Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learningfrom the world's big
thinkers
Subscribe to our Politics & Current Affairs newsletter
Retraction: "Are these 100 people killing the planet?"
A retraction regarding a May 6, 2019 article entitled "Are these 100 people killing the planet?"
31 July, 2020
<p>Last year, Big Think incorrectly claimed that Nicholas DeIuliis was CEO of CONSOL Energy at the time via the republication of a map containing outdated information.<u></u><u></u></p><p>In a May 6, 2019 article entitled <a href="https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/climate-change" target="_blank">"Are these 100 people killing the planet?"</a> and subsequent social media postings of that article, we republished a map that incorrectly identified Nicholas DeIuliis as the then current CEO of a combined coal and natural gas company, CONSOL Energy Inc., as set forth in the July 2017 CDP Carbon Majors Report upon which the map was based.<u></u><u></u></p><p>It has come to our attention that Mr. DeIuliis was not an officer, director, or employee of CONSOL Energy Inc. at the time of that article's publication. Nor, at that time, did the entity CONSOL Energy Inc. as referenced in the CDP report, still exist, having split into two entities on November 28, 2017--CNX Resources Corporation, a natural gas exploration and production company, and CONSOL Energy Inc., a coal company. As of May 6, 2019, Mr. DeIuliis was and remains as of the date of this statement the President and CEO of CNX Resources Corporation.<u></u><u></u></p><p>We acknowledge our mistake and apologize for any inconvenience to Mr. DeIuliis.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Malcolm Gladwell live! | Strangers, Storytelling, and Psychology
Join the legend of non-fiction in conversation with best-selling author and poker pro Maria Konnikova.
02 August, 2020
Big Think LIVE
Add event to your calendar
<p>
In this Big Think Live session, <strong>Malcolm Gladwell</strong> and host <strong>Maria Konnikova</strong> will explore the quirks of the human mind, the ins and outs of writing about psychology, and the nature of storytelling through the framework of Gladwell's podcast series <a href="http://revisionisthistory.com/seasons" target="_blank">Revisionist History</a> and his latest book <em><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316478520?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">Talking to Strangers</a></em>. <br>
<br>
Ask your questions for Malcolm Gladwell during the audience Q&A!
</p>
<p>
<strong>Join the stream at 12 pm EDT on Tuesday, August 4.</strong>
</p>
<h2>STREAMING LINKS</h2>
<p>
<strong><a href="https://edge.bigthink.com/live_streams/106" target="_self">Big Think Edge</a> | <a href="https://youtu.be/_jb0pM9FrZk" target="_blank">YouTube</a> | <a href="https://www.facebook.com/BigThinkdotcom/posts/10157549491758527" target="_blank">Facebook</a></strong>
</p>
<p>
--
</p>
<p>
<strong>Malcolm Gladwell</strong> is the author of five <em>New York Times</em> bestsellers: <em>The Tipping Point</em>, <em>Blink</em>, <em>Outliers</em>, <em>What the Dog Saw</em>, and <em>David and Goliath</em>. His newest book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316478520?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>Talking to Strangers</em></a> (2019), is a darker-than-usual look at the miscommunications and assumptions that occur when we interact with people we don't know, told through historical case studies like Sandra Bland, Bernie Madoff, and Adolf Hitler. Gladwell is also the co-founder of Pushkin Industries, an audio content company that produces the podcasts <a href="http://revisionisthistory.com/seasons" target="_blank">Revisionist History</a>, which reconsiders things both overlooked and misunderstood, and <a href="https://brokenrecordpodcast.com/" target="_blank">Broken Record</a>, where he, Rick Rubin, and Bruce Headlam interview musicians across a wide range of genres. Gladwell has been included in the TIME 100 Most Influential People list and touted as one of Foreign Policy's Top Global Thinkers.
