If you missed Climate Reality’s recent 24 hour marathon focused on the link between dirty weather and dirty energy, here’s one of the videos, a fun “symphony of science” auto-tuned compilation featuring Al Gore and climate science:
A musical creation about the reality of global climate change from the live broadcast of 24 Hours of Reality – The Dirty Weather Report. The Symphony of Science is a musical project of John D Boswell, designed to deliver scientific knowledge and philosophy in musical form.
In case the link above stops working (which it has once already, mysteriously changing to an ad for Climate Reality t-shirts), here’s another Symphony of Science compilation on climate science put out by Mr. Boswell:
One of the great things to come out of Climate Reality is a new tool for pushing back at the nonsense spread in the mainstream media by anti-science climate deniers, Reality Drop. It’s focused on “spreading truth, and destroying denial.” With the deep pockets of the fossil fuel industry obscuring this debate, any new tool is useful; this one uses gaming and social media to make slaying deniers on-line fun as well as gratifying!
The PBS Frontline program “Climate of Doubt” masterfully exposed the strategies and tactics that climate denialists have used to delay, if not undermine meaningful action in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and addressing climate change in the US. Perhaps the #1 strategy they have pursued involves denying the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming.
The number one strategy this shadowy, well-financed group has pursued involves denying the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming. As Myron Ebell of the right-wing think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) put it,
“We felt that if you concede the science is settled and that there’s a consensus…the moral high ground has been ceded to the alarmists.”
Republican Congressman from Wisconsin and climate denialist James Sensenbrenner explained the importance of the public awareness of the scientific consensus:
JOHN HOCKENBERRY:Do you think this will ever be settled scientifically, if 97 percent consensus doesn’t settle it for you?
Rep. JAMES SENSENBRENNER:Well, I — you know, I think that it’s up to the scientists and their supporters to convince the public that this is the right thing to do. And the supporters of that side of the argument in the Congress have been a huge flop.
Two of my favourite Bills talk climate change, along with the Republicans at the table. It is, as 350.org posted, a seriously awesome “smack-down” – climate science and reality versus climate nonsense. With infinite patience, Bill McKibben responds yet again to the same tired old Republican/conservative talking points:
If this link stops working, go to this Huffington Post link to view the video.
*Thanks Jen P for sending this my way*
Virtually all of America’s corn and soy farms are now in drought disaster areas. Food prices globally are already rising as a result. This is what the very beginning of climate change looks and tastes like. We can’t afford this kind of change – we need serious action on climate change now.
There’s lots of action on the climate change front this week, including in Washington DC where Senate hearings on climate change started this week. To no one’s surprise, climate denier (and fossil-fuel funded) Senator James Inhofe railed against the science and the scientists (aka “climate alarmists), declaring at one point that “the global warming movement has completely collapsed.” During Sen. Inhofe’s diatribe against climate “alarmists,” the National Academy of Sciences, NOAA, NASA and, by extension, Galileo, it was the hottest day ever recorded in his home state of Oklahoma.
The hearings are being live-streamed here. Common Dreams gives a good overview of yesterday’s presentation by climate scientists in Scientists Tell Senate Panel: Climate Change Is Here And Disaster Costs Will Be Huge. George Monbiot weighs in on Inhofe’s entrenched inanity in Dance With The One Who Brung You, where he asserts that the environment is being trashed because of a failure to reform campaign finance. Truly, these politicians need to wear their sponsors on their clothes, like athletes, so that citizens can identify clearly whose interests they are protecting.
I’m listening to the hearings while I write this, and it’s fascinating in a disturbing kind of way (like watching a car crash in slow motion) to hear Inhofe and Sessions carry on about the “proof” that the planet isn’t warming, and claiming that the National Academy of Sciences is some kind of lobby group for special interests. Oh, the irony!
Here’s some Canadian nonsense. PM Stephen Harper, whose government has been awarded more “Colossal Fossil” awards at international climate talks than any other government, asserted this week that Canadian youth, who are among the most vocal critics of this government’s climate policies, are “misinformed” about global warming talks. *sigh*
On the upside, here’s some interesting developments:
To wrap up, this one’s for Prime Minister Harper, Senator Inhofe and Senator Sessions, and all those conservative politicians out there suffering from Anti-Science Syndrome (ASS):
I’m off canoeing in beautiful Canadian Shield country again this week, so while I’m on holiday I will be reposting articles from the 350orbust archives. This article was first published in July 2010.
An acquaintance I recently bumped into told me, loudly and emphatically, that “people who believe in climate change should have their heads examined”. He went on:
“We’ve just had the coldest Florida winter ever, and we’ve had two cold summers here in northern Ontario. Anybody who thinks global warming is happening is out to lunch.”
