331 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2022
    1. I hope, for the sake of everybody -- Ukrainians, Russians and the whole of humanity -- that this war stops immediately. Because if it doesn't, it's not only the Ukrainians and the Russians 00:11:39 that will suffer terribly. Everybody will suffer terribly if this war continues. BG: Explain why. YNH: Because of the shock waves destabilizing the whole world. Let’s start with the bottom line: budgets. We have been living in an amazing era of peace in the last few decades. And it wasn't some kind of hippie fantasy. You saw it in the bottom line. 00:12:06 You saw it in the budgets. In Europe, in the European Union, the average defense budget of EU members was around three percent of government budget. And that's a historical miracle, almost. For most of history, the budget of kings and emperors and sultans, like 50 percent, 80 percent goes to war, goes to the army. 00:12:31 In Europe, it’s just three percent. In the whole world, the average is about six percent, I think, fact-check me on this, but this is the figure that I know, six percent. What we saw already within a few days, Germany doubles its military budget in a day. And I'm not against it. Given what they are facing, it's reasonable. For the Germans, for the Poles, for all of Europe to double their budgets. And you see other countries around the world doing the same thing. 00:12:58 But this is, you know, a race to the bottom. When they double their budgets, other countries look and feel insecure and double their budgets, so they have to double them again and triple them. And the money that should go to health care, that should go to education, that should go to fight climate change, this money will now go to tanks, to missiles, to fighting wars. 00:13:25 So there is less health care for everybody, and there is maybe no solution to climate change because the money goes to tanks. And in this way, even if you live in Australia, even if you live in Brazil, you will feel the repercussions of this war in less health care, in a deteriorating ecological crisis, 00:13:48 in many other things. Again, another very central question is technology. We are on the verge, we are already in the middle, actually, of new technological arms races in fields like artificial intelligence. And we need global agreement about how to regulate AI and to prevent the worst scenarios. How can we get a global agreement on AI 00:14:15 when you have a new cold war, a new hot war? So in this field, to all hopes of stopping the AI arms race will go up in smoke if this war continues. So again, everybody around the world will feel the consequences in many ways. This is much, much bigger than just another regional conflict.

      Harari makes some excellent points here. Huge funds originally allocated to fighting climate change and the other anthropocene crisis will be diverted to military spending. Climate change, biodiversity, etc will lose. Only the military industrial complex will win.

      Remember that the military industry is unique. It's only purpose is to consume raw materials and capacity in order to destroy. What is the carbon footprint of a bomb or a bullet?

    1. This is a moment that we should seize, in all seriousness, in order to take on the two huge existential plagues that face us this morning: the climate crisis, outlined in this new IPCC report, and the fact that we have a madman with nuclear weapons who’s used the revenues from oil and gas to intimidate and terrify the entire world.

      This is the critical observation - everything is interconnected. It is a nexus of problems that requires that we deal with all dimensions of the problem simultaneously.

      Putin is the nexus of so much that is wrong with the world. He is like an octopus that has its arms in multiple crisis of the planet.

      The political polarization of the US, the ascendancy of the puppet government of Trump and the blatant cognitive dissonance of the extreme right who are impervious to facts is reminiscent of the propaganda imposed upon the Russian people themselves for one reason - it was part of Putin's master plan: https://youtu.be/FxgBuhMBXSA The US population has been split by Putin's information warfare system, the same one he uses on the Russian population.

      The fake news programmed by Russian propaganda about the Ukraine war has worked effectively to mislead the Russian populus: https://youtu.be/kELta9MLOzg The same pattern of psychological manipulation has also had the same impact in the belief system of the typical hardcore Trumpist.

  2. Feb 2022
    1. (For comparison, most organizations can’t avert a metric ton for less than $2. The average American causes around 16 metric tons of emissions per year.)

      So, taxing people, say, $50 per year would allow the government to fund those charities, right? Sounds like an excellent way to facilitate climate change mitigation.

