http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/02/house-science-committee-takes-up-climate-change-again/
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
That Americans elected these climate change deniers and conspiracy theorists who are now, inexplicably, in charge of...
That Americans elected these climate change deniers and conspiracy theorists who are now, inexplicably, in charge of the laws limiting our response to climate change makes me question the wisdom of letting every "adult" vote. Or, to be more precise, I am increasingly unnerved by the prospect of allowing a willfully ignorant electorate to determine whether or not we work towards averting mitigating the world's worst man-made catastrophe.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/02/house-science-committee-takes-up-climate-change-again/
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/02/house-science-committee-takes-up-climate-change-again/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
LEGO Americana Roadshow: Building Across America I just checked out this traveling exhibition from LEGO and was quite impressed. The scale ... -
Merry Christmas, everyone!
-
When we let politics trump science, people are needlessly put in harm's way. http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/self-censoring-fears...
Democracy does require high standards of public education to work.
ReplyDeleteCraig Froehle -- if these politicians really believed what they preach is one thing. But when politicians or a political party fight or deny the obvious simply for their own political gain....that is the height of stupidity and the depth of a coward...and lordy...we have enough of them
ReplyDeleteSakari Maaranen it helps, but no, it's not required. What is required is for the members of the Parliament not to be bought and paid for by monied interests. The 1% are literally killing you. Your system needs the money removed so very badly
ReplyDeleteYou need public education to have informed people who know how to vote to achieve that Peter Billing. Education is also required for there to be enough competent people to fill the political ranks to make laws that allow fighting the corruption among other challenges.
ReplyDeleteSakari Maaranen
ReplyDeleteThe number #1 requirement of an voting people is less gullibility and more research. That and getting their lazy butts off their couches and voting intelligently. For many today...voting is simply a popularity contest
Agreed Kenneth Schmandt. That's what education does to you.
ReplyDeleteSakari Maaranen
ReplyDeleteStill...the worst voters I dislike are those who vote straight party without the slightest understanding of what their party is pushing in polics
I'd be more concerned about the members of Congress representing their financial donors, rather than their constituents.
ReplyDeleteJenny Meyer That is exactly what these politicians are doing. When coal and oil industries bankroll your campaign, you tend to want to keep them happy.
ReplyDeleteSakari Maaranen I'm not exactly disagreeing with you. All those things are true. I'm just conscious of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It worked fine* for the first couple of hundred years until the money took over.
ReplyDelete(A qualified 'fine' because, you know, first past the post' sucks and elections being run by party political elected officials is really dumb. But you got to the moon, so something was working.)
The House Science Committee should be known as the House "Science" Committee, with quotes.
ReplyDeletePart of the problem is that the electorate has no real idea of who's on what committee -- or, at least, it doesn't play much if any role in their voting.
ReplyDeleteHey, don't blame these guys! If the Republicans on the committee give any support to climate change data being correct, let alone that climate change is man-made, then they will be out of GOP on their ear next election. The denialist dogma goes deep, even if it is only to keep the fundies' vote on board, along with the oil, coal and Koch brothers funding for them. And who said religion was bad for the world? Rampart capitalism and lobbying is, too.
ReplyDeleteLarissa lara Quote natural disasters are increasingly
ReplyDeleteWould you like to provide some facts to back that up please.
Mike Barton
ReplyDeletehttp://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing-climate/extreme-weather
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing-climate/changes-storms
Craig Froehle
ReplyDeleteSorry but even the IPCC admits there is no evidence for more extreme weather and having looked at that first site and seen errors I lost interest besides it being a shitty site because they have tried to dazzle rather than stick to facts.
Nothing like ignoring evidence because you don't like the presentation...
ReplyDeleteJason Meyer
ReplyDeleteIf what you think pleases you good luck.
I'm fairly certain it doesn't please me which is why we would like to do something about it. I just think it's odd that you ask for facts, facts are then provided and you dismiss them because they aren't displayed in a manner that were pleasing to you. Was it the massive amount of references and sources at the end?
