A virtual penny for your thoughts….
Climate Progress
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Get ThinkProgress email alerts
About Climate Progress
Edited by Joe Romm, we cover climate science, solutions and politics. Columnist Tom Friedman calls us "the indispensable blog" and Time magazine named us one of the 25 "Best Blogs of 2010." Newcomers, start here.
Joe Romm's New Book
Language Intelligence: Lessons on persuasion from Jesus, Shakespeare, Lincoln, and Lady Gaga.
Joe Romm has pulled together the secrets of the greatest communicators in history to show how you can apply these tools to your writing, speaking, blogging — even your Tweeting.
Subscribe to Climate Progress by Email
Powered by NewsWhip
Got a Hot Tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Climate Progress Archives
About ThinkProgress | Contact Us | Donate
Networking at http://biochar.me Share your ideas!
My question to climate hawks:
Are you prepared to go on hunger strike to achieve climate progress?
Are hunger strikes effective? When, who, with what kind of demands?
Please share your thoughts.
#2 how about any CPers willing to sign up to curtailing flying….
http://www.facebook.com/pages/ClimateFlightAction/165484890164497
Our public leaders are unwilling acknowledge the critical nature of AGW and our existential future. Logic suggests the establishment some sort of state-of-emergency to implement the changes necessary to reduce the risks but most are unwilling or unable to take such actions. This suggests that, we who recognize the problem and are free to act, have a responsibility to implement our own state-of-emergency. (The responsibility is greater that we would like to admit.) If the threat is as grave as it seems to be, then almost any level of action is not too great and not undertaking those actions undermines our credibility.
Are we men (and Women) or mice? The transition to the clean energy economy will take years, but the change from where we are as a nation to making the commitment as a nation to engage in the effort, without limit, can happen very quickly.
So how far does a virtual penny go these days?
To elaborate on a widely-used analogy…
We, the (independent and non-partisan, of course) American Sceptic Smokers for the Wholesome Health of Independently-minded People (ASSWHIP), after carefully considering the evidence produced by six of our finest associated researchers, endorse the following positions completely, or individually, or any convenient combination thereof:
1) Lung cancer does not exist.
2) Existing lung cancer has natural causes.
3) Lung cancer caused by smoking has no consequences.
4) The consequences of lung cancer are probably beneficial.
5) To the negative consequences of lung cancer we’ll find remedies.
6) In any case, government must under all circumstances stay inactive, so as to not interfere with the free market’s magic, which will deliver salvation to us all.
We cannot help but conclude it is thus proven that the most prudent decision is to keep smoking.
For more information and to donate, please visit:
http://asswhip.ing
Just kidding…
The hungry among us in the human community must, absolutely must be fed now here because we can do so and we are bound to care for them. But how do we begin to move toward the achievement of this goal? If we hold steadfastly to the necessity of assuring a sustainable population in a sustainable world for the children, how do we feed those who are hungry and starving, and simultaneously not keep ‘feeding the problem’ posed to the family of humanity by the human overpopulation of Earth?
If the outrageous per-capita overconsumption and individual hoarding, the reckless large-scale corporate overproduction of unnecessary stuff and resulting pollution, and the unbridled overpopulation of Earth are occurring synergistically, then the human community is soon to be confronted with formidable global ecological threats. Somehow the human-induced global predicament, however colossal, that all are observing and some are discussing has got to acknowledged as well as addressed and overcome as a whole. Think of the global predicament as a rope made from three colossal strands. Because overpopulation, overproduction and overconsumption activities by the human species are occurring synergistically and on such a gigantic and soon to become patently unsustainable scale, taking hold of one of the strands will not change the course of events. All three strands will have to be simultaneously grasped carefully, skillfully and humanely somehow. What appears before us is a super ordinate challenge, unlike anything seen in the course of human history, I suppose.
Perhaps what we need, even if it is not all we need, is an adequately functioning democracy, but first ordinary people will have to liberate ourselves from the pernicious, widely shared and consensually validated thinking of a tiny minority in the human community who extol the virtue of greed mongering as good, as an activity to be valued most highly.
Even an enlightened dictator is not a person in whom I could place much faith. We need for duly elected, common people who are chosen by a society to accept the responsibilities and fulfill the duties of leadership by meaningfully embracing democratic principles and eschewing greed, by not “selling out” to greed mongers.
It appears that the most arrogant, foolhardy and avaricious, self-proclaimed masters of the universe among us rule the world in our time, and rule it absolutely. This situation is bold evidence of a corruption of democracy, not an example of the reasonable exercise of democratic principles and practices. These circumstances are not only a colossal insult to humanity, but also are a clear and present danger to global biodiversity, Earth’s frangible environs, its limited resources and to a good enough future for the children.
Democracy requires representatives who reject the entreaties and bribes of greedmongers. They also need to embrace principles and practices that promote long-term well being of the great majority of people and not only the short-term desires and fantasies of masters of the universe.
By the way, where did the ‘Homo hubris hubris’ idea for the name “Homo sapiens sapiens” originate?
Joe, a suggestion: Would it be possible for you to help improve the dissemination of your invaluable posts? I try to share your posts on facebook, and they all repeat the tag about ““The Web’s most influential…” after the headline. A tease from the blog post itself would be much more informative..
I, for one, tend to agree with David Smith (#4). The failure of our electeds to make the same type of principled stand that Rep. Jackie Speier made last night on another suybject should shame them all. Instead, most will compromise away whatever leverage they have to opponents who know that they only have to hold out to win the inevitable compromise.
It is my fervent hope that every member of Congress who is not on the correct side of this issue will find themselves in a primary fight with a leader who is not afraid to tell it like it is. It took a Pete McCloskey running against Richard Pombo to give Republicans permission to vote against a man who was working to destroy our natural resources. Now, Congress is filled with Pombos and the Republican Party no longer tolerates any new McCloskeys
So it’s 2030, and we have been growing our own food for almost 20 years… but with the recent alternating droughts and floods this has become near impossible. We either have too much water or too little.
Now retired, we are nearly penniless since the market crashed, taking our 401Ks with it, and our social security checks have lost so much buying power.
This year the floods washed away our chicken coop with the chickens in it. We can’t afford to replace them.
The prices at the grocery store have gotten so high it is impossible afford a balanced diet.
The situation is grim, but we’re better off than most. Famine claimed 1 million lives in Africa this year…most of them children. There’s been food riots in New York and Los Angeles. I don’t know if it is a blessing or a curse that we still have some internet… the news is so depressing.
On the bright side, we’re now getting 40% of our electricity from renewables here in the US. That’s only partly because oil is going for $300 a barrel. We are old. The young suffer terribly. They are choosing not to have children. I don’t know whether there will be many of us around to benefit from the too little too late efforts to mitigate climate change. Turns out the scientists were way too optimistic over the last few decades. It’s way worse than they predicted.
Re #2 and hunger strikes:
I doubt very much these would be of any particular value. Recall that Gandhi went on hunger strikes to whip his own people in line; the Brits could mostly not give a turd one way or the other.
The same is true here. Who exactly do you hope to move by such an action? The deniers won’t care, propagandist organizations like Faux Noise will simply mock you (the “Karen Carpenter Diet plan”) while the people on your side are already there and have no where else to go.
I am very intrigued by the paper by Song and Colberg published last week in the J Geophysical Research Ocean. I read the paper last night, and found it very interesting. They used gridded satellite altimeter data for sea level and compared this to gridded ocean bottom pressure (OBP) from GRACE. They then took the upper level (700m) ocean heat content (OHC) info from XBT/ARGO and translated that into a steric sea level (SSL) contribution. The contribution of eustatic rise from ice sheet and glacier melt is removed, leaving the SSL contribution from the deep ocean heating in each particular grid cell.
The Result: Deep ocean heating contributes about 1.1 mm of the observed 3.1 mm per year of sea level rise (SLR). The paper also shows significant regional deep ocean warming variation, with the Southern Ocean and portions of the Atlantic warming much faster. The authors compare the regional results with other studies and discuss many similarities and a few discrepancies.
Although not discussed in the paper, this amount of SLR should translate into the deep ocean acting as a heat sink with a rough estimate that the deep ocean is taking as much as 70 x 10^20 J per year of the planetary energy imbalance, roughly the same as the upper 700m level. In essence, this would close the planetary energy budget, and confirm the planet is heating about 0.9 W per square meter, the estimated top of atmosphere (TOA) imbalance from AGW models (and roughly confirmed by measurements of outgoing longwave radiation).
Dr. Trenberth has published extensively on the planetary energy imbalance, and it will be interesting to hear his views on the Song and Colberg results. This paper may go a long way in helping resolve the famous “Trenberth Travesty”.
Is it possible, when people post here with information about what has been invested, (anywhere it’s done) for instance when a new solar installation is finalized, or proposed,
how far the installation goes, in reduction of carbon, say per year, and what percent that is of what is needed to get to a certain point, say 350?
It would help me to understand the size of contribution to attacking the global problem.
#2: “Are you prepared to go on hunger strike to achieve climate progress?”
If the cost of food becomes prohibitive because of climate change, sure I am! (Until TPTB order me to eat cake, that is;)
“Are you prepared to go on hunger strike to achieve climate progress?
Are hunger strikes effective? When, who, with what kind of demands?
