00:01Hi. So I'd like to start with a quote from Heidegger, in part because it's been a long day.

00:12The last thing you wanted to see beginning the last presentation was a quote from a German metaphysician.

00:19I therefore proved that life is not fair.

00:23Second reason I like this, those of you that know Heidegger know that…

00:27…these are the only two sentences he ever wrote that you can understand…

00:30…without the use of powerful pharmaceuticals that are still illegal in California.

00:36Thirdly, he's right. Particularly the last part.

00:41"The flight into tradition, out of a combination of humility and presumption, can bring about nothing in itself…

00:47…other than self-deception and blindness in relation to the historical moment."

00:51I would like to submit that, in fact, in spite of our good work, in spite of our efforts…

00:56…in spite of the fact that we try to reconceptualize the world, we are in fact deceiving ourselves and we are blind.

01:02And that if you think about it, that's an inherent…in the framing of geodesign.

01:13For a moment, take yourself out of your planning or operational box and think about geodesign, literally.

01:21And what does it suggest to you? It suggests to you the fact that what you are working on…

01:26…is not the design of individual items, individual artifacts…

01:30…but in fact there is one more scale that was left out of the last presentation, and that is the scale of global systems.

01:36And that we are, right now, at an age where we are designing global systems and we are pretending to ourselves not to…

01:45…precisely because we want to deceive ourselves and we want to be blind…

01:50…because if we're not, we have to accept responsibility for it.

01:53Let me give you an example. There's a fellow at Columbia, some of you probably know him, Klaus Lackner…

01:57…great guy, kind of weird, and what he has done is he has developed a system…

02:04…where you can extract carbon dioxide out of the ambient atmosphere.

02:09You can do it at a fairly high price, but not totally irrational, and you can do it and still…

02:17…even if you're burning fossil fuel to power the system, have a positive gain for the atmosphere.

02:23Now I want you to think about what that actually means in terms of design and responsibility.

02:29If my approach to global climate change is the Kyoto Protocol, then my response is, Oh Lord, give it up.

02:36Do not use fossil fuels. I'm not going to ask how many people in here drive SUVs. Do not do that.

02:42You are evil and if you give it up we will all be safe, and so would the polar bears.

02:48But then I go to Klaus Lackner's technology, right? And he's extracting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

02:55What have I suddenly turned that into? It's a design problem. What do you want?

03:02You want an atmosphere of about 280 parts per million equivalent?

03:06It's what we started with before the Industrial Revolution.

03:08Now, I cannot guarantee that there won't be glaciers bearing down on New York City…

03:13…but I can guarantee that most people except in New York City probably won't care.

03:19You want what? 350? We're a little bit above 350, but 350's nice. I can live in Phoenix at 350. It's okay. We can do 350.

03:27So I'll give you 350. But maybe you're Russia or Canada and you kind of like the idea that you're going to get…

03:33…a whole bundle of new resources while everybody else is suffering.

03:38I wouldn't say that about Canada. Take your choice on Russia.

03:43So what do you want? 480? So what do we got? We got a design problem, right?

03:51What kind of world are you going to give me? And it's got all the classic questions.

03:56Who gets to decide? You here? You elites? Who's deciding now? Well, that's a good question, isn't it?

04:08So you have a world that is already being designed. You cannot avoid that higher scale.

04:15You may want to, but in good conscience, you can no longer avoid it.

04:21So what I want to do is I want to talk a little bit about earth systems engineering, some of the issues that it raises.

04:29I'm going to use water as an example because I come from Phoenix…

04:33…and if you don't use water they don't let you back in the city. But it applies across the board.

04:39All of these systems are extraordinarily complex, extraordinarily difficult, and we are, by and large, blind to them.

04:48Think about the ways that we're approaching global climate change.

04:52It's either (A) the Kyoto Protocol, the "just say no" approach, which has worked so well with drugs…

05:00…or (B) it's geoengineering, which is a bunch of guys out at Lawrence Livermore dreaming up…

05:07…some weird thing to do to the environment that's going to be strong enough and powerful enough…

05:11…to change the entire environment, but hey, it's not going to have any other impacts.