    2. The Founders Pledge report used countries’ climate targets and projected policies to estimate how many metric tons of carbon can be saved by avoiding various lifestyle choices.

      Are there countries that haven't already blown past their own targets and had to reset them? It seems quite naive of them to suggest that any country will be able to meet their targets. Indeed, considering how many countries that produce lots of GHGs have had to step back from their climate change targets, I would expect that accounting for policy changes would actually make population reduction even better.

  3. Jan 2022
  4. Dec 2021
    1. Extinction Rebellion has been at the forefront of a fundamentally new message which is if a government doesn't change, it's your right and as we've identified, your duty, if you're not going to be complicit, 00:34:43 to go into a rebellion a nonviolent civil disobedience against the government in order to fundamentally reduce carbon emissions. It's not actually that complicated, Is it? If you ask the average person who controls the economy, right? They know it's the banks, the big banks, right? And we had the banks, I think they did it pretty deliberately ten years ago. 00:35:12 They pulled our chain and we had the most massive transfer of wealth that the world has ever seen the bank bailout, right? Trillions and trillions of dollars. We're seeing the same thing now with covid and the banks have got to be behind it, right? If the banks wanted and decided that emissions have to decline from today 00:35:36 fast in a matter of years, the banks can do it, right? Because the banks hold the strings. All governments now are in a massive amount of national debt . we have an axis of evil if you want, we have the big banking corporations. We have the big fossil fuel corporations and we have the compliant government.

      The big three institutions making up the climate axis of evil: banks, governments and dirty energy.

      While XR does this, it is also possible to apply pressure on another front, a bottom-up, rapid, citizen-led transformation effort.

  5. Oct 2021
    1. A recent survey found that only 14% of people they surveyed in the United States talk about climate change. A previous Yale study found that 35% either discuss it occasionally or hear somebody else talk about it. Those are low for something that over 70% of people are worried about.

      Conversation is not happening! There is a leverage point in holding open conversations where we understand each other’s language of different cultural groups. Finding common ground, the common human denominators (CHD) between polarized groups is the lynchpin.

    2. For a talk at one conservative Christian college, Dr. Hayhoe – an atmospheric scientist, professor of political science at Texas Tech University, and the chief scientist for The Nature Conservancy – decided to emphasize how caring about climate change is in line with Christian values and, ultimately, is “pro-life” in the fullest sense of that word. Afterward, she says, people “were able to listen, acknowledge it, and think about approaching [climate change] a little differently.”

      We often talk about the same things, share the same values, have the same common human denominators, but couched in different language. It is critical to get to the root of what we have in common in order to establish meaningful dialogue.

  6. bafybeiery76ov25qa7hpadaiziuwhebaefhpxzzx6t6rchn7b37krzgroi.ipfs.dweb.link bafybeiery76ov25qa7hpadaiziuwhebaefhpxzzx6t6rchn7b37krzgroi.ipfs.dweb.link
    1. Fundamental features of human psychology can constrain the perceived personal relevance andimportance of climate change, limiting both action and internalization of the problem. Cognitiveshortcuts developed over millennia make us ill-suited in many ways to perceiving and respondingto climate change (152),including a tendency to place less emphasis on time-delayed and physicallyremote risks and to selectively downplay information that is at odds with our identity or worldview(153). Risk perception relies on intuition and direct perceptual signals (e.g., an immediate, tangiblethreat), whereas for most high-emitting households in the Global North, climate change does notpresent itself in these terms, except in the case of local experiences of extreme weather events.

      This psychological constraint is worth demonstrating to individuals to illustrate how we construct our values and responses. These constraints can be demonstrated in a vivid way wiithin the context of Deep Humanity BEing journeys.

