Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Five Facts That Put America to Shame
- Colonized by Corporations
- Accidentally Released - and Incredibly Embarrassing - Documents Show How Goldman et al Engaged in 'Naked Short Selling'
- Preying on Poverty: How Government and Corporations Use the Poor as Piggy Banks
- Updated: Under Pressure, TED Releases 'Income Inequality' Talk
Popular content
Today's Top News
Climate Change: Deniers Jump on NASA Gaff, While Greenland on Verge of Meltdown
TORONTO - Scientists warn that climate change tipping points are imminent, and will lead to potentially catastrophic events like a seven-metre sea level rise. Meanwhile, conservatives in the North American media are focusing on a NASA admission of a climate calculation error.
First the error.
U.S. and Canadian mainstream media and Internet news sites devoted tens of thousands of words over the past week to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies admission that it made a calculation error ranking 1998 as the warmest year on record in the United States when it should have been 1934.
While the difference is only a few hundredths of a degree, the climate change deniers variously cite this as evidence of NASA (U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration) incompetence and cover-up, and more proof that global warming is a hoax.
The neo-conservative U.S. network Fox News reported Aug. 9 that "the discovery of an embarrassing temperature error rained on their (the 'alarmists') parade." Canada's National Post on Monday said the reasons given for climate change "hysteria" were "no longer true".
The Washington Post and the Toronto Star both noted the reaction of conservatives in the media and in the blogosphere, including outspoken radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, who said: "We have proof of man-made global warming. The man-made global warming is inside NASA. The man-made global warming is in the scientific community with false data."
Forgotten in all this is that U.S. temperatures are only a small part of the global mean average temperatures, which remain unchanged even with NASA's re-calculation. Nine of the 10 hottest years globally have occurred in the last decade, although that is not the case in the United States, where there were several very warm years in the 1930s.
Now the warning: The complete collapse of the massive Greenland Ice Sheet -- which has a mean height of about two kilometres -- now appears inevitable, and could raise sea levels seven metres.
"It's a sobering message, I think," says Tim Lenton, of the School of Environmental Sciences at Britain's University of East Anglia.
Lenton's research group surveyed climate and glacial experts around the world and the consensus is that the recent evidence shows that rising temperatures will soon reach the Greenland Ice Sheet's "tipping point", where it will break up within 300 years, raising sea levels by seven metres and flooding millions out their homes long before the year 2300.
Recent calculations show the Greenland collapse could be triggered by temperature rise of just 1 degree Celsius warmer than today. This is an example of what scientists call a "non-linear response", in which a small change can make a big difference, more commonly described as "tipping points".
And this point is coming much sooner than it looks. Due to a time lag in the atmospheric warming response, even if there were no more greenhouse gas emissions from this day forward, temperatures would still rise another 0.6 degrees Celsius.
"I don't want to say the Greenland meltdown is inevitable, but it will be very difficult to avoid," Lenton told IPS.
James Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, believes that without drastic international efforts, a sea level rise of up to five metres is possible before the end of this century.
"In my opinion, if the world warms by 2 to 3 degrees Celsius, such massive sea level rise is inevitable, and a substantial fraction of the rise would occur within a century," Hansen wrote in the Jul. 25 issue of New Scientist magazine.
He notes that the last time the Earth was that much warmer was around three million years ago: "It was a dramatically different planet then, with no Arctic sea ice in the warm seasons and sea level about 25 metres higher, give or take 10 metres."
This Northern Hemisphere summer, the amount of sea ice in the Arctic is 30 percent lower than normal, and is expected to be the lowest ever recorded, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) reported last week. It may be that the Arctic sea ice has already passed its tipping point, in which warming temperatures and a "positive ice-albedo feedback" (ice reflectivity) will inevitably result in less and less ice until the Arctic is ice-free in the summer, says Lenton.
