4A - Wednesday, November 3, 2010 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbot, MI 48109 tothedaily@umich.edu TO make this work there is only one label that matters. That label is Michigander." - Michigan's governor-elect Rick Snyder (R-Ann Arbor), commenting last night on his desire for bipartisanship in Michigan after his win against Democrat and Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero. 0 JACOB SMILOVITZ EDITOR IN CHIEF RACHEL VAN GILDER EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MATT AARONSON MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. Earni n the grade University must improve sustainability programs t looks like the University might need a tutor in environ- mental sustainability. Recently, it received a lower grade than usual in a sustainability report card published by a respected survey of North American colleges. Officials have stat- ed that the University deserved a higher ranking than it received. For an institution that says it has a strong commitment to being environmentally conscious, this year's grade shows that the Uni- versity's actions don't support its words. Despite protestations that the survey was flawed, there is more that the University can - and should - do to improve campus sustainability. The only thing to fear... he entire country was alarmed last Christmas when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to bomb a plane travelling from Amsterdam to Detroit. But there were a few things about the situation that likely scared University students a bit more than the general population. For JEREMY one, Abdulmutal- lab was kept in the LEVY University hospi- tal briefly follow- ing his arrest. And many students have likely taken or plan to take the Northwest international flight from Amsterdam to Detroit as part of a study abroad program. I almost took that flight from Amsterdam during the summer of 2009, prior to the attempted bombing. In the same manner, members of the Chicago Jewish community - me included - had specific reason to be alarmed in regards to the attempted terrorist attack last weekend. On Thursday, officials in London and Dubai intercepted two packages with explosives that were mailed from Yemen to the United States. These packages were both addressed to Chi- cago area synagogues, as President Barack Obama announced last Thurs- day, according to The New York Times. While official addresses haven't been released, the Chicago Tribune reported that one of the packages was intended for a synagogue in a suburb called Rogers Park. This suburb has particular meaning to me because it's where I worked for a Jewish charity organization over the summer. It's frightening to think that a synagogue in the same community was the tar- get of an attempted bombing. It's not unusual to fear terror- ist attacks. But the reason . bring up these cases is to show that when an individual can personalize an attack or attempted attack in some way, that individual's fear will likely be ampli- fied. Whether such fears are justified or not (some are, some aren't), they must beputinperspective.As Freakonomics co-author Steven D. Levitt often points out, the average American's individual chances of dying in a terrorist attack are smaller than his chances of dying from a car accident. In this light, one of the biggest mistakes we can make as a country isto act irrationally due to fear and uncertainty. Public perceptions of terrorism play a large role in shaping national policy. Every attempted act of ter- rorism ratchets up public fears and results in massive pressure for the government to strengthen its coun- ter-terrorism measures. This was certainly the case with the Christmas Day bomber, and I'd be willing to bet that many Chicago Jews will recall the Yemeni packages in future discus- sions of terrorism policy. Public offi- cials who are vulnerable to the votes of their constituents have little incen- tive to go against public fears, and this often shows in policy decisions. The problem is that such policies aren't always rational and often don't take long-term consequences into account. For instance, in the after- math of Sept. 11, 2001, Congress voted by an overwhelming majority to give the executive branch broad powers to combat terrorism. This legislation was in line with public opinion about how to handle the situation. But in the wake of the legislation, the Bush administration captured roughly 800 alleged "enemy com- batants," most of whom were taken without just cause and have since been released. The administration also created the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, which has subject- ed the U.S. to accusations of human rights abuses. Looking back, it's hard to say that granting the executive as few limitations as Congress did was the best decision. Another example of fear driv- ing potentially unsound policy is the pending decision of how to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other Sept. 11 conspirators - either in a federal court in New York City or a military tribunal. While there are legitimate arguments to be made on both sides, public objection to holding terrorists in a major city may wield dispropor- tional influence. The Sept. 11 conspir- ators are dangerous in the sense that they planned anunprecedented attack on U.S. soil, but the allegation that they are still dangerous in military or FBI custody is driven by blind fear. Knee-jerk fear can lead to poor policy decisions. I'm not saying that fear is an unrea- sonable response to terrorist attacks, especially when such attacks effect individuals personally. Nor am I deny- ing that Congress's decision to grant the executive broad war powers was almost unanimously considered the right thing to do at the time. What I am saying is that we have to be able to learn from our mistakes and develop the ability to analyze our fears in a broader context. When we give our fears undue weight in decision-mak- ing, it leads to policy mistakes. In the near future, there are going to be more threats of terrorist attacks and there will be individuals who are personally affected by each one. All of us have to be prepared to handle such situations in a rational