Comments snedunuri has made
- You may be a science teacher, but you're surely not teaching science, if that's the kind of stuff you go quoting to your school kids. You're right about one thing though: it is best to get to the underlying science if you can. The problem is that most of the public is not very well versed in science, and even for those who are, the arguments can seem quite arcane and eyelid-drooping. For those who do get down to the science, one thing is clear: the science on human induced climate change is nearly unanimous: Its happening, and Its us. The dissenters as you might call them are generally funded by big Oil or various loony right wing outfits. Even Lindzen, considered one of the more honest skeptics, is well funded by such interests (see http://www.desmogblog.com/lindzen-wipes-hands-clean-of-oil-and-gas). As for your claim about Milankovitch cycles and Medieval Warming, that's just old recycled claims. Take a look at this article http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/werent-temperatures-warmer-during-the-medieval-warm-period-than-they-are-today/ Finally, its popular among dissenters to claim they are being muzzled but far greater and revolutionary ideas in science have found takers in the form of some respected scientific journal. It makes you wonder why these dissenters can't get their theories published anywhere and instead have to resort to yelling at passers-by from their web sites. cheersOn ‘No compromise’ faction attacks climate bill posted 1 month, 2 weeks ago 104 Responses
- Ed Abbey wrote: "Looks like you two aren't all that familiar with popular uprisings and their dynamics." On the contrary, it seems you are the one not familiar with the psychology and dynamics of mass movements. Remember when Nader ran against Gore, and predicted that the election of Bush would unleash a mass of protests against his utterly incompetent adminsitration (rather like the starry-eyed predictions I'm seeing on this page)? Well we got an utterly incompetent administration alright, but I don't recall mass protests every night, and certainly nothing that changed a thing that that tone-deaf president did. You've all got a rosy view of "mass protests" I'm afraid. People have to take time out of their lives and sometimes risk career and life to protest. That in turn demands that it be something that's staring them in the face. Vietnam was certainly one of those. Racial discrimination was another. Sadly climate change isn't in that category b/c people don't have a very good record of reacting in advance to climate disasters, which is exactly what we have headed our way. Until its in their faces, i'm afraid we can expect very little "mass action". That means its left to a small group of dedicated individuals to take action - and for them the only means is the legislative and legal process. I certainly hope that as evidence for climate change shows up on people's doorsteps there will be calls for further action, but further action is only possible when we have initial action - hence why a climate bill is so importantOn ‘No compromise’ faction attacks climate bill posted 1 month, 3 weeks ago 104 Responses
- OK, what evidence do you have that young people are massing at the gates for action assuming the Senate doesn't pass a Climate Bill? Yes, I agree that gummnts are not usually very far sighted - that's the problem. However, what I am saying is that this situation calls for a far sighted entity, such as a government to be able to move a step at a time over the next 10 or so years. Realize we're dealing with a bunch of folks (I won't use the R********n word here) who're barely this side of the stone age, so getting them on board is going to take patience. We need to start from somewhere and the current W-M bill is as good as we'll get in the current climateOn ‘No compromise’ faction attacks climate bill posted 1 month, 3 weeks ago 104 Responses
- There was a reply earlier (Time Dechristopher) saying that the failure of the Climate Change Bill in the Senate would be a good thing because it would then galvanize young people into action. This is a mistaken belief. Generally, people are only galvanized into action when something affects them negatively *right now* (hence the student protests in the 60's were over themselves and their friends being killed in Vietnam, the racial protests were from blacks being mistreated, bread riots in other countries over lack of food, etc). Climate change, sadly, is not something that the majority of the population can see happening to them in a way that affects their well-being *right now*. Hence it is very unlikely there will be any kind of agitation over the failure of congress to pass anything. Instead we will be paying the price 5-25 years down the road. When it comes to long term action, only a far sighted entity can take action - this is usually a government. Since there is no major interest from the publinc at large the only way to proceed is in baby steps. This is how other major changes in society were accomplished. Hence the Waxman-Markey bill is the kind of start we need.On ‘No compromise’ faction attacks climate bill posted 1 month, 3 weeks ago 104 Responses
What, no Exxon-Mobilers or loonies posting about how 350 ppm is just a liberal scheme to take over the world and we have nothing to worry about b/c its all just sunspots??