</p>
<p>
<strong>Maria Konnikova</strong> is the author of two <em>New York Times</em> bestsellers: <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0143109871?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>The Confidence Game</em></a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/014312434X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes</em></a>. Her new book is <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/052552262X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank"><em>The Biggest Bluff</em></a> (June 2020). While researching <em>The Biggest Bluff</em>, journalist Konnikova became an international poker champion and the winner of over $300,000 in tournament earnings—and inadvertently turned into a professional poker player. She is a regular contributing writer for <em>The New Yorker</em>, and her writing has been featured in Best American Science and Nature Writing and has been translated into over twenty languages. Maria also hosts the podcast <a href="http://thegriftpodcast.com/" target="_blank">The Grift</a> from Panoply Media, a show that explores con artists and the lives they ruin, and is currently a visiting fellow at NYU's School of Journalism. She graduated from Harvard University and received her PhD in psychology from Columbia University.
</p>
<p class="media-headline">
<br>
</p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="0332f291b67d266ba4aca01e78a31a44" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316478520?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/4186LIB65oL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316478520?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$7.77</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$9.98</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$7.77</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p class="media-headline">
<br>
</p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="b75ced350bf0cb70772656e0976543e9" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/052552262X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51DJaigYDeL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">The Biggest Bluff: How I Learned to Pay Attention, Master Myself, and Win</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/052552262X?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$25.20</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$25.20</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$39.99</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
Keep reading
Show less
The world on a billionaire’s budget
Who needs student loans, health care and mortgages?
30 July, 2020
Mark Wilson/Getty Images
The world's wealthiest are prospering. As of February 2017, there were about 2,000 billionaires in the world. This micro-elite controls over US$7.6 trillion, an increase of 18 percent from 2016.
<p>
A billionaire's spending power is difficult to grasp, both because <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12028" target="_blank">most people do not correctly intuit large numbers</a>, and because a billion dollars far outstrips most people's experience.
</p><p>
What does a household budget look like to a billionaire? To find out, let's scale down a billionaire's income to $50,000, the <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-pinc.html" target="_blank">median American income</a>, adjusting budget items proportionally.
</p>
<h2>A year in the life of Joe Billionaire</h2><p>
To start, we need to estimate a billionaire's annual income.
</p><p>
In the 30 years from 1987 to 2016, Bill and Melinda Gates amassed about $120 billion. This figure represents $80 billion in net worth and $40 billion controlled by their charitable foundation. The Gates' average annual income for these years is $120 billion divided by 30, or $4 billion. (The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a strategic partner of The Conversation US and provides funding for The Conversation internationally.)
</p><p>
<a href="https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:realtime" target="_blank">According to Forbes</a>, the wealth of Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos increased last year from $72.8 billion to $108.7 billion. Despite billion-dollar hiccups caused by daily stock price fluctuations, Bezos' 2017 wealth increase was at least $32 billion, over $1,000 per second around the clock.
</p><p>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=791&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=994&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=994&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202316/original/file-20180117-53310-1sfg53h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=994&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
</p><p>
One cube represents the median U.S. worker's income. (Andrew D. Hwang, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-SA</a>)</p><p>
The Gates and Bezos are extremes. But what about a more typical billionaire's income?
</p><p>
Let's assume a new fortune has been acquired over about one decade. Since the median worth on <a href="https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:realtime" target="_blank">Forbes' list</a> is about $2 billion, a ballpark estimate of annual income is one-tenth of this, or $200 million.
</p><p>
In absolute terms, $200 million per year is over $6 per second around the clock, equal to the <a href="http://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-household-income-000.aspx" target="_blank">global median annual income</a> every eight minutes. Each year, Joe Billionaire amasses 4,000 median American incomes.
