Integral By Topic in this, or any, I-I forum implies that you have read COMMUNITY BASICS (found in the FILES section).en-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60217.2664)Re: Integral Climate Change, 31 Jan 2007 22:01:32 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:18908Heartwater0 slams Bush administration manipulation of science

Published: Wednesday, January 31, 2007
By Candace Page
Free Press Staff Writer

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., was still shaking his head at mid-afternoon Tuesday over an anecdote told at a morning hearing in Washington on the Bush administration's apparent political interference with government scientists studying climate change.

"There was a story about a scientist who got authorized to speak at a conference. He was prohibited from using the phrase 'global warming.' He was allowed to say 'global,' and he could say 'warming,' but he couldn't put them next to each other. It became a charade," Welch said.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is holding hearings on what Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., calls the administration's determination "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."

A number of scientists have complained publicly about the ways in which political appointees with no science background have rephrased their conclusions and altered their reports to downplay or suppress the significance of climate change.

Welch said he had read such newspaper accounts, but hearing the testimony made a greater impact.

"It's a stunning personal experience to hear directly from scientists whose life work has been compromised, who live in fear of retaliation or compromised careers if they adhere to their code of ethics as scientists," he said.

Two private advocacy organizations, the Government Accountability Project and the Union of Concerned Scientists, presented the committee with findings from in-depth interviews of 40 government scientists and a survey of nearly 300 more.

Nearly half said they had seen or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words "climate change" and similar terms from reports and other communications. Two in 5 said they had seen or personally experienced changes or edits that altered the meaning of their scientific findings.

Administration officials did not testify Tuesday. In the past, the White House has said it sought only to inject balance into reports on climate change. President Bush has acknowledged concerns about global warming, but strongly opposes mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

Welch said legislation might be needed to better protect scientists and whistleblowers, but that oversight by a Democratic Congress might by itself
pressure the administration to lessen its interference.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 30 Jan 2007 20:05:43 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:18866Heartwater0

Hi all, Big Smile [:D]

I would like to resurrect this Integral Climate Change thread. I am a little disappointed that there have been so many viewers and so few posts. Maybe some of our Integral Sustainability practitioners could contribute. The good news is that Annelene Decaux’s injunction, to read the websites she so generously supplied, have had a positive influence in getting me off the fence. So, I would like to respond to Ewan’s post 6932. You can find the list of links above at that post. Below are Annelene’s questions.

Read the web links…

As you do so, I invite you to conduct 2 inquiries (UL):

-          Do you feel trustful, or distrustful, of the material? What makes you trust, or distrust it? (some LL elements)

-          What else do you feel as you read the material? (e.g. fear, sadness, boredom, excitement, inspiration?)

When you’re done, take a moment and ask yourself (UL):

-          What did you learn from the exercise? About the topic? (LR) About what/who you trust? (LL) About how you learn? (UL)

-          What actions will you take based on what you learnt? (UR)

I read all of the web pages directed by the links. For a long time I have been aware of the unsustainable manner in which we as a species live on this planet, and have tried to account for this in my personal life choices, but have been swayed to sit on the fence of indecision on the issue of Global Warming; how bad, is it real, can we do anything, etc. I now feel that global climate change and its associated social, cultural, economic, health, and mental affects will be the defining challenge of this century.

I feel trusting of most of the material I have read because a lot of it is grounded in solid peer reviewed science. Also because of learning that large amounts of money have been poured into disinformation on the other side of the argument. I did a bit of research and spent some time reading the counter arguments to global warming--tried to feel into their fears and rejection of the idea of climate change. A lot of people that fear change or are happy with traditional business and belief systems have a lot to loose. Many companies and sustainability proponents see that those that make the shift have more profits to make in sustainable business practices than those that don’t.

Since completing Annelene’s exercise I have made significant changes, of which I will elaborate on a few. While I have lived off-grid and produced about 60% of my own food for many years now, I felt it important to further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While we generate all of our electricity by photovoltaic panels we have used propane for refrigeration and cooking. Recently we upgraded our solar system by the addition of two more panels, which involved buying another mounting rack, to be able to run an electric refrigerator. I also bought 4 additional panels as an investment; the price of panels has doubled in the last 6 years due to demand.