ReplyDeleteMike Barton You ask for "facts" and then, when they're provided, you dismiss them without offering the same quality sources? You're not interested in discussion, you're just a troll. Begone.
ReplyDeleteMike Barton's dismissive reaction reveals a very dangerous truth. Dealing with climate change in the US is now a marketing issue - it ceased being a science issue 20+ years ago. The rugged and independent [ ;-) ] outlook of many Americans means that they don't like being told what they have to do in restricting OR changing their lifestyle. This is made MUCH worse by all the negative messages from the Republicans, who dislike/discard science largely because it conflicts with the views of their Evangelical buddies because science minimises the need for their god in some areas. It also conflicts with their coal, oil, Koch buddies who want to sell you more of this stuff. The last group also put out lots of pseudo-science arguing the truth of climate change through 'think tanks' (Homeland Institute etc).
ReplyDeleteIt is unsurprising that people who are not normally scientifically inclined will react negatively to politicians from the 'other side' saying there are bad times ahead and urgent change is needed.
It is time that all Americans grew up and understood that this world is not just theirs to pollute as they see fit. It is their children's children and every other of the 7 billion people's world, too. Even more, it is time that politicians manned up and acknowledge publicly that there are more important things in the world than playing to the next election with cotton wool wrapping and good news. Time for a statesman to step forward, not some party-serving science denier..
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN SERIES ON EXTREME WEATHER, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND THE RISKS WE FACE
ReplyDeleteScientific American published a three-part series authored by award-winning science journalist John Carey and commissioned by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change that reports on the link between extreme weather and climate change. Editorial control was held by the author and Scientific American.
The series details the impacts of extreme weather events, the science behind extreme weather and global warming, and the risks and how to respond to the increase in extreme weather. Through enterprising reporting, this series provides an in-depth and accessible account of extreme weather affecting communities across America, why it’s happening, and what can be done about it.
Part One - Storm Warnings: Extreme Weather Is a Product of Climate Change
More violent and frequent storms, once merely a prediction of climate models, are now a matter of observation.
In North Dakota the waters kept rising. Swollen by more than a month of record rains in Saskatchewan, the Souris River topped its all time record high, set back in 1881. The floodwaters poured into Minot, North Dakota's fourth-largest city, and spread across thousands of acres of farms and forests. More than 12,000 people were forced to evacuate. Many lost their homes to the floodwaters.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=extreme-weather-caused-by-climate-change
Part Two - Global Warming and the Science of Extreme Weather
How rising temperatures change weather and produce fiercer, more frequent storms.
Extreme floods, prolonged droughts, searing heat waves, massive rainstorms and the like don't just seem like they've become the new normal in the last few years—they have become more common, according to data collected by reinsurance company Munich Re. But has this increase resulted from human-caused climate change or just from natural climatic variations? After all, recorded floods and droughts go back to the earliest days of mankind, before coal, oil and natural gas made the modern industrial world possible.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=global-warming-and-the-science-of-extreme-weather
Part Three - Our Extreme Future: Predicting and Coping with a Changing Climate
Adapting to extreme weather calls for a combination of restoring wetland and building drains and sewers that can handle the water. But leaders and the public are slow to catch on.
Extreme weather events have become both more common and more intense. And increasingly, scientists have been able to pin at least part of the blame on humankind's alteration of the climate. What's more, the growing success of this nascent science of climate attribution (finding the telltale fingerprints of climate change in extreme events) means that researchers have more confidence in their climate models—which predict that the future will be even more extreme.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=extreme-future-predicting-coping-with-the-effects-of-a-changing-climate
There is no man made climate change.
ReplyDeleteJanette Miller You vote Republican and go to an evangelical church, too?