Please share your thoughts.”
dietary choice is not a revolution; the state and corporations would love nothing more that for environmentally concerned citizens to starve themselves quietly in “peaceful demonstration.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5vSia_tLeI
there is no set of “demands” to implore from the dominant social system that will actually address the root causes of ecocide. we are forced to introduce our own system from below and dismantle the dominant one. instead of starving yourself, eating vegan or out of dumpsters (“freegan”) or whatever and trying to influence social change by shame and oversocialized nonsense why not enjoy life: grow your own food (or shoplift from big chains), teach others to grow food, share what you learn with others, offset your own carbon emissions by making your own biochar, network and prep for life in a world of corrupt failing states and worldwide conflict.
“‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.’” He screwed up his face in an
expression of disgust.
“And yet,” said Susila, “in a certain sense the advice is excellent. Eating, drinking, dying—three primary manifestations of the universal and impersonal life. Animals live that impersonal and universal life without knowing its nature. Ordinary people know its nature but don’t live it and, if ever they think seriously about it, refuse to accept it. An enlightened person knows it, lives it, and accepts it completely. He eats, he drinks, and in due course he dies—but he eats with a difference, drinks with a difference, dies with a difference.” – aldous huxley from “Island”
“Traditional non-violent protest is dead as a means of reversing bad organizational behavior. It’s easily ignored/overlooked in a media saturated environment and the methods of controlling and marginalizing it have become widely practiced/tolerated (from “free speech zones” to non-lethal weapons to crowdsourced identification of protesters). Further, shame doesn’t work anymore as a means of dissuasion. Given these impediments, the revival of protest means rethinking how it is used as a coercive tool. It means going beyond attrition (boycotts, physical damage, etc.) and moral suasion (signage, marches, etc.) and into the realm of systemic disruption…”
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2010/06/coercive-games.html
I have a few questions which I hope some readers can answer in the below posts. I should note I am a business person, not a climatologist or scientist thus I don’t have the knowledge some of the others do, but that doesn’t mean I am indifferent or don’t care about climate change.
1. We all agree both warming and cooling are dangerous. Which is more dangerous and why? I know cooling is unlikely to happen barring a nuclear war or supervolcano but best to at least debate which is worse or not?
2. How can this be made a moral issue, not a left/right one. In the US its become too much of a left wing one and anytime an issue is associated with one side of the spectrum it won’t go anywhere as the nation is quite polarized. We do have some exceptions such as Arnold Schwartznegger who is a Republican and supports action on climate change. It seems in Europe they have been more successful at making it a moral issue as many on the right (David Cameron, Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy etc.) are for action on climate change. Can the same be done in the US.
3. What are the chances of melting ice causing the conveyor belt to shutdown and what impact would that have globally. Would it only cause harsher winters in Europe while we would still see warming elsewhere or would it cause a reverse as happened in the Younger Dryas Period. Also could it create a more extreme European climate, otherwise much like the Eastern US and Canada where winters are much harsher but summers are much hotter and unlike Eastern Canada and US I don’t think Europeans could handle such extremes very well.
4. SO2 is known to have a cooling effect as it blocks sunlight. If we mandated that all fossil fuels must include sulphur, could this offset the negative impacts of CO2 and even if it could would it cause other negative impacts. In the 60s and 70s when sulphate aerosols were used a lot more and CO2 emissions were high too, we didn’t see much in terms of warming, while once aerosol use dramatically declined in the 80s, we saw rapid warming otherwise suggesting this might have masked the warming that would have otherwise occurred.
I would be interested in what other readers have to think and feel free to only respond to one of them.
Joe,
I’ve been looking at your climate solution plan, and I’m wondering if, looking at the rapidly falling price trends for PV and batteries, you might consider updating your climate solution plan. Specifically, reverse the ratio between PV:CSP from 1:3 to 3:1 … Big CSP projects are selling their permits to PV plants. New battery tech has lowered the cost of PV demand response and base load.
http://www.grist.org/article/2011-02-15-busting-4-myths-about-solar-pv-v.-concentrating-solar
PV price trends are downward – and DOE is on board.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/sunshot/
Local distributed PV, owned by the user, is much more resilient, providing electricity even when the grid goes down or becomes unreliable. It’s financially much better for individuals, who gain ownership rather than paying permanent rents for grid electricity.
Nickel-iron batteries can last 40 years or more without degrading. They use safe, commonly available elements, and can get lifeboat communities through the gap between the peak oil crash, climate collapse, and the renewable renaissance and climate restoration that must follow (but unfortunately, will be too late to avoid the “long recession” because our leaders didn’t listen to us!)
Nickel – Iron Battery link:
http://www.ironedison.com
Thank you for considering this mid-course correction!
Joy
CYCLONE Carlos exploded like a “hand grenade” over Darwin, weather experts said. Authorities called the storm a “one-in-500-year event”.
And Met Bureau regional director Andrew Tupper said the cyclone was so unusual, he wanted to turn it into a case study.
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2011/02/20/213601_ntnews.html
Carlos is about to reform off the Kimberly coast line.
Push Big Business, Not Congress, to Create Jobs
Excerpted from my forthcoming book, “Carbon Karma”.
It is a safe bet that when things are going spectacularly wrong in any system, there is a fundamental flaw in one or more of the foundational axioms of that system. If we identify and correct these flaws, the system has a chance to right itself. But, if we keep patching up the symptoms that arise in the faulty system, then we will be applying more and more complex patches over time until the whole system collapses spectacularly. It is not a question of whether such a collapse occurs, but when. For the human enterprise has truly been an organically grown, seat-of-the-pants engineered Rube Goldberg contraption when compared to the robust ecosystems that Nature has developed through eons of evolution.
Thus far, we have been applying patches to the symptoms of our systemic distress as they arose. It is long past due for us to examine the foundational flaws in the human enterprise instead. This would require a fundamental sea change in the way humans interact with Nature. And, it is up to the next generation to make that shift.
I consider the 10-35 year olds alive today as the Most Important Generation that ever Lived on Earth (MIGLE) for they need to make this shift or choose not to and face the dire consequences. The members of this generation are Miglets. My two children are Miglets.
In contrast, members of my generation that is currently in power throughout the planet are the Piglets. We have oinked our way through the resources of the planet leaving a vastly diminished base for future generations. And, though in power, we are yet to face up to it. We have punted the problems down the road at every opportunity, while looking for make believe fixes of the technological kind. The spectacle has been nothing short of disgusting. We have found trillions to bail out the banks and their money-grubbing CEOs, but we have failed to find the resources needed to ensure a livable planet for our children.
How did it come to this?
The mythology that drives our modern culture stems from the rousing words of Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers of the American Revolution: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Their Declaration of Independence is arguably one of the most stirring documents ever produced by human beings, but it has been profoundly misinterpreted to the point where we currently are doing the exact opposite of what it says. I base this observation upon my familiarity with the Bhagavad Gita, the Hindu scripture, and how that defines Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, but I’d wager that a scholar in any other religion would be able to point to the same parallels in their foundational texts as well.
Take, for starters, Life. In our modern culture, “Life” has been interpreted to mean the attainment of Leisure. We strive to achieve a life of leisure.
The Bhagavad Gita stridently opposes this attainment of leisure or inaction. “Do not be attached to inaction,” warns Lord Krishna. Life is about action. And, actions have consequences. That, in summary, is what the ancient concept of “Karma” is all about. Karma is the original source for Newton’s third law of motion, that every action has an equal reaction. Some mystical traditions assert that there is a temporal ledger for each individual’s actions for which consequences will be meted out to that individual over this and even multiple lifespans. We don’t need to subscribe to that somewhat egotistical version of Karma to understand that every action provokes a reaction from the cosmos. A destructive action likely provokes a destructive reaction (Bad Karma), while a constructive action likely provokes a constructive reaction (Good Karma).
What goes around comes around.
The promise of Karma is that no act is ever ignored by the cosmos. Every act matters. Even a tiny butterfly can flutter its wings in the Amazon and stop a hurricane from forming over the Atlantic. Our actions matter, regardless of how insignificant we may regard them to be as we perform them. And, we are given the gift of Life in order to act, not just to stand around ogling at sights.
Next is the interpretation of Liberty. According to the GIta, true liberty is when neither praise nor criticism affects you. Then, you are truly untethered from the control of another and are free to pursue your own path. Unfortunately, in our current culture, praise and criticism are used to train humans from their childhood onwards to adhere to societal norms. And, liberty is mistaken to be your freedom to do any imaginable depredation to Nature, especially on the property that has been designated to you by other humans. Including shooting at wolves from helicopters using machine guns, for sheer entertainment.
Finally, the biggest mistake of all has been the interpretation of the Pursuit of Happiness. In our modern culture, this has been completely conflated with the Pursuit of Affluence, while the Gita clearly states that true happiness is found within. More on this later.
In a way, it is comforting to note that when a culture profoundly misinterprets and does the exact opposite of what is written in the ancient texts, the result is a complete mess.
Carlos swept past the Daly River community early today.
Several people were evacuated to higher ground.
The community received 442mm of rain in the 21 hours to 6am.
“That’s a lot of rain,” Mr Davies said. “It could be a record.”
Heavy rain fell through the Daly and Adelaide river catchments.
Mango Farm at the Daly copped 228mm.
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2011/02/19/213411_ntnews.html
I just wanted to note that the front line of the climate war in the United States is focused on whether President Obama will invest political capital in the EPA over the next two months. The jaw-dropping Republican amendments in the House of Representatives over the past few days show clearly that Republicans would like to effectively shut down the EPA – just as that agency is preparing to accomplish administratively what Congressional Democrats failed to do with regard to our dangerous carbon emissions.