I have also started a sustainability awareness group in my local community and hope to introduce Integral Sustainability…we will see. Tipping my scales also gave me motivation to tip my career into the field of sustainability. We are also remodeling a building we own into a multi purpose business and are now engaged in building it ”Green.”

As I read the material I felt a twinge of sadness because all of the links seemed to be resonating from the rational lower right quadrant and I don’t believe that the situation can be solved at just the rational wave or that the initiatives can be successfully implemented as just techno/economic solutions without an integral approach. Though I will have to state that after reading most of Barrett Brown’s papers from the FILES and considering Ken’s writings in some of his “excerpt” material, I feel that shifts in the Lower Right quadrant, i.e., better technology, market acceptability, green materials accessibility, etc., are extremely effective tools to shifting the other quadrants.

I also would like to report a shift that has emerged as a result of this little exercise. As I have been aware of the sustainability issues for the last 30 years or so I have taken more of a pessimistic view of the outcome as an imagined future and I must admit that sitting down and being further convinced that global climate change, in my mind, is a definitive fact, was more depressing. From continued reading and investigation I started to delve into the solutions. Reading “Natural Capitalism” inspired me to see the future in a more positive light; more of a potentiality.

I would love to hear what others have noticed, are doing, are feeling; and Ewan, I would like to hear back from Annelene.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 29 Oct 2006 01:31:56 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:12975Heartwater0 Ewan and all,

I am about half way through the reading list. Please tell Annelene that I will get back and answer the questions she possed. I am discovering some interesting things from the inside that I think are important but want to finish before I post. Meanwhile I have been going nuts with winter's oncoming and closing fall duties around the farm.

However this is just out so I thought you should be aware of this new Climate Change movie. See it.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 25 Sep 2006 14:42:48 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:9237Heartwater0

Hi Ewan,

I’ve been away from this thread too long and am very grateful to return and see your kind post from Annelene. Thank you Annelene. I will embrace the injunction you present and see what I come up with. I so much appreciate your efforts and the links as I am in a period or re-self education in the matters.

I have just returned from a science symposium gathered around works at the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument and was amazed at the vast amount of research going on related to climate change in the 1.9 million acre monument. There was startling evidence that the southwest has just been through the coolest wettest 30 years in recent geological history and that we should expect to see our six year drought extend for around another 30-40 years.

I also would like to report again about BP solar panels that were previously praised in this thread. In the last month, three of my six panels have had diode failures and have been sent out for repair. I am quite disappointed as they are our sole source of power and I feel that the technology should run a little longer than 5 years without problems. So if you are considering solar; get panels that have on site-replaceable diodes rather than sealed units.

Hi Harv,

Fully agree with what you say. I guess if time is a factor then until we reach a consensus through integral cross fertilization and actually address the issue on a global scale; each of us that feel inclined to do so can be the change we want to see in ways that work.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 07 Sep 2006 00:04:19 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:6993hbishop0

Hi, John,

I agree, I had hoped to see more sustainbility discussion with the IU Presents papers (I was caught in time crunch between semesters) and in other forums, but it is a dynamic  focus with integrally minded people I know within the Denver area.

From my perspective, accepting the frame of climate change as real or not real is  accepting the terms of debate offered by some in the US right. The ranks of climate change sceptics (scientists) has always been small is getting smaller. Even some comentators on the right have admitted time and science have verified much of what Al Gore has to say in "An Inconvenent Truth." But setting aside the either/or question people need to talk about  questions about the possible severity and potential consequences and the range of appropriate social and political responses. And that will need all sides at the table and that is why I believe an integral approach is absolutely essential, especially through cross level communication discussed by Barrett and others. Complex science and policy raises a number of difficult areas related to democracy and an informed citizenry and leaders. Citizens can be intimidated by experts, may not have time to review literature, and be faced with unfamiliar jargon. Citizens have been lied to by experts (50s era nuclear tests). Science runs on slow time and is comfortable with uncertainty, debate and verification. Policy moves on a faster track from political pressure and often without certainty. When dealing with complex issues governing officials often don't have full expertise and rely on expert staff (not elected) or outside experts or short summaries of more complex studies. Even with good information they may be forced to rely on what is politically possible rather than the "rational" policy choice.

Hi Ewan,

Thanks to you and Annalene for the great links and resources and AQAL exercise.