ReplyDelete拜託來台灣的修士應該都成我們蓋的教會和教堂的牧師和神父吧
ReplyDelete我仍然相信天主耶和華阿
ReplyDelete武學只是來自大乘佛法金剛亁阿不念經
ReplyDelete錢(亁)同音
ReplyDeleteJanette Miller Now if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you find the opinion of key industry representatives more convincing:
ReplyDeleteBP, the largest oil company in the UK and one of the largest in the world, has this opinion:
"There is an increasing consensus that climate change is linked to the consumption of carbon based fuels and that action is required now to avoid further increases in carbon emissions as the global demand for energy increases."
http://www.bp.com/subsection.do?categoryId=9012335&contentId=7025781
Shell Oil (yes, as in oil, the fossil fuel) says:
"Shell shares the widespread concern that the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities is leading to changes in the global climate."
http://www.shell.com/static/au-en/downloads/corporate/annual_review_2003.pdf
Eighteen CEOs of Canada’s largest corporations had this to say in an open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada:
"Our organizations accept that a strong response is required to the strengthening evidence in the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We accept the IPCC consensus that climate change raises the risk of severe consequences for human health and security and the environment. We note that Canada is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change."
http://www.climateforchange.ca/statement/index_e.asp
Have the environazis seized the reigns of industrial power, in addition to infiltrating the U.N., the science academies of every developed nation, and the top research institutes of North America? That just doesn’t seem very likely!
Cy Husain Very interesting bunch of references, thanks.
ReplyDeleteRevealing that Shell, BP and many others who were the 'bad guys' are now saying climate change is real. Why do so many Americans, one of the two main political parties and the evangelical churches all claim it is made up, a scam, a conspiracy? What is their disconnect from reality, what exactly do they think is going to happen? That their god is going to rescue the world?
This just goes to show, again, why so much of the rest of the world now regards the US as a big pantomime, but with a lot of money.
Cy Husain,
ReplyDeleteI do not find a way to reply to you but this is my reply to you. In my opinion, There is NO man made Climate Change. It is a scam the ones that are pushing the BS are doing it for Money and power, I will give you no other response as I am not the Idiot whisperer.. Luck.
.
Janette Miller And believe FOX News?
ReplyDeleteNick James, I do not know what you mean.
ReplyDeleteOh, dear...
ReplyDeleteJanette Miller I was being horrible to you.
ReplyDeleteThe science of climate change is very well established and demonstrated to be correct, by the same sorts of people that gave us iPhones, GPS, colour TV, drugs for high blood pressure, antibiotics and some cancers. Sure, there are bits that don't yet fit in the climate model and things that are not yet understood. But, in general, the science is really simple and the effects of that simple science are very evident.
Most of the world is in agreement that climate change is real. Europe, for instance, believes it is a done deal - the only question is when some countries will get their population to understand what is going on and do something about it.
This is mainly a US problem. The land of the free, home of the brave. Independent people that dislike outside direction and change being forced on them.
The major claims against climate change in US are along the lines 'I don't believe it' or 'it is a tax scam' or 'it is a scientists wanting plush grants scam'. All these are totally lacking in any scientific argument, just 'I don't want it to be true'.
A lot of this is pushed by the GOP. They do not like science, partly because scientists are not going to vote for them (left wing, not much motivated by money etc) and partly because they are very heavily involved with evangelical religion. This was a decision GOP made in Reagan's era - before that, they were very pro-science. Evangelicals hate science because it undermines many of their teachings about how the world works. Which, if you know anything about science, is an infantile world view. Science does not try to undermine religion, hence many others are ok with it e.g. Catholics.
A lot more pushing is from people that have a $$$ vested interest in climate change not being real, or in being able to delay action against it. Primarily oil, coal and a bit of gas industries. Several states have a lot of these, they deny it strongly. A LOT of money to put into denying it.
FOX, the TV channel of anger and strident bias, takes the right wing view that climate change is a scam, even though they can't explain away any of the science as they just don't look at it, let alone understand it.
Ok. Long rant. Just take one thing away. Science believes climate change is real. Nature does not care what we believe - it will go on and do it anyway. Our children and their children will have to deal with the mess left by all of us burning too much.