On Pachauri's call for 350 ppm is breakthrough moment for climate movement posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago 13 ResponsesWhat, no Exxon-Mobilers or loonies posting about how 350 ppm is just a liberal scheme to take over the world and we have nothing to worry about b/c its all just sunspots??
On Pachauri's call for 350 ppm is breakthrough moment for climate movement posted 2 months, 3 weeks ago 13 ResponsesI don't think India is going about this problem in the best way. The current Indian position seems to be that they didn't contribute to this problem so they refuse to accept CO2 caps. Wrong. Climate change will absolutely hurt India. There's no doubt about that. At the very least it will exasberate an extremely serious water shortage problem, increase the prevalance of tropical diseases, and probably wipe out several species of flora and fauna, not to mention flooding low lying coastal areas. The economic costs of this alone will bankrupt the country. In addition, India (along with China) will soon become a major CO2 emitter. So its in India's interests to ensure that a climate change pact *is* signed. The position India should advance is the speed with which the country is being forced to act, on account of past Western CO2 emissions over the last century. That is why India should push for per-capita CO2 limits (since its current per-capita emissions are extremely low, that gives the country a decent amount of wiggle room to grow its economy) but in return inisist on funding and loans for hi-efficiency appliances, for renewable energy projects, and for education from the West which did build its current wealth on a century and half of unrestricted CO2 emissions.
On India blames Kyoto failure for climate standoff posted 3 months, 2 weeks ago 2 ResponsesA conversation with jabailo
jabailo: More roads!
chorus: Uh, more drivers, more congestion, more pollution?
jabailo: So? More roads!
chrous: But, more drivers, more congestion, more pollution.
jabailo: What's your problem? You some kind of suburbia raping liberal or what?
chorus: our problem is that its taking us longer and longer for most of us to get from A to B, and we'll never get 80% CO2 reductions by mid-century
jabailo: Move to the suburbs you america hating leftists
chorus: a bunch of us already tried that it takes us even longer to get into town, not to mention what gas prices did to us last summer
jabailo: your middle name Hussein or what? Can't you see we're all wedded to our cars!
chorus: no, actually, there's lots of evidence from cities on the west coast that if trains and trams are run frequently enough, people will ride them
jabailo: Listen Hussein, we ain't subsidizing no socialist scheme to destroy how america travels
chrous: But america loved traveling by train and tram until the cars did that in (with govt. subsidies and a little help from GM of course)
jabailo: More roads!On Restructuring the U.S. transport system posted 9 months, 2 weeks ago 22 ResponsesRe: Why "best science" American
(1) I'm pretty sure is wrong. Which fields has the rest of the world surpassed the US? I am in a scientific field myself (computer science), and while I can't speak for other disciplines, I can pretty much say without hesitation that the US still remains the leader in this area. This is not to imply that other countries aren't doing some excellent work. They are. But the US is still the trend-setter and primary discoverer of new ideas.