Climate Progress should run an interactive climate fix game like the NYT’s game for fixing the deficit.
Our emissions are 7 billion tons now and will be 8.5 billion tons by 2050. Our promises at Copenhagen commit us to 5.8 billion tons by 2020 and 1.4 billion tons by 2050. The climate deficit is 1.2 billion tons by 2020 and 7.1 billion tons by 2050.
Various solutions are:
Energy efficiency standards.
Fuel efficiency standards.
Clean energy standards.
Renewable fuel standards.
Ending energy subsidies.
EPA regs.
Incentives to reduce agricultureal emissions.
Warming is altering anatomy of forests
The seminar was organized by For the Forest, an Aspen organization formed in response to infestations of bark beetles killing lodgepole pine on the hills surrounding the ski town.
Aspen sits in the heart of the White River National Forest, which is seeing a barrage of threats. Entire stands of aspen are dying due to a phenomenon called sudden aspen decline. Beetles are killing off vast swaths of pine and, more recently, spruce. Massive wildfires have scorched thousands of acres. All events have different causes, scientists agreed, but climate change is a common denominator, creating weaker trees and more-robust insects and disease.
Read more: Warming is altering anatomy of forests – The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_17428133#ixzz1EQsqHFMm
Joe, I signed up for the climateprediction.net distributed computing program and it is now happily churning away on my computer. Heard about it on NYT Env. blog y’day – http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/you-will-be-assimilated-if-you-wish/. :o)
House Republicans Fire White House Climate Advisers as Frenzied Budget Debate Continues
One of amendment’s top targets is U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern, Obama’s chief treaty negotiator at the U.N. global warming talks. It also defunds Obama’s climate adviser, a post formerly held by Carol Browner, and several other “czar” positions that Republicans decry as unaccountable to Congress.
“There’s actually a czar still trying to impose a cap-and-trade regime,” Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the amendment’s author, claimed on the hectic House floor yesterday. “You’ve got a global warming czar that’s running around spending taxpayer money promoting a policy that would destroy jobs.”
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/02/18/18climatewire-house-republicans-fire-white-house-climate-a-41808.html
Washington, D.C. — Iowa State University will lead a five-year, federally funded study into corn production and climate change.
The project’s goal is to find out how various cropping methods affect greenhouse gas emissions or aid farmers in adapting to climate change and to evaluate farmers’ willingness to adopt new cropping systems.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20110219/BUSINESS01/102190314/0/NEWS02/?odyssey=nav|head
Koch Brothers Behind Wisconsin Effort To Kill Public Unions
http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/02/18/koch-brothers-behind-wisconsin-effort-to-kill-public-unions/
Live now
Ground-Breaking Leaders Reveal World-Changing Projects That Are Engaging the World
http://tedxberkeley.org/
Nvm, the TED stream is from justin.tv and over capacity(now pay), should have used ustream.com
deniers, denialists, zombies, cranks, delusionaries want us to believe that we are unable to create jobs through existing green technologies and innovations. They insult us.
Wish the folks who voted them saw it that way.
Joe, I want to echo what Harry said upthread, text from the article would be more effective when sharing on Facebook.
The last 4 days (15-18) in the US record books -
The new record daytime (max) highs vs lows :
709 vs 54
The new record night time (min) highs vs lows :
588 vs 22
Ok, so this is something I’ve dreamed up in the past couple weeks based on my observations of the environmentalism movement. It is most definitely a work in progress, and will probably be significantly tinkered with by this time next week.
Ideally, I’d like to think this could be the catalyst for the start of a true mass movement, but we’ll just have to see.
Caveat: I am an American in his early 20′s, which will probably be unconsciously reflected in this manifesto. So if it seems U.S-centric, that’s because it probably is. Also, it’s entirely possible I’m just rediscovering a bunch of ideas environmental groups have already come up with, but I figure it’s worth a shot anyway.
The Alliance for a Livable Climate Manifesto
The purpose of this statement is to call for the creation of an over-arching alliance of concerned parties, for the cause of mitigating humanity’s impact on the environment in general, and the climate specifically, in order to preserve the Earth as an inhabitable environment.
Principles
1) Anthropogenic climate change, and the associated degradation of the environment, represent the greatest existential threat to current human civilization known. As shown by Sherwood and Huber (2010), the most plausible worst-case scenarios for global climate change (+12C due to the effect of existing positive feedback loops) will render most of the Earth physiologically uninhabitable, due to increased wet-bulb temperature. Therefore, we reject the belief that extreme climate change is something that humanity can adapt to- for the vast majority of the population, it will not be survivable.
2) The single most important tool for initiating the required wide-scale systemic changes in our governments and our economies to prevent this is mass, popular support. It has lead most recently to the ousting of several tyrannical governments in the Middle East. Likewise, in the First World politicians may be beholden to corporate interests, but it is ultimately the voting populace that elects them, and is their ultimate master. In the U.S. alone, it was mass popular support that lead to the Civil Rights Act, women’s voting, and the creation of the FDA and the EPA. For perhaps the best example in American history, consider Prohibition- despite the stiff opposition of alcohol producers, a totally grassroots movement not only lead to the outlawing of alcoholic beverages, but had this ban enshrined in the Constitution, something that is quite difficult to do by design. Imagine how far a similarly large group of like-minded individuals could get with an idea that’s actually good.
3) In light of this, it is the hope of this document to provide a foundation for an ever-growing coalition of environmental interest groups, NGOs, and concerned citizens, in order to create the popular pressure required. At the moment, while it is mostly unified on certain subjects, the environmental movement is split by many ideological differences and conflicts. Due to the urgency of this crisis, and the implications if we fail, these difference must be put aside. It doesn’t matter if you’re an atheist, a pagan, or a devout evangelical Christian; or if you’re a capitalist, communist, anarchist, or none of the above- those discussions and debates can be held after the world has been saved.
4) The changes needed must be evolutionary, not revolutionary- that is to say, the goal is not to overthrow or topple the existing system ( since, after all, revolutions tend to be messy affairs at best, and there’s no guarantee that what comes after will be any more sustainable), but to come up with a new system, a new way of doing things, that will effectively render the old system unquestionably obsolete.
5) A central means to evolutionary change is the utilization of disruptive innovation, both technologically and socially. Disruptive technologies are technologies which are frequently unexpected, but have pervasive impacts upon becoming common, and will often quickly render their forbearers obsolete. A classic example is the personal computer; a more recent example is the digitization of music, which has greatly altered the landscape of the music industry, despite the best efforts of opposing interests. Cleantech itself may be on the cusp of becoming a disruptive technology. However, we must also seek out or create disruptive social innovation- new ways of working, of playing, of living, that will rapidly supplant existing unsustainable ways, as technofixes alone will not save us or the planet.
6) All of this must be started, as soon as humanly possible.
General Strategies:
1) The major strategy is to create a central, coordinating organization for the various disparate environmental groups. Membership in the Alliance would be voluntary, though all organizations would be encouraged to join. And I mean all- every NGO, every community environmental council, every church, every high school or college environmental science club, every single person we can get on board. Sheer numbers is our greatest strength. Our actions must be coherent and coordinated to succeed, however.
2) For the time being, this manifesto is agnostic on mitigation strategies. There are several good plans out there- Dr. Joe Romm’s climate wedges or Lester Brown’s Plan B are excellent places to start- but really, we’re going to have to throw pretty much every solution we have at this problem.
3) In addition to grassroots organizing and communication, we should probably use as much of the exiting media channels as possible. For example, funds could be raised to contract out a high level advertising firm that is either sympathetic to our cause or (more likely) mercenary enough to take our money, to create an aggressive, multi-year awareness campaign (because if there’s anyone out there who knows how to sell an idea, it’s the advertising industry). We may not like them, but we’d be fools not to use them if we can.
4) When in doubt, re-frame the argument. There is a lot of hardened ideological opinion out in the general populace, which would be highly difficult to overcome head-on. Instead, re-frame the argument. Once you’ve gotten their interest, then talk about climate change and environmental degradation straight out. If you’re trying to make in-roads about into West Virginia, don’t start off by talking about noxious coal is- talk about the vast geothermal resources that have were just discovered in the state last year, which can provide three times as much power as all current coal output, and which won’t run out for billions of years. And then start talking about the environmental advantages, such as not having to deal with blowing up mountains or coal ash spills.
5) Aim for the persuadable middle, not the conservative fringe. The conservatives will come around, once our numbers our great enough, as they are susceptible to peer pressure by nature. They’ll probably try to co-opt as it being their idea all along, but frankly, as long as the climate has been stabilized, they can go ahead, for all I care.
6) Emphasize the scale of the crisis that we face- but also, subsequently, the opportunity it presents. If we make it through this, it will probably mark the single greatest transformation of human civilization, greater than the Agricultural, Industrial, and Information Revolutions combined. If you’ve ever wanted the chance to help re-make the world, this is it.
Note to Colorado Bob:
I really appreciate all your posts, very very informative, thanks.
Exclusive: Submarine Dive Finds Oil, Dead Sea Life at Bottom of Gulf of Mexico
“It looks like everything’s dead,” University of Georgia professor Samantha Joye said.