  7. Sep 2021
    1. Global air traffic is expected to double to 8.2 billion passengers in 2037, according to IATA, which predicts that aviation's 2019 emissions peak of around 900 million metric tons of CO2 will be exceeded within the next two to three years.At the same time, the window to cut the world's reliance on fossil fuels and avoid catastrophic changes to the climate is closing rapidly. The International Energy Agency forecasts that aviation's share of global carbon emissions will increase to 3.5% by 2030 from just over 2.5% in 2019 in the absence of efforts to further decarbonize.

      SRG education campaign for air travellers ( mostly middle class and rich) to do their part and minimize air travel until the breakthrough technologies are here. Temporary abstinence or voluntary lotto system.

    1. Since about 70% of water delivered from the Colorado River goes to growing crops, not to people in cities, the next step will likely be to demand large-scale reductions for farmers and ranchers across millions of acres of land, forcing wrenching choices about which crops to grow and for whom — an omen that many of America’s food-generating regions might ultimately have to shift someplace else as the climate warms.

      Deep Concept: The US Government, in the 1960's/70's provided a crystal ball glimpse into the future by defining climate change (man-made global warming) as a national security concern. Various reports warned of "exponential" growth (population) and related man-made factors (technology etc.) that would contribute to climate change and specifically discussed the possibility of irreconcilable damage to "finite" natural resources.

    2. The tunnel far below represented Nevada’s latest salvo in a simmering water war: the construction of a $1.4 billion drainage hole to ensure that if the lake ever ran dry, Las Vegas could get the very last drop

      Deep Concept: Modern America is mostly corrupt from it's own creation of wealth. Wealth is power, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely! Money and wealth have completely changed the underlying foundation of America. Modern America is the corrupted result of wealth. Morality and ethics in modern American have been reshaped to "fit" European Aristocracy, ironically the same European aristocracy America fled in the Revolutionary War.

      Billions and billions of tax payer money is spent on projects that could never pass rigorous examination and best public ROI use. Political authoritative conditions rule public tax money for the benefit of a few at the expense of the many. The public "cult-like" sheep have no clue how they are being abused.

      The authoritative abusers (politicians) follow the "mostly" corrupt American (fuck-you) form of government and individual power tactics that have been conveniently embedded in corrupt modern morality and ethics, used by corrupted lawyers and judges to codify the fundamental moral code that underpins the original American Constitution.

  8. Aug 2021
  9. Jul 2021
    1. Pathways that aim for limiting warming to 1.5°C by 2100 after a temporary temperature overshoot rely on large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) measures, which are uncertain and entail clear risks.

      People supporting CDR are supporting a hail mary.

  10. Jun 2021
  11. May 2021
  12. Apr 2021
  13. Mar 2021
    1. Baker, C. M., Campbell, P. T., Chades, I., Dean, A. J., Hester, S. M., Holden, M. H., McCaw, J. M., McVernon, J., Moss, R., Shearer, F. M., & Possingham, H. P. (2020). From climate change to pandemics: Decision science can help scientists have impact. ArXiv:2007.13261 [Physics]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.13261

    1. ReconfigBehSci. (2020, November 9). Now underway at SciBeh workshop are our 3 hackathons: 1. Combatting COVID-19 misinformation with lessons from climate change denial 2. Optimising research dissemination and curation 3. ReSearch Engine: Search Engine for SciBeh’s knowledge base & beyond [Tweet]. @SciBeh. https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1325796158887882752

  14. Jan 2021
    1. People thrive in a wide range of climates. The projected climate change is small relative to the diurnal cycle. It is therefore rather peculiar to conclude that climate change will be disastrous. Those who claim so have been unable to explain why. https://twitter.com/RichardTol/status/1313182006310731776?s=20

      This is shocking!

  15. Dec 2020
    1. The science of the "Science is settled" crowd isn't an open system of skeptical inquiry, but a closed system of centralized authority funded and controlled by special interests, beholden to political agendas and intolerant of dissent. It has the same relationship to science that the various People's Democracies had to democracy.

      They try to mold our opinions so we are more amenable to their agendas.