(2) I can agree with. But so long as the country can keep importing geeks, who really cares? There's still a waiting list as long as my right arm of geeks who want to immigrate here (hell, I myself did that several years ago)
Anyway, my point was really that there's a big disconnect between the general public and scientists, more so than in other countries. And i think that is ultimately bad, since it allows pseudo-science and creationist freaks to set the agenda.On Poll shows more Americans do not believe global warming is result of man-made activity posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago 14 Responses
a paradox
How is it that the American public is so scientifically ignorant, and yet the best science takes place in America? I believe its because in America science is something that is understood and pursued by a small (but extremely talented) minority of "others" "geeks", and "nerds". ie not "normal" people. So as long as these guys are delivering the best computers, software, medicine, and video games, the public really doesn't care to keep informed of science, giving slimey climate deniers a chance to jump in with their pseudo-science and confuse the public.On Poll shows more Americans do not believe global warming is result of man-made activity posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago 14 Responses
But Net Zero carbon taxes are different
OK, so the Right will distort any taxation scheme, but net-zero taxes? couldn't the newly empowered left do something on the framing front that? Everyone gets a rebate check back from the gumt, since the point of this isn't to raise $ but to direct industry away from carbon-intensive activity.On There's a reason Republicans stump for a carbon tax, and it ain't to reduce emissions posted 10 months ago 37 Responses
Re: Pass it quick
You might be right about some of the pork in the spending bill. i suppose there'll always be a certain amount of pork in a spending bill. The only difference is whether that pork gets spent on individuals or by corporations, so you take your pick. I am highly suspicious of your claims of pork though when i read your little rant at the end about rationalized health care and having to wait 2 years for an MRI. The UK has a national health service. How many people over there do you know had to wait 2 years for an MRI. If 1 person in a million had to, is that a worthwhile price to pay so 100 others don't go to the emergency room for treatment?On House passes stimulus package with more than $100 billion in green spending posted 10 months ago 6 Responses
Net Zero Tax Might just work
There's a pretty impressive group pushing for it. Sorry don't recall their name right now. But its a net-zero tax on carbon emissions at source, a very different proposition from a gas tax, which as we saw last summer, probably won't do enough to reduce carbon emissions. On Conservative touts gas tax as cure to all ills, alternative to other climate/energy policies posted 10 months, 2 weeks ago 6 Responses
Re: Make it a fair comparison.
Bill wrote: airlines are private companies that pay expenses and stockholders out of ticket prices.
Oh really? Hmm what was that $12 billion subsidy, oops, I mean bailout, er I mean help, oh to hell with it, lets just call a spade a spade, I mean welfare for the airline industry in 2001? That was about 30 times the support Amtrak ever got. And you can bet Al Queda wouldn't have been able to take out 3000 people with a train. Oh, and BTW, guess which industry is going to be lining up at the trough soon as this auto bailout is done. Hint: not Rail.
To fly from San Diego to Sacramento, or New York or Paris we only need two miles of concrete at each end. Compare that to the material in a rail line. Consider all the earth moving, compacting, concrete and steel work etc, using enormous amounts of diesel fuel, natural gas and coal.
You conveniently leave out that CO2 emissions per passenger mile from aircraft dwarf anything from a train. Who cares how much concrete got built. The real issue is what is the net benefit. And trains win handily, in terms of pollution, safety, and number of communities served.On A real path to energy independence posted 1 year ago 31 Responsesdum-dum
to jabailo: How could it possibly benefit any environmental (or democratic) organization "prevent" any kind of breakthrough in hydrogen fuel development? The goal is reducing fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, period. Whether its hydrogen, cellulosic ethanol, or conservative hot air, it doesn't matter so long as its done in an environmentally sustainable way.On GOP senators say green group is 'abusing' tax-exempt status posted 1 year ago 4 Responses
a minor correction
Shiva says She pointed out that peasant farmers in India's most fertile area are fighting to save their land from being swallowed up by a car factory. The truth, from what I've read, is somewhat different. It appears that the farmers were willing to give up their land and had agreed to a deal, but some local Commie leader (they are often backed by China) decided to rile everyone up and force the govt to renege on the deal. The result was that Tata (the manufacturer) just got up and moved their factory to another state. Now the state has lost not only the jobs from this factory but potentially several other car manufacturers. And for what - several acres of land - i wonder how many people that's going to feed. I should end this post with a disclaimer - I'm no fan of corporations, and pretty much agree the essence of what Shiva's saying.On A food/climate manifesto presents new visions for responding to climate change posted 1 year ago 30 Responses
Wait, say that again
$2.5 billion a year for Amtrak -- almost double the amount the passenger rail system currently gets in federal funding
You mean current Amtrack funding is barely more than $1bn? And for all the howling and gnashing coming from the Right I was expecting to see a number in the 10's or 100's of billions. For crying out loud, an organization that employs nearly 20,000 people and serves 25 mn passengers, asks for only $1bn? Given that we've just handed out hundreds of billions to various moneyed organizations, I'd say that $1bn to employ 20,000 people is a steal.On $13 billion Amtrak bill heads to Bush's desk posted 1 year, 1 month ago 4 Responses
Folks like jailabo
are exactly the kind that the republican party can fool, and have been fooling quite nicely for some time. Incapable of reasoning things out for themselves they often jump to "conspiracy" conclusions and make thus easy prey for Republicans. As it happens the current head of the IPCC was selected by the Bush administration (8 wasted years of stubborn refusal to accept the facts on global warming) after toppling the previous head b/c he didn't suit their views. So even a Bush supported scientist has come to the conclusion that the evidence is real and is happening. Surprise! I wonder if there is something to the science after all. Unf numskulls like jailabo probably don't bother to listen to the science and base conclusions on facts. Heaven help us all if Obama doesn't win. With dumb broads like Bachmann and the rest of the "christian" right we will be truly screwed.On The odd lies of Sarah Palin posted 1 year, 1 month ago 11 Responses
Decentralize!