Re: Integral Climate Change, 06 Sep 2006 14:51:49 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:6932ewantownhead0

Here is a post from Annelene Decaux, a climate change scientist, and Integral follower.  She dosn't have a I-I membership, but really wanted to contribute this post to the discussion, so here it is!  Enjoy...



Here’s an all-quadrant exercise for you:


Set aside one or two hours, and do your own research on global warming on the internet (LR). If you want, and for starters, you may want to peruse some of the links below -- or come up with your own “research protocol”.


As you do so, I invite you to conduct 2 inquiries (UL):

-          Do you feel trustful, or distrustful, of the material? What makes you trust, or distrust it? (some LL elements)

-          What else do you feel as you read the material? (e.g. fear, sadness, boredom, excitement, inspiration?)


When you’re done, take a moment and ask yourself (UL):

-          What did you learn from the exercise? About the topic? (LR) About what/who you trust? (LL) About how you learn? (UL)

-          What actions will you take based on what you learnt? (UR)


Enjoy! Here are some links:


***If you have only a few minutes to spare


Science’s Article on the scientific consensus on climate change

And this more recent one on the same topic

Pew Center’s Answers to Key Questions Raised by M. Crichton in State of Fear

More comments on State of Fear on the Real Climate blog

Woods Hole Research Center’s Beginner's guide to understanding the issue of global warming

Especially this article

And you may want to spend some more time with the excellent Pew Center website and the Real Climate blog.


***If you are more serious about this (these are only some of many links)


Climate science

NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies

American Institute of Physics

MIT Center for Global Change Science

Hadley Center



Center for Clean Air Policy

The Climate Group

Resources for the Future

Pew Center


US Administration



US Climate Change Science Program

US Climate Change Technology Program

US Global Change Research Program

US Global Change Research Information Office

California Climate Change Policy and Programs -- find out what’s going on in your state!


Some other countries

UK Environmental Protection Agency

European Commission

Australia Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade


United Nations

UN Environmental Program Climate Graphics

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Full text of the Rio Convention (1992, acknowledges global warming as a result of man-made emissions, entered into force in 1994, US signatory)

Full text of the Kyoto Protocol (1997, provides a framework for concerted action for the parties to the Convention, entered into force in 2005, US non-signatory)


Some other international bodies

International Energy Agency

World Resources Institute

International Institute for Sustainable Development

World Bank on climate change and on carbon policy



Edison Electric Institute

American Petroleum Institute



Business and investors

Carbon Disclosure Project

World Business Council for Sustainable Development

International Chamber of Commerce


Energy R&D

Stanford Global Climate and Energy Project

International Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas R&D Program

Global Energy Strategy Technology Program

DOE Carbon Sequestration Program


CO2 emissions trading markets

Point Carbon

EU Emissions Trading Scheme

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (US North-Eastern States)

Chicago Climate Exchange

International Emissions Trading Association

GHG Protocol


Climate Trust

World Bank’s Carbon Finance Unit


Climate news

Climate Ark


BBC Climate

Re: Integral Climate Change, 24 Aug 2006 17:10:49 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:5209Heartwater0

Hi Harv,

I read both of Barrett’s documents and quite enjoyed them. I love what I-I has done with levels in relation to giving them names that are identifiable. This was first introduced to me at the Integral Ecology and Sustainability Seminar in 2004.

There isn’t a lot of conversation going on on the I-U Presents forum. I find that in the integral groups or people that have populated the Integral Naked forums in the past the sustainability subject is a bit lacking in interest. What do you think?

Hi Ewan,

I have heard a bit of Crichton’s books summaries. I don’t doubt that the scientific communities discredited some of his stuff. I have heard that he postulated that we cannot know about climate change because of the weather’s chaotic behavior. While I recognize weather patterns are fractal, chaotic systems I do not think that the reduction of climate to the sum of weather is a correct assumption. While daily and weekly weather is chaotic, and inaccurately predictable, climate on the other hand is more predictable based on long term trends. The conservative right in the USA have been publicizing that climate change is a leftist liberal scam based on the unpredictability of weather (see Rush Linbaugh).

With regard to the social/cultural aspects: I guess the big question is; the scientific community makes observations in the RH quadrants and the data or facts are subject to LH quadrant interpretation. How do you, we and all of us interpret those facts or observations? Is there really a thing called climate change going on?

