Via Scott Thomas (@ScottGL1 on twitter) comes a very interesting note on a US weather service forecast from yesterday:
I live on a small island located in a steep-walled inlet that opens onto an inland sea on the Pacific Coast of North America. Our island is medium-sized, about 12 km long and 8 km wide. Part of it sticks out into the Strait of Georgia, which is part of the larger Salish Sea that exists between Vancouver Island and the mainland. Part of our island sticks into Atl’ka7tsem/Howe Sound, an inlet that leads from the Strait 45kms inland to the mouth of a river valley that drains the Coast Mountains. In winter, katabatic winds can blow more 100km/h onto the north shore of the island, coating it in ice and snow with a -25C windchill while 12kms away on the southern shore of the island, it can be a nice warm, calm, and sunny spring day, where the temperature feels 30 degrees warmer.
If you count on the local weather forecast, which comes from a mere 15 km away at the Vancouver airport, you will have no idea about the weather on Nexwlelexwm/Bowen Island. The Vancouver airport is located on an island in an estuary at the mouth of a long and broad river valley and experiences completely different weather.
It still boggles my mind that people who live where I live fail to grasp the hyperlocal nature of our microclimates. If you rely only on weather apps and have no idea how the forecasts on these apps are made (or indeed what a 60% chance of rain means), then you might think that meteorology is a big lie. In fact, the limited accuracy of long-term weather forecasts is often one of the things that climate change deniers use to bolster their idea that you can’t forecast the weather and you can’t trust the “weather scientists.”
Trying to predict the intensity of an atmospheric river or the landing point of a compact sub-tropical cyclone is an important function for weather forecasters. But it is impossible to tailor forecasts to the hyper local conditions. I know, by virtue of the fact that my house faces southeast, that the gale warnings that come from an atmospheric river forecast are important for me to heed. The rain will fall everywhere, but it will be more intense on the windward-facing slopes and with a 90 or 100 km/h wind gust, it will be driven into the cracks and seams on my house. I have to seal things up if I don;t want leaks. I have to make sure stuff is bolted down or put away and that the fireplace remains dry, as the rain can be driven into my chimney under the cap.
Literally a few hundred meters away, over the ridge behind my house, there will be no wind. Rain, yes. But if you panicked upon hearing the gale warnings, you might be surprised to find that the wind didn’t matter to you at all. People express anger or frustration all the time on our neighbourhood Facebook pages. Sometimes folks will ignore a warning that actually applies to them, because the last one didn’t affect them at all. That lack of situational awareness is perilous and it is not the fault of weather forecasters.
We just do not have a very good sense of how complex systems work or how we are supposed to relate to them. There is a broad societal expectation that experts will give us answers. Weather forecasts do not provide answers, they provide guidance. To use a weather forecast, you have to also participate in sensemaking and decision-making. You have to have situational awareness about where you are and what information you have about your current state, and you have to have an idea about where the forecast information is coming from and what it means. You need to understand the cadence and granularity of the forecast and to know that forecasts about volatile weather systems can change by the minute. With weather emergencies, you need to be able to prepare and take action, even if the outcome isn’t as severe as the forecast made it out to be. And you also have to realize that things could turn out to be worse than the forecast for your area at any given moment.
This weather forecaster, upon retirement, offers us good wisdom for living in a society where we have tools and expertise that help us live with complexity. This little missive reveals what it is we need to do as complexity practitioners and experts in different fields and it also illuminates how to be a better consumer of data about complex situations, whether that is the economy, the weather, our own health or the myriad of other places where the future is just a set of probabilities.
I’m back in Tlaoquiaht territory on the west coast of Vancouver Island. This is a place I once described as The Land of Tsawalk as it is the cradle of a philosophy and cosmology of interconnection and interdependence that has been refined by centuries of Nuu-chah-nulth philosophers, leaders and families. We’re here to do an Art of Hosting with the Clayoquot Biosphere Trust and 40 or so local leaders and organizers. This will be the fourth Art of Hosting I’ve done here and they are always different, responsive to the land and the ocean and the people and the way time works here. We will plan tomorrow and then we will allow things to happen, and it will be, as it always is, a rich and abundant experience.
On the way here, Caitlin and I listened to some podcasts. Two of these had moments that spoke to the place and the quality of time and landscape, and this is the real purpose of this post.
The first is. A Radiolab episode called “Small Potatoes” is about how observation and reflection can transform the most mundane of things in our daily experience. One segment of this episode featured a clip from Ian Chillag’s podcast Everything is Alive in which the philosopher Chioke l’Anson plays “a grain of sand” in conversation with Chillag. l’Anson brings an incredible perspective to this interview, including these gems:
CHIOKE:
Yeah, I mean, I think that if there’s one difference between them and I… Sorry, I’m just having
trouble with the pronouns, you know, we’re doing this interview and I’m a grain of sand.
IAN:
Yeah.
CHIOKE:
But that’s not really the way I would think of myself. I think normally I would just say, “We are sand.”
IAN:
OK.
CHIOKE:
So, you see that there’s the mass noun thing happening and it’s weird to talk to you because you
don’t have a mass noun thing. Or you don’t seem to have a mass noun arrangement. So, you say
yourself that you’re a person, right?
IAN:
Yeah, I would say I’m a person.
CHIOKE:
So, like why aren’t you a grain of person?
IAN:
Like why do I not consider myself as like a fraction of all of humanity?
CHIOKE:
Yeah, like that makes more sense. It just seems to me like if you recognise the degree to which you
owed your existence to other people you might also be nicer to other people.
Or then there is this meditation on time and change:
IAN:
Right. Do you know how old you are?