As the article (and previous articles such http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/4/9/162115/5465) argue, because the national transmision system is so rickety and unreliable, many in India have moved to using their own local power sources. The article then goes on to say this is bad thing. In fact its not at all. The problem is what is being used to provide that power - nasty dirty diesel generators in the cities and wood burning in the villages. But in fact if those nasty generators could be replaced with small scale hydro or wind or solar generators, suddenly you've solved two problems at once: the problem of a national government that moves like molasses, and a rickety transmission system as well as loosening the grip on power that comes whenever anything is decentralized. the fact that many Indians are already used to the idea of decentralization anyway should make this a much easier proposition than say here in the US. Why aren't env groups pursuing this option?On Low-carbon energy solutions in India may depend on Tata posted 1 year, 3 months ago 4 Responses
Everyone's a scientist
To listen to all these deniers is kind of interesting. Funny how everyone becomes a climate scientist as soon as they're told they'll have to pay extra for the damage their 10mpg Denali XL is causing.On New global warming denier article in Salon posted 1 year, 4 months ago 22 Responses
To all the Deniers
When you post comments like this CO2 concentrations have been up to 20 times higher than today's level, and runaway warming did not occur. In fact, ice ages happenned. please post references. Otherwise we will have to assume you pulled these statements out of your a-holes (since your heads are firmly in the sand)On New global warming denier article in Salon posted 1 year, 4 months ago 22 Responses
Re: [new] My cynical approach
Well said. I myself came to this conclusion quite a while ago. Its not that we don't need to produce a change in American thinking - we eventually do - but there simply isn't time for that right now. All we have is 10 years to turn the ship around and there's just appalling apathy and ignorance out there - even among my "liberal" leaning generally knowledgeable friends. Somehow this opposition from the Right and apathy from the Left seems deeply ingrained in American thinking. Does the idea the earth is an endless resource perhaps date back to the American "pioneer" days? I dont know. In any case, getting at that root is going to take a long time, its not something that will be acomplished in a short span like a decade. So in the meantime I'm quite happy to take a leaf from the dirty tricks book of the Right and say lets get people chanting the same thing even if the deeper meaning eludes them for now.On An ad campaign on climate needs spokespeople who believe what they're saying posted 1 year, 5 months ago 18 Responses
Interesting
32,000 thousand seasoned scientists...all Deniers!
There's about 32,000 rednecks in the backwoods of Oregon. Coincidence? I think not.On U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions rising posted 1 year, 6 months ago 7 Responses
Re: Did Anyone Ask the Seals?