</p><p>
In 2017, Jeff Bezos raked in 150 times more than Joe Billionaire – the equivalent of 600,000 median incomes.</p>
<h2>A billionaire's household budget</h2><p>Because Joe Billionaire accumulates 4,000 median American incomes, a $4,000 expenditure for Joe Billionaire is the same fraction of income as $1 for a median American earner.</p><p>Let's call $4,000 one "Joe buck," or J$1. Joe Billionaire's annual income is J$50,000. Thus, a $2,000-vacation package costs J$0.50, proportional to a half-dollar from a middle-class income.</p><p>At this scale, a generous annual food budget comes to J$3. One year's tuition at a prestigious university costs J$15. An extended stay in a top-quality hospital might run J$50. For J$150, Joe Billionaire can pick up a large middle-class home in most parts of the United States. If that's too modest, a week's income buys a <a href="https://www.trulia.com/CA/Rancho_Palos_Verdes/" target="_blank">mansion in Rancho Palos Verdes, California</a>. Who needs student loans, health care and mortgages?</p><p>Joe Billionaire can and does purchase goods and services not available to the rest of us. J$2,500 <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2016/12/02/robert-mercer-trump-donor-bannon-pac-523366.html" target="_blank">builds a media mouthpiece</a>. Comparable political donations may be <a href="https://www.snopes.com/devos-family-campaign-contributions/" target="_blank">followed by a Cabinet appointment</a>.</p><p>Unlike a tithing purchase for you or me, a one-time J$5,000 donation for Joe Billionaire has no effect on spending power. We're speaking of a scale where lavish living costs a few hundred Joe bucks. Next year will bring another J$50,000.</p>
<h2>Matters of perspective</h2><p>Ronald Reagan fomented outrage at <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/linda_taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villain.html" target="_blank">one welfare recipient cheating the government of $8,000</a>, or J$2. Unfortunately, we are not proportionally outraged by theft and losses dwarfing the human scale.</p><p>By comparison, the Reagan-era <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis#Consequences" target="_blank">savings and loan scandal</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal#Aftermath" target="_blank">Enron scandal</a>, the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis#Impacts" target="_blank">mortgage-backed securities crisis</a> and the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-11-06/offshore-havens-show-policy-failures-at-home" target="_blank">annual losses to offshore tax havens</a> cost ordinary taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of millions of times more than one welfare cheat. That's enough to drain or break even Jeff Bezos' bank.</p><p>Public services are inexpensive by comparison. The 2017 budget for the <a href="https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/what-we-do/budget" target="_blank">National Institutes of Health</a> was about $33 billion; for the <a href="https://www.nsf.gov/about/congress/115/highlights/cu17_0508.jsp" target="_blank">National Science Foundation</a>, $7.5 billion; for the <a href="https://www.arts.gov/open-government/national-endowment-arts-appropriations-history" target="_blank">National Endowment for the Arts</a>, $150 million. The 2017 <a href="https://budget.boston.gov/operating-budget/" target="_blank">Boston city budget</a> was just under $3 billion, including about $1 billion for public schools, $200 million for pensions and $78 million for the Public Health Commission.</p><p>Most Americans <a href="http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html" target="_blank">don't understand</a> how inequitably <a href="https://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM" target="_blank">American wealth is distributed</a>. Worldwide, wealth inequality is <a href="https://youtu.be/uWSxzjyMNpU" target="_blank">even more stark</a>.</p><p>We live in a world where two dozen of the wealthiest individuals could collectively fund health and science research for the United States, where any of the thousand billionaires could individually fund the NEA with no practical impact to their purchasing power. Participatory government may remain, but only the ultra-wealthy need apply.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88355/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation"></p><p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-d-hwang-397731" target="_blank">Andrew D. Hwang</a>, Associate Professor of Mathematics, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/college-of-the-holy-cross-1730" target="_blank">College of the Holy Cross</a></em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-world-on-a-billionaires-budget-88355" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
3 questions to ask yourself next time you see a graph, chart, or map
Start by reading the title, looking at the labels and checking the caption. If these are not available – be very wary.
27 July, 2020
Photo by Giacomo Carra on Unsplash
Since the days of painting on cave walls, people have been representing information through figures and images.
<p>
Nowadays, data visualization experts know that <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/evamurray/2019/01/28/how-data-visualization-supports-communication" target="_blank">presenting information visually</a> <a href="https://ed.ted.com/lessons/david-mccandless-the-beauty-of-data-visualization">helps people better understand</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.12.006">complicated data</a>. The problem is that data visualizations can also leave you with the wrong idea – whether the images are sloppily made or intentionally misleading.