    1. Nonethel ess, scholars have begun to iden-tify procedures that can potentially mitigate political sectarianism. These in clude efforts to help Americans comprehend opposing partisans regardless of their level of agree-ment, such as by focusing on commonalities rather than differences (e.g., “we’re all Amer-icans”; SM) or communicating in the moral language of the other side (e.g., when liberals frame the consequences of climate change in terms of sanctity violations; SM).

      Interesting, especially point re climate change.

      I would go further into the ontological sources of these issues e.g. attachment to views, and how we can address that.

    1. It seems to also highlight how much our governments, banks and big corporations roles play into the state of our planet, how much we need them to change so that our individual choices can actually make a significant difference. Read more

      Notice the subtle othering: it's not "us" who have been doing this but the "governments, banks and big corporations" ... But who are their shareholders, who are their citizens, staff, customers etc? Us ...

      Note this is a comment on Attenborough's book. I do wonder what his recommendations are...

    1. “Although we now have at our disposal some fairly sophisticated methods of characterizing uncertainty,” she warned, “these do not actually enable us to control or even predict the extent of the disaster.

      Many believe models predict the future. Exhibit A: Climate change

  16. Nov 2020
  17. Oct 2020
  18. Sep 2020
    1. If everyone did all of the above things, they would have the personal infrastructure in place to enable their lives to become zero-emissions. But the above changes only cover 45% of average American emissions—so what gives? The remaining 55% of emissions come indirectly from the goods, services, and food we buy. The only way we’ll get to a zero-carbon world is for each of those industries to adopt new technology and change their processes to be emissions-free, or be replaced with a zero-emissions alternative. That’s why your first action is voting to make sure that policies and incentives are put in place to accelerate the overall transition.

      The "above things" being:

      1. Vote for elected officials who prioritize smart climate policy; join climate action or political groups to support pro-climat candidates and non-profits.
      2. Use only electric vehicles. Your next car [and this right here is a measure of how very car-dependent Americans as a whole are] needs to be electric. [AND you also need to press your power companies and government for clean electricity; lots of electricity comes from coal!]
      3. Electrify your house. There's a reason California's no longer permitting gas in new construction. Induction has vastly improved!
      4. Switch to all-green electricity. See my note on #2.
    1. Although relocations can be difficult, it requires a certain level of privilege to be a climate change migrant in America right now. Most of the people I spoke with are relatively free to move around, without the ties of children or home ownership, and with enough money to afford to relocate.

      There's a racial divide here, too. With harassment and violence on the rise against Black and Asian Americans, moving anywhere where there are fewer of us is another dimension of precarity.

  19. Aug 2020
  20. Jul 2020
  21. Jun 2020
  22. May 2020
  23. Apr 2020
    1. EIT Climate-KIC is a Knowledge and Innovation Community (KIC), working to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon economy. Supported by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, we identify and support innovation that helps society mitigate and adapt to climate change. We believe that a decarbonised, sustainable economy is not only necessary to prevent catastrophic climate change, but presents a wealth of opportunities for business and society.

      would be interesting to understand more about their budget, philosophy and approach.

    1. About InfluenceMap InfluenceMap empowers investors, corporations, the media and campaigners with data-driven and clearly communicated analysis on critical issues associated with climate change and the energy transition. Our flagship platform is the world's leading analysis of how companies and trade associations impact climate-motivated policy globally.
  24. Dec 2019
    1. New analysis by the Climate Impact Lab brings more bad news for American skiers already experiencing disappointing conditions at their favorite resorts. Within the next 20 years, the number of days at or below freezing in some of the most popular ski towns in the US will decline by weeks or even a month. If global greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at the same pace that they did in the first decade of this century, ski resorts could see half as many sub-freezing days compared to historical averages by late century.
    1. Across the CONUS as a whole, total snowfall largely declined between 1930 and 2007, according to a 2009 study cited by the Environmental Protection Agency. That study examined long-term snowfall-station data, finding that snowfall totals dropped by more than half in the Northwest, and also declined sharply in the Southwest.
  25. Sep 2019
    1. Table 2.2:

      IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C - Table 2.2: The assessed remaining carbon budget and its uncertainties

    1. Is there a planetary threshold in the trajectory of theEarth System that, if crossed, could prevent stabili-zation in a range of intermediate temperature rises?