When I pointed out to him that “weather weirding” is exactly what climate scientists have been saying would happen if we continued to warm up the atmosphere with our burning of fossil fuels, he dismissed it out of hand.
So what is it that makes intelligent, other-wise responsible people dismiss out-of-hand the predictions of over 97% of scientists who study this for a living? If nine out of ten pilots told you a plane you were about to board was going to crash, would you get on anyway? I think not! Yet this is our planet, our only home, that we are talking about changing irreversibly because we won’t listen to the experts!
Is it because we can’t see the carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane gas in the air that we can dismiss these emissions as being insignificant? It is true, that based on our experience for the last 200 years since the beginning of the industrial revolution and our love affair with burning carbon began, we have gotten away without significant global consequences. Only when the air or water pollution in specific locations becomes a problem do we sit up and pay attention, at least if it’s close to us. However, tell the people in Chernobyl or the Love Canal that because you can’t see something it isn’t significant and can be dismissed!
Now, this acquaintance has two daughters, just like I do, and I know he loves them just as much as I do mine. If only he – a pilot and businessman with no scientific training – would take the time to consider what their futures are going to be like if he is wrong and the scientists are right. The crazy thing is, humanity is up to this challenge. We are innovative, intelligent creatures who unfortunately have let the destructive side of our nature run rampant with the environment recently. But it doesn’t have to be this way – we don’t have to be this way. The solutions are myriad, and are not the same for every community, or country. But they are achievable – if we start before we reach the tipping point. As Kelly Blyn wrote recently on 350.org:
The truth is, there is no silver bullet to stopping the climate crisis, no single technological solution that can fix everything at once. We don’t just need solar power, or wind power, or efficiency. We need all of these things and more. What we need, in a word, is diversity.
Still not convinced that this issue is important? Maybe this will change your mind:
And, because the town I live in has a thriving tourism industry based on hunting and fishing, here’s a new link I’ve found, Target Global Warming, for and by hunters and anglers confronting climate change.
For a more examples of how climate change is changing the world here and now, go to Father Theo’s recent blog posting, Climate Change Notebook, July 2010.
We can do this – let’s join together and build a better future for all our children. I’ll quote from 350.org again:
Looking over the list of campaigns above, it becomes clear: there actually is one silver bullet to solving the climate crisis, and it’s not solar power. It’s people power.
We can’t do this without you. Let’s keep building this movement.
Take Action to become a fossil fuel abolitionist:
- Join or start a Citizens Climate Lobby group in your community
- Participate in the global day of action on Sept 24 to demand solutions to the climate crisis and accelerate the move away from fossil fuels
- Become part of the Transition Network, which supports community-led responses to climate change and shrinking supplies of cheap energy, building resilience and happiness.
I’m a Climate Scientist Rap by Hungry Beast
In the media landscape there are climate change deniers and believers, but rarely are those speaking about climate change actual climate scientists…
yo….we’re climate scientists.. and there’s no denying this Climate Change Is REEEEALL..
Who’s a climate scientist..
I’m a climate scientist..
Not a cleo finalist
No a climate scientist
Droppin facts all over this wax
While bitches be crying about a carbon tax
Climate change is caused by people
Earth Unlike Alien Has no sequel
We gotta move fast or we’ll be forsaken,
Cause we were too busy suckin dick Copenhagen: (Politician)
I said Burn! it’s hot in here..
32% more carbon in the atmosphere.
Oh Eee Ohh Eee oh wee ice ice ice
Raisin’ sea levels twice by twice
We’re scientists, what we speak is True.
Unlike Andrew Bolt our work is Peer Reviewed… ooohhh
Who’s a climate scientist..
I’m a climate scientist..
An Anglican revivalist
No a climate scientist
Feedback is like climate change on crack
The permafrosts subtracts: feedback
Methane release wack : feedback..
Write a letter then burn it: feedback
Denialists deny this in your dreams
Coz climate change means greater extremes,
Shit won’t be the norm
Heatwaves bigger badder storms
The Green house effect is just a theory sucker (Alan Jones)
Yeah so is gravity float away muther f**cker
Who’s a climate scientist..
I’m a climate scientist..
I’m not a climate Scientist
Who’s Climate Scientists
A Penny Farthing Cyclist
A Lebanese typist
A Sebaceous Cyst
No! a climate scientist! Yo! PREACH~!
Written and performed by Climate Scientists, Dan Ilic, Duncan Elms and production by Brendan Woithe at Colony NoFi.
(Thanks to Joe and Cathy for sharing)
Canadian parliament will resume today, after an unexpected two month break brought on when Prime Minister Stephen Harper made the unprecedented move to “prorogue”, or dismiss, parliament in the middle of a session. The rather dubious reason he gave for this unscheduled holiday was that the minority government needed to “recalibrate” before introducing a new budget.