</p><p>
Take for example the bar graph presented at an <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?470990-1/president-trump-coronavirus-task-force-briefing" target="_blank">April 6 press briefing</a> by members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. It's titled “COVID-19 testing in the U.S." and illustrates almost 2 million coronavirus tests completed up to that point. President Trump used the graph to support his assertion that testing was “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-21/" target="_blank">going up at a rapid rate</a>." Based on this graphic many viewers likely took away the same conclusion – but it is incorrect.
</p><p>
The graph shows the total cumulative number of tests performed over months, not the number of new tests each day.
</p><p>
<iframe class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" frameborder="0" height="400px" id="pG025" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/pG025/2/" style="border: none" width="100%">
</iframe>
</p><p>
When you graph the number of new tests by date, you can see the number of COVID-19 tests performed between March and April did increase through time, but not rapidly. This instance is one of many when important information was not properly understood or well communicated.
</p><p>
As a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=T7vRKkQAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank">researcher of hazard and risk communication</a>, I think a lot about how people interpret the charts, graphs <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101487" target="_blank">and maps</a> they encounter daily.
</p><p>
Whether they show COVID-19 cases, global warming trends, high-risk tsunami zones, or utility usage, being able to correctly assess and interpret figures allows you to make informed decisions. Unfortunately, not all figures are created equal.
</p><p>
If you can spot a figure's pitfalls you can avoid the bad ones. Consider the following three key questions the next time you see a graph, map or other data visual so you can confidently decide what to do with that new nugget of information.
</p>
<h2>What is this figure trying to tell me?</h2><p>
Start by reading the title, looking at the labels and checking the caption. If these are not available – be very wary. Labels will be on the horizontal and vertical axes on graphs or in a legend on maps. People often overlook them, but this information is crucial for putting everything you see in the visualization into context.
</p><p>
Look at the units of measure – are they in days or years, Celsius or Fahrenheit, counts, age, or what? Are they evenly spaced along the axis? Many of the recent COVID-19 cumulative case graphs use a logarithmic scale, where the the intervals along the vertical axis are not equally spaced.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-3Mlj3MQ_Q" target="_blank">This creates confusion for people</a> unfamiliar with this format.
</p><iframe width="100%" height="315" src="https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/embedded-video/mmvo80534597724" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="">
</iframe><p>
A March 12 broadcast of 'The Rachel Maddow Show' included a graph with unlabeled numbers and a tricky horizontal axis.
</p><p>
For instance, a graph from “
<a href="https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/u-s-unprepared-for-expected-explosion-in-coronavirus-cases-80534597724?cid=sm_fb_maddow">The Rachel Maddow Show" on MSNBC</a>, showed coronavirus cases in the United States between Jan. 21 and March 11. The x-axis units on the horizontal are time (in a month-day format) and the y-axis units on the vertical are presumably cumulative case counts, though it does not specify.
</p><p>
The main issue with this graph is that the time periods between consecutive dates are uneven.
</p><p>
<iframe id="yzUp1" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/yzUp1/5/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0">
</iframe>
</p><p>
In a revised graph, with dates properly spaced through time, and coronavirus diagnoses plotted as a line graph, you can see more clearly what
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-cases-are-growing-exponentially-heres-what-that-means-135181" target="_blank">exponential growth</a> in the rate of infection really looks like. It took the first 30 days to add 33 cases, but only the last four to add 584 cases.
</p><p>
What may seem like a slight difference could help people understand how quickly exponential growth can go sky high and maybe change how they perceive the importance of curbing it.
</p><h2>How are color, shape, size and perspective used?</h2><p>
<a href="https://eos.org/features/visualizing-science-how-color-determines-what-we-see" target="_blank">Color plays an important role</a> in how people interpret information. Color choices can make you notice particular patterns or draw your eye to certain aspects of a graphic.
</p><p>
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=196&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=196&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=196&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/349252/original/file-20200723-23-wgpj48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=246&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
</p><p>
Oregon landslide susceptibility. (Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries)</p><p>
Consider two maps depicting landslide susceptibility, which are exactly the same except for reversed color schemes. Your eye may be be drawn to darker shades, intuitively seeing those areas as at higher risk. After looking at the legend, which color order do you think best represents the information? By paying attention to
<a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/hass-storytelling/storytelling-pixar-in-a-box/ah-piab-visual-language/v/color-visual" target="_blank">how color is used</a>, you can better understand how it influences what stands out to you and what you perceive.