manner. - Jeremy Levy can be reached at jeremlev@umich.edu. 0 According to an Oct. 28 article in The Michigan Daily, the University's grade from the Campus Sustainability Report Card dropped from a B+ in 2010 to a B on the 2011 report card, which was released last week. The Report Card grades 332 North American colleges in nine differ- ent areas of campus-wide sustainability. The executive director of the University's Office of Campus Sustainability, Terry Alexander, told the Daily that he believes the University deserved an A. He also believes the Campus Sustainability Report Card's process of rating is faulty. Part of the problem, according to Alexan- der, is that the Michigan Student Assembly Environmental Issues Commission never filled out the student portion of the survey, which was sent out in July. The commis- sion has filled out the survey in the past, but somehow it slipped through the cracks this summer. Students and the Office of Campus Sustainability must work together to create a greener campus, and students need to keep up their end of that responsibility. But the Office of Campus Sustainability must lead the charge for a more sustain- able campus. It's easy to blame the grading system, but the reality is that the Univer- sity doesn't deserve an A. There are many easily identifiable areas in which campus could be more sustainable. For example, the University's fleet of vehicles - which increased by about 60 in the last year - doesn't run completely on alternative fuels like ethanol or biodiesel. And the Univer- sity has no intention to switch to hybrid buses in the near future, even though the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority start- ed purchasing hybrids 2007. The Univer- sity could also implement trayless dining across campus, a program that encourages students to not use trays in dining halls. The program has already been success- fully implemented in East Quad. The University's construction and reno- vation projects also haven't prioritized green initiatives. North Quad wasn't con- structed to earn LEED certification. And the University currently has only two LEED-certified buildings, which is aston- ishingly bad considering the University's size, construction budget and supposed commitment to going green. Grand Valley State University, a much smaller institution than the University of Michigan, has seven LEED-certified buildings on its Allendale campus alone, and is waiting on approval for two more as of September 2010. The University's current sustainability programs seem to only pay lip service to its environmentally friendly reputation. But half-hearted environmentalism isn't accept- able. The University must remember that environmental consciousness isn't just a mindset. It also requires progressive action. 0 0 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be fewer than 300 words and must include the writer's full name and University affiliation. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters. Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu. Interpretation ofpreCiitation EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS: Aida Ali, Jordan Birnholtz, Adrianna Bojrab, Will Butler, Eaghan Davis, Michelle DeWitt, Ashley Griesshammer, Will Grundler, Jeremy Levy, Erika Mayer, Harsha Nahata, Emily Orley, Harsha Panduranga, Tommaso Pavone, Leah Potkin, Asa Smith, Laura Veith PAKISTANI STUDENTS' ASSOCIATION Get involved with flood relief From July through September, the lives of millions in Pakistan were changed for the worse. Seasonal monsoon rains inundated nearly one- fifth of the country, causing what has been called one of the worst natural disasters in recent his- tory. To put this devastation in perspective, the number of victims is higher than those of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, the 2005 Kash- mir earthquake and the 2010 Haiti earthquake combined. More than 20 million people with limited means have been rendered either home- less, jobless or both. That's nearly the population of Michigan and Ohio combined displaced from their homes and livelihoods, with nothing left. For most of us, it's difficult to grasp the extent of this devastation that has uprooted thousands of families in Pakistan and crippled the country's already weak economy. The greatest irony of this disaster (there are many) lies in the fact that Pakistan faced a near- drought situation earlier this year. The water in the country's dams and reservoirs had fallen below the dead levels at the beginning of sum- mer, which means that the water level had fallen so low that spillways no longer functioned and water could only be pumped out. Alarming pho- tos and reports of dried-up dams and parched rivers appeared in local media outlets, which criticized the government for its apparent inac- tion to avert disaster. All hopes were pinned on the monsoon rains, which bring annual respite from hot dry weather to the south Asian sub-con- tinent. The prediction of a looming disaster came true, however, in an unexpected form. Soon after the mqch-anticipated monsoon rains started toward the end of July, reports of flooding in the northern areas of Pakistan marked the beginning of a calamity that would engulf much of the country in weeks to come. The rains washed away entire villages, cities and even districts across the country, making the costs of rebuilding these areas an impos- sible target - one much beyond the country's limited resources. This description of the 2010 Pakistan floods might be news (or, at best, old news) to many in this part of the world. It's baffling how little air- time the Pakistani floods have received in world media. No benefit concerts or telethons have been held to help the people whose lives have been turned upside down. Some have considered the contrast between this disaster and the great American response to Haiti's earthquake - 2010's other major natural disaster. The world commu- nity has shown reluctance to help the affected people of Pakistan; the United Nation's largest ever appeal - to raise $2 billion - has received a disappointing response. Ironically, the Kashmir earthquake of 2005 in Pakistan received immense support from the local