People send me stuff. This time is a novel about climate change. – Anthony
CAGW as self-organising narrative, referencing previous posts on fiction, and offering a free downloadable novelette
By Andy West
I’m a long-term WUWT reader, but extremely rare commenter. The last time was back in January when I had time at various airports, and I commented on Willis’ Venusian atmosphere post.
I first became interested in the topic of Global Warming, as it was known then, almost 6 years ago. The trigger for me was watching Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth, and realising that the film was a very powerful narrative which lacked proper balance and was all about advocacy, with references to underlying theory frustratingly vague and infrequent. The cherry-picker scene was kinda sciencey, yet somehow even that aroused questions rather than convincing me. I had no means to evaluate the science aspects back then, so resolved to look into them (wow, armed only with a long-ago physics degree did that take years longer than I thought!) But in fact my chief interest was not the climate science.
My passionate hobby is evolutionary science, and particularly the evolutionary bounds on, and processes within, sentient populations. Those processes include the development of memeplexes, ‘self-organising narratives’, if you will, and I very quickly realised that here, right under my nose, was a doozy of a specimen already far into burgeoning growth that I nevertheless hadn’t noticed at all. Until that time I’d made the mistake of believing that the science underpinning CAGW was ‘certain’, ‘solid’, was hard fact, and a solid factual cage prevents memeplexes from escaping and evolving. They thrive on mysticism and doubt, on unbounded (or very poorly bounded) fact-spaces. So I’d missed the obvious.
Well a little more on memeplexes later. Meanwhile I should explain that I’m a writer on the side (mainly high-concept Science Fiction, but occasionally more mainstream work and a little poetry), so during my regular trawls of the climate blogs the following posts caught my eye, the first being here at WUWT:
People send me stuff. Here’s one about UEA offering a prize contest for “creative climate writing”. – Anthony.
“The scholarship is open to all applicants to the Prose Fiction and Poetry strands of the MA, whose writing demonstrates a commitment to environmental themes, in particular to furthering the general understanding of the impact of climate change.”http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/24/poetic-license-ueas-creative-climate-writing-prize/
The above is an annual bursary, worth £5000, open to students undertaking the UEA MA Creative Writing course.
Here’s another, this time from Australia, courtesy of Bishop Hill:
Philippa Martyr, writing in Quadrant magazine, looks at academic grant awards relating to climate change. Like this for example: Literary Studies: “The project will devise and develop a new ‘cultural materialist’ paradigm for science fiction studies and apply it to a case study of science fictional representations of catastrophe, especially nuclear war, plague and extreme climate change.” ($239,000) http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/7/24/climate-change-and-literary-studies.html
Given the establishment offering the prize, I suspect the first effort will contribute to the narrative of man harming the planet through the medium of climate change, and the second will likely re-interpret existing literature to align to that same narrative. Just two more contributions added to the (probably) hundreds of thousands of narrative reinforcements in press releases and articles and talks and action-days and all the rest. The fact-space is still far too unbounded to restrict this aggressive accumulation of narrative weight, which already leans far too heavily upon sceptical questions and healthy debate. But pending the maturation of climate science, other means can be used to help restore some balance.
Every narrative can have its roots exposed by the light of a counter-narrative, can be challenged by a different story. The many excellent posters here and at other good sceptic blogs create a kind of patchwork ‘resistance’ narrative based on emerging science and science-audit and political comment. But the fiction posts above inspired me to contribute in a way that I’m personally able to do, with a self-contained piece of counter-narrative expressed in science fiction, something that may hopefully be a useful and very readable means to keep minds open.
Anthony’s post above starts with those immortal words ‘People send me stuff’.
I have read that so many times and never thought I’d be sending stuff, but here I am doing precisely that. And my stuff is high-concept fiction. I offer the novelette ‘Truth’ free to WUWT readers and in fact also for free distribution elsewhere as you please (the work is under a creative commons license with no-commercial-use and no-making-derivatives, but you can email / put on websites / whatever). In fact though I hope everyone has some pleasure reading it, the main value would be in migrating out from the fully sceptic audience, so send it where you will. My intent was an enjoyable way to make folks stop and think, to raise questions, to counter the massive narrative weight of ‘certain’ CAGW and indeed to portray the social phenomena behind that weight as a means to do so.
For anyone nervous of SF geekiness, don’t worry it has no ray-guns or spaceships or time-warps; it’s only loosely SF and has plenty of action too. And those self-evolving memeplexes I mentioned are luridly portrayed, one in particular… Please do not baulk at the first use of the word ‘denier’, the context will become clear. Mention of climate change issues appears only slowly, but fear not there is purpose in this and a lot comes later on to stir minds, or for those already asking healthy questions, still an interesting perspective, a glimpse at depths of social realism, and some parts to revel in too 🙂 .