This week, therefore, one of the government’s first orders of business will be to introduce a new budget. Those Canadians concerned about climate change will be watching carefully to see if the Harper government restores funding to The Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS) that was cut in the last Conservative budget. CFCAS is the main funding body for university-based research on climate, atmospheric and related oceanic work in Canada.
A retired MSC scientist puts it this way:
Through the CFCAS a body of expertise and capability has been
built up which is internationally competitive but focused on issues of
importance to Canada. This expertise is presently endangered by a lack of recommitment to fund CFCAS and creating the science necessary for effective environmental policy. In my view, it is very important to support scientific research that is
independent of government in order to forestall any temptation to try to
ignore or worse suppress the scientific knowledge necessary to construct
As reported recently on the Can-West News Service, the result of these cuts is the demolishing of climate-related projects around the country:
The foundation’s projects at universities across the country, which are seen as key to understanding the remarkable change underway in the climate, are already being dismantled. And young scientists, trained at substantial cost to Canadian taxpayers, have begun leaving in the country in search of work.
One project is the Centre for Regional Climate Studies and Simulation, based at the Universite du Quebec a Montreal, which involves about a dozen professors, 20 research assistants and 50 graduate students. The team studies interactions governing the climate and how to adapt to coming change that could transform large swaths of Canada.
The project is “about to disappear because of (the) Harper government’s indecisiveness to renew funding for the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences,” say gradate students at the centre, which they liken to an “endangered species.”
It is jaw-dropping that a federal government of a northern nation would cut funding to climate science at this crucial time. It makes one think that this government doesn’t like what the science is saying, and it working to ensure that Canadians are kept in the dark about it. For more about the Harper government’s record on climate change go to my What the heck IS Canada’s policy? page. James Hoggan, from DeSmogblog.com summarizes it this way:
The Canadian government’s climate plan is pure politics – pure public relations. It’s all hot air, with no regulation or legislation to back it up. The government is not passing laws to limit greenhouse gas emissions. It is not setting science-based targets and it’s not financing renewable energy.
If you’d like to send Prime Minister Harper the message that climate science is important, click here to sign a petition being circulated by students at the University of Montreal. The english portion of the petition is underneath the french, and you need to keep scrolling past both to reach the place to sign.
For more information on CFCAS, click here to go to their website.
This guest posting was submitted to a local newspaper recently in response to an opinion piece entitled “Why Dismiss Dissent” by right-wing ideologue Peter Worthington. While the said newspaper declined to publish it, I am happy to give it space here:
In this article, Mr. Worthington parrots the usual climate change-denying arguments and pseudo-science: Humans are too insignificant to cause climate change; carbon dioxide is our friend; climate change is a conspiracy by poor countries to dupe rich countries into giving them money; etc. What Mr. Worthington fails to do is address any of the vast body of research which shows convincingly that the earth is warming quickly and beyond normal variations. He also entirely fails to mention that virtually all reputable climate scientists from around the world and across numerous scientific disciplines agree that global warming is real and threatens humanity’s future, that it is caused by human activity and industry, and that the need to change this constitutes an emergency. While there are still some details of global warming which spark debate between serious scientists (i.e.those scientists who use their skills to look for the truth and not to promote an agenda), the basic facts have been settled. Moreover, despite Mr. Worthington’s claims, there is really no believable way in which all these diverse scientists from around the world could be conspiring to deceive the world into accepting global warming as real when it is not. And what would be the point? They don’t stand to gain anything and would actually stand to lose a great deal by lying. On the other hand, most prominent climate change deniers have either demonstrable links to organizations whom the status quo benefits (oil and coal producers, etc.) or, as with Mr. Worthington, to right-wing lobby groups who are funded by these organizations. One has to ask which group is more likely to be trying to deceive the public.
The situation is this: We are all on the Titanic speeding through the North Atlantic night. Someone has just spotted what looks like a very large iceberg dead ahead and we are bearing down on it fast. The crew begins rushing to avoid the collision but the ship owner shows up and begins shouting that we should all stop and discuss this first. Maybe the iceberg is smaller than it looks, or further away. Maybe the ship could survive the impact. Maybe the ship can turn faster than we think. Maybe turning sharply will cause some passengers to fall out of bed andsue the ship owner. We should probably just wait and see what happens.
Does this approach make ANY sense?
Mr. Worthington, given the relatively small long-term cost of changing our
greenhouse gas-emitting ways and the absolute catastrophe which awaits humanity if
scientists are right about climate change, isn’t your recommendation for continued
inaction kind of irresponsible?
For a 2 1/2 minute review of the earth’s climate history and where we are now, click on this link to the BBC News video “A Journey Through The Earth’s Climate History” which looks at the dual questions of how the Earth’s climate arrived at its current state and how scientists delve into the secrets of our planet’s past. To get a expanded text version of it, including the sources and resources for the video, click here.