</p><p>
Shape, size and orientation of features can also influence
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01150.x" target="_blank">how you interpret a figure</a>.
</p><p>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="confusing pie chart of employment data" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=608&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=764&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=764&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/348978/original/file-20200722-32-o99maq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=764&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
</p><p>
What industries employ Coloradans? (<a class="source" href="https://dossier.ink-live.com/html5/reader/production/default.aspx?pubname=&edid=5f3a495a-fdef-463f-b826-6b92609f04c5" target="_blank">Hemispheres</a>)</p><p>
Pie charts, like this one showing employment breakdown for a region, are notoriously difficult to parse. Notice how hard it is to pull out which employment category is highest or how they rank. The pie chart's wedges are not organized by size, there are too many categories (11!), the 3D perspective distorts the wedge sizes, and some wedges are separate from others making size comparisons almost impossible.
</p><p>
<iframe id="yCDTo" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/yCDTo/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0">
</iframe>
</p><p>
A bar chart is a better option for an informative display and helps show which industries people are employed in.
</p>
<h2>Where do the data come from?</h2><p>
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="screen shot of Twitter poll about Trump's performance" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/345601/original/file-20200703-33935-elrvg1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
</p><p>
Survey posted on 'Lou Dobbs Tonight,' requesting viewers vote on Twitter about Trump's performance. (<a class="source" href="https://www.mediaite.com/tv/lou-dobbs-invites-viewers-to-vote-on-trumps-coronavirus-leadership-superb-great-or-very-good/" target="_blank">Fox Business Network</a>)</p><p>
The source of data matters in terms of quality and reliability. This is especially true for partisan or politicized data. If the data are collected from a group that isn't a good approximation of the population as a whole, then it may be biased.
</p><p>
For example, on March 18, Fox Business Network host Lou Dobbs polled his audience with the question “How would you grade President Trump's leadership in the nation's fight against the Wuhan Virus?"
</p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1240421216692961284"}">
</div><p>
Imagine if only Republicans were asked this question and how the results would compare if only Democrats were asked. In this case, respondents were part of a self-selecting group who already chose to watch Dobbs' show. The poll can only tell you about that group's opinions, not people in the U.S. generally, for instance.</p><p>
Then consider that Dobbs provided only positive responses in his multiple choice options – “superb, great or very good" – and it is clear that this data has a bias.
</p><p>
Spotting bias and improper data collection methods allows you to decide which information is trustworthy.
</p><h2>Think through what you see</h2><p>
During this pandemic, information is emerging hour by hour. Media consumers are inundated with facts, charts, graphs and maps every day. If you can take a moment to ask yourself a few questions about what you see in these data visualizations, you may walk away with a completely different conclusion than you might have had at first glance.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/141348/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
</p><p>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/carson-macpherson-krutsky-1092926" target="_blank">Carson MacPherson-Krutsky</a>, PhD Candidate in Geosciences, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/boise-state-university-1983" target="_blank">Boise State University</a></em>
</p><p>
This article is republished from
<a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/3-questions-to-ask-yourself-next-time-you-see-a-graph-chart-or-map-141348" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</p>
Keep reading
Show less
'A world with no ice': Confronting the horrors of climate change
The complacent majority needs to step up and call for action on climate change.
27 July, 2020
Videos
- Climate change is often framed as a debate that has split society down the middle and that requires more evidence before we can act. In reality, 97 percent of scientists agree that it is real and only 3 percent are skeptical. A sticking point for some is the estimated timeline, but as Columbia University professor Philip Kitcher points out, a 4-5 Celsius temperature increase that makes the planet uninhabitable is a disaster no matter when it happens.
- In this video, 9 experts (including professors, astronomers, authors, and historians) explain what climate change looks like, how humans have already and are continuing to contribute to it, how and why it has become politicized, and what needs to happen moving forward for real progress to be made.