05:17Which means, you people in California really are consuming those pharmaceuticals.

05:23Okay, so why earth systems engineering?

05:25Well, in the first place, it's because you reach a point where you can no longer ignore what you're actually doing.

05:33And I submit that we are close to that point. Some of the examples, global climate change.

05:38We've mentioned that. That's the one everybody knows.

05:40The important thing to realize about global climate change is that a lot depends on how you want to define it, right?

05:48So if you define it as a problem, then it has solutions.

05:55But if you define it as a condition, a condition of seven billion people that's coupled…

06:00…to changes in virtually every other earth system--nitrogen, phosphorous, economic, financial, fossil fuels, culture.

06:10If that's what it is, then all of these simple solutions people have been talking about fail.

06:17And you're getting into a much, much more complex and dangerous world.

06:21Major natural cycles--carbon, nitrogen, quite obvious.

06:25Phosphorous. Phosphorous is kind of interesting. People are starting to get a little worried about phosphorous.

06:29It's a mined product, by and large, absolutely critical for agriculture.

06:34So we had a meeting at ASU of people who are beginning to think of phosphorous as an earth system…

06:40…and what we should do about it. And the suggestion was made by a totally off-the-wall academic…

06:48…that phosphorous actually could be considered a human right.

06:52You talk about water as a human right. I can generally find you water, but phosphorous…

06:57…I can't find you that, and you can't do agriculture without it. So maybe phosphorous should be a human right.

07:03The fertilizer people at the meeting were not impressed.

07:11Biodiversity. We've talked a lot about biodiversity.

07:15Biodiversity, as an earth system, illustrates another profound point, which is…

07:20…unless you really understand what you're dealing with…

07:22…you're liable to make some very bad conceptual mistakes.

07:25Most of the conservation biologists I know, as well as most of the public…

07:29…is aware of the fact that there is a huge crisis in biodiversity.

07:32The synthetic biologists I know say, No, what you've got is a cusp.

07:37You're at a historic point where biology is shifting from being a natural science with evolved biodiversity…

07:46…to being a design science with synthetic biodiversity with designed biodiversity.

07:54We are putting as much information into biological systems as you are losing out there.

07:58That's a hypothesis. I have no idea how you figure out the information content of biology, but that's the argument.

08:07Now, leave aside whether or not any of us are comfortable with that. I would assume most of us aren't.

08:12Leave aside whether or not the amount of information being exchanged between designed systems…

08:17…and evolved systems is actually somewhere equivalent, because I have no idea how to think about that.

08:23But ask yourself a fundamental question. Does it matter if that in fact is happening?

08:27Suppose it's a scenario. Does it matter if it's happening? Well, yes, it does. Why?

08:32Because if I am looking at evolved biodiverse communities…

08:36…I'm looking at communities that tend to evolve toward stability.

08:39If I'm looking at designed biodiversity, I am looking at biological systems…

08:43…that are being designed for economic or some other throughput.

08:47There's a huge difference. And the primary difference is in stability.

08:53So if I move towards a designed biodiversity, I am moving towards a much less stable system.

08:59You don't even begin to think about that until you begin to understand…

09:02…that the biodiversity crisis is in fact something that's a little more complicated.

09:08The economy. We probably better not say anything about that. Sell euros. I will leave it at that.

09:14Technology systems. Technology systems are absolutely critical in determining how these…

09:20…earth systems are going to evolve over time. And yet we tend to ignore them.

09:25I work a lot with people in the school of sustainability.

09:28Most of them are blithely unaware that even as I speak there are people at Stanford and Harvard medical schools…

09:33…trying to figure out how to get everybody to live to 150.

09:37In fact, the mantra there is that the person to live to 150 with a high quality of life…

09:41…has already been born in this country. Have they? I haven't a clue. Is it a plausible scenario? Yes, it is.

09:48They have a research program. They know what they're looking for.

09:51They know what they need to find. And they're pretty convinced that they've got it.