While sea ice does not result in sea level rise, it adds more fresh, cold water to the North Atlantic which, along with massive amounts of Greenland Ice Sheet meltwater, has the potential to slow or reverse the Atlantic Ocean thermohaline circulation (THC).
The THC, sometimes called the ocean conveyor belt, drives the deep currents in the oceans around the world. In the Atlantic Ocean, warm waters from the Gulf of Mexico are transported north-east to help moderate temperatures in the British Isles, Ireland and Northern Europe.
The THC is another potential climate tipping point where a rapid shift could occur. If the Atlantic THC reversed, not only would Northern Europe cool, the southern oceans around Antarctica would warm, according to Lenton's analysis soon to be published.
"It's a case of 'domino dynamics'. These are interrelated systems where a change in one affects the others," he said.
A warmer Southern Ocean will rapidly accelerate the current slow rate of melting of the vast West Antarctic ice sheet. A complete collapse of that ice sheet would raise sea levels an additional four to six metres, but that point is unlikely to be reached for another 300 years.
Global temperature rise between 3 to 6 C degrees will not only melt a lot of ice, it will greatly strengthen the El Niño Southern Oscillation, research shows. Among its impacts will be severe droughts in South-east Asia, the Amazon and elsewhere. El Niño is a cyclical climate phenomenon arising from a warm Pacific Ocean surface current travelling from west to east.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates a temperature rise this century of at least 1.4 C to as much as 6.4 C degrees in its 2007 assessment report.
"The Indian summer monsoon system could also be in for a rocky ride this century," says Lenton. The Indian monsoon system appears to be sensitive to changes in conditions, switching on and off unpredictably with climate change and affecting millions of people.
Of all these potential events, the melting of Greenland Ice Sheet is both the first and most likely tipping point we will reach. Preparations for coping and adapting to the resulting sea level rise would have to begin now. In addition, strict mitigation efforts are also needed to reduce both the speed and extent of sea level rise and to avoid crossing other potential tipping points, he said.
The public and policy-makers need to be aware of this non-linearity -- that climate change impacts will not be gradual. "Change can come quickly and with a huge escalation in damages and costs," Lenton warns.
Copyright © 2007 IPS-Inter Press Service

32 Comments so far
Show AllRemember, if anyone 'says' that it will happen sooner we would be on the verge of an economic collapse. So, just let it happen. May we all have been born in interesting times, as the blessing/curse goes. The predictions are always wrong and they get closer and closer to us. The truth is still deniable to those who don't look for themselves, my yard tells me so. I will be sad when the land gives way under the feet of my friends and the sea opens up to take away the land at my door but to complain about change is not what I do. I build the world after they are gone and forever change, will only do us good. The changing world is upon us and we must make way, for the weak will depend on the strong and noble to survive. Do your part and we will watch the disbelievers and mis believers crumble in their own ignorance from their fear. Truth is always the same in the end. We will see.
I'm going to learn boat building. It might be handy! I might have beach front property.
Oops, I came too soon, it is friggin cold here.
i believe this article except for one thing. 300 years is too long. scientists are continually saying that new evidence indicates that these phenomena are occurring faster that previously thought.
also, melting ice must be subject to a geometric increase in effect that is unmeasurable but appears to be happening rapidly.
1 degree celsius? whatever is happening cannot include a atypical warming trend within the greater slower trend? hardly.
the oldest creatures on earth are sea creatures. guess why!
the ensuing chaos will begin in short order. look how long it took the 21st centuury to revert to the Dark Ages in New Orleans, about 5 minutes!
Onceler's of the world need to listen. You are destroying the environment with the greenhouse gasses and the pollution you keep dumping into the waterways. You keep sitting back and counting your money while sending your little armies of deniers out to sway the public opinion. It won't be long until we're waist deep in rising seawater and you'll probably say then "It would have happened anyway."
Does ANYTHING at all matter to you except money?