My feeling is that if some of the observers are correct there is a tipping point within the earth’s planetary climatic system and that once it is reached an accelerated climate shift will carry forth which will dramatically alter business as usual. It seems that it is the convincing or shift in the LL belief system, based on values, that needs to tip to be in preventative mode. Then again I may be deluded by my own beliefs in climate change. This seems to be a major issue and I would like to feel my brain, mind and heart are all on the same page.

Do any of you have a convincing paradigm for knowing if climate change is real or not?

Re: Integral Climate Change, 12 Aug 2006 01:47:18 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:4136hbishop0

Hi John,

It's great that there is pre-IU general interet access to "The Eye of the Storm." ! 

Coincidently Barrett's articles have just been posted on IU presents with some very interesting discussion threads on integral sustainability developing in the new IU Forum.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 10 Aug 2006 16:50:21 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:4019ewantownhead0

There is a climate cgange pod over at zaadz with a little debate, worth checking out...

And as I was the one to mention the Crichton book, here is a link from the zaadz pod about it, posted by C4Chaos.

Much of Crichtons findings have been 'dismissed' and 'disproved' by the Scientific community, although from my own readings I didn't think that was totally fair.  It would appear that some of the slants on the research he uses in the book has been disputed by the actual researchers themselves (pretty conclusive!) but they obviously only attend to the objective scientific stuff.  The crux of Crichton's argument often rests more on social and cultural aspects, which arn't really mentioned.



Re: Integral Climate Change, 03 Aug 2006 04:40:10 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:2999Heartwater0 Harv,

This post has been haunting me all day. I know Barrett sent me Chris's thesis link when it came out but just couldn't remember...but ahh

To read Chris Reidy's Phd. thesis "The Eye of the Storm" go here

or if this link doesn't work...
Re: Integral Climate Change, 02 Aug 2006 14:59:20 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:2870Heartwater0 all,

I am glad to see serious discussion regarding climate change. I have been very perplexed by the issue. From reading I get the idea that we are moving into the frying pan and that the in the last year, the folks that study this stuff are discovering more feedback loops than before that heat us up. In my local area over the last twenty years I have observed steadily increasing changes in snow pack, late freezes, early springs and aquifer drops. The forest above us is about 60% dead. “They” say it is climate related. Others say that it is just a long drought; others blame the environmentalists for resisting logging.

Bishop, Thanks for the info leads…I can’t wait to delve into Chris’s thesis. There is truly a lot of good stuff coming out of Australia regarding sustainability.

Turtle, I agree BP is moving in the right direction…I’ve got 6 BP 150s good panels.

Jason, I embrace your view that climate change or not, our civilization on this blue marble would be greatly enhanced and avoid a lot of otherwise present and future problems if we moved toward a more sustainable lifestyle. At a recent local government meeting concerning long range planning I brought up the issue of sustainability. The response was that; “sustainability is a liberal buzz word and was not for serious consideration.” I guess I have my work cut out for me.

Ewan, Great thread, thanks. I have not yet read “State of Fear.” I’ll put it on the list. I am currently reading “The Revenge of Gaia” by James Lovelock a pretty passionate plea from Orange that the sky is already falling. He states in his introduction that it’s already to late and billions will die and suggests a retreatist strategy to save civilization.

I feel very frustrated to wade through much data and interact with all the polarized first tier views, including MGM guilt and shame while awaiting a significant tipping point of second tier to shift perception and resultant effective action.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 06 Jul 2006 18:40:45 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:1049hbishop0

Hi Turtle,

Many thanks for the kind words.

I'm with you. Meeting people where they are is essential. I have found in applying integral approaches in the classroom that students tend to relax when the strengths of their basic worldview are honored and in many cases they are then more open to other perspectives.

BP is great example of something that can appeal to orange. According to what I read in "It's Alive" The Coming Convergence of Information, Biology and Business" by Christopher Meyer and Stan Davis BP projected reducing greenhouse emissions and meeting Kyoto treaty standards within 5 years, but actually achieved those goals in two years all the while remaining the second most profitable oil company in the world. And they did it not with a big massive plan, but by soliciting lots of small carbon reduction ideas from employees!