09:54Now, let's assume it's a scenario, which is a good way to think about these kinds of future technologies, not a prediction.

10:01But let's ask if it's a reasonably probable scenario.

10:04What happens to virtually everything we think we know about sustainability? Down…the…tubes.

10:11Why? Because I'll start getting people living to 150 in developed economies, consuming far more resources…

10:19…using far more energy, and doing weird things that I had not planned on…

10:23…back when I was doing sustainability in good old 2011.

10:29Technology, particularly technology that's evolving across the entire frontier…

10:34…nano, bio, information and communication technology, the stuff that we work directly with.

10:39When technology accelerates across the entire frontier…

10:42…then what you've got is extraordinary unpredictability and contingency.

10:48How contingent? The human as a design space. Is there anything about yourselves…

10:55…that you think should not be designed by some twit like me?

11:01Because if there is, you'd better figure out how you're going to protect it…

11:04…because otherwise, I guarantee you I'm going after it.

11:10What's that going to do to all of these predictions we're making about sustainability and biodiversity and resources?

11:16It blows them out the door. The future is a lot more unpredictable than you think it is.

11:23Is it going to be terrible? I have no idea. The data won't tell me.

11:27But it does tell me that the way we think about our world is profoundly broken…

11:32…and it's broken just at the time we need to be using all the imagination, all of the skill that we have…

11:38…to try to break out of the obsolete barriers to thought that inhabit every one of us.

11:45Social and cultural behavior. Enough about that. Let's go to water.

11:50Alright, before we go to water, this is a little bit of a schematic about how you might begin thinking about climate change.

11:57Why don't we think about climate change that way?

11:59Think of all the politics that are involved in any one of those particular quadrants and that explains it.

12:06Earth systems engineering. Why is it difficult? Well, first and obviously, it's the complexity.

12:12Now again, I want to remind you that I'm not raising these issues just because I want to be contentious, although it's kind of fun.

12:20I'm raising them because that's the world you've already got. This is not the world you're going to get.

12:25This is not the world that Stevenson thinks you'll get or Gibson thinks you'll get.

12:31This is the world you've already got. You're trying to struggle with climate change. You're doing a great job.

12:37How many years has the Kyoto Protocol been going on? And how many years have our emissions continued to go straight up? I rest my case.

12:48They integrate across very complicated systems. This is where thinking about GIS becomes really interesting, right?

12:56Suppose I was doing…well, Phoenix actually had Phoenix 20/20.

13:00It was a kind of study that you've seen some examples of here.

13:04What happens when I begin to reconceptualize Phoenix though in terms of the financial networks that it's a part of…

13:10…in terms of the technologies that it's developing, that're going to change the way that it functions?

13:15That may change the way that people operate. I really don't know.

13:22But what's interesting is, I begin to cut across a lot of very different categories.

13:27The Calgary presentation this morning I thought was particularly interesting. Why?

13:32Because there were a couple of categories of data that were just pulled out of there. Why were they pulled out of there?

13:37Well, because they would have given the wrong answers. How objective does that make your entire process?

13:45So I want to…I want to understand medical marijuana, because I want you to be able to read Heidegger, okay?

13:56So everything I read tells me that marijuana is very damaging to you. How do I know that?

14:02I know that because of all the research that's being done.

14:06But unless you know that the federal government tries not to fund research that shows marijuana in a good light…

14:14…and won't give permission to use a controlled drug if they think that you're going to do an experiment that shows that…

14:20…then you're not going to realize that, yeah, you got a lot of data, but it's all skewed.

14:25There is nothing objective about data.

14:30The only thing data do is they make it more interesting to play subtle games with the political process.

14:38Alright, water. So, water, we use a lot of water. I think you probably knew that.

14:48One of the interesting things about water though…

14:51…and it's good to look at sort of high-level patterns before you dive into details.

14:56One of the interesting things about water is that we have managed to decouple it from GDP growth.

15:02A lot of times there's an assumption that resources need to continue growing with GDP growth.