In an exclusive trip aboard the U.S. Navy’s deep-ocean research submersible Alvin, ABC News was given the chance to observe the impact of this summer’s massive oil spill that most will never see.
The ocean floor appears to be littered with twigs, but Joye points out that they are actually dead worms and that Alvin is sitting on top of what is considered an 80-square mile kill zone.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-submarine-dive-finds-oil-dead-sea-life/story?id=12305709
As Colorado Bob mentioned the record highs vs lows, here is a map of the record events for the past 7 days across the U.S.:
http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html
http://initforthegold.blogspot.com/2011/02/motion-to-defund-ipcc-passes-us-house.html
Please appropraitely communicate with you representative.
The Climate Show
Highly recommended is this show from downunder, you can get it various ways:
Watch The Climate Show on our Youtube channel, subscribe to the podcast via iTunes, or listen direct/download here:
The Climate Show
http://hot-topic.co.nz/the-climate-show-7-box-and-boxsters-the-cryosphere-special/
“Highlight of this week’s show is a fascinating — and sobering — interview with Greenland expert Professor Jason Box. His perspective on current events in the Arctic — from the dangers of permafrost methane, through rapid warming over Greenland and the potential impacts on sea level is essential listening and viewing. And he can surf, too. Glenn and Gareth discuss warm weather in New Zealand during a La Niña summer, drought in the Amazon and the complex interactions between climate and weather extremes, food production and political stability. John Cook from Skeptical Science debunks the favourite sceptic arguments about ice at both poles, and in the solutions segment we discuss the recent WWF report on renewable energy, and the new all-electric Porsche Boxster.”
See the website above for links to all the data & other things they discuss if you are not watching it on Youtube, in this delightfully informal yet engrossing fortnightly program.
Clare in NZ
Sadly I think nothing serious will be done to stop global warming till something very bad happens. I wonder what it will be? and when it might happen? My own thoughts are that some time in the next 10 years there will be a terrible heat wave in the U.S. causing major crop failure. Unfortunately it will have to be in the U.S. or nothing will be done.
I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on what might happen to get people panicked?
If there are any survivors after the coming crash, it is important that they know what caused it. It is of course the known ecological, physical cause of GHGs but there is also a social factor and that is the way we have organized ourselves. People keep wondering why so many are apathetic or why our political systems are so reluctant to attack the problem.
A major part of the answer is that we have predominantly set up organizations of all kinds, including our political systems, that are based on the first design principle, the master servant relationship. This principle produces competition, win-lose, and one of the inevitable consequences of competition is that people are forced into self interest.
This is not necessary. Most of our ancient cultures, e.g. Australian Aboriginees, N. American nations, organized themselves on the second design principle which produces cooperation. In cooperative systems, people work for the common good. When people spontaneously organize themselves, they do it on the second principle as we saw with the armies of volunteers who spontaneously turned up to help after the Australian floods.
It is perfectly possible to have formal organizations built on the second, cooperative principle. Commercially they are more successful than those built on the master servant relationship. It is also possible to build political systems on this principle as well. Representative democracy is not the only form of democracy and participative democracies are possible even in very large populations.
Why don’t we have a majority of these cooperative systems? Primarily because a lot of people don’t know there are two ways of organizing and a lot of people don’t believe it is possible for people to function without being told what to do, apart from those at the top of course.
Unfortunately because so many are wedded to the first design principle, it has become the way we also view our relationship to the Earth. Rather than working with her as was the way with the ancient cultures, we have attempted to dominate her and rip her off with the consequences we see gathering around us.
All this is discussed further in a little paper called ‘Afterwards’ on http://www.thelightonthehill.com and http://www.sustainablefutureplanning.com.au. It is important that people have conscious knowledge of these design principles so they do not continue to unconsciously keep on creating organizations that add to the problem rather than ameliorate it. Even environmental organizations have designed themselves on the first principle because they don’t know there is an alternative.
If there are survivors, they will need to know the choice. It isn’t ‘human nature’ that has created this mess. Greed is not an inevitable, inbuilt feature of human behaviour, it is a consequence of the first design principle. ME
Climate Projections Show Human Health Impacts Possible Within 30 Years
New studies demonstrate potential increases in waterborne toxins and microbes harmful to human health
February 19, 2011
A panel of scientists speaking today at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) unveiled new research and models demonstrating how climate change could increase exposure and risk of human illness originating from ocean, coastal and Great Lakes ecosystems, with some studies projecting impacts to be felt within 30 years.
“With 2010 the wettest year on record and third warmest for sea surface temperatures, NOAA and our partners are working to uncover how a changing climate can affect our health and our prosperity,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “These studies and others like it will better equip officials with the necessary information and tools they need to prepare for and prevent risks associated with changing oceans and coasts.”
In several studies funded by NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health Initiative, findings shed light on how complex interactions and climate change alterations in sea, land and sky make ocean and freshwater environments more susceptible to toxic algal blooms and proliferation of harmful microbes and bacteria.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110219_aaas_oceansandhealth.html
This morning on BBCs “One Planet” they interviewed a denier in Australia who rattle off 4-5 reasons why GW was a fraud, etc. One of his reasons was that we (scientists, others) “lost a court case in England”. Does anyone know what he might be talking about?
Thanks,
Bob
eesolar@sbcglobal.net
[JR: A lie about the Gore case, no doubt.]
Mickey @16 — Warming is much worse than cooling; it is easy to keep the globe from cooling too much.
In Wally Broecker’s latest book, “The Great Ocean Conveyor”, he points out that global warming will slow it down but not shut it off.
The ice breaths….
Race against the tide, risking death under huge blocks of ice.
http://www.wimp.com/racetide/
MIckey #16, as far as the aerosols creating global dimming, check out this movie:
http://witsendnj.blogspot.com/2010/12/insidious-soup.html
Colorado Bob, #24 -
True, climate change is altering the forest habitat, but those researchers forgot to look at trees and shrubs being grown in nurseries where they are watered, many of which are indigenous to much warmer latitudes – and they have the same symptoms of decline. What they all have in common that is causing damage to foliage and stunted growth isn’t drought or less precipitation – it’s the level of ozone in the atmosphere.
I think though you will like this link if you haven’t seen it already:
http://thecomingcrisis.blogspot.com/2011/02/120-year-old-record-high-temperature.html
as well as this one:
http://thecomingcrisis.blogspot.com/2011/02/60-feet-monster-waves-produced-in.html
The cost of meat…fossil fuel cows….
http://www.wimp.com/helicoptercowboys/
“There’s actually a czar still trying to impose a cap-and-trade regime,” Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), the amendment’s author, claimed on the hectic House floor yesterday. “You’ve got a global warming czar that’s running around spending taxpayer money promoting a policy that would destroy jobs.”
“So be it.”
John Boehner is so eminently quotable.
Bob (#45):
Yes, that reference to “a court case in England” must mean Stewart Dimmock’s suit to block An Inconvenient Truth being shown in British public school classrooms. Dimmock contended that it was full of errors. The court acknowledged some errors but ruled that it is substantially accurate, allowing it to be shown with a printed disclaimer.
Dimmock was awarded some of the court costs, but he never could have brought suit on his own. Funding came from a variety of sources, including those with ties to oil interests.
Some information here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/al-gore-inconvenient-truth-errors.htm
You can Google for more.
Mickey (#16) wrote: “I have a few questions which I hope some readers can answer in the below posts.”
I’ll try a couple of them.
For #1, think of what’s needed to combat these conditions. If it gets too cold, either locally or globally, energy sources can be used to produce more heat. Houses can be insulated, more clothes can be worn.
If it gets too hot locally (but not globally), the cooler location(s) can always be used as places to dump some of that extra heat — at least until they also get too hot.
But if the entire globe is too warm, it’s very difficult to get rid of the extra heat. Of course there’s always air-conditioning, but that can only do so much. Several studies have found that the presence of AC in cities during heat waves does not eliminate deaths from heat. One said there was some evidence for increased mortality.
Presently, more deaths worldwide occur due to cold than heat. But that could change in the future. Consider the 2003 heat wave which killed 35,000 in Europe.
Then there are the effects on climate. Cold slows things down. Heat makes things more active, hence more violent. Extreme cold could be as bad, but we’re not headed that way.
Now if we can just help the self-proclaimed masters of the universe among us, who will do anything (even patently unsustainable things) to provide themselves with outrageous bonuses and their “too big too fail” corporations with a trillion dollars in bailout funds, to focus attention on ‘bailing out’ a good enough future for the children before the planet all of us are blessed to inhabit is rendered unfit for human habitation and life as we know it.
Chris Winter — Finaal accounting is now complete: the 2003 heat wave in Europe resulted in 74,000+ premature deaths.
Regarding SO2 (your question 4), you’re correct that sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere offset some warming, and warming increased when they disappeared due to pollution reduction. The eruption of Mount Pinatubo (1991) restored some, making the next year cooler. Its effect is also gone.
There are several schemes for “artificial volcanoes” to put sulfur into the stratosphere as needed. One favored by Tim Flannery would add 5 percent sulfur to jet fuel. It may be the least costly method, but would be hard on the jet engines. See Chapter Seven of Gwynne Dyer’s 2010 book Climate Wars for a good discussion of this. (It’s an excellent book all around.)
The thing about this is that it’s risky because its effects are poorly understood (like all geoengineering ideas.) Also, it leaves the extra CO2 in the atmosphere, so it does nothing about ocean acidification.