and international community alike. Billions of dollars were given in the form of aid money or support for various developmental projects. However, the same generosity is missing this time around. Why? Could this absence of world support be a case of one too many natural disas- ters? Is it simply a lack of publicity about the floods? Or is there some other explanation for this unresponsiveness? These questions are difficult to answer. Speculating about the reasons behind apathy toward human suffering usually gets nowhere. It is more important to raise awareness about the crisis in Pakistan. Getting involved in the Pakistan flood relief efforts is easy. Manylocal and internationalorga- nizations are participating in the ongoing relief and rehabilitation efforts. Here in Ann Arbor, the Pakistani Students' Association at the Uni- versity, along with its affiliate associations, have been actively involved in organizing fund raising events on campus such as bake sales, dinners, sporting events and musical shows. By donating through one of the reputable relief organizations, volunteering at PSA events or even attending them, we can decide whether or not we want to break away from an indifference towards the flood victims. Let's help alleviate human suffer- ing, which is irrespective of age, gender, religion, location or any other classification. This viewpoint was written by Faiza Matasim and Fahad Muhammad Sajid on behalf of the Pakistani Students' Association. N little over three years ago, I was attending the new student rientation at the College of Engineering. And, if reality hadn't struck when the time came to sign up for classes - I just couldn't han- dle the prospect of taking multiple calculus courses - I might still be pursuing a degree TOMASSO in atmospheric PAVONE sciences. Never- theless, even after my decision to study public policy and political sci- ence instead, I still consider myself a weather nerd., Two weeks ago, my meteorologi- cal geekiness was revived when a friend shared an article titled "'A 30 percent Chance of Rain Tomorrow': How Does the Public Understand Probabilistic Weather Forecasts?" The answer? It doesn't understand them at all. The article follows researchers who decided to survey random pedes- trians in five cities: Amsterdam, Ath- ens, Berlin, Milan and New York. The researchers asked the pedestrians to interpret what a 30-percent chance of rain means. In all cities except New York, most pedestrians provided an incorrect definition. So, do you know what it means when there's a 30-percent chance of rain tomorrow? The correct interpretation is that, out of ten days like tomorrow, three of them will include measurable rainfall. Yet most respondents in the study interpreted "a 30-percent chance of rain" as meaning that it will rain 30 percent of the time or in 30 percent of the region for which the forecast applies. Oops. The fact that weather forecasts are frequently misinterpreted raises an important question: Does the public lack an understanding of basic prob- abilities or does the fault lie with meteorologists' lackluster abilities to clearly communicate their forecasts? To some extent, both camps are at fault. Interpreting a 30-percent chance of rain as rain falling 30 per- cent of the time does misinterpret a basic probability: if it rains 30-percent ofthetime, itmeans there isa 100-per- cent chance of rain falling. The other misinterpretation, namely that it will rain in 30 percent of the region, seems to me a less serious offense. But I argue that meteorologists aren't doing themselves any favors when they issue public forecasts. Considerthe following forecast pro- vided by the National Weather Service (NWS) on Dec. 5, 2007: "Tonight... mostly cloudy. Snow likely this eve- ning...total accumulation around an inch. Chance of snow 70 percent." Joe Bastardi, a senior forecaster at AccuWeather, responded to this forecast with a trenchant critique on the AccuWeather professional site (of which I am a loyal member): "Does anyone in the (NWS) understand they put out forecasts that make no sense? (T)he darn forecast says they will get an inch...but then has SNOW LIKELY THIS EVENING. How the heck can it only be likely? It has to snow to accumulate an inch, doesn't it? How can it accumulate an inch, if there is a chance it doesn't fall (30%)?" Bastardi definitely has a point: how is the public, who already has difficulty understanding basic prob- abilities, supposed to correctly inter- pret forecasts that are ambiguous, contradictory and confusing? After years of reading Bastardi's blog, I know that Bastardi's own fore- WANT THE DAILY ON THE GO? casting methodology leaves much to be desired. Perhaps in an effort not to make the same mistake as the NWS, Bastardi seldom refers to probabili- ties in his forecasts. If he believes a hurricane will strike Miami, Florida, he'll make that call as if it's a certain- ty and stubbornly stick to-his guns through thick and thin - at least until the storm strikes Charleston, South Carolina instead. Understandably, weather forecasts can be confusing. This problem is, frankly, a lose- lose situation. The public is left to choose between confusing forecasts that it often misinterprets or fore- casts A la Bastardi that include no margin of error and are often wrong. On the other hand, meteorologists are faced with a public that doubts their predicting abilities and often mocks their profession. I can't recall how many times I've heard the joke that meteorologists are the only peo- ple who can be wrong half of the time and still keep their jobs. This problem might be dismissed as a minor inconvenience if weather forecasting weren't such a vital com- ponent of our daily lives. In the end, meteorologists have an obligation to improve the clarity of their forecasts. As for us, perhaps we should make a little extra effort to interpret a fore- cast correctly before we crack anoth- er joke about it being wrong. - Tonmaso Pavone can be reached at tpavone@umich.edu. Now you can access your favorite Daily opinion content on your phone. Keep up with columnists, read Daily editorials and join in the debate. Check out the Daily's mobile website at m.michigandaily.com.