15:08What this example tells you, not much in case you're interested, excuse me, unless you're interested in water.

15:13Well, what this tells you is that these are very complicated systems that may be displaying patterns that we don't expect.

15:21To take another case. You're the EPA. You're in charge of figuring out if CFCs are a good idea or not.

15:28And you think they're a pretty good idea. Why?

15:31They substitute for bad chemicals, they protect workers, they're stable so they don't impact environments.

15:40How are you supposed to know that while your back is turned it's taking out the stratospheric ozone layer?

15:46How do you know that? You know that only if you've got enough imagination to win a Nobel Prize.

15:53How much are we missing because we're lacking in imagination?

15:58How much are we tying ourselves to ideas and concepts and assumptions…

16:03…that at best are incrementally valid and at worst are increasingly dysfunctional? So anyway, this gets at that.

16:12So what is water? I asked my students this, and they tended to regard it as the sort of comment…

16:19…that a whacked-out professor would make, but it turns out water's actually fairly complex, right?

16:26It's a material, sure. It's a commodity. But most importantly it's a legal construct.

16:32Why does Phoenix worry about water? Because we don't have the Colorado flowing down to us?

16:37No, we got the Colorado. We're cool with that. We worry about water because California has senior water rights.

16:44One of the rules about water, as an acting assumption, is that California always has senior water rights.

16:50I don't care who you are. You could be in Colorado and you can live on the flippin' glacier…

16:55…and you can bet California's got the water rights. I don't know how they did that.

17:01But that's what it is, right? It's a legal construct. It's also a cultural construct, and a very, very bitter one.

17:07Is water a private good or a public good? Is it a human right?

17:11If it's a human right, that's code for "don't give it to private firms"…

17:16…because they'll charge for it and you can't charge for a human right. What does it mean? What is it?

17:25That's a very deceptively simple question, and it's a question that I keep coming back to…

17:31…and kept coming back to as I was listening to some of the discussions today.

17:37GIS is interesting, but how much of the phase space of these kinds of systems does GIS get at?

17:46How do you integrate GIS into an understanding of these systems?

17:51I haven't answered that and I don't intend to because I don't have enough time.

17:57Water's a technological construct. One of the things that people don't realize is how clean we can make sewage water.

18:08People have an inherent dislike of drinking sewage. Now, this leads to some really interesting patterns.

18:12They'll drink polluted groundwater, but they won't drink tertiary treated water because it came out of sewers.

18:22And that's understandable, right? That's a disgust response. So how do people get around it?

18:25Well, Orange County gets around it by taking its treated sewage water and pumping it into the ground…

18:30…and then pulling it out of a well, and miraculously it has become groundwater and people drink it.

18:38This is a really good idea, so now we're doing it in Scottsdale.

18:45My point would be something that I think we need to remember…

18:49…particularly because most of us are techies, and that is, it is not a techy world.

18:55Do not think that you are manipulating the policy makers and the sneaks and the spinners.

19:00They are manipulating you. Just know that they're doing it.

19:05Okay. Transport. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

19:07Energy. Political power, essential for life, blah, blah, blah.

19:12It's the new oil. That's ridiculous. I don't know who came up with that slogan.

19:18If I take oil and I put it through a cracking system and then I put it in my car…

19:23…and I burn the gasoline, I get CO2 out. CO2 is not oil.

19:28If I go to the bathroom, I get sewage out. It's still water. I may not want to drink it, but it's still water.

19:35So I don't know where people get this idea.

19:37But more importantly, water gives us the same kind of example as climate change did, right?

19:44And that is, water is an absolute scarcity. There are published reports from very good scientists…

19:51…that will tell you that Arizona is going to run out of water. We are not going to run out of water.

19:59We may run out of cheap water, but if we have to…

20:04…we will put plants in the Gulf of California or in the Pacific Ocean and we will desalinate and we will get water.

20:12We will not run out of water. What does that mean?

20:15That means that what we are taking to be an absolute resource constraint is a price point issue.

20:20What was CO2? An absolute constraint. No. No.