Hey, its me GW knocking at the door…
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=195996927092229&id=139434822741700
Powerful winds blasting the Northeast have downed numerous trees since the start of the weekend. The most famous one of these fallen trees is the National Christmas Tree in Washington, D.C.
David B. Benson, I’m SOO sick of this distortion:
it’s not the heat! It’s the toxic pollution!
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w16622317044m861/
A unique, record-breaking, killer heat wave occurred across several European countries during the first two weeks of August 2003. As weather conditions which characterize heat waves are highly conductive to tropospheric ozone formation and persistence, this is a contributing factor which should be regarded as a major stressor for biota. Hourly ozone means were captured between 1 and 15 August 2003 with automatic analysers in nine stations in Tuscany, distributed into six Districts. Compared to historical ozone reference climatology, daily maxima of 2003 were systematically higher by a factor of about 1.5, with differences which approached three times standard deviation. At the end of the period, cumulated ozone exposure over the threshold of 40 ppb (AOT40) was 4,750 ppb h in 2003, vs 2,200 ppb h of the historical series; such a difference was four times the standard deviation of the long-term series. Biological data are also enclosed in the present study, in the form of analysis of the ratio between above ground biomass produced by NC-S and NC-R clones of white clover when exposed to ambient air. Standardised samplings were performed on a monthly basis, and a significant difference between the two data sets was observed between summer 2003 and the historical series. The close correlation of high-ozone episode with increased temperature (as a consequence of increased solar radiation) suggests that, if climate change were to result in warmer summers in Europe, more frequent exceedances of dangerous ozone thresholds would be expected at the current emission levels.
#46 Its right up there with his lastest “Read my lips”. I guess if your only job is to make sure nothing of substance is done during your run he’ll be top DOG at the pound.
Under the AEI article (Brad Johnson cross post?), I mentioned reviewing an on-line poem/lyric contest entry that was little more than a diatribe against the evils of green energy… it appears to have been based around this article…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
Daily Mail… i could have guessed, i suppose. Still, I feel obligated to make some pertinent points in my critique. Any help, references, etc. would be greatly appreciated.
thanks.
On a happier note, two daffodils have bloomed in my yard today. During the drought a few years ago, they bloomed in the last week of January. February 19 is normal.
#34. Some excellent ideas.
I know some people in the USA who can help you with a very reliable process to get some environmental groups together to kick it off. Let me know if you are interested. If you are in the north of the USA, I also know some people in Canada who could help, ME
Costs of Inaction: Not Only a Problem For the Poor
http://realclimateeconomics.org/wp/archives/745
Frequent, Severe Fires Turn Alaskan Forests Into a Carbon Production Line
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110218221921.htm
http://onion.com/h52iMU
There are also good scientific reasons for inaction:
Asteroids don’t exist.
The atmosphere will destroy the asteroid.
Senator Simkus says that God told Noah it won’t happen.
Huckabee says that Tim LaHaye says that St. John the Divine said it will happen because Obama is a socialist.
Scientists are lying to increase funding.
It’s natural. Massive asteroids strike the earth all the time.
Al Gore is a Liberal.
Wit’s End @54 — Gail, Tuscany is not all of Europe. Find the WHO report on the summer of 2003 in Europe.
Earth The Climate Wars
The Battle Begins. Dr Iain Stewart traces the history of climate change from its very beginning and examines just how the scientific community managed to get it so very wrong back in the Seventies. Along the way he uncovers some of the great unsung heroes of climate change science, and introduces us to a secret organisation of American government scientists, known as Jason, who wrote the first official report on global warming as far back as 1979.
Episode 1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8547224522119252436#
Episode 2
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8547224522119252436#docid=-1668329593924661115
Episode 3
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8547224522119252436#docid=-4809718812879164013
@59 Merrelyn Emery
Sure, shoot me an email at taitu1996 (at) hotmail (dot) com. I’m not exactly in the position to lead a movement- I have the rather demanding day job of being a grad student- but I figure the least I can do is try to get the ball rolling.
I figure my generation is going to have to live through the worst of this, and it’s probably going to be up to us to try to fix or prevent as much of it as we can.
I am attempting to unit environmental groups, unions, AARP, advocates for the poor, etc. for joint action against our new Republican majority’s bad actions. They have removed barriers for 2 coal plants to be built and pollution restrictions for animal farm (CAFO) waste. Here are some sentences from my email to 80 of them:
To the point; this is a call for the leaders of all Michigan groups that are negatively impacted by the new State “aid the wealthy on the backs of the poor and middle class” policies and actions.
Big businesses and the rich have taken over Michigan government for their own benefit. Mr. Snyder’s $1.2-billion tax cut for businesses comes at the expense of the poor, struggling middle class, retirees, our environment, health, unions, public employees, police and fire protection, our children’s education, and many others. We have much in common and strength in cooperation.
It is time for the leaders representing these groups to unite and take action. (Hope it works, too many liberals are sitting on the sidelines.)
LOS ANGELES, Feb. 19 (Xinhua) — Climate change could prolong toxic algal outbreaks by 2040 or sooner, posing a health threat to humans, a new study suggests.
Using cutting-edge technologies to model future ocean and weather patterns, a team of U.S. researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) the University of Washington looked at blooms of Alexandrium catenella, more commonly known as “red tide,” which produces saxitoxin, a poison that can accumulate in shellfish.
“Changes in the harmful algal bloom season appear to be imminent and we expect a significant increase in Puget Sound and similar at- risk environments within 30 years, possibly by the next decade,” said Stephanie Moore, Ph.D., with NOAA’s West Coast Center for Oceans and Human Health.
“Our projections indicate that by the end of the 21st century, blooms may begin up to two months earlier in the year and persist for one month later compared to the present-day time period of July to October.”
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/sci/2011-02/20/c_13740319.htm
What plans are there for coping with zero success in curbing CO2 emissions?
It seems highly likely we will fail looking at international conference results, or national governments efforts.
So a plan should be in place for coping with what unfolds. Is there such planning being done anywhere on a comprehensive scale?
Further, it seems there is little interest in doing this obviously needed planning. One could say it is politically incorrect to initiate such planning despite the overwhelming need for it.
Just one note of interest. In madison wisconsin for the last few days there have been almost 70000 standing up to the new governor. Didn’t take long eh. They are asking for support from environmental groups. Make friends if you can. They would be a big help when the AGW movement picks up steam.
Just a few hours ago there was a hailstorm in southern california. It’s been a while since I’ve even seen it rain this much during a year. I’ve never seen hail before in southern california. Just another damaging effect of climate change.
#5 jcwinnie says:
“So how far does a virtual penny go these days?”
Virtual pennies are low carbon, locally produced, and infinitely recyclable. Best of all, virtual pennies are legal tender for that most valuable of all commodities: Knowledge. Drink up!
I fed my virtual dog for a week on a virtual penny.
I just finished Mark Hertsgaard’s new book – Hot: Living Through The Next Fifty Years. Towards the end of the book he talks briefly about acid rain and how there was a ‘dramtatic reduction in emissions of sulfur dioxide’ in the early 1990s due to a successful cap and trade campaign. It made me think about the term “acid rain.” I remember when I first heard it. Acid raining down! Rain with acid in it!… It’s very shocking. It’s high time to relabel ‘climate change,’ and ‘global warming.’ They are such banal terms in relation to the real problem. Let’s start using something else whenever we talk about it….. Climate chaos? Climate disruption? Like climate hawks. Let’s agree to use something more appropriate…..
A Chinese drought map -
But in a drastic measure to help combat the water shortages, China launched a massive well-drilling operation in the worst-affected areas.
Approximately 1,000 wells initially will be drilled in Shandong province, then others will be bored in Henan and Hebei, officials said.
http://www.earthweek.com/2011/ew110218/ew110218a.html
from krugman today, at http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/19/thank-you-boeing/
in case it’s unclear, the connection here is to whether we can leave industrial detox to market forces.
Experts took turns giving 15-minute presentations on the state of Western forests. The speakers then had a brief question and answer session with Renee Montagne from National Public Radio as moderator.
Although topics presented ranged from the sudden decline of 1.1 million Aspen trees in national forests to their role in carbon sequestration, an overiding theme of doom and gloom permeated throughout the day. Presenters talked about the declining health of forests as a result of disease, climate change and human influence.
“There wasn’t much good news in anything that any of you have said,” said Montagne addressing the first group of speakers. “What can be done?”
“That is really one of the toughest questions because I don’t think anyone knows,” said Worall.
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/145344
ASPEN — The outlook for forests in western North America is grim: White pines in majestic Yellowstone National Park face obliteration; two-thirds of aspen forests, including many in the Roaring Fork Valley, are likely doomed; and bark beetle infestations will intensify with climate change.
The grim outlook was delivered Friday by scientists at the “Forests at Risk” conference in Aspen. More than 400 conservationists, U.S. Forest Service workers and curious folks attended the conference presented by For the Forests, an Aspen nonprofit.
http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20110219/NEWS/110219812/1077&ParentProfile=1058
Scientist finds Gulf bottom still oily, dead http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gsv8vJ45hWNxvco5tgcPE_iHt6dQ?docId=b0876e788169473cb4fbe2d7ff275ffb
Strange photos from Ap
I was working on the post below, was planning on posting it here (which I’m doing) and found it was relevant to #33 and #38. Thanks. So I followed up with the weekly map plot provided in #38. The initial post addresses a “challenge” from climate denier twit Steven Goddard.
