Information

Climate Concerns

The "CLIMATE CONCERNS" group is dedicated to discussion regarding the topic of the ever present and serious issue of changes to our climate due to the introduction into the atmosphere of human induced effects which prove harmful to the environment and which eventually may prove destructive to our planet. 

Members: 51
Latest Activity: Jan 3

Reference/Research Sites

Discussion Forum

How Woody Guthrie can help us fight for science

Started by Joan Denoo Jan 3. 0 Replies

Oklahoma, the home of protest singer Woody Guthrie, provides an example of resistance in the 1930s class and culture wars between rural and urban values. If Woody could use his voice to speak up, so…Continue

Tags: method, Permaculture, soil, voices, farming

Framing Climate Destabilization

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Bertold Brautigan Dec 9, 2016. 22 Replies

The words we use and the images they evoke shape public comprehension of Catastrophic Climate Destabilization's immanence. Here are a few terms from the past few days. It's a tiny…Continue

Tags: communicating climate science, Climate Destabilization, framing

Jet Stream Mayhem begins Tues

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Dec 3, 2016. 3 Replies

Siberian air…Continue

Tags: jet stream waves

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Climate Concerns to add comments!

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on August 24, 2016 at 3:55pm

Climate inaction figures.

Play at Doing Nothing with Trump, Palin, and Other “Climate Inactio...

Kids tired of superheroes? Now there are supervillain climate inaction figures, powerful enough to destroy the planet.

Here's my favorite.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on August 12, 2016 at 5:03pm

ExxonMobil: carbon tax hypocrite

Their stable of owned legislators still oppose a carbon tax.

ExxonMobil’s Latest Campaign To Stymie Federal Climate Action

Recent press accounts report that ExxonMobil is now actively promoting a carbon tax. If true, that’s big news ...., after nearly 20 years of blocking action on climate change,...
... ExxonMobil has paid lip service to the idea of a carbon tax since 2009 but, all the while, has continued to fund federal lawmakers who resolutely oppose it.

The numbers are unambiguous: When it comes to a carbon tax, there’s no escaping the fact that ExxonMobil still funds legislators who don’t favor it and, by the same token, doesn’t support many who do.

image source

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on July 21, 2016 at 1:44pm

Wildfires in Russia have been widespread for weeks, mostly between Yamal and Lake Baikal. Note that fires even burn on the Arctic Ocean shores.

You can see three near Arctic Ocean beaches in this satellite photo.

image source

new complex of fires has also begun in the Russian far East.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on July 21, 2016 at 1:35pm

The tree die-offs are horrific, and no doubt a stage of transition to drier vegetation, possibly scrub instead of forest. But I read that dead trees aren't a greater fire hazard than live ones, because of the lack of oil bearing needles on branches.

Yeah, Daniel, people were out driving long distances as if carbon footprints didn't exist.

image source

Comment by Joan Denoo on July 5, 2016 at 10:47pm

26 million trees have died in the Sierra since October, raising fir...

"A lethal combination of drought, heat and voracious bark beetles has killed 26 million trees in the Sierra Nevada over the last eight months -- an alarming finding for a state already raging with wildfires fueled by desiccated landscapes."

“Tree die-offs of this magnitude are unprecedented and increase the risk of catastrophic wildfires that puts property and lives at risk,”

~  Tom Vilsack , Agriculture Secretary

Clear evidence that climate changes take place in that area; the question is, what caused it and can it be stopped? 

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-drought-dead-trees-2016...

Comment by Daniel W on June 27, 2016 at 2:08pm

Low gas prices mean arecord breaking July 4th.

Apres nous le deluge.

Comment by Joan Denoo on June 22, 2016 at 2:00am

Ultimately, an individual is responsible for his or her decisions. 

So, a whole line up of tobacco executives testifying under oath to Congress that tobacco is not addictive and does no cause cancer means that anyone can lie under oath and get away with it?

Do the tobacco people share any part of the responsibility for the health and welfare of the people? Sounds a little like a young girl saying, "No! No! I don't want to get pregnant" and the young man saying, "Trust me!" Is there not joint responsibility here? 

Comment by Joan Denoo on June 22, 2016 at 1:51am

I agree that 99.999 % of the scientists may agree or disagree on a topic; vote does not determine the truth. The evidence is the deciding factor. 

Comment by Čenek Sekavec on June 22, 2016 at 1:35am

I have read Merchants of Doubt.  May I give a book recommendation in return?

By way of general response, I posit that personal responsibility can't be abrogated. 

Those tobacco lobbies weren't any more responsible than the scientific consensus for the decision of smokers.  The premise of the book is that it is appropriate to think that it is right and even possible to transfer ownership of a decision. Demonstrably false premise.

Things get strange regarding climate talks. The debate is over - the anthropogenic camp won. It's over. Nearly all the money, influence, power, and rectitude are quite firmly held by 'the consensus.'  But in many ways talking about it is still like this.  Anyone against the consensus is easily destroyed by accusations of basis.

But one can't take the word of the consensus. Conclusions are inseparably a property of the individual. Else it would be quite rational to say, "I believe because my pastor said so."

Comment by Joan Denoo on June 22, 2016 at 1:25am

Well, well, well, we are at it again. Who is correct? I don't know. Maybe I am wrong about climate change; maybe not. Maybe Dr. Lindzen correctly analyzes the situation. 

I certainly am not willing to shoot anyone in defense of my position; neither am I able to ignore the various changes taking place. The question is not if a change is happening in climate, but climate is changing, and why? 

Glaciers melt, sea currents change, El Nino and El Nina bring about changes, temperatures rise every place I look, sink holes open where none opened in human history. Air becomes polluted; we make some changes and the skies clear. The same for lakes and rivers. Forests dry out and burn; new species come in behind them. Coastal waters erode the land. Iceland rises without the weight of glaciers; New Orleans has a rash of sinkholes. 

Are places sinking because of pumps pulling too much oil or gas or water out of the ground or is the ground sinking for other reasons worldwide? 

Just for the sake of argument, let's say I am wrong about the causes of climate change, so what? Climate changes. There are things I can do to reduce the impact on me. I am powerless to stop the changes. We, as a society, were able to improve air pollution. Can we, as a society, make shifts in the climate?  

 

Members (51)

 
 
 

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service