pedlt3+journal

2/5/14 The “polar vortex” is a good example of how difficult, and important, it is to teach both complex systems and climate change science to young people.

While climate skeptic and right wing media point to the frigid temperatures as evidence that climate change is a hoax (or as more evidence that there has been a “[|pause]” in global warming), the polar vortex may actually be a [|result of global warming] (or at least similar events will happen more frequently). My understanding of the phenomenon: “sudden warming events” near the North Pole may, by forcing air from the stratosphere to the troposphere, knock the spinning top that is the vortex off balance. In some cases, this will stretch the vortex, but in others it can break it apart or, combined with a weakened jet stream, push it away from the poles. Global warming has also contributed to the weakening of the jet stream, which usually acts a barrier between northern cold air and warm southern air, as it has lowered the temperature differential between north and south that drives it.

That’s a mouthful, its counterintuitive, and it requires quite a bit of previous knowledge to understand. Pointing out the difference between climate and weather helps, and is probably much easier. But I think one way to begin getting at this would be to emphasize “weirdness” when teaching systems (some people use the term “global weirding”). This would emphasize that effects and causes need not resemble each other when mediated by a complex system, and that the results may even seem to be the opposite of what you would expect. Not an easy task, but it could—perhaps weirdly—make learning systems even more engaging and memorable to emphasize these kinds of unexpected and counterintuitive outcomes.