Speaking meteorologically, the contrast between the two weeks is remarkable — but the more significant of the two weeks is the warm one, not the cold one.
http://tugpullpushstop.blogspot.com/2011/02/temperature-records-set-across-country.html
http://tugpullpushstop.blogspot.com/2011/02/final-record-temperatures-february-13.html
Kudos to Merrelyn (#59) for her kind and insightful compliment on spacermase’s world class comment (#34). We need more thinking like this, and I would very much like to be in on some further interchanges. Anyone who’d like to trade ideas such as these, please email me at rs(at)gwenet(dot)org.
IMHO we need more of this type of thing: listening to and communicating with each other, to build things up–sort of as Merrelyn also suggests in her first comment (#41).
In any case, let’s all try to build on good ideas, and to cooperate. We need a bold, strong, engaged, effective climate movement if we are going to collectively avoid the hell and high water that seems to lie dead ahead on our current course. (Joe, might you play a bigger role?)
@2 Some European:
“Are hunger strikes effective? When, who, with what kind of demands?”
As many have brought out, No! Americans in particular are too egocentric and lacking in social conscience.
Should you go ahead and decide to do it, let me give you some advise based on personal experience. It’s much easier to go ‘cold turkey’ than to supply some food (liquids are consumed in some ‘hunger strikes’) to your body.
You will be in constant hunger if you consume some calories on a daily basis. By going completely ‘cold turkey’ you will suffer two or three days of severe hunger pangs and then feel nothing after wards. You might actually feel more clear headed for a few days.
@66 Ziyu:
“I’ve never seen hail before in southern california.”
Ziyu, I’ve been living in the Los Angeles area for 37 years and I’ve seen hail several times. :-)
After several years of challenging skeptical arguments over global warming using scientific evidence on various messageboards and internet forums, I’ve often felt that I’ve been ‘the bigger fool to argue with the fool’ or even more damagingly been made to feel like I’ve been ‘feeding the troll’ and give them more opportunity to spread their verbal rubbish to all and sundry.
After a while it just really gets me down but it still angers me when I read someone spreading lies about accepted climate science. What is the best balance between that what I’ve said and that of honest robust debate over a very serious issue?
g. waller #69,
I’m inclined to agree, and like some others on CP I have been active in justifying Climate Destabilisation as a more appropriate theme.
Here’s the ending of a piece I wrote late last year hoping I might get it published in the Guardian, setting out to justify that term. The first half, which I’ve left out or the post would be horribly long, described the stark evidence for climate change in my local landscape here in mid-Wales. Here’s the last few paragraphs:
“Such features in the landscape, all within half an hour of my front door, tell the story of our changing climate of the past 18,000 years – from glacial maximum, when valley glaciers carved their way seawards and permafrost gripped the lowlands, through the warming that proceeded for the following 12,000 years to the cooler and wetter conditions that became established during Bronze Age times. During this overall timespan, Wales has varied from fertile to uninhabitable, from having expansive coastal plains stretching out towards Ireland to the present-day inundated coastline. Yes – our climate has changed immensely over the past 18,000 years and it continues to do so, now driven additionally by the highest atmospheric carbon dioxide levels since the late Miocene.
“The climate has always changed” is a common talking-point amongst political opponents of climate science, which is nicely ironic as, often as not, in the next breath they will state that there’s no such thing as climate change. However, the landscape tells us the first one is right. So what’s the problem?
The problem is extremely simple. The relatively stable climate – and sea levels – of the past 6,000 years, from the beginning of the Neolithic age, have permitted human civilisation to develop widely: sophisticated, well organised, highly-populated but most importantly fixed to the ground. The latter is a critical factor. At the end of the ice-age, nobody owned the land. When sea levels rose, the few people in the way simply upped and moved inland. In the Bronze Age, the hunters who lived up at Bugeilyn seem to have sensibly relocated to lower levels as conditions cooled. There was no need to ask permission, negotiate with an Estate Agent or put in a planning application.
Opinions change regarding labels. For example, a 2002 memo to President Bush, written by Republican adviser Frank Luntz, noted that: “climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”. As one focus group participant noted, climate change “sounds like you’re going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale”.
Now there is talk of adapting the term “Climate Disruption”.
Having seen what is possible for humans to achieve during an extended period of relatively stable climate and taking account of the fact that we have today mostly nailed ourselves firmly to the ground in terms of land ownership and planning regulations, I suggest a more accurate term to describe the risk we are taking.
Climate Destabilisation. Last time, there was a landscape in the way. This time, there is a civilisation in the way.”
Cheers – John
Potpourri:
1. I could use a good hunger strike given my weight, but I don’t think the right people would care in the slightest.
2. For a new name, I still like “global heating”. People are so used to hearing it called global warming that it will be pretty difficult to change it much, but a change from “warming” to “heating” might catch on. If the new name doesn’t catch on, it is not effective. At least “heating” is stronger than “warming”.
3. We should hitch a ride on the momentum that others are trying to build about the national debt. Their favorite argument is to talk about the problems left for future generations. But the debt is far from the worst problem they will face. Who cares if you are in debt if the atmosphere doesn’t work properly?
4. We should talk more about the fact that 5 degrees C of cooling is enough for an ice age. That indicates how sensitive the climate is to what would seem at first glance to be a small change in temperature.
5. There used to be a number of republicans who saw that global heating is a problem, but they have been silenced by the tea party influence and by party discipline. Work on the ones who changed their tune. They must have some kind of memory of why they used to think differently.
i have this sense that hunger strikes are the weapon of people with either unassailable moral stature, or a real big peaceful army on their side to drive the point home.
UAH troposphere temps are about to surpass 2009 levels, while SSTs are tracking very close. This despite the massive La Nina and pretty much all natural drivers turned to the COOL setting. Amazing (and scary).
The hunger strike I’m most concerned about is the involuntary global one this century. . .
OK. So the deniers and delayers, who like to think of themselves as sceptics, don’t like the labels we attach to them. Recently whilst trying to wrap my brain around another, necessarily, convoluted passage of reasoning in one of Richard Dawkins’ books I hit upon the term disunderstanding i.e. deliberately misunderstanding so as to cause confusion.
Now I obviously am not accusing Dawkins of such behaviour, far from it, but as an extension of this I consider that the term disunderstander(s) fits the likes of Monckton, McIntyre, Curry and the rest of their clan to a tee, or T.
Wondering if this term had been already in use I discovered that it has an entry in The Urban Dictionary:
What does the team think?
It looks like The Urban dictionary is not strong on spelling.
David B. Benson, take a look at slide #16 in this presentation from Harvard:
http://www.slidefinder.net/t/tropospheric_ozone_linking_air_quality/22230840
About hunger strike, it reminded me of Mia Farrow’s one to stop the Darfur genocide: sorry,but LOL!
Anyway, I prefer seppuku, you go quicker and it’s a lot of fun too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_12E1EN6fs
She also showed pictures of oil-choked bottom-dwelling creatures. They included dead crabs and brittle stars — starfish like critters that are normally bright orange and tightly wrapped around coral. These brittle stars were pale, loose and dead. She also saw tube worms so full of oil they suffocated.
“This is Macondo oil on the bottom,” Joye said as she showed slides. “This is dead organisms because of oil being deposited on their heads.”
Joye said her research shows that the burning of oil left soot on the sea floor, which still had petroleum products. And even more troublesome was the tremendous amount of methane from the BP well that mixed into the Gulf and was mostly ignored by other researchers.
Joye and three colleagues last week published a study in Nature Geoscience that said the amount of gas injected into the Gulf was the equivalent of between 1.5 and 3 million barrels of oil.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gsv8vJ45hWNxvco5tgcPE_iHt6dQ?docId=b0876e788169473cb4fbe2d7ff275ffb
Avoidism
Call deniers ‘extinctionists’?
Thank you Prokaryotes @ 1,
Seems to be a way to avoid indecision
and become an activist.
Dp at 75 -
Well said.
Perhaps the question warrants advancing to:
“How much longer do we want to leave industrial de-tox to the market ?”
Regards,
Lewis
After winds & more warmth, could it snow?
What about those winds? See Ian’s full forecast for the latest on today’s powerful winds (last updated at 3:45 p.m.) – they’re causing power outages, brush fires, and have blown over the National Christmas Tree – and the weather through the rest of the holiday weekend. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2011/02/after_winds_more_warmth_could.html
Another video debunking Lord Monckton:
Monckton Bunkum Part 2 – Sensitivity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTY3FnsFZ7Q
Next time one comes across the “Cooling for the last 10 years” canard , here’s a wonderful real world factoid from the Alaska DOT :
———-
Climate change having impact on Alaska transportation
DATA: Roads built over permafrost at risk from warming trends.
The state spends roughly $11 million per year dealing with permafrost-affected roads and has for about eight years, he said.
Read more: http://www.adn.com/2011/02/19/1712553/climate-change-having-impact-on.html#ixzz1EWFi8PHb
Hey everyone,
I’m curious as to why the idea of hunger strikes has been seemingly dismissed so easily. If there is a debate about the effectiveness of ANY tactic, then based on history, ALL of them have failed. Lobbying legislators, building support through environmental groups, educating people about the truth, they have all
been ineffective. Certainly there have been small battles won by many different means, but the overall war is already lost. Am I wrong about this?