Climate Deniers = Climate Dodos
"The Dodo (Raphus cucullatus) was a flightless bird that lived on the islands of Mauritius. Related to pigeons and doves, it stood about a meter tall (three feet), lived on fruit and nested on the ground.
"The dodo has been extinct since the mid-to-late 17th century. It is commonly used as the archetype of an extinct species because its extinction occurred during recorded human history, and was directly attributable to human activity. The phrase "as dead as a dodo" means undoubtedly and unquestionably dead." -- Wikepedia
tellurider is correct. We don't understand the complex interactions of systems on our planet and the positive feedback loops that are continually being triggered by the changes that are occurring. All of our predictions are based on what has already happened and we are continually being surprised by new and unexpected changes. If we were smart, which we aren't, we would operate on a worst case scenario and hope for the best.
Much more serious action needs to be taken against the "deniers". Then the sane people can try and do some meaningful things to slow the warming and ensuing destruction.
Last night, that NBC numbnuts reported on the "raging" debate surrounding whether global climate change was "real" or not. More than equal time to the "deniers," all of whom worked for some org financed by - guess who - big energy. Same old crap, all a myth, natural cycle, probably happening but to a minuscule degree, and, of course:
It's all a hoax by... who?... and, why, again? Oh, right, GE owns NBC. Still bringing good things to life... like lies and phony journalism.
Excellent points TELLURIDER.
Not long ago, we read where the lower ground level of gigantic glaciers are being lubricated by melting water and that makes the massive sheets of ice slide towards the ocean nuch faster than previously predicted.
The thousands of ice core samples taken in the Arctic and Anarctica, prove beyond any doubt that carbon emissions since the beginning of the industrial age have risen dramatically. How can anyone truthfully argue, that use of fossil fuels in not the cause of the steady rise of Earth's temperature? How can anyone? They do it, and as you stated Frank, they own the news.
I third tellurider's skepticism: it's going to happen a lot sooner than over 300 years. I know some of the NSIDC folks. If truth got out how swift the actual consequences are going to occur, you can bet your sweet babushka that all hell would break lose. It would be beyond terrible. I think that's why these guys are timid, and somewhat relieved that the neo-cons' collective delusion actually helps keep social order. If they could post the truth to their own website, they would probably say "enjoy each and every moment/day that you can".
Our so-called government adopted the worst-case scenario throughout the Cold War, when it came to out-producing the Soviet Union in nuclear weapons.
Today they pursue the worst-case scenario in the "Global War on Terror" when it comes to locking people up and spying on U.S. citizens.
Why won't they adopt the worst-case scenario in responding to Global Warming?
Because there's no way to make a profit from it.
Actually, there are a thousand ways to make a profit from it... for everyone but the fossil fuel industries.
We need to take our government back from the oil companies... now!
Global warming will produce great opportunities for the beast capital to put the people to work in climate adaptation enterprises with "windfall profits" assured.
The progressive task is to educate the people to understand that no profit is to be made from global warming, and that current profiteers are to carry the future costs.
The fundamental progressive approach works very well against global warming profiteering, as it works very well against all capitalist crimes. The approach is for individuals to boycott/strike against capital concentrations generally, in both the economic and civic arenas, with the goal of achieving permanent public authority over the beast capital.
Due to our short lifespans (and attention spans), we humans tend to think linearly. Nature, however, operates exponentially! Scientists know this and try to take it into account in their predictions. But, even they are human and tend to underestimate the growth rate of natural processes, such as population expansion and, yes, global warming.
I read that core samples revealed that ice ages did not slowly evolve, but that they flipped rapidly - a spring that never really became summer, and then a winter that never ended. That's what Thom Hartmann predicted if the great ocean current stops - and I read that it has been staggering lately.
Could someone correct me if I'm wrong here but Global Warming leads to more extreme weather events, including lots more extremely cold days (NB all the children freezing to death in Peru this year, the cows freezing to death in America etc) .... would this not bring the annual temperature down, thus obscuring the fact that the heat we're reaching is even worse than the average might suggest?