‘Truth’ is about an hour’s read. Go here wearenarrative.wordpress.com to grab the pdf. Just look for the tasteful 1950s B-movie front-cover image above.
Or pull the book direct from here: http://wearenarrative.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/truth.pdf.
In fact the blog is brand new and not made known to the world until this post. In truth I wasn’t expecting much of any traffic and have little time to respond anyhow, but I’d appreciate it if anyone drops by with a comment on the story. In case anyone is wondering, there was definitely no grant funding for this story, and I can say with confidence that it isn’t going to win a prize from any consensus organisations!
A final word on memeplexes. I’m sceptical of the three Cs: ‘consensus’, ‘certainty’, and ‘catastrophe’. Nevertheless I don’t know whether CO2 will work out to be big problem, a modest problem, or possibly not a problem at all. I really don’t think anyone yet has the means to know. But to compare CAGW with other social memeplexes: if the existence of God was unequivocally disproved tomorrow, there’d be no need for the huge infra-structures of religious paraphernalia.
And, more interestingly, if he/she beamed down tomorrow and introduced himself/herself, there would likewise be no need for the same infra-structures. We’d all just get his/her phone number. Similarly if the case for CAGW was indeed proven (inclusive of all main mechanisms), the fact-space would be just as constrained as if it was disproven, and the whole memeplex would collapse. In the proven case, just as for historic major disasters or wars, everyone’s shoulder would be at the wheel, we’d all know what to do and all the social messaging and CC related promotion hierarchies and political positioning would evaporate overnight.
As this clearly isn’t anywhere remotely close to happening, while terms like ‘believers’, ‘disbelievers’, ‘faith in the science’ (or loss thereof) and the ugly ‘deniers’ term, all abound, then I’m guessing there’s probably very little that is certain within the wicked problem of climate, least of all attribution.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


A sentient person could be forgiven for wondering just how accurate the temperature records are for giant swathes of the earth’s surface such as, say, Russia ( ~1917- 1946) or China (~1915-1970) or Sub-Saharan Africa ( ~1850-2012) or a lot of other places where’s there have been long periods of revolution, upheaval or anarchy.
Martin C says:
(December 15, 2012 at 11:40 am)
Great, thanks Martin.
John says:
(December 15, 2012 at 11:51 am)
Well you’re bang on it’s incredibly difficult for people to change their world view. But regarding your example, I think this departs from my supposition in that the historical documentation shows He did not present proof, but required faith instead…
Andy
Iane says: December 15, 2012 at 12:28 pm:
mpainter : – ‘The AGW hypothesis has been falsified by the temperature record of the last fifteen years’.
“I too am deeply sceptical about AGW, but the above statement cannot possibly stand like that, rather the AGW hypothesis is made less likely by the past 15 years temperture record, because :-
a) the record is not very accurate (we can question the value of the error bounds but, given all the problems Anthony has exposed, the errors COULD be pretty large).
b) other factos besides CO2 will obviously influence the temperature record and, given all the uncertainties of our current understanding, it is far from clear how long these other factors might neutralise the effect of CO2.”
mpainter replies:
Fifteen years, soon sixteen years, is certainly long enough to draw conclusions. The last warming trend lasted only twenty years (1977-97). How long does one need to watch atm CO2 increase while temperature does not? Climate models are contrived to forecast a warming trend and have been condemned on a number of aspects, including their hindcast failure. They fail signally when tested against observations, time and again. They belong to the midden heap of failed science (in case you do not understand this, global climate models are the AGW theory put into algorithms.)
a) The last fifteen years are accurate enough, with a satellite-based metric as a constraint of the station records. If anything, the station record is skewed toward warmth because of the UHE, as shown by Watts et al.
b) To claim that the effect of CO2 is neutralized is to say that it has no effect. To say that the immutable laws of radiation physics have been muted in some unknown way is hardly science. You imply that at some time in the future, these laws will assert themselves and then watch out for CO2! You need to re-consider this bald, unsupportable assertion.
Thanks Andy.
I promiss not to comment on every line but…
Before great monsters of debt slipped harness and turned around to rip chunks out of nations,
…really grabbed.
Back to the novelette…
For some reason, I can’t access it at the web page or the direct link — it comes up black. I’m using Firefox. Any suggestions, Andy?
I liked it. Especially the first half. Clearly some awareness of manipulation beyond just CAGW.
@Neill
I also use Firefox and had no problem. Perhaps you have a addon installed that is interfering. On the help menu item there is an option to ‘restart with addons disabled, this is only active till you close Firefox and restart it normally as I recall. Or right click on it and use the ‘save link as …’ option.