- David Wallace-Wells, journalist and New America Foundation National Fellow, says that the main goal of climate action is not to win over the skeptical minority, but to "make those people who are concerned but still fundamentally complacent about the issue to be really engaged in a way that they prioritize climate change in their politics and their voting and make sure that our leaders think of climate change as a first-order political priority."
<p class="media-headline"><br></p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="d1653c69ed88460fb3040e81c9e95e0b" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0525576711?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/31ewOFn7KuL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">The Uninhabitable Earth: Life After Warming</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0525576711?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$10.73</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$11.62</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$10.73</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p><br></p>
Keep reading
Show less
This is now the world’s greatest threat – and it’s not coronavirus
Affluence could be our real downfall.
25 July, 2020
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Politics & Current Affairs
A detailed analysis of environmental research has revealed the greatest threat to the world: affluence.
<ul class="ee-ul">
<li>Affluence is the biggest threat to our world, according to a new scientific report.</li>
<li>True sustainability will only be achieved through drastic lifestyle changes, it argues.</li>
<li>The World Economic Forum has called for a great reset of capitalism in the wake of the pandemic.</li>
</ul><p>
That's one of the main conclusions of a team of scientists from Australia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, who have warned that tackling overconsumption has to become a priority. Their report, titled Scientists' Warning on Affluence, explains that
<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16941-y#citeas" target="_blank">true sustainability calls for significant lifestyle changes</a>, rather than hoping that more efficient use of resources will be enough.
</p><p>
"We
<a href="https://phys.org/news/2020-06-overconsumption-growth-economy-key-drivers.html" target="_blank">cannot rely on technology alone to solve existential environmental problems</a> – like climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution," writes the report's lead author, Professor Tommy Wiedmann from Australia's University of New South Wales Engineering, in an article on Phys.org. "We also have to change our affluent lifestyles and reduce overconsumption, in combination with structural change."
</p><p>
<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16941-y/figures/2" target="_blank"><img alt="Sustainable lifestyles are situated between an upper limit or 'environmental ceiling' and a lower limit or 'social foundation'." src="https://assets.weforum.org/editor/dV_rIZLOwb8QRpsu2njqWYjrtTWgRuza8jLrE64QoTM.png"></a></p><p>Sustainable lifestyles are situated between an upper limit or 'environmental ceiling' and a lower limit or 'social foundation'. Image: Nature
</p>
<h3>A growing global challenge</h3><p>There is widespread acceptance that the planet faces an ecological tipping point. "To care for humanity, we must care for nature," said United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres on World Environment Day in June. He stressed the importance of making changes as the world recovers from the recent pandemic: " <a href="https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/press-release/time-nature-world-environment-day-shines-spotlight-biodiversity" target="_blank">As we work to build back better, let's put nature where it belongs</a> – at the heart of our decision making."</p><p>Approximately half of global GDP is bound up in the natural world, according to the UN. In addition to the many millions of jobs dependent on nature, there are also billions of people intimately connected to and wholly reliant upon natural remedies and medicines.</p><p>Plus, the use of tree-planting and reforesting programmes could reduce the impact of global emissions and help meet the Paris Agreement target to <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement" target="_blank">keep global temperature increase below 1.5C</a>.</p>
