can be picked up like that. The middle of the road projections that net data special scenario that would have peaked at 9. 6 billion just over 9 billion the World Economy would have grown with 67 trillion the average income is 68,000 u. S. To do in combat over 100,000. That amounts of wealth and at enables people to buy health and education. Why . We did over the water and air quality is improving. But as they start moving up the Economic Development curve they want to get there kids education with health care and get a house with access to energy so theyre not careful about their outdoor environment. That is the great United States developed we had a lot more pollution in rivers and streams and the air and then said they really dont like this so we spend more money on regulation. And ben and billy through the transition and regulating since the 70s on average the pollutants are down between 60 and 70 above the amount of miles has doubled the economy has doubled but the air is a lot cleaner this is the trend that the wealthy people can do in the future. To your editor we will publish her book and make some money but i want to tell you if you predict the end of the world would have made a mistake. Unfortunately. Those who make a living by scaring people. Therein is dave beecher that pays more attention to bad news more than a good news and he said it is simple back into the plains of africa hundreds of thousands of years ago there are two types of people that is just the wind i dont care about that. But another one said that could be lying in. It turns out the guy who ran away more likely survive the and had four children have the one that was eaten. So were a descendant of those that are scared of every rustle in the breeze. And therefore,. Host Ronald Bailey who is paul ehrlich . The worlds worst. [laughter] he made age years career out of selling millions of books starting the late 60s with the population bomb. He is a biologist and a understand he used to be very good but if his book he declared flat out hundreds of millions of people will starve to death despite any. Period. And he assured me that i got the timing wrong that famine would occur. It is no
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.