Janette Miller WHAT? You are NOT backing your claims with ant scientific evidence! Now if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you find the opinion of key industry representatives more convincing:
ReplyDeleteBP, the largest oil company in the UK and one of the largest in the world, has this opinion:
"There is an increasing consensus that climate change is linked to the consumption of carbon based fuels and that action is required now to avoid further increases in carbon emissions as the global demand for energy increases."
http://www.bp.com/subsection.do?categoryId=9012335&contentId=7025781
Shell Oil (yes, as in oil, the fossil fuel) says:
"Shell shares the widespread concern that the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities is leading to changes in the global climate."
http://www.shell.com/static/au-en/downloads/corporate/annual_review_2003.pdf
Eighteen CEOs of Canada’s largest corporations had this to say in an open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada:
"Our organizations accept that a strong response is required to the strengthening evidence in the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We accept the IPCC consensus that climate change raises the risk of severe consequences for human health and security and the environment. We note that Canada is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change."
http://www.climateforchange.ca/statement/index_e.asp
Have the environazis seized the reigns of industrial power, in addition to infiltrating the U.N., the science academies of every developed nation, and the top research institutes of North America? That just doesn’t seem very likely!
Dkjakhsnkjhkktkdjgkcjg9649otu
ReplyDeleteAkjjrhfjjhsjykfkykskjrjjjfgkgfjujdhghdhdfjyskyrjjsjdjhsjehjrhskdfhjrhjhejhsrhndmgdnjdjsjykd jsntjsjtsjhehhdhhrjtjdjsjfjshhsjbsbhfnsjhhjdjyndydysjydkyksjrnstndjtjfjfnajyjajyktyjajtjsjyjtjshgjsjtjsjtjsjdbjgkjfgjsjg
ReplyDeleteZkgkfngjys
Hdyhejjtbasd
ReplyDeleteDjrjjtdjyfmslfkskdjdjsjj
Ehshthabahyhyayajjyeuejyrjyjryrhhrbyjdhhejhdjhsitbdhdhhfhfhshsdjhjfhdbbdgdhhshbshdjyjdhfbgffhfbdbgdbbdbhdbhshhhfhrhhyjsjtkftjkrktkdyjdjjrjjjjffgjrjrjgjjfjyjdjfjrjgjefshhvthgrhdfyusghdydusgdrtudghdf6gdgffyujyjoiujjguiuguh
ReplyDeleteGgggthhhj
Hbxghfzjtdytt hzhdbffbnjdjjzhfFfngkchxkfk dkgjxjf
ReplyDeleteSfsdrsff
Doris ham
These same Americans along with the douchebags in Europe destroyed communism and left us with a world queued up at malls.
ReplyDeleteTraider A Actually, it was the previous generation of douchbags. The people who ran the place before they realised it was easier to brown nose to fundies and creationists to get votes than to do hard things like science and solve real problems like climate change. All you have now is multi-millionaires chasing the next payback and trying to put US back to 1250 AD.
ReplyDeleteNick James
ReplyDeleteThe populace in the West now and in the past still see themselves as being the fount of freedom and wisdom and will continue to believe so even as the fringes of their world turn dustbowl brown as this climate mess takes a hold.I should know. I am a Westerner for my sins and have observed smug self serving governments past and today embark on policies that simply keep fast tracking unsustainable economics even as people continue voting them in (whilst obsessing over recycling their bottles and cardboard). Its a fcukkin joke.
Traider A I had not realised you were real:-)
ReplyDeleteTotally right. Going down the chute, but with a high voter approval rating. Delusional. The real problem is how you tell people the world is going to the wall while blaming everything on the last administration and telling everybody its going to get better, riches all round, if you just .
Reality is it is a huge long term problem and its going to get worse, no matter who is in charge. Its just how much worse and can we do anything for 50 years time.
Nick James
ReplyDeleteWhen we abandoned the alternative (closed modernity or communism) we basically consigned ourselves to global suicide. Infinite growth will expand along with the rise in toxic emissions, breaches of crucial thresholds and this will gather pace even as our leaders press for the expansion of the free market further still. This is the drug addict on his last round of fixes.
I will like
ReplyDelete