<h3>Call for systemic changes</h3><p>The threat of human-made environmental harm was highlighted in the World Economic Forum's Global Risk Report 2020, where it is in the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2020" target="_blank">top 10 of both the most-likely and the greatest-impact risks</a>.</p><p>The chief problem outlined by the report is that any gains in resource efficiency and environmental protection offered by technology-based solutions have been outrun by the growth of consumption. The report also posits that it might be time to rethink traditional ideas about supply and demand</p><p>In capitalist societies, the theory goes that consumer need drives the rest of the economy – businesses will only produce things for which there is a demand. But the reality of 21st-century global capitalism is a little more complex than that – <a href="https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2020/02/12/economists-slow-economic-growth" target="_blank">some economists argue that growth itself is the problem</a>.</p><p><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-16941-y/figures/2" target="_blank"><img alt="Global emissions, shown as the green dotted line, keep pace with the rise in production (purple) and global GDP (orange)." src="https://assets.weforum.org/editor/4QZjxlCwJv2nH0a7lQuHCVXBMj70Hk1VgagmyhiiUOU.png"></a></p><p>Global emissions, shown as the green dotted line, keep pace with the rise in production (purple) and global GDP (orange). Image: Nature</p>
<h3>Time for a great reset</h3><p>Writing shortly before World Environment Day, the Forum's founder and executive chairman, Professor Klaus Schwab, called for a <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/now-is-the-time-for-a-great-reset" target="_blank">great reset of capitalism in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic</a>. His vision of the great reset includes creating a stakeholder economy, where the market pursues fairer outcomes for all, underpinned by changes to tax, regulatory and fiscal policies, and new trade arrangements.</p><p>Schwab also calls for investments that advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability. This is something that is already taking place in parts of the world where economic-stimulus programmes are being enacted.</p><p>In addition, Schwab urges us to address health and social challenges with the innovations made possible by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. That means more public/private collaboration in pursuit of the public good.</p><p>The pandemic has devastated families and brought major economies to a standstill. But by directing resources into new and improved systems and processes, rather than shoring up the existing ones, Schwab believes a lasting change for the better is possible.</p><p>That belief is echoed by the scientists' report, which shows that affluence is "actually dangerous and leads to planetary-scale destruction," says co-author Julia Steinberger, Professor of Ecological Economics at the University of Leeds. "To protect ourselves from the worsening climate crisis, we must reduce inequality and challenge the notion that riches, and those who possess them, are inherently good."</p><p>Reprinted with permission of the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/" target="_blank">World Economic Forum</a>. Read the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/07/affluence-bigger-threat-than-coronavirus-scientists-capitalism/" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Polar bears could be extinct by 2100, says heartbreaking new study
If Arctic ice continues to melt at its projected rate, the bears will go extinct due to starvation by the end of the century according to a first-ever projected timeline.
24 July, 2020
Photo: Hans-Jurgen Mager on Unsplash
Surprising Science
- A new report on climate change by the University of Toronto is projecting that most of the polar bear population could reach extinction in under 100 years due to starvation.
- Polar bears are dependent on sea ice for hunting seals, a primary component of their diet. As temperatures rise and sea ice continues to shrink it has become increasingly challenging for the carnivores to hunt for food.
- The Arctic is likely to have warmed more than double the amount of the global average this year compared to pre-industrial temperatures.
<p>If Arctic ice continues to melt at its projected rate, polar bears will go extinct by the end of the century according to a first-ever projected timeline.</p><p>An alarming new report on climate change is projecting that most of the polar bear population could reach extinction in under 100 years. </p><p>The University of Toronto published a study in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0818-9.epdf?sharing_token=0wHq5etbmJi7MUc_jBsOl9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0P_29KxAi4i5L-CC0GQ9g-DIeGjALpyDzRYuJ9UqzBqTN27ad13OBC-oAL6KHcA60YHg0IHk499FZq6azv9X64JjsLoAtX9Z79N5jv1FgFsgzaJzjjaaWxNdR-CpZxKr-CDEWfXRMcU_VIa7ssVm1s6dqrWJXxfyWzcWaZKBAuzN3xuV56tWKUGP1Owv240OKEWp_KFKjNvxeXlywhZU8Norx9V6D5p9u_hZFOR312i0n833NJXpu2r3-Z8_I-QEA565nUU0jaAofcuK0kOObWV&tracking_referrer=abcnews.go.com" target="_blank">Nature Climate Change</a> last week that put a timeline on the beloved Arctic mammals' crisis for the first time. It's long been known that the ice habitats of polar bears — which most countries classify as an endangered species — have been rapidly melting, but now the "poster animal of climate change" has been given an extermination date by 2100. </p>
Starving into extinction