I'll assume this was written by a 12 year old. Polar bears simply do what polar bears are programmed to do. You can't sit and debate with a polar bear about the merits of its approach to feeding. Only people are capable of changing their ways and habits. (Well, at least some people are. I am not counting the village idiot who's currently President). That's both good and bad. As we've seen, over the last 10,000 years we've changed our habits so extensively, we now threaten just about every other species except the cockroach. The point here is that perhaps we can convince some people to change their habits again, so both us and other species can co-exist.On So say Big Oil-friendly opponents of protecting them posted 1 year, 7 months ago 6 Responses
the letter
I read the letter and its wrong on many fronts: There will be job gains, not job losses by shifting to a green economy. Re Economic growth, even the Bushwhacked EPA, says that economic growth by 2050 with the L-W bill will be only 1% less than it would otherwise have been. Re. extra food costs of $20 billion - do those lunatics have any idea what this country spends in Iraq in just one month? They give no references for their so called "climate data" so it sounds like one of those bogus references to me. All in all, its a pathetic attempt by a bunch of reactionaries to cling to their outdated beliefs (and outmoded lifestyle I might add)
cheersOn Industry launches campaign against Lieberman-Warner climate bill posted 1 year, 8 months ago 5 Responses
Lunatics still holding things up
Not just JonBoy, but still many others. You know none of these so called skeptics can point to any specific piece of scientific conclusion and say what is wrong and why. So next time you're confronted by them, indeed any of you on this list, why don't you tell us exactly what you think is wrong with the the 99.9% of scientific opinion. This is a very serious question. Scientists have argued this now for going on 20 years, they've analysed, subtracted, modeled, projected back, projected forward, and the stubborn conclusion remains - we are witnessing a significant man-made component of global warming. So c'mon guys, I apologize for calling you lunatics. Why don't you put on your lab coats and tell us where they scientists are wrong?On Climate science doesn't rely on a consensus of opinion posted 1 year, 8 months ago 16 Responses
of course
Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp have recognized this distinction between agribiz "farmers" and family farmers for a long time. They hold Farm Aid every year for that very reasonOn Why we shouldn't target farmers for our farm bill frustrations posted 1 year, 11 months ago 9 Responses
I'd have to disagree
While I'm personally for the strongest possible bill, I have to set aside my own personal preferences here. That is because much of the public is still woefully ignorant of the problem. Conditioned by years of Exxon-Mobil lies (when the time comes I hope that the states go after E-M they way they went after the tobacco cos.) they're still not sure there's even a problem. So a strong bill on which there isn't bipartisan support is simply not going to make it past both Houses. Given that Bush will veto it the first time round, its vital that it gets passed a second time round, so he'll have no choice but to sign it. That's where all-round support is more important than crafting a perfect bill. Believe me as the evidence comes pouring in over the next decade, the public is going to start clamouring to strengthen it. Meanwhile its important we get started on tackling the problem without delay.On Green groups battle over climate bills in the Senate posted 2 years, 1 month ago 13 Responses
Re: new deniers
"Affluent conservative Christians are the biggest deniers, there are letters from them every day in newspapers in Phoenix area. "
I've had it up to here with these backward "religious" s?itheads. Is there nothing that can be done to shut them up once and for all?On Climate-skeptic books abound on Amazon's top sellers list posted 2 years, 1 month ago 8 Responses
You're stopping you!
Indeed, that is basically the Libertarian stance. But what evidence do you have that we can "buy our way" out of this problem? In fact what evidence do you have that we have bought our way out of any environmental problem? Without such evidence, you're no better than any lazy ass republican that would rather just stick his head in the sand and pretend there's no problem.
Incidentally, i dont know what you've been reading but this is very much a man-made problem. The most recent conclusion of the world's climate scientists is that the current additional global warming is almost certainly man madeOn Tidwell responds to scientists responding to Tidwell posted 2 years, 2 months ago 28 Responses
Re; Green Evangelicals
to John: instead of relying on proof by bogus references why don't you actually post some of these "Statements" and "Petitions" so we can see what they actually say. Or at least your "long list" of "scientists" who have changed their views.
Sheesh. It never stops from some of these dunderheads.
On Fred Thompson's confused stance on climate change posted 2 years, 2 months ago 12 ResponsesWake up!
I know its popular to bash Hilary. I also know that her environmental record is not outstanding, but it is solid. But some of the nuts that post on here have to wake up and realize that America simply NOT READY to cycle to the corner grocery store, never mind cycling 5 miles to work. Nor is America ready to recycle every piece of paper or scrap plastic that comes their way. We have to be ready to accept partial solutions so long as we see people moving in the right direction. This is really important. Another point: America will simply not elect Kucinich. Period. Much as though I personally like the guy, and I would vote for him, he is unelectable. So, I think that we could do a lot worse than Hilary. Our best bet is to work with her and try and get her to see the light on remaining issues that are still troubling.