At the end of 2005 James Hansen said we had 10 years to the tipping point .... everyone continues to quote this .... why is no one saying it's less than 8 1/2 years and that, in fact, many of the tipping points have already been reached.
Scientists thought that it would be over 100 years before the Antarctic shelves would break up or melt, then, in 2002 the Larssen B iceshelf broke up in 37 days .... no one knew this could happen until 5 years ago .... what else don't we know?
On a positive note, check out what's happening in Sao Paulo where outdoor advertising has been banned .... www.stoplaughing.com.au/wordpress
tipping point
" even if there were no more greenhouse gas emissions from this day forward, temperatures would still rise another 0.6 degrees Celsius."
So we will coast to within 0.4 degrees Celcius of the very benign effect of a rise in sea lever of 20 some feet even if no more greenhouse gasses were released starting tomorrow. And we all know we will be releasing greenhouse gasses tomorrow.
You may wonder why I call the catastrophe of a rise in sea level that will make millions homeless a very benign effect. It is a very benign effect in comparison to the other effects of global warming, such as the inability to grow crops, flaming balls of methane streaking through the sky, and in the end Earth being the true twin of the planet Venus. The tipping point for being a planet like Venus is is very, very close to the rise in sea level tipping point. Of course none of this bothers the neocons. They have the Rapture.
A good discussion of this issue is at
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all-that/
Notice that this 'correction' is very small and that on a global scale, 1998 is still the warmest year. The US corporate media treatment of this issue reveals that they are simply working as public relations spokespeople for the entrenched fossil fuel interests, nothing less or more.
After six years of stonewalling & deception to impede global warming mitigation, The right wing now finds an insignificant error on which to capitalize The dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data them to conceal and derail corrective measures for this threat and other vital environmental reforms has always been apparent--and all indicators still show that their motives have not changed.
Contrary to their assertions, measures to reduce greenhouse gases could only improve our economy by lessening our trade deficits, and improving our security by reducing our dependance on foreign oil. We could also regain some of our lost world respect that has resulted from our opposition Kyoto while arrogantly contributing disproportionally to carbon pollution.
Evidence linking carbon pollution to warming has been as close to certain as science can be for many years. Its causes, consequences, and mitigation requirements have been documented by many dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
Often overlooked is the fact that the same measures needed to mitigate global warming would be necessary even if it were not an issue. Conservation, alternative energy development, anti- pollution refinements, etc are essential for other vital environmental reforms such as air and water quality, reductions in toxic waste generation, land preservation, etc.
The environmental and social damage from our indifference to carbon pollution and related environmental measures can only worsen if we allow this reckless and unlearned president to continue this war on the environment.
If it's any consolation, most of us will probably die from some combination of warfare, the collapse of civilization, starvation, disease and pollution, long before global warming finishes off any stragglers.
For anyone who thinks we are going to solve the problem of global warming and over population, you need to catch up on research about how the human brain works and how we evolved.
Evolution equipped us to recognize sudden threats that are in close proximity. A loud noise, sudden movement, a shadow at the cave door. However, we are absolutely lousy at recognizing long-term threats. We have no built-in defense mechanism for recognizing or dealing with long-term risk. Our evolution didn't require it, and we won't evolve it any time soon. And that is precisely what's going to nail us.
Did someone say, enjoy what time you have left? Good advise.
Slowing, much less stopping global climate change, encounters inertia. Inertia is what kills us in a car accident. The driver slammed on the brakes just before impact but whether there is a smash up depends on the built up inertia of the speeding car and ... well you know what happens when the driver was going too fast and was too slow in hitting the brakes.
We want to slow the speeding car of global warming but we want to do it ... without actually having to hit the brakes.