20:25If I can take it out of the atmosphere at a high price, it's a price point issue.

20:30If you tell me you want to solve global climate change tomorrow, we can start putting up those plants.

20:38It's a price point issue. And water is a price point issue. What does that begin to say?

20:44That begins to say that there are characteristics of these earth systems that keep driving us back to design responsibility, right?

20:55If you want very expensive water, we can give you that.

20:59It will have social impacts that are fairly profound. But we can do it.

21:06The question is, What are you going to design for? What are your design objectives?

21:10What are your real design constraints?

21:13We have a very poor understanding of that because what we tend to do is substitute ideology for understanding…

21:20…particularly when we don't have much understanding.

21:23And that can be a very dangerous process when things are moving as rapidly as they are.

21:27Case in point--Durban fails. What's the result on geoengineering?

21:31There are calls now in Washington for implementing geoengineering…

21:35…and they're citing the failure of Durban as a reason to do that.

21:39I don't know how many of you have looked at geoengineering technologies…

21:42…things like putting aluminum balloons in the stratosphere to reflect off sunlight…

21:46…putting sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, that's a favorite one.

21:51It nucleates clouds, clouds reflect sunlight, everybody's happy…

21:55…except we were trying to take sulfur out of the atmosphere, but, hey.

22:01These are design issues. What we are doing is we are avoiding the responsibility…

22:07…for a design that we in fact have been implementing for at least 200 years.

22:12We really got good at terra forming with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. We just never admitted it to ourselves.

22:20So now when we look out and it's a designed world, what do we do?

22:22Well, we blame other people. The auto companies did it. Some point that runs out.

22:31Okay. Distribution challenges. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

22:39Now there are…there are of course instances when water can run out.

22:45And part of that is when you run into transition phases.

22:48If there were a sudden drought and we had to get water quickly in a place like Phoenix…

22:54…it would be very hard to do it, because everybody else is drawing, maxed out.

22:59It's amazing how much water the Colorado is supposed to have in it, if you add up all the water rights on the Colorado.

23:05One of the things that you always want to remember if you're doing water rights…

23:08…is pick a time when the river is really flowing and then allocate water rights.

23:13And everybody will be relatively happy and then the river goes at about two-thirds of that and the rest is written in lawsuits.

23:21But you can have transition issues, and this becomes, again, part of the planning dilemma, right?

23:29How do I plan for transition issues that could be fairly substantial?

23:34Another part of the planning dilemma--if I'm looking at something like say the everglades…

23:42…or even climate, and I say I want to go back.

23:46So let's say that I poll the world in some miraculous way…

23:49…and 98 percent of the world says they want to go back to 280 parts per million.

23:54So I take everybody there. Is it going to be the world that we left? No. These are complex adaptive systems.

24:01You never go backwards in a complex adaptive system.

24:04You may go to someplace new, but you are not going to get the world that you had.

24:10You want to restore the Everglades? It will never happen. Give it up.

24:15What you will get is something that is new and may be pristine and may be very biodiverse…

24:22…but you will not get the old Everglades back. All of this--all of this--are complex adaptive systems in play.

24:31And what we need to do is we need to learn how to design in the context of complex adaptive systems when we're part of it.

24:39We had a very interesting experience working with the design theater at--which is sort of a GIS kind of shop--at Arizona State.

24:49One of our engineers, very traditional engineer, did a study of water in the Phoenix area…

24:55…had all the water mapped out and it was really cool and you could see where the water was going.

24:59And he showed it to the city because he was sure the city was going to love this. And the city hated it.

25:05And the reason they hated it was that part of their political power came from being able to manipulate the water system.

25:12So of course they hated it. These are the kinds of issues that you need to get into…

25:16…if you're really going to be doing design in this kind of complex space.

25:20Alright. Weaponized. We tend to forget the human tendency to go to war.

25:28Trade networks and virtual water. I want to end with this as an example…

25:32…and it's one, if you think about it as I go through it, that applies very nicely to GIS.