CHIOKE:
Not exactly, no. I think, it probably would amount to somewhere in the hundreds of thousands of
years. Like, I mean, I wasn’t always sand, right? Like there was a time when I was a boulder.
IAN:
Yeah, yeah.
CHIOKE:
Yeah. So, you know, like do you know about the myth of Sisyphus?
IAN:
Yeah
CHIOKE:
Yeah, that’s a funny one to me because Sisyphus is cursed to roll this boulder up the hill for eternity,
but really the boulder would eventually erode. I mean, a hundred thousand years or so. It would be
like a little pebble. Like, just stick it out, Sisyphus. You’ll be done in no time, you know?
IAN:
Eventually it’s just going to be sand.
CHIOKE:
Yeah, exactly. And in addition, the hill will also erode. And so, you know, Sisyphus after some time
would have a flat plain instead of a hill and maybe like a marble instead of a boulder.
IAN:
Yeah, so, yeah. So, he’s cursed for eternity, but really, he just needs to get through I don’t know
50,000 years or something.
CHIOKE:
Yeah, like he should really stick to it. And then that’ll show the Gods.
Amazing.
In another podcast we listened to, a To The Best Of Our Knowledge episode on deep time, Ann Strainchamps interviews geologist Marcia Bjorneru about changes to our earth and climate:
AS: Do you think the perspective of deep time can help with any of the existential fear and dread that comes with an awareness of climate change and global warming? Does being aware of the many long ages of the planet put climate change in perspective? Or make it more frightening?
MB: From a scientific point of view, I can say that Earth will be fine. The Earth will deal with the changes in climate that we’re causing and eventually, new ecosystems will emerge.
But the human part of me mourns what we’ve done and the rapidity with which old, well-established ecosystems and landscapes have been changed. And I worry for humanity, for what the next decades or century will bring as we cope with a new set of rules. That’s the scary thing to me. We’ve been able to understand the way the planet has worked through the Holocene, but now we’re changing the boundary conditions and parameters, and so many of the models we’ve developed aren’t going to be very relevant as we go further into the Anthropocene.
The past won’t necessarily be a key to the future. And there’s real sadness there. Our cultures have grown up with a certain version of Earth, and it’ll be radically different.
These insights seem to hit so much deeper out here in the Nuu-Chah-Nulth territories, where a deep sense of time and a deep connection with the ancient marine and forest ecosystems are responsible for thousands of years of occupation and well-being. Indeed, Bjorneru’s observation about the new boundary conditions of life on earth brings added importance to preserving intact large amounts of wild and ancient ecosystems. In 300,000 years as a species, humans have never lived in an environment that is as heavily degraded as it is now. We were nurtured in the complex life-giving cradles of the very ecosystems out of which we arose. We have changed those conditions of life, and who knows what effect it will have on our survival, the survival of millions of other species and the evolution of new forms of life on Earth.
Out here, on the edge of the world, the principles of tsawalk compel us to engage these questions. The perspective of deep time and deep interconnection lies all around us.
There is a swing on the path that leads up and over the headland from the village of Nazare. This is me on that swing last month. Happy.
We watched the first episode of the two-part Apple documentary on Steve Martin, which charts his early life through the development of his stand-up act, his early forays into television and movies and which ends in 1980 when he walked away from stand-up comedy, as he puts it, jumps off the train of stand up and onto the train of movies.
During the 15 years in which he developed and honed his act, he kept detailed notes about his experience and many of those diaries are shown in the documentary. Lovely notes and remarks about what worked and what didn’t, how he was feeling, the goals he set for himself and what he was learning as he tried to build a new approach to comedy on the shoulders of those who inspired him. It is very interesting to see how many of his bits are interpretations of bits by comedians working in the 1940s, 1950s and early 1960s.
Some of those notes deal with existential questions and in one he makes a note to the effect of “what if happiness is not the end, but rather the work is the end.” It was during this period I think that he started to develop gratitude that he could just do the work he is doing and not focus on happiness as an outcome. The trailer for the second part of the document seems to make this pursuit of happiness a big part of the story so I’m looking forward to that.
But that little throwaway line kind of lodged with me. Lots of my work is immensely satisfying in its own right, even when it’s challenging. I get to travel around and work with a huge diversity of issues and people. It feeds the way my brain works to be doing a bunch of different things, even though I sometimes can’t keep them all straight.
The work is the end. Happiness is generally there too. Are they related? Do they need to be?
What’s your take?
What our local forest looked like 4 years ago
Walking this morning, the air and the light reminded me of that lockdown spring of 2020. By April that year, we were all in it together. People made art and music in their living rooms and shared it with the world. We were learning how to use Zoom and bake sourdough and Google different customs for personal hygiene from places where toilet paper is a novelty.
What stays with me from that time is the fact that there was real hardship in many places, as COVID-19 outbreaks caused a lot of death, suffering, and separation. If we were lucky enough not to be affected by what was happening in places like New York, Seattle, Milan, and Wuhan, then we only needed to do the simple thing and stay home. Governments worked furiously to implement a Universal Basic Income, which, to my surprise, they did, thereby accidentally solving child poverty for a short time.
I want to remember it as a time when we all were in the same boat around a global problem, doing what we could to look out for each other in creative and generous ways. It didn’t last, but I will go to my grave with the tantalizing knowledge that I saw it happen with my own eyes for a few short months that spring.
We start on April 11…a deep dive into complexity theory and practice that will take you on a journey to understand complexity and work with it, both inside yourself and in your teams, families, organizations and communities.
Come and join 30+ folks worldwide in an intensive, engaging, cohort-based exploration of these topics and tools.
For more info, check out our program description.
1 2