      Yes: there are tipping points.

  26. Aug 2019
    1. The history of the scientific discovery of climate change began in the early 19th century when ice ages and other natural changes in paleoclimate were first suspected and the natural greenhouse effect first identified. In the late 19th century, scientists first argued that human emissions of greenhouse gases could change the climate. Many other theories of climate change were advanced, involving forces from volcanism to solar variation. In the 1960s, the warming effect of carbon dioxide gas became increasingly convincing. Some scientists also pointed out that human activities that generated atmospheric aerosols (e.g., "pollution") could have cooling effects as well. During the 1970s, scientific opinion increasingly favored the warming viewpoint. By the 1990s, as a result of improving fidelity of computer models and observational work confirming the Milankovitch theory of the ice ages, a consensus position formed: greenhouse gases were deeply involved in most climate changes and human-caused emissions were bringing discernible global warming. Since the 1990s, scientific research on climate change has included multiple disciplines and has expanded. Research has expanded our understanding of causal relations, links with historic data and ability to model climate change numerically. Research during this period has been summarized in the Assessment Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change is a significant and lasting change in the statistical distribution of weather patterns over periods ranging from decades to millions of years. It may be a change in average weather conditions, or in the distribution of weather around the average conditions (such as more or fewer extreme weather events). Climate change is caused by factors that include oceanic processes (such as oceanic circulation), biotic processes (e.g., plants), variations in solar radiation received by Earth, plate tectonics and volcanic eruptions, and human-induced alterations of the natural world. The latter effect is currently causing global warming, and "climate change" is often used to describe human-specific impacts.

      This section needs citations included.

  27. Jul 2019
    1. zombie theory

      since 1991, less than two per cent of all peer-reviewed studies say climate change is caused by something other than human activities (that's burning fossil fuels and digging up forests, to you and me).

      source

  28. Jun 2019
  29. Feb 2019
    1. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft have all struck lucrative arrangements—collectively worth billions of dollars—to provide automation, cloud, and AI services to some of the world’s biggest oil companies, and they are actively pursuing more.

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/silicon-valley-courts-a-wary-oil-patch-1532424600

    1. “I don’t think most people have a systems view of the natural world,” he said. “But it’s all connected and when the invertebrates are declining the entire food web is going to suffer and degrade. It is a system-wide effect.”
  30. Dec 2018
  31. Nov 2018
    1. clean air and water

      Do these still qualify as public goods? I would argue that our use of air and water has started diminishing these goods' availability—and quality—for others.

  32. Oct 2018
    1. a comprehensive crash course on human psychology to deal with the massive changes we’re seeing; a guide to self-care for the most important decade in human history. We need to know how climate change will change us as social beings, how we can deal with grief, how to go about the process of imagining a new society. We will need to know not only how we can survive in this new world, but how we will live.
  33. Jul 2018
    1. It was found that the three new emerging districts (District 2, 9 and ThuDuc) are highly vulnerable to floods, but the local government still implements the plan for attracted investments in housing without an integrated flooding management. This is also in line with the development pattern of many coastal cities in Southeast Asia, as economic development can be seen as a driving factor.

      This is interesting!

  34. May 2018
    1. Idaho, however, this year joined several other states that have declined to adopt new science standards that emphasize the role human activities play in climate change.

      this is fucked up.

  35. Apr 2018
    1. Given the conclusions from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely to be due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, and furthermore that it is likely that there has been significant anthropogenic warming over the past 50 years averaged over each continent except Antarctica, we conclude that anthropogenic climate change is having a significant impact on physical and biological systems globally and in some continents.

      supports: climate change leads to global physical and biological change

  36. Mar 2018
  37. Feb 2018
    1. In addition, around 144 million people weredisplaced by disasters in between 2008 and 2014, and many of them were exacerbated byclimate change with increasing frequency and intensity.