First, we delayed accumulating the proof after the scientists like Hansen gave warning. Bush needed another five years for that. Then we found our data gathering systems were inadequate predictors and we see that each year the rate of warming is faster than we predict.
Then we dispute the significance of the data. Some still manage to insist there isn't any (all you have to do is not read the data and then as far as you're concerned, there "There isn't any proof" that you know of).
All I can say is... if the blind are leading the blind ... they shouldn't be driving the car!
Boy I hope this global warming doesn't affect reporting on Paris Hilton, American Idol, Harry Potter, or Hillary's cleavage.
There is only so much disaster I can take!
An interesting link for those people who have blind faith in the results of climate models and are ready to build an ark or pack up to the nearest mountain:
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9645336
The wealthy and powerful can afford to have climate change even, welcome it. The problem is the size of the human footprint on planet earth. Rapid "natural" reduction of the human footprint will resolve the problem, and a little help along the way (even by denying the problem exists) will mean more resources for those who can afford to survive, and will make damned sure they do.
The wealthy and powerful have already bought their hideaways and retreats around the world, they have the means and resources to survive climate change and they will hardly blink an eye when large amounts of humanity disappear as climate change catastrophes proliferate. Take a hard look at the morality of these individuals and tell me you really don't think this sort of scenario will take place, or even is taking place (Tsunamis and hurricane disasters as in Asia and New Orleans around the world and the events of their aftermath paint the picture). Sudden, massive catastrophic climate change doesn't bother the wealthy and powerful in the least, they know it will resolve the problem they created and perpetuated and with massive population die-off the problem of human impact on our planet disappears and the earth can and will naturally readjust, free of the burden of that part of the species that is not sufficiently evolved to be more than cattle. It's all driven by a very Darwinian philosophy which can be stated simply as "survival of the richest" as these are the "most 'fit' to survive...obviously."
Take a hard look at what's going on, and project it: start thinking about WHO is going to survive and HOW.
Also, consider how and why the powerful should obfuscate, confuse, mislead and delay. What are the benefits to be gained by doing so?
The human race has achieved some pretty remarkable things, but undoing or managing this Planetary Mismanagement Situation we have created by permitting the free reign of the ancient consumerism policies of rape, plunder and pillage is not going to happen unless the human impact of that footprint is rapidly reduced. At this time no solutions are being bought into and considered in public media unless they perpetuate the current infrastructure that created the problem in the first place (Ethanol is such a "solution"). We need true solutions that do not simply create a new problem while failing to address the causes--the impact components of our human footprint. E.g. Dependence on fossil fuels.
Catastrophic climate change IS happening. It's not going away and in some circles it may simply be "a blessing in disguise."
From their viewpoint: To effectively and rapidly manage this problem Earth needs a smaller population, as the attitude change required to change the ideas that fuel this situation fly in the face of the very system that creates the problem, and will take even longer to effect. The only way to rapidly reduce earth's human footprint is to continue to perpetuate the status quo therefore the system of consume-and-produce that has created the problem is not going to stop. In the end it will make "good economic sense...regrettable but necessary." Seems unlikely? Consider the economic 80/20 rule (80 percent of the business comes from 20 percent of the market--now global scale that concept--and factor in the recent economic reports of ownership and control of wealth and resources 1-2% of the population control far too much) and how this will be factored into the economic equations of catastrophic climate change. You think the wealthy and powerful are not running the economics of catastrophic climate change and considering the problem with every single resource they can (easily) afford? Don't be daft. If it makes more economic 'sense' to leave in a fault that costs human lives in a car design, it will be left in as from an economic 'ethic' it's more profitable to do so than retool manufacturing plants; the costs of law suits and reparations will be cheaper than retooling, so let the car-that-kills stay on the road and continue to claim lives. We already know this is how these 'people' 'think.' In other words, if 80 percent of the human race were wiped out, it wouldn't hurt profits at all. In fact, it would focus market forces and drive profits up, while costs go down. That's the sort of viewpoint we have to take into account.