So what’s the point in so casually dismissing hunger strikes? In theory they are just as effective or ineffective as anything else. For people with no power and no voice, hunger striking may be a viable option to show we TRULY care about human beings. If there existed a large group of people willing to truly admit the truth about our situation and sacrifice their time, why would they be wasting their efforts? All other efforts thus far have amounted to nothing so havent those other people just wasted their time too?
I think there are many, many very smart people here on CP. But I think everyone has to be careful about what they believe to be effective.
Honestly, am I wrong about this?
Thanks everyone,
Ian
ianwittenber@gmail.com
Minor headline: Antarctic sea ice extent will reach its low for the year about three days from now. The amount will be the lowest since 1993 or 1996.
This would be noteworthy if it marked a reversal of the medium-term uptrend. More likely, I think, it’s indicative of the wide annual peak-to-trough swings caused by changes in salinity and deepwater temperatures.
#50 and #53, thanks for the responses. I tend to think cold is worse than warmth off course the real problem is not which is better or worse but rather rapid change in either direction can cause many difficulties. After all, the type of crops we grow, how we build our homes (whether they have central heating or air conditioning or both), the types of activities we do, what we wear is all based on the climate and thus if it changes we have to alter those which costs a lot. In the case of 2003 European heat wave, Athens and Madrid reguarly see those kind of temperatures in the summer, but they have all the infrastructure in place to handle it whereas France, Northern and Central Europe don’t since that kind of heat is unexpected. The only reason I think cold is more harmful is humans are found in large numbers in the tropics and mid latitudes, but not so much in the polar regions. North of the 60th parallel only Scandinavia has a sizeable population and their winters are much milder than most places at those latitudes due to the Gulf Stream. Also its tough to grow crops at below freezing temperatures such too short a growing season would mean less food. Off course flooding, droughts, and extreme heat can also severely damage crops too. Either way, I don’t think we have to worry about cooling so much barring a supervolcano, nuclear war, or being struck by a comet or asteroid, all things unlikely to happen. Someone also mentioned about the conveyor belt slowing down but not shutting down. I could be wrong but would this mean a more extreme climate for Europe, otherwise colder winters but hotter summers as this would be even worse than what is projected now.
[JR: Extreme weather of any kind is dangerous, as are rapid changes in climate. But it is rapid warming that we face and it is certainly as dangerous as rapid cooling, particularly because of the amplifying positive feedbacks.]
Thank you Michael, watching clown monckton really makes you laugh, would be actually real fun, if the implications wouldn’t be so urgent.
Mickey -
55,762 Russians died last summer in that heatwave, the carbon monoxide levels in downtown Moscow were 5 times above what the Russian’s call safe.
I direct you to the fact that both Spain and Greece have suffered do to wild fires, and their temperature spikes are keeping pace. It was 114F , with 45 mph winds, in Athens, when the last forests around it burnt down 4 summers ago. A recent study showed the predicted drop in rainfall on the Iberian Pen. , as the desert prepares to jump the Mediterranean.
There is a relentless increase in water vapor in tandem with the rising heat .
The “wet bulb temperature”, is about to make it’s self known , that’s when it’s so hot and humid you’re sweat glands don’t work. This heat train is just pulling out of the station.
It’s just started killing people, mainly old and sick people, nature being what she is.
As for extremes , we had a 115F swing just the last 2 weeks in Oklahoma.
That is not a signal that things in the system are stable.
That 115F swing , this kind of temperature gradient opens to door to some serious hail storms.
Hail like we’ve never seen before where the stones stay in the cloud for hours.
Sorry it was 110F swing.
Must read: British Government Chief Scientific Adviser John Beddington goes on the offensive and lashes out at pseudo-science.
http://www.researchresearch.com/index.php?option=com_news&template=rr_2col&view=article&articleId=1032320
Dellingpole’s upset, so Beddington must be doing something right ;)
‘Tis all a checkerboard of nights and days,
Where Gods with men, for pieces plays
Ither, tither mates and slays
Then one by one, back in the closet lays
Ian, #100, you asked about possible career for you in a previous weekend thread. This is from National Geographic. (I saved this info. just for you):
“If there’s a fearless gene, wildlife photographers have it. Tiptoeing through dim forests on tiger patrol, stalking one of the world’s most dangerous snakes– these are not jobs for the faint of heart… such experiences prove addictive,as rainforest ecologists and photographer Tim Laman has learned. As a research assistant in Borneo..”
Check out Nat. Geographic Magazine, Collector’s Edition, Vol. 3, Jan. 13, 2003
The Supreme Court will soon be hearing arguments about whether big greenhouse polluters are legally liable for greenhouse damages.
American Electric Power Co., Inc. v. Connecticut
So far, I count 25 or so amicus briefs in support of American Electric Power, but none, so far as I could see, in support of making huge polluters liable for climate damages. Most of the amicus briefs argue that the Supreme Court should leave the matter to the Congress and the President.
Where is Greenpeace, the Center for American Progress, the American Civil Liberties Union, and 350.org? Why haven’t they filed amicus briefs in support of allowing individuals and organizations to sue huge polluters for climate damages?
According to Stanford climate scientist Ken Caldeira, the total cumulative greenhouse heating side effects of burning a quantity of fossil fuel will be roughly one hundred thousand times the useful heat of combustion.
It seems like a very clear case of public nuisance law.
Aren’t there any environmental organizations that want to protect the public’s right to sue for climate damages?
Aren’t there any big law firms out there who want to sue for climate damages?
Where are the amicus briefs for our side?
I will proceed with a few ideas already tossed out.
anyone who belongs in this thread knows that, for about 50 years, science has been describing and quantifying the risk that excessive atmospheric carbon poses to humanity. Yet today, we find no rational response to this increasingly risky reality, and observe with gaping mouths, an expanding effort to institutionalize the denial. adequate doubt has been created in the average person, to prevent critical change. If we can agree that whatever the countless “climate/sustainability/green” organizations have been doing is not working, we will have taken the first step toward a solution. To line up once again, and engage the “other side” on their own terms, in the same fashion, is unlikely to result in anything but more of the same. something different needs to occur, a strategy that creatively steps around previous failure.
something is clearly broken: carbon emissions are rising instead of falling. the well-meaning, voluminous reaction to this has not been successful: this is a time for creative, concentrated effort.
When our country was drawn into war 70 years ago, an immediate effort followed, affecting all Americans. Undoubtedly a strategy was developed, but no one claimed that they knew how to win the war. today, we can’t wait for someone to come up with a “complete solution”: what we need is a process to agree on some initial steps, and then continue charting the course to victory as these steps unfold. What i see is “climate” being handled more as a never-ending academic exercise than a threat demanding action. Here’s a few changes that I think would help:
only address & acknowledge emission goals for 2020, rather than the generally disconnected array of goals (emissions, global carbon, % of energy supply from renewables, higher standards for buildings and vehicles, reduction of oil imports, reduction in coal use, etc. etc.) for 2025, 2030, 2035 and 2050. how can we have a functional plan for doing anything until we have a stationary, uniformly accepted, easily envisioned target?
we need to create a clear image of what buildings and vehicles will need to look like in 2020, if we are to get even close to meeting 2020 goals (such as those adopted by the 3 west coast states)
stop legitimizing deniers by debating them (yes, # 83): redirect this chatter toward actually reducing carbon. The public’s “uncertainty” is fed by the debate: we need to create conviction.
stop arguing about who or what caused climate change: it doesn’t matter, there’s too much carbon, we need to stop making so much. The required response to excessive carbon is unaffected by the outcome of unresolvable philosophical debates.
Stop debating about technological problems or limitations: we have the technology to address climate change. It will always improve in the future, but we won’t have a future if we don’t start using “best available technology” to start the increasingly difficult process of reducing carbon.,
All legitimate readers know that we need to rapidly deploy carbon reduction measures. Despite this, the last election shows that the general public doesn’t see much of a problem. this points to a behavioral challenge: we need to create a stronger “climate message”, deliver this to the general public in a unified format, and motivate a rational response.
Most people buy insurance, due to a perceived risk of incurring greater expenses in the future. Today’s investment in carbon reduction is small, compared to the average person’s annual loss from their insurance investment. If this were not true, the non-benevolent insurance industry would be charging even more. An effective climate message will make this connection.
From an expanded outreach effort, we need to build a constituency of those who will benefit from a “clean economy”: this is a majority, since very few actually benefit from the dirty economy. Let’s use the most basic principle of political science: generate the support of the “winners”.
rich or poor, our children and grandchildren face a murky future.
A couple months ago, Bill McKibben made the news with his comment that Cancun was like a family reunion aboard the Titanic. I appreciate the role that 350.org is playing, but have a more optimistic analogy. There was a time when someone could have turned the Titanic’s wheel, changed course, and avoided disaster. I believe that we still have time to change course, and create a more comfortable future.
I think we can do better than being able to yell “i told you so” as the ship goes down.
I think we need to step up to the helm and steer
Leland Palmer, the best group I know of so far regarding legal challenges is the Center for Biological Diversity. They are ferocious!