      This is interesting.

  38. Jan 2018
    1. Climate science details the threats that climate change poses to the livelihoods and well-being of present and future human generations and ecosystems, while policy approaches increasingly recognize the growing social risks of climate-change-driven vulnerabilities. 8

      This is interesting!

    1. Instead, we envision a long, hard-fought victory in which the scientific evidence debate should occupy the foreground. We propose that not all sceptics are of the entrenched/obstinate kind, and that many sceptics sincerely share the values of transparency, critical freedom, and inclusivity associated with serious scientific enquiry.

      this is interesting!

  39. Dec 2017
    1. A study from Finland's Leppeenranta University of Technology and Berlin-based Energy Watch Group claims that the entire world could transition to 100% renewable electric power by 2050.

  40. Nov 2017
    1. We invite all scientists to endorse this global environmental article and engage with a new alliance concerned about global climate and environmental trends

  41. Oct 2017
    1. I take as given the evidence that human beings are irrevocably altering the conditions for life on Earth and that, despite certain unpredictabilities, we live at the cusp of a mass extinction. What is the place of digital humanities (DH) practice in the new social and geological era of the Anthropocene? What are the DH community’s most significant responsibilities, and to whom?

      While the thought of this is incredibly depressing, it does open up questions as to the place of DH. Personally, I think the DH community's most significant responsibilities are to record life on earth as we know it now, how we as humans are endangering it and suggesting ways to actively preserve it. I believe keeping a record or an archive of plants and animals that are in danger of becoming extinct (for example) is incredibly important for future generations to come and this is who DH must aim to speak to: future generations.

    2. ‘Truly it would seem as if “Man strews the earth with ruin.”4 But this conclusion is too flattering to human vanity. Man's most permanent memorial is a rubbish-heap, and even that is doomed to be obliterated’ (Sherlock, 1922, p. 343

      CO2 atmospheric concentration used as simple indicator for many years to track great acceleration / progression in Anthropocence, this now joined by long list of other indicators, escalating at an alarming rate, population, water use/ shortage, paper consumption, global warming, increase in number and ferocity of storms .......

    3. Ted Talk by Will Steffen . Journey through science measuring humanity effect on the planet. important for me, while i had heard and read about debate on climate change, Anthropocene is a new concept for me. Irrefutable change, cannot be ignored.

  42. Sep 2017
    1. The good news is that it is a challenge we can meet

      This seems optimistic based on climate research.

  43. Jul 2017
    1. 252 million years ago; it began when carbon warmed the planet by five degrees, accelerated when that warming triggered the release of methane in the Arctic, and ended with 97 percent of all life on Earth dead

      Why aren't we talking about this?

  44. May 2017
    1. Did the writer engage with anyone who disagrees? Did they call a senator whose legislation bugs them? Did they try to grasp what the president-elect was doing, or merely repeat one of his more outrageous statements? If it's a broadcast interview, was the guest presented with genuine opposing views and challenged to answer? Those who wrestle with opposing arguments do you a service and often improve their own arguments.

      This is a double-edged sword in traditional media - the need to get both sides of the argument. It is important for balanced and factual reporting, but it can also be problematic as it frames both sides as having equal importance in an issue. Think of the debate about climate change. In the name of journalistic fairness, a mainstream reporter may often feel obliged to get the opinion of a climate change denier to balance the story. This often gives the impression that the deniers are of equal weight on the issue. Could lead the general public to believe that climate change is a devisive issue since there are 2 sides, despite the fact that 99% of the science and research is weighted towards climate change. Should both sides be given equal weight in journalism? Could this actually help to create an environment of skepticism about facts? Making all facts seem debatable?

    1. Scientists think that the increased melting of permafrost in polar regions could lead to the revival of viruses that haven't been around for thousands of years.