With corporatization of the world's food production we now have a truly dangerous situation: people are at the mercy of these systems, and the food labeling legislation that has stood for 30 years has recently been called into question and, if I remember correctly, abandoned. Gee! Why? What are the potential gains and benefits? For who? Just a few?
If these truly unpleasant considerations of human nature are not considered as part of managing this scenario, then we truly don't deserve to survive. The corporatocracy doesn't give a damn about humanity--who are just so much sheep and cattle (human resource) to them--raised to produce, consume and serve the system the powerful will do (or not do) anything to ensure is preserved. The military-industrial-mediaplex failed to preserve 3000+ American lives, terrible, but they managed to kill 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians and spend approximately a Trillion Dollars of American taxpayers' money (fueled by American exports of culture, technology and otherwise) and secure one of the world's largest oil reserves, while generating tremendous additional profits--celebrated as highest ever! This is good business! Makes great economic sense! Hoo-rah! Sarcasm aside, America is a military economy, it needs wars to survive, if it can't find one to participate in, it will create one, or two, or.... Post-1945 and the end of the Cold War America never came off nor ended its war footing (more than 80 wars demonstrate that America is no peace-loving nation. It worships Mars, the God of War). Now America's imperial stance has driven China and Russia closer together; got those calculators busy, Wall Street beanies? I bet you have, and I bet you're smiling at the military-industrial-mediaplex projections for the next 50 to 100 years.
Read the bigger picture. Stop focusing on the small stuff which is intended to distract and tie up attention and other precious resources in a lot of useless debate. If you want to win this battle for humanity, you've got to think as the 'enemy' does, and understand how and why they do what they do (as illogical and irrational as that kind of thinking is). It's those ideas that have got to be removed from the ken of human endeavor, they're the 'stinking-thinking' that got us into this situation in the first place.
Any solution for the problems mankind now face, has got to take into account the philosophies, the ways of thinking and the ideas and principles that drive action that creates such situations, so we can effectively pull humanity together. The barriers that have created separateness of nation-from-nation, man-from-man-and-woman-and-child has disappeared, evaporated. The world is connected and we know what is going on to a degree we have never been able to see or understand before. This makes it possible to start to review our collective experience, and the situations we find ourselves in. This affords decent human beings, who embrace _humanity_ (and all that word means and defines) as one of the most valuable opportunities in the existence of mankind to address those situations, and find out what our common dreams may be, that we may then determine our future and ensure it is a good one for all, and not just a few.
There's not a lot of 'dreaming' going on in this forum. It's about time there was more focus on solution, than simple reportage, and debate.
As is pointed out time-and-time again (like some litany designed to promote doubt and inactivity, or a false sense of security) we cannot afford to act any longer as if science can predict a certain future for us in matters of global warming and time frames. We cannot act as if we have time, that is the one thing we do not have and in which scientific predictions continually do not serve the issue nor assist us in resolving it as humanity. Rather those work against us, and are used against any initiative to resolve and manage the issue.
What ARE the criteria of effective solutions to address this most pressing of situations?
Define those criteria and include all of humanity in the solution and then we'll have a common dream to forward. "Imagine all the people..."
The arctic tundra is THE tipping point to watch. If it starts to thaw, it releases HUGE quantities of CO2 and the 20 times more potent GHG methane. Then you have a run away feedback loop that can change climate in only a few years. Persistent crop failures due to climate change can get everyones attention. However, it is then too late.
BugsBBunny makes an excellent analog of stopping a speeding car compared to stopping global warming. The problem is that not only are we not slamming on the brakes, we've still got our foot on the accelerator! The oil industry may eventually go along with taking our foot off the gas, but by then, it'll be way too late...