25:37One of the things that we can't do is trade water qua water because water is a very heavy commodity…

25:44…and the idea of shipping water across borders, politically for most countries, is extremely touchy.

25:50Just go up to Canada and ask them how much they want for their share of the Great Lakes. We tried.

25:57It doesn't work very well. I'm not sure that we've gotten the bodies back yet.

26:03Virtual water. Virtual water's the idea that to create products I need to put in a lot of water.

26:09The kind of product determines how much water, but it can be very significant.

26:12So, for example, it takes 32 liters to make a two-gram microchip, because of the purity required for the process.

26:21That's a lot of water every time you make a microchip.

26:25Now you can recycle some of that, yada, yada, it gets into manufacturing techniques.

26:28But the bottom line is, there's a lot of water embedded in that chip. So what does that mean?

26:34Well, if water becomes that difficult, what it means is that you should be siting microchip plants...

26:40…where you have a lot of water, so that when you ship the chips…

26:43…which are relatively light, you're shipping water, virtual water. You begin to get the idea.

26:50Probably the most interesting aspect of this is beef being the single largest component of virtual water flow.

26:57Now this is basically because a cow is a very primitive way to manufacture steak.

27:05I mean, there's just no other way to get around it. It emits enormous amounts of methane.

27:13It eats a lot of grass. It just…it is a really lousy manufacturing system.

27:20So, what if, for example, to control water, you begin to do two things.

27:27One is, you begin to control beef, so that you ship beef instead of water and you grow beef in very water-intensive areas…

27:39…not Arizona, where we do grow a lot of beef. So that's one thing you can do.

27:44The second thing you can do is you begin thinking about the technological fixes that can feed into this…

27:50…such as, for example, industrial production of beef.

27:54It's a fairly primitive technology right now, very, very, poorly funded.

27:59You can imagine what happens when you go to the Department of Agriculture and say…

28:02…You know, I'd kind of like to put all of the livestock guys out of business.

28:08But if you think about water as a serious problem, then you ought to be thinking about…

28:13…that technology fix and somehow managing the flows of beef in trade.

28:19Now, the interesting thing about this is, conceptualize a little bit further with me.

28:24We know that we've got serious problems in most of our natural cycles, nitrogen, phosphorous, et cetera.

28:32So that what you're really looking at is some kind of multilayered mapping of virtual flows of these materials…

28:40…in such a way that you optimize their use and their security.

28:46So you can begin to see building models of virtual material flows that begin to get you the flexibility and the possibility…

28:57…of working in very broad global systems that have significantly reduced our impact without reducing quality of life.

29:06The good news, I think, is if you use a little bit of imagination…

29:10…you can find extraordinary ways to improve the systems that we are embedded in.

29:16But until you realize that that's really what we're dealing with, you're not going to get very far at all.

29:23So again, that's why Heidegger, because unless you realize that what we have chosen to do…

29:29…is be blind in the face of the challenges that we really face…

29:32…then you're not going to understand why you need to think about these issues at all. Uh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

29:40A nice graphic. It's good for cocktail conversation.

29:47So a couple points to close with. I want to talk about some of the earth systems issues.

29:52I'm going to go over these quickly. You can get copies of the slides if you want…

29:56…but I’m assuming by this point, if you're still conscious, it's probably barely.

30:02The first thing to understand is that there are technological options that can be developed…

30:07…but because we don't realize our responsibilities and the challenges that we actually face…

30:13…we are seriously underinvesting in those technologies. So that's one problem. That's solvable.

30:20Examples for water. There's also a number of opportunities for efficiency.

30:28You want to be careful with those, because those are partially what give you resiliency.

30:32One of the things that we don't talk about enough in any of our planning processes…

30:36…because we start talking numbers and getting technocratic…

30:39…is the need to try to support resiliency where we can.

30:43So for example, Phoenix has a lot of lawns. Anybody who knows Phoenix thinks that's really stupid.

30:51They should all be xeriscape so you don't have to use all that water on lawns.

30:54Well, maybe, but I get a good feeling in my heart when I pass those lawns. First place, they don't have cows on them.