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6a66d2ea09b66ae24f3d997218f573f0"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_JhaVNJb3ag?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Polar bears are dependent on sea ice for hunting seals, a primary component of their diet, and aren't exactly built for swimming to catch their prey in the open water. As temperatures rise and sea ice continues to shrink it has become increasingly challenging for the carnivores to hunt for food. The species could be starved out within the next 80 years, save for a few high-Arctic subpopulations.</p><p>"Here, we establish the likely nature, timing and order of future demographic impacts by estimating the threshold numbers of days that polar bears can fast before cub recruitment and/or adult survival are impacted and decline rapidly," the authors of the study said.</p><p>The study looked at 13 of the world's 19 subpopulations of polar bears that account for 80 percent of the species' total population. Researchers modeled the energy use of the polar bears to calculate the number of days the bears can fast before their reproductive abilities become impacted. They then mapped that onto the number of estimated iceless days that will be faced in the coming decades, determining that the amount of time the bears would be forced to fast surpassed the amount of time they were capable of fasting. In 20 years from now, some polar bears living in Canada will begin to face reproductive failure and in 40 years a majority of the global population will more than likely be affected. </p><p>"The dire predictions in our study result from polar bear's dependence on sea ice and the projected rapid loss of that ice due to human-driven climate change," Marika Holland, co-author of the paper <a href="https://time.com/5869316/climate-change-pushes-polar-bears-towards-extinction-study-finds/" target="_blank">told TIME</a>.</p><p>While the scientists noted that moderate cuts in emissions could potentially extend the bears' estimated life-expectancy for a bit, it won't be able to save some species populations from extinction by the end of the century.</p><p>"Land-based feeding is unlikely to occur at scales that shift the timelines for recruitment and survival declines by more than a few years, because foods that meet the energy demands of polar bears are largely unavailable on land," the study said, pointing out that some polar bear populations are already feeling the impact.</p>The melting arctic
<p>Of course, as the <a href="https://www.iucn.org/content/action-now-save-polar-bears" target="_blank">International Union for Conservation of Nature</a> has cited, climate change is the main cause of the population's suffering and decline.</p><p>According to the World Meteorological Organization, the Arctic is likely to have warmed more than double the amount of the global average this year compared to pre-industrial temperatures. Since the 1970s, satellites have shown sea ice melting by 13 percent per decade. If greenhouse gas emissions stay on their current trajectory, the only polar bears that will be left by the end of the century will likely be those living in the Queen Elizabeth Islands in Canada's Arctic Archipelago. </p><p>Keeping tabs on polar bears, the largest land-dwelling carnivore on earth, is how scientists keep their finger on the pulse of the health of Arctic populations at-large. Their loss, as Holland <a href="https://time.com/5869316/climate-change-pushes-polar-bears-towards-extinction-study-finds/" target="_blank">told TIME</a>, "would reverberate throughout the ecosystem." </p><p>But the bears won't go down without a fight for their survival. As Arctic temperatures rise, melting the species' normal hunting grounds, the bears may begin to move toward land to find food. For example, in 2019 authorities in Russia's remote arctic region declared a state of emergency as a mob of starving polar bears charged into villages. </p>Any hope?
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUxMTYxMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMTM5ODY0M30.RqKPGBEzFaJsP81U2JcpbnMglhCYfg-TQpG7qPZT6H4/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C301%2C0%2C302&height=700" id="c7cea" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f92dedfaaf59e0d8df8c00e016d1f288" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="arctic fox in snow" />Arctic foxes are another species endangered as their habitats and diets are threatened by melting sea ice due to greenhouse gas emissions.
Photo by Jonatan Pie on Unsplash<p>Polar bears have faced extermination in the past. In 1965, scientists were worried that commercial polar bear hunting would cause the species to go extinct. A 1973 worldwide ban on hunting led to a resurgence in bear population, yet the melting sea ice that now threatens the lives of the <a href="http://pbsg.npolar.no/export/sites/pbsg/en/docs/2019-StatusReport.pdf" target="_blank">estimated 26,000</a> that live on earth today is a much more complex issue to solve. While the species' future looks grim, the study does point out that decreasing fossil fuel burning may reduce Arctic sea ice loss. </p><p>If there is a sliver of hope left for the polar bears and <a href="https://www.un-habitat.org/endangered-animals-arctic-region/" target="_blank">other Arctic species</a> endangered by melting Arctic ice, it rests on rapid and radical human action against fossil fuel emissions.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