Hi Andy,
Haven’t been able to get into it so far. Not a fault. Some of it is eerily reminiscent of contact with the hippy communities that used to live near us in rural Wales in the 1970s. I guess that’s relevant, because that period was the origin of much of the memeplex that is troubling the world these days.
I recall lecturing one of my sons on the risks of imbibing cannabis. His response? “It’s ok Dad – we know it’s not harmless”. “You do?” “Of course – we used to go up there sometimes, tried to talk to them – that’s why we know.”
Memeplex seems to be similar to the modern usage of shibboleth, eg what the in-crowd believes in but the rest of us know is bullshit. Every profession, cultural group, belief system etc has its shibboleths. The interesting thing about the CAGW/CC Creed is that it has had massive positive feedback. Not in the “science” of course, but in the amount of money it has misdirected. The hippies used to go on about getting their “shit” together. None of them ever succeeded as far as I could see, but now it has been transformed into gold ….
Richdo says:
(December 15, 2012 at 1:24 pm)
Well I’m very happy with the comment on the line you chose, thanks 🙂
Andy
Neill says:
December 15, 2012 at 2:20 pm
For some reason, I can’t access it at the web page or the direct link — it comes up black. I’m using Firefox. Any suggestions, Andy?
====================================================
Perhaps you have a Fx extension that’s getting in the way. My Fx works fine on both links. Have you tried with restarting with them disabled?
Help -> Restart with Add-ons Disabled
Neill says:
(December 15, 2012 at 2:20 pm)
Hi Neil, I’m not technical regarding browsers and such so I can’t suggest a fix. However, if you put in a comment giving permission for the Mods to send me your email address, maybe they’ll be kind enough to do that so then I can mail you a copy direct.
Andy
Thanks for the link Andy. I like the way you started out. I think it deserves a good read. I will add your link to my philosophy of science blog. I’m sure some of those readers will like it too.
Mods, I give permission for you to give Andy my email address so he can send story direct. Thanks.
spinifers says:
(December 15, 2012 at 2:49 pm)
Nice comment, thankyou. Once you see into this sort of narrative, you begin to realise that essentially everything is a narrative!
Martin Clark says:
(December 15, 2012 at 3:03 pm)
Thanks for giving it a go. Yes, massive +ve feedback indeed. I guess it’s hard to argue with saving the world when it can’t be proved that is *isn’t* in danger, unlikely though that danger seems underneath the blaring narrative. Ironic that with all the talk of ‘certainty’, it is scientific *uncertainty* that has directly caused the +ve feedback, and diminishing uncertainty (as science eventually gets a real grip) that will one day strangle this memplex.
Andy
Dennis Nikols says:
(December 15, 2012 at 3:47 pm)
Great, Dennis, that’s very kind. I’ll drop by when I get a chance (which is not now as it is past midnight in the UK and I’m still trying to keep up with various posts!)
Andy
Great read, Mr West! Couldn’t put it down, in fact, though your intriguing turns of phrase and visual metaphor (itself a parallel to the protagonists Vision?) had me re-reading sections, by turn – and so an hour and half, well spent, say I.
Really a long Short Story, though – rather than novelette? In any case, an elegant multi-layered ‘sidling-up’ to the emotional, psychological and intellectual charge that’s embedded within the CAGW debates, and a solid contribution to the cause of ‘Truth’ in our interpersonal and cross-cultural dealings. And while not yet convinced of your postulate of ‘meta-memes’ driving cultural evolution (personally, I suspect the Universe Itself to be more predicated on Moral Imperatives and their corollaries) I think your protagonist’s cool ‘honesty’ and grasp of essential aspects of Reality in facing the interlacing cascades of his own life, bespeaks the necessity for courageous self-examination in our own perceptive mindsets when we approach any issue of social or geopolitical import.
I’m no writer, so I’ve great admiration of those like yourself who ‘put it out there’, as like losing at chess I imagine it kinda ‘gets to ya’ on a visceral level when unsuccessful. As said above, I think you’ve succeeded as you set out, and I’ll forward the read to a couple of souls of my acquaintance.
Nice action scenes, btw – I DO think it’d make a kewl movie, w/lots of CGI to boot – hopefully better scripted and directed than the recent Russian flick (on memes, in that case Advertising memes) “Branded” (which I found interminable, additionally taking a little umbrage at the gratuitous use of the Ashes of the Red Cow Mystery to ‘further’ the plot line…I mean, WTF?)
Took me a while, well into the narrative, before I realized the speaker was ‘geriatric’ and in ICU post CI or Big C – I kept looking for the near-mortal wound acquired in battle, and the hero awoken from coma or rendered paraplegic of some such. Nice maintenance of suspense. His passing Sweet, as well — with a daughter named Hope. Kewl.