31:01Second place, every one of those lawns is water that can be pulled out and used in an emergency.

31:08Every one of those lawns is a source of resiliency if you really think about Phoenix's water system.

31:14Now, that's not the way people think about it, but that's what it is.

31:17Conceptualizing the system you have becomes very…

31:20…very important once you begin to understand some of the issues.

31:26Some of the policies that come out of thinking this way are different than the ones you would ordinarily expect.

31:32So I think that a very profound environmental policy would in fact lead to established stable trade relationships.

31:39The Doha Round, for example. Most people don't think about that if they're interested in environmental policy.

31:46But if in fact I can get significant environmental gains by trading food instead of water, then this makes a lot of sense.

31:55Why do countries generally want to grow all of their own food, be self-sufficient in food?

32:00Because they don't trust the trading system. If they could trust it, then you could have more trade in virtual water.

32:08If you had more trade in virtual water, you could develop a more rational system.

32:15Let's look at the last one for a little bit.

32:18One of the things that I like to do as a technologist is social engineering. I don't admit it.

32:25I don't talk about it a lot, but the reality is, I know the way people should live a lot better than they do.

32:32And it's just really unfortunate that they don't listen to me.

32:36So if I manipulate the data so that they think they're getting objective transparent data…

32:42…then I can get them to change their lifestyles and they're not even going to know I did it.

32:50I have heard that argument made by a number of my students about global climate change.

32:59Now, disregard whether it's true or not, because in some cases politically it doesn't matter. Think about what that does.

33:05Number one, it means that in an area where you need to have serious agreement on the underlying science…

33:13…you have undermined the validity of that science for a large chunk of people…

33:18…somewhere around 40 percent in the United States. How have you done that?

33:24You've done that because what they have perceived is that you're trying to change them…

33:28…by using social engineering hiding as science.

33:34There's been very little recognition of the danger that poses to rational discourse, or for that matter, to rational policy.

33:44It's been so long since we've had it, I'm not sure I'd recognize it, but let's assume we could get there again.

33:49One of the things I think we need to be very, very careful about is being sophisticated…

33:54…in the way we understand data and the technologies that we use to communicate….

34:01…because they have been used in the past or perceived to have been used in the past in such a way…

34:07…as to have people believe that they're being manipulated. This is a particular problem in this country…

34:15…which has developed a very high level of anti-intellectualism in the political discourse.

34:21You can't fight that directly, but you can certainly avoid adding to it…

34:25…by being perceived as having played with the data in any way whatsoever.

34:31I'll tell you what, anybody wants it, I'll send out these slides.

34:43I do not think we have accepted our responsibility. I do not think we are accepting our responsibility.

34:53I think that the world that we have already created is one that desperately needs new ways of thinking…

35:00…new imagination, new tools to help it understand what we already have…

35:06…and that those are not going to come from the public.

35:10They're going to have to come from us, and so far, we have failed. Thank you very much.

Copyright 2014 Esri
Auto Scroll (on)Enable or disable the automatic scrolling of the transcript text when the video is playing. You can save this option if you login

Managing a Terraformed Planet: Earth Systems Engineering

Brad Allenby of Arizona State University presents the challenges in developing tools and frameworks for a planet that has been increasingly defined by human activities, technologies, values, and cultures.

  • Recorded: Jan 5th, 2012
  • Runtime: 35:17
  • Views: 22544
  • Published: Feb 16th, 2012
  • Night Mode (Off)Automatically dim the web site while the video is playing. A few seconds after you start watching the video and stop moving your mouse, your screen will dim. You can auto save this option if you login.
  • HTML5 Video (Off) Play videos using HTML5 Video instead of flash. A modern web browser is required to view videos using HTML5.
Download VideoDownload this video to your computer.
<Embed>Customize the colors and use the HTML code to include this video on your own website
Start From:
Player Color:

Right-click on these links to download and save this video.


Be the first to post a comment
To post a comment, you'll need to login.
If you don't have an Esri Global Login ID, please register here.