In my opinion one of the principal reasons, why governments are inactive in taking efficient measures against the CO2 emissions, is that it would lead to a greater autonomy of regions on central governments. Due to the expected increasingly extreme weather conditions, network infrastructures like electricity distribution would need to become very decentralized, in order not to be too vulnerable to weather challenges. Another reason for the decentralization would be a diversification of energy sources, many of which would be local and renewable (solar, wind).
Further on, it would become necessary to effectuate a radical cutback on the transportation of goods, especially of those food commodities that could be grown locally. Farmers might become practically independent on distribution networks of combustibles, if they used their own e.g. hempseed oil grown and pressed on site (and wouldn't pay any taxes of it). All these tendencies would have a very negative impact not only on the big business, but would represent a still much more serious threat. That is that regions would become less dependent on central governments and thus less controllable. I am afraid that this also might be behind that so stunning stillness in front of the more or less imminent danger of the climatic change.
Other thing - am I paranoiac, if I have found weird that this revelation of an error in NASA calculations came just now? Exactly in the moment when the agency is being afflicted by a number of internal scandals, which make it very vulnerable and at the mercy of its providers... Just a thought.
BTW - I live in a little village in Southern Bohemia (Czech Republic). After a record-breaking super-mild winter with no snow or substantial freeze we had a hot and dry spring, which resulted in a very serious drought. Water level in rivers and lakes is on a critical low, humidity of the soil is of 0-5% in about 1,5 feet. Substantial rains were very scarce this summer, not enough to compensate the water deficit. Of course, grain yields were generally very poor, in the most affected regions they were only of one third of the usual yields (e.g. barley). In combination with the present steep rise of grain prices on the world markets and an increase of the V.A.T. on food articles from 5% to 9% planned from the New Year by the Czech government, it is not promising anything good to us.
But in our uncertain world, there is at least one thing one can always rely on: the greediness of the US rulers. Bioethanol solution as a renewable combustible replacing fossil fuels is the most stupid option in a country that can't grow at least two crops within a year, which is the case of the USA. Sure, it is a very convenient option from the business point of view, but what about the people? I would find it damn humiliating, if one day I had to decide whether I could afford drive my car or eat. Is this the freedom, the USA is so keen to spread around the world?
Enn, that is an excellent post, and to the point. So, any solutions? I mean obviously we have to take back our money from the filthy rich and stop all this warfare. The only way I can see is by electing Dennis Kucinich (not likely), or by passing the National Initiative which is a slow process and as you point out we are short of time.
I had suspected that the rich had been amassing their wealth not just for the hell of it but to make themselves comfortable when things heat up and chaos kicks in. I'm sure their minions will also be comfortably well off and the house slaves will be better off than anyone else out there. Makes me think of the line from Soylent Green "Are you furniture?".
It doesn't have to be that way and the US does stand out as having the characteristics of a third world country with health outcomes and income distribution. And our civil rights are headed that way too, with help from our shamefully complicit Congress.
And the way the people of New Orleans have been treated is a taste of things to come. Blackwater anyone?
The link to the original article does not work.
The American, or I should say the Anglosphere's media is almost hopeless because of the heavy corporate concentration (the Independent and Toronto Star are some of the few semi-independent media concerns left in their respective countries). Under the neocon governments in France and Germany, the trend will accelerate there too.
Rupert Murdoch and his ilk are responsible for this great evil. I wouldn't be surprised to find that these folks sold their souls to the devil, or form the real world's version of the Ringwraiths.
Hi Contributors,
Tracking some recent stories on the web and I've compiled a bunch of links should anyone want to look at some of these items. They cover academic papers, opinion pieces and news stories. I hope they're of interest.
A recent conference that did not get much publicity was the Environmental Change Institute event - Climate Change and the Fate of the Amazon - held at Oxford in March 2007. The programme is can be found at http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/events/070320amazonconference.pdf. The presentations are available at http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/news/events/070320presentations.php and can also be listened to as podcasts, perhaps while scrolling the related presentation.