Colorado Bob, I’m working through this for a post, but you should see this excerpt from the UN Environment Programme – it’s not the wet-bulb (yet) that kills people in heat waves:
“One obvious health-related issue is the combined effect of heat waves and high ozone levels. Recent studies in France and elsewhere suggest that the overall contribution of ozone to mortality in cities may range from 2.5% to 85.3% in periods of high temperature. Each increase in ozone concentrations results in increased risk of death (an increase of 10 ug/m3 is reported to increase the excess risk of death by 0.3-0.5%). It must also be noted that ozone is a powerful greenhouse gas more powerful than carbon dioxide which contributes to global warming. It has several deleterious effects on health, environment and climate. Thus the abatement of greenhouse gases and air pollution must take these obvious inter-linkages into consideration.”
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/02/a-warming-world-could-add-billio.html
A Warming World Could Add Billions to Shipping Costs
by Sid Perkins on 20 February 2011, 2:57 PM
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Climate change already stands to wreak huge financial damage by inundating coastal cities and harming human health. Now, researchers have added a surprising victim to the toll: ships. In a session here today at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (which publishes ScienceNOW), a scientist said that climate change will stimulate the growth of barnacles and other ship-clinging creatures, potentially adding billions to the cost of worldwide shipping.
HR1: Deaf, Dumb, and Blind on Climate Change
Early this morning, after making an atrocious bill even worse, the House of Representatives passed H.R.1 on a vote of 235 to 189, with only three Republicans joining all the Democrats in voting no. What was supposed to be a “continuing resolution” to fund the government through the end of this fiscal year is instead an all out assault on government, and the public health safeguards most Americans want government to enforce, at the behest of big polluters and anti-science ideologues. This is probably the single most irresponsible bill I have seen either Chamber of Congress pass in the more than 20 years I have been in Washington.
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dlashof/hr1_deaf_dumb_and_blind_on_cli.html
Scientists Criticize House Vote to Bar Climate Panel Funds
Last night the U.S. House of Representatives agreed to cut off funding for the rest of 2011 for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. “My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American,” said Representative Blaine Leutkemeyer (R-MO), the sponsor of the measure, in floor debate before the vote. Leutkemeyer said in a press release that his amendment, which passed 244 to 179 largely along partisan lines, represented “a victory for taxpayers.”
Asked about the vote, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration head Jane Lubchenco said she disagreed with the House’s action. “Science should not be partisan. It is highly unfortunate that in many cases it is,” she said. The spending measure, which would fund the government for the rest of 2011, now goes to the Senate, which disagrees with many portions of the bill.
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/02/scientists-criticize-house-vote-.html?ref=hp
Cleaning the Air Would Limit Short-Term Climate Warming
An assessment report to be released this week by the United Nations Environment Program and the World Meteorological Organization shows that reducing emissions of two common air pollutants — black carbon and gases integral to the production of ground-level ozone — could slow the rate of climate change markedly over the next half-century.
For decades, scientists have known both substances harm human health. More recently, evidence has emerged showing the particles also affect climate, yet the magnitude of the impact has remained uncertain. Some studies have suggested reducing the pollutants could have a major and immediate climate impact, while others have shown the impact of such reductions would be minimal.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20110220/
I am making an interactive chart on how to fix the climate deficit. I need one more solution on the chart since I can fit in 9. Any suggestions?
Oh and half the time when I post, my post never gets posted and just disappears. Does anyone know how to fix this?
ziyu: JR’s got lots of suggestions in his own http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/10/the-full-global-warming-solution-how-the-world-can-stabilize-at-350-to-450-ppm/
Thanks. the final solution will be ending US deforestation.
Michael T. @64 — Note the completely open non-Jason Charney et al. 1979 NRC/NAS report:
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12181&page=R1
which unfortunately di not result in any strong action.
Just wont let up…
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/weather/severe-storms-forecast-for-queenslands-south-east/story-e6frep3x-1226009249924
Residents from the town of Carnarvon in Western Australia have emerged from their third flood in as many months, exhausted but with minimal damage.
Cyclone Carlos, which has re-formed and is expected to track south along the WA coast.
“I don’t know how people are going to cope emotionally after all of these floods and then a cyclone,” she said.
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201102/s3144181.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2011/s3141787.htm
The Gas Rush
So in a warmer world they can expect this to repeat in 7-10yrs. Sustainable?
More than 200 communities need rebuilding after disasters
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/21/3144343.htm?section=justin
Exciting times?
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/941829–china-too-ripe-for-grassroots-discontent
Here is the climate solutions interactive link.
http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/Zygorithm/1610037
The Dark and Bright Sides of Global Warming
2008 Nierenberg Award recipient James Hansen explores the global threats inherent in global warming.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZYmMrwLdXY
Joe,
I’m suspecting that the Koch brothers had a lot of influence in state level elections and are now influencing the batty actions coming out of state legislatures.
As an example, I offer NH house bill 519 which is to repeal New Hampshire’s participation in RGGI (pronounced Reggie), a regional Initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with a mechanism similar to Cap and trade. There seemed to be no opposition to this bill locally, which is costing me an estimated 36 cents a month on my electric bill. And suddenly the Republicans are all heart for the poor who are going broke paying for it, as well as business. http://newhampshire.watchdog.org/7715/house-committee-approves-rggi-repeal/
This aligns with the position of NH Americans for Prosperity. http://www.nhbr.com/businessnewsopinion/906696-290/quit-rggi-and-boost-the-economy.html
I thought a bill proposed to de-mandate kindergarten was a local effort unrelated to AFP. New Hampshire had several towns without kindergarten until a recent mandate. As far as I know no municipality has full-day kindergarten. Then I googled on Americans For Prosperity & kindergarten and found this is one of their pet issues!
I wonder how much money they put into local elections.
@129 Purple Ozone
I notice that first link about New Hampshire has one comment in it, from a denier. Ooh, he buys into a couple of arguments. Temperature leads CO2. Models are unreliable. It’s a scam to raise taxes. Temperatures have gone done since 1997. I find it hard to believe that anyone could be convinced of so many denier arguments at once.
Planet could be ‘unrecognizable’ by 2050, experts say
WASHINGTON (AFP) – A growing, more affluent population competing for ever scarcer resources could make for an “unrecognizable” world by 2050, researchers warned at a major US science conference Sunday.
The United Nations has predicted the global population will reach seven billion this year, and climb to nine billion by 2050, “with almost all of the growth occurring in poor countries, particularly Africa and South Asia,” said John Bongaarts of the non-profit Population Council.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110220/ts_afp/scienceuspopulationfood
http://usat.ly/ePEpJl
Wind fueled fire plays havoc in NE…
Re Michael The Dark and Bright Sides of Global Warming,
Did not kew that yet …
“Sea level rise in the past earth history of 1 meter can happen within 20 years.”
Sydney heatwave breaks 150-year-old record
Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) senior forecaster Neale Fraser said that Saturday was officially the sixth successive day that the Sydney area had sweltered in 30-plus temperatures.
Since records were first kept in 1858, Sydney had never experienced such consistently high temperatures.
“We’ve had runs of hot weather for three or four days but you get a southerly change that keeps it below 30 then it warms up again,” Mr Fraser told AAP.
The previous record was five straight days.
Richmond, in Sydney’s northwest, broke its own record with seven days straight of 35-plus degree heat.
“And chances are they’ll break that again tomorrow (Sunday),” he said.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/sydney-heatwave-breaks-150yearold-record-20110205-1ah7o.html
Girl, 9, seriously injured after she’s thrown 110ft in the air when her bouncy castle is caught in freak 160mph gust of wind
Alissa Baray and her 11-year-old sister and Jessica were playing on the structure in their back garden when a ‘microburst’ is thought to have torn through their street at a speed of 160mph.
The bouncy castle was tied down but the force of the wind sent it flying into the sky with their father desperately giving chase.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358848/Two-girls-thrown-110ft-air-inside-bouncy-castle-strong-winds.html
The temperature of the rain might change
Over time. Do people record rain temps.
and times? If so it could show change in
trend.
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO), who sponsored the amendment to cut IPCC funding, claims on his website that his bill would cut $13 million in expenditures.
In fact, the U.S. contributes about $2 million to the IPCC. The larger figure is its share for the IPCC plus the entire UNFCCC, a far more complex operation.
http://www.wwfblogs.org/climate/content/house-passes-bill-to-strip-IPCC-funding-19feb2011
I write “Letters to the Editor” (LTE) using content from your frequent Climate Progress releases and cite the source link(s). In the last few minutes, I just sent a LTE using the absurdity of the GOP’s budget reduction to NOAA and adding the content on how Germany’s insurance rates have tripled. Concluding that letter, I used Aldux Huxley’s quote to “bang on” the deniers and the anti-science crowds, “Fact ignored do not cease to exist.” (I also opened the letter with, “From those defending “Facts ignored do not cease to exist,” comes this bright light upon the GOP controlled House:”)
I saw a header in a recent CP daily feed.
“The GOP decides accurate weather forecasting and hurricane tracking are luxuries America can’t afford – Republicans try to defund NOAA’s satellite program — just as climate change is making the weather much more extreme”
Funding to replace end of life satelites are one thing. However, since corporations control the government, it would seem that another non-weather related lobby has moved this legislation forward to this point. There is always HAARP to consider, which crossed my mind soon after reading the article. Why would stopping or threatening something that provides SO MUCH (weather satelites) ever be considered for dismantling or discontinuing, unless other more sinister motives were afoot, like greed and control. Consider the reasoning behind this action, it doesn’t sound like something oil would care about…would they?
The girls tossed into the air story is very climate change related. Artic winds in Arizona???