I've been very excited by the ongoing work of I-I's Barrett Brown (this month's featured teacher)developing level appropriate messages about sustainability along with other skillful means and eagerly await that material and more being widely available with the coming launch of IU. On a related note Barrett and Sean Haregns mentioned at this spring's I-WISE seminar that Al Gore (a fan of "The Marriage of Sense and Soul") had requested material on the integral approach to ecology and sustainability so more signs of hope Big Smile [:D] along with the success of "An Inconveient Truth."

Here's to staying out of the frying pan!

Re: Integral Climate Change, 05 Jul 2006 22:29:27 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:980randomturtle0, thanks for that informative response!

I really like the idea of aproaching the dangers of climate change by appealing to everyone's good side, rather than triggering their fight or flight response, since rationality flies out the window when that happens. No one wants to see the planet fried (well, almost no one). So it's a good starting point, I think.

If we can approach people at their level, and with a positive, solution oriented request, they are likely to be cooperative. And I see that this is what you say Chris Reidy is proposing. Good stuff!

I understand that some big corporations are slowly starting to get the idea here. I think British Petroleum (BP) is moving in a more integral direction, and branching out into sustainable energy business, including solar (I've got one of their solar panels!). So that may be a good model, even if imperfect, to use with the Orange level folks.

Peace, Love, and Bicycles,
Re: Integral Climate Change, 03 Jul 2006 22:22:57 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:812hbishop0

Hey Ewan,

A complete and fair synoposis would be difficult as it is a 500 plus page document, but I'll throw out a few of the ideas that I resonated with the caution that it's my interpretation of the work.Smile [:)]

 I would differ with your perspective somewhat in that I view climate change as a very serious issue but also a touchstone issue- one that if addressed in an integral way would hold the key to moving towards sustainability across the board. I do, however, totally agree with your view that scare tactics are hugely counter productive and a lazy way to do politics ("Someday there will be a disaster and people will see that boomeritis greens have the answer" doesn't cut it). (For another critique of tradtional environmentalism that discusses climate change politics in a new way see the free PDF download "The Death of Environmentalism: Global warming in a Post-Environmental World." A Google serach will pull up the paper. Although not explicitly integral many integral ecology folks felt it contained second tier elements. The authors Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus are expanding it to a book due in a year or so.)

Chris Reidy's AQAL thesis deals with the issue in all its complexity and ambiguity and brings interiors into the discussion (as you note above). While dealing with a specifically Australian context I believe that many of his ideas would apply in other countries. He argues for a deliberative democratic process adressing the quadrants and levels. He would begin with meetings in civil society (to create publcity and impetus for for change and pressure on governent). These meetings would bring together experts from a variety of scientific disciplines and stakeholders (affected businesses and industries) to address science and  policy impacts ( LR) as well as including citizens and policy makers in the process. Individual citizen behavior would be addressed (UR). In the LL and UL competing values would be made explict through a series of discussions about desirable futures, feasibility and evlauting impacts. Solutions would be designed to appeal to various levels- some regulation for tradtionals, market approaches for moderns, and participatory dialogue for postmodern-greens. Traditionals would be in sync with government leadership, moderns with investment opportunity and developing new technology and postmodern greens with environmental ethics. He also has developed proposed safeguards so that citizen members are not overwhelmed by experts and stakeholders.

Re: Integral Climate Change, 01 Jul 2006 11:35:27 GMTee28e699-b6ce-41f9-9b68-f4b3d2b14a5b:712ewantownhead0

Hi Jason And Harv,


They are indeed all very pressing matters, and ones I contemplate a great deal.  The issues you mention are undenyably pressing, and I'm exciting by some of the more Integral approaches to these issues, have you read Natural Capitalism?

Sustainability has to be the way of the future, no doubt, however, I often see it lumped in with climate change, when sometimes they need to be seen as very seperate issues, does that make sense?

I try to stay as open to the issue, and evidence as possible, and currently I still feel quite ambiguous about the whole thing.  However, whether it is in fact a reality or not, I often feel like Climate Change can be used as a bit of self-righteous scare tactic.  I'm not so sure thats the most compassionate or honourable way to justify the drive toward sustainabilty.

Ultimately however, as Ken points out, the biggest constraint is a general disregard for interiors, and interior development.  Here's to some new youthfully Integral energy...!



Thanks for the heads up.  I look forward to getting my hands on that!  You have read it I presume?  A sneaky synopsis perhaps?