The German Advisory Council on Global Change has published an interesting set of reports over the last few years - for these see http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu_download_engl.html . In particular, they've prepared a document titled Summary for Policy-Makers - World in Transition: Climate Change as a Security Risk http://www.wbgu.de/wbgu_jg2007_kurz_engl.pdf - 'The core message of WBGUs risk analysis is that without resolute counteraction, climate change will overstretch many societies adaptive capacities within the coming decades. This could result in destabilization and violence, jeopardizing .... international security. Climate change could also unite the international community, provided that it soon sets the course for the avoidance of dangerous anthropogenic climate change by adopting globally coordinated climate policy. If it fails, climate change will draw ever-deeper lines of conflict in international relations, triggering conflicts between and within countries over the distribution of resources over migration, or over compensation payments'.
A paper presented by Tim Lenton and colleagues from UEA has recently made headlines. Scientists warn on climate tipping points - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/16/climatechange.greenland
A 2006 summary of the state of knowledge - The tipping point of the iceberg 'There is near universal agreement that we are now seeing a greenhouse effect in the Arctic'. Mark Serreze. Could climate change run away with itself? A look at the balance of evidence. http://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh/media/tippingpoint_nature_06.pdf
The recent news on the state of the ice in the Arctic 2007 season - Scientists warn Arctic sea ice is melting at its fastest rate since records began -. Dr Serreze said that even pessimistic predictions may have overestimated the resilience of the Arctic sea ice. He said that we may have already reached the tipping point when there is a rapid disintegration. "The big question is whether we are already there or whether the tipping point is still 10 or 20 years in the future. My guts are telling me we may well be there now" http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article2864214.ece
News on a forecast from researchers at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter revealing that natural shifts in climate will cancel out warming produced by greenhouse gas emissions and other human activity until 2009, but from then on, temperatures will rise steadily. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/aug/10/weather.uknews. The full article is Climate Change: Humans and Nature Duel Over the Next Decade's Climate http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/317/5839/746
A map presenting Potential Anthropogenic Tipping Elements in the Earth System.
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/infodesk/tipping-points
An impressive presentation with excellent quality images & diagrams showing how glaciers worldwide are changing - http://www.na.unep.net/media/Melting_Glaciers.ppt A large file.
Hansen argues in Scientific Reticence and Sea Level Rise that professional and personal reticence amongst scientists leads to a downplaying of significant climate risks - 'that a scientific reticence is inhibiting communication of a threat of potentially large sea level rise. Delay is dangerous because of system inertias that could create a situation with future sea level changes out of our control'. See http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0703/0703220.pdf
Global Warming: Connecting the Dots from Causes to Solutions. Jim Hansen polemical presentation of Feb 2007 at the US National Press Club http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/dots_feb2007.pdf
Sudden Change of State - George Monbiot discusses the recent James Hansen papers - 'Reading a scientific paper on the train this weekend, I found, to my amazement, that my hands were shaking. This has never happened to me before, but nor have I ever read anything like it. Published by a team led by James Hansen . It suggests that the grim reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change could be absurdly optimistic'..... http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/07/03/a-sudden-change-of-state .
The Hansen paper Climate change and trace gases published in May 2007: http://www.planetwork.net/climate/Hansen2007.pdf
A further news story covering the Hansen paper - The Earth today stands in imminent peril ... 'and nothing short of a planetary rescue will save it from the environmental cataclysm of dangerous climate change. Those are not the words of eco-warriors, but the considered opinion of a group of eminent scientists writing in a peer-reviewed scientific journal'. See - http://environment.independent.co.uk/climate_change/article2675747.ece
A glaciology paper Rapid and synchronous ice-dynamic changes in East Greenland: http://geography.swan.ac.uk/glaciology/adrian/luckman_GRL_feb06.pdf
Editorial comment on the The West Antarctic Ice Sheet And Long Term Climate Policy http://www.princeton.edu/~step/people/fulltext.