Earth Day live internet TV with thought leaders and gamechangers

Kevin Grandia is broadcasting a bunch of Earth Day interviews on ClimateTV starting at noon EDT.  You can get the background on this at Desmogblog.  I will be on live at 1:30 if my Skype connection works — never done an interview this way before.  Here are all of the guests you can see:

Dr. Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at the University of Victoria and author of Keeping our Cool: Canada in a Warming World.

Josh Dorfman, author of The Lazy Environmentalist: Your Guide to Easy, Stylish, Green Living and star of Sundance Channel’s TV series The Lazy Environmentalist.

Maggie Fox
, CEO and President of Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection

Erin Carlson, Director of Yahoo! Green

Kate Sheppard, Environmental Reporter for Mother Jones Magazine

JW Randolph
, Legislative Associate for Appalachian Voices, a West Virginia grassroots organization fighting to end the practice of mountain top removal

Phil Radford
, Executive Director of Greenpeace USA

Cliff Schecter,
political columnist and author of The Real McCain: Why Conservatives Don’t Trust Him””And Why Independents Shouldn’t

Katharine Hayhoe,
climate scientist at Texas Tech University and author of A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith-Based Decisions

Nate Byer, Earth Day Network’s 2010 Earth Day Campaign Director

Nick Miller,
Founder, President and CEO of Xool Labs, Executive Producer of ClimateTV
ClimateTV will also be airing an online broadcast premiere of the award-winning documentary No Impact Man starting at 3:30pm pacific, 6:30pm eastern. The screening will be followed by a live interactive panel discussion with special guests Jennifer Prediger, also known as “Ask Umbra” on, David Beers, founding editor of The, Kim Thee, ClimateTV host and Kevin Grandia, yours truly :)

4 Responses to Earth Day live internet TV with thought leaders and gamechangers

  1. prokaryote says:

    Earth Day photo selections; severe weather outbreak for TX/OK

  2. rossabbey says:

    Just watched the archived version from earlier today. Well done as always, Joe.

    Regarding scientists not wanting to spend their time repeating the AGW basics again and again and again (or getting dragged into disingenuous debates with paid denialists) – the solution seems clear. Scientists, or at least their employers and institutions, need to hire full-time professional messengers. People like yourself in the dozens.

    To the extent that denialists are gaining ground, one big reason is that it’s not a fair fight. With the exception of yourself and a few others,
    the current debate is mostly between scientists and (in effect) lawyers.

    Lawyers are not necessarily evil. (I don’t believe in self-loathing.) But we do play by a different set of rules. Rather than seeking objective truth, our job is to zealously represent our client in front of the relevant decision maker. Rather than having to recognize and deal with subtleties and complexities in the data, lawyers cherry pick the best data for their side and frame it in the most sympathetic light. In the courtroom this often leads to the right outcome, because both sides are playing under the same set of rules — rules well understood by the judge and jury. But lawyers vs. scientists is not a fair fight. To win, scientists must either fight like lawyers, or (the better option) lawyer up.

    Two important distinctions. First, in the courtroom context, attorneys are legally bound to declare who they are representing (no secret clients allowed). The mainstream media must demand the same from its sources & publish these facts for the benefit of readers.

    Second, in court an attorney can be held in contempt or disbarred for telling an outright lie. And most attorneys never even get close to that line, because they know the judge & jury are scrutinizing both sides for the merest credibility destroying mistake (so the lawyer will concede a bad fact to preserve her creditability). Most in the mainstream media want to shirk this credibility judging responsibility, leaving it instead to their readers. Of course that is a ridiculous cop-out, because in today’s world, by merely covering a source or repeating a talking point, the media necessarily confers credibility in the minds of many readers.

    A good lawyer would use every possible occasion to attack the other side for failing to disclose their clients & for the merest chink in their credibility.

    A good scientist, of course, would not.

  3. Ibrahim Mohammad says:

    Yep the big thunderstorm season is now. Ozone levels are skyrocketing.

  4. Ibrahim Mohammad says:

    Greenpeace is a game changer. The drive nails into trees and creat danger for lumberjacks.