      This is scary!

  45. Mar 2017
    1. What’s more, when COP21 negotiators were asked about how confident they were in their scientific understandings of temperature rise, they showed no more confidence than the MBA students they were tested against. While it’s one thing to have a group of over-confident (probably millennial) MBA students, it’s another to have international climate negotiators reporting an average confidence level of about 4 out of 7 in their own understandings of temperature rise. 

      For me, this is not surprising, but rather a beautiful example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. (Graph)

      They know the amount of uncertainty and lack of predictability of the severity. And they are equally sure of the trajectory of failure.

    1. Beaufort Sea Project

      The Beaufort Sea Project for Climate Change began as a research project in Canada in 2002. The project was started by Magdalena A.K. Muir and Geographic Information System (GIS) specialists with support from the Fisheries and Joint Management Committee and governmental organizations. The focus of the project from 2002 to 2007 was to study the effects of climate change on marine mammals and fish in the Beaufort Sea. In conjunction, the research studied the effects of using, managing, and allocating marine resources. After 2008, the research has focused on identifying species of marine wildlife that could be at risk in the future due to overfishing and climate change related effects. This research continues to study the effects of climate change on the health of marine species and management of marine resources. The management of these resources includes gaining species knowledge, setting limits on the number of marine mammals and fish that are allowed to be captured and killed per year, and enforcing legislature about managing marine resources. Specifically, researchers are studying the effects of climate change in marine mammal migrations patterns. The specific environmental effects are changes in the fresh water Mackenzie River inputs, sea and land ice, and water circulation. Researchers plan to use these changes to catalogue direct effects of climate change on migration. Sea and land ice changes will be detrimental to ice dependent animals. This research will provide information for scientists, researchers, organizations, charities, and government officials so that appropriate laws and regulations can be established (Muir n.d.).

      Source:

      Muir, Magdalena A.K. "Beaufort Sea Project for Climate Change." Arctic Institute of North America. Accessed March 05, 2017. http://arctic.ucalgary.ca/beaufort-sea-project-climate-change.

  46. Feb 2017
    1. This is one subject where it might be wise not to rely on the reflexive media narrative.

      Did they not ask for lists of scientists working on climate change during transition? Did they not wipe any mention of climate change from whitehouse.gov on a day one? Did they not put a gag order on science?

  47. Jan 2017
  48. Oct 2016
  49. Aug 2016
  50. Jan 2016
  51. Dec 2015
    1. IPCC: Solar & biomass produce 3.5 - 21 times more carbon emissions (eq.) per kilowatt-hour than nuclear & wind.

      Is this right? If so, that's disappointing for solar. But it shows wind as lower CO2 than nuclear. (And the chart doesn't show fossil fuels. Is solar favorable compared to them?)

    1. How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI

      Science is such a funny thing.

      Ruminant for a healtherier world, https://youtu.be/MwbdDqq7HMI

      Science is not simple, less than 1% of bacteria can be grown in a petri dish, https://goo.gl/Y0LY7O

      Freeman Dyson: A Global Warming Heretic, https://youtu.be/Pou3sGedeK4

    1. How to green the world's deserts and reverse climate change, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI

      Science is such a funny thing.

      Ruminant for a healtherier world, https://youtu.be/MwbdDqq7HMI

      Science is not simple, less than 1% of bacteria can be grown in a petri dish, https://goo.gl/Y0LY7O

      Freeman Dyson: A Global Warming Heretic, https://youtu.be/Pou3sGedeK4

  52. Aug 2015
    1. The right-wing base has a coherent position on climate change: It's a hoax, so we shouldn't do anything about it. The left-wing base has a coherent position: It's happening, so we should do something about it. The "centrist" position, shared by conservative Democrats and the few remaining moderate Republicans, is that it's happening but we shouldn't do anything about it. That's not centrist in any meaningful ideological sense; instead, like most areas of overlap between the parties, it is corporatist.

      The worst possible outcome.