PS whenever there's a post like this, there's always some nut that posts about the population bomb. I wonder i don't recall seeing anything like that yetOn An interview with Hillary Clinton about her presidential platform on energy and the environment posted 2 years, 2 months ago 32 Responses
Re: Colin
India is still primarily agrarian and largely vegetarian yet it has destroyed its natural ecosystems and rivers. It is also deeply mired in unimaginable poverty. I would call that an example of what not to do.
Actually like most agrarian societies catching up with the modern age, India's environmental destruction is a consequence of modern greed being imposed on a traditional society. That is, the desctruction of habitat and environment is not a consequence of its agrarian or vegetarian society. Furthermore, the rise of poverty in India can be traced almost entirely to British (mis)rule. e.g. In 1830, India accounted for 17.6per cent of global industrial production against Britain's 9.5 per cent, but by 1900 India's share was down to 1.7 per cent against Britain's 18.5 per cent. There was a corresponding rise in famines during the period of British rule. This is surely not a consequence of India's agrarian society.cheersOn What a nice idea posted 2 years, 5 months ago 45 Responses
so why are the Inuit planning on suing the US govt
...oh, and the polar bears can't simply "go north". If the Artic becomes ice free (as is expected). Polar bears depend on ice for their survival.
Anyway this post is really idiotic and beside the point. Rather than addressing the issue of global warming it seems to be saying "hey I'm doing fine here in Bumblef**k, Texas so y'all should enjoy it too"On 'Global warming stopped in 1998'--Only if you flagrantly cherry pick posted 2 years, 9 months ago 170 Responses
Just a couple of observations
OK, a couple of comments. One, he says environmnentalists are uncompromising. But surely not compared with the right wing zealots that he was busy advising in the last election! In fact, we've seen how the media has been fawning over Bush's own uncompromising behavior on many issues. So the point is not the uncompromising itself, but how its presented. Is it seen as principled, standing for the right thing, and most of all, in the public interests (good) or is it seen as rigid and obstructionists (bad). I think that the env movement needs to somehow reframe itself as the former.
Secondly, he says that the envs are seen as not presenting solutions. I have to agree with him on this. In fact they are, but they are perceived as not doing so. Why? Because the language they use is often received negatively. Rather they ought to be touting how much better an alternative solution is - and repeat that endlessly. If there's any one thing I've learned from the criminals right now in the White House, its take a message and repeat it ad nauseum - it doesn't even have to be true. In our case, it is, which helps, but that's almost beside the point.On GOP strategist Frank Luntz argues enviros are failing -- and they're mean to boot posted 2 years, 9 months ago 35 Responses
I agree completely with the poster David
These ads are easy to stereotype as "alarmist", "chicken little". They do nothing to address the trash that the right wing has effectively managed to spread - that global warming is just a liberal hoax designed to restrict freedom of choice. Yes of course its right wing nonsense. But that's not the point. The public to a large extent buys into that thinking, if not consciously then subconsciously.
I think that an effective ad must first (if only incidentally) address this misinformation and then connect with the public about what they can do. I don't think the Environmental movement (and the Left in general) get how important it is to connect with people at a subconscious level. That's why we see no effective action from the public on what is probably the most dangerous scariest experiment we are carrying out with the Earth.cheersOn What would your global warming ad look like? posted 3 years, 8 months ago 18 Responses
Borg mentality?
Its really sad to see nothing of significance happening in response to the Bush administration's assault on the environment. This is one of the most evil, and cunning administrations in a long time. They know exactly what issues the public will get riled up about and what they wont. One issue that public currently barely bats an eyelid is the environment. So they continue to destroy it in the name of short term profits. Is there perhaps a feeling among many greens that this like the invasion of the Borg and resistance is futile? But they must be stopped or we all become like themOn Earth Day goings-on don't measure up to dark drama on Capitol Hill posted 4 years, 7 months ago 4 Responses