Thanks,
DCRS (Tiburon)
I have problems reading on screen, even as little as four pages. This however, I read in one go.
I will reread too.
I guess you are ex army and can only express regret that we did not provide you with MRAPs at an early point in your campaign in Iraq. I suppose we can only really blame the likes of Dannet for that. The reason I thought that was your accurate description of the, (incorrect in my opinion,) British tactics to win over the local populace.
Good read as I said and will reread more analytically later.
DaveE.
I wrote a climate related Christmas satire myself last year, based on this animated film (shown in eg Sweden and England every Christmas): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnM4hswopgs.
The story is available here (ignore the first paragraph in Swedish; the rest is in English):
http://www.freelists.org/post/skriva/God-Jul-med-en-liten-julsatir
–Ahrvid
I am not a scientist. However, I can read and evaluate information like many others on this site. I came to WUWT, and several other sites which I read regularly, through the Junk Science site while I was researching information on another subject around 2007, and I now consider myself reasonably well informed on the basic science too. I also found http://www.green-agenda.com which tells you pretty well all you need to know about the politics of CAGW.
Non scientific evaluation of CAGW is now, I feel, almost more important for those without scientific training, and if Andy’s work of fiction, like the splendid Michael Crichton’s State of Fear, can further understanding of what is going on that is all good. Whenever I see a copy of State of Fear in a charity shop I buy it and pass it on to someone who has bought the propaganda. I have a few converts under my belt now just doing that!
(Crichton’s Caltech Lecture,,’Aliens Cause Global Warming’ from 2003, although not fiction, is worth re reading.)
Tiburon says:
(December 15, 2012 at 8:52 pm)
Many thanks for your kind comments and interesting thoughts, Tiburon. Yes, one needs a thick skin as a writer, as the literary community I mingle in are all very well aware. Even a ‘successful’ work will attract some um… very challenging reviews, reflecting that there is a vast range of taste out there.
I dream of having one of my works made into a movie 🙂
Incidentally, ‘The Science Fiction Society of America’ defines a Short Story as being up to 7,500 words, a novelette between 7,500 and 17,500 (‘Truth’ is about 14,000), a novella from there up to 40,000 and after that a novel. But other bodies have other definitions! Confusing. Many thanks for passing the story on to others; I’m hoping it will open a few eyes regarding the social phenomena of CAGW.
Andy
David A. Evans says:
(December 15, 2012 at 10:13 pm)
Glad the the story worked out for you 🙂 Thanks for your comments.
I fact I’m not ex-forces, though I do have a certain insight into matters military. Fifty years ago the UK led the world in the design of MWRAPS (such vehicles probably had a different acronym then, but I can’t recall it), but in recent times we’re… well let’s say it’s a sore subject.
Andy
Hello Andy,
Thanks for posting the novelette here. It made for a nice Sunday morning read while the sun poked through here in Herts. The metaphors in your writing remind me of the first two Frank Peretti novel’s that I read back in my Christian days. I liked the progression; discovering the truth, the truth as a burden, turning a blind eye to the truth in exchange for acceptance and happiness. Thanks again.
Eric
Eric H. says:
(December 16, 2012 at 2:53 am)
My morning is not too far from yours, in Bucks. Thanks for your kind comment. In fact I’ve never read Peretti, but if I could generate 1% of his earnings with my writing, I’d be pretty happy 🙂
Andy
Understanding AGW as meme is an important tool. It raises questions about so many things we take for granted. Thank you for so effectively pointing out how this dysfunctional aspect of social interaction has taken root.
Andy,
I just read it. It’s beautifully written and very thought-provoking. That image of the truth made visible will stay with me for a long time.
It seems to me that truth is the enemy of delusion, as it should be, but one man’s truth is another man’s delusion. Apparently a large fraction of Americans believe the world will end next Friday, and it seems that around 10 percent of the world’s population believe this. That’s pretty depressing. What’s even more depressing is that many of the same people will continue to believe in all the other forms of doom mongering, even when Friday has peacefully come and gone.
Unfortunately, for people who know little of climate science, when a climate scientist tells a lie, they will be taken in by it. I have a perfect example. You may have seen the BBC Horizon program, ‘Science under attack’. In it a senior NASA climate scientist told an outrageous and provable lie. He specifically stated that mankind emits 7 times more CO2 than Nature. This was part of his claimed proof. Of course, the truth is the exact opposite: mankind’s emissions are dwarfed by natural emissions, by a factor of around 30. You actually referred to this in your story.
The sad thing is that most people would have thought that the scientist was telling the truth.
Still, there is hope. This year several scientists, including Lovelock, radically changed their views. And we now have Owen Patterson in charge of DEFRA in the UK. Hopefully the truth will eventually triumph in climate science. But I’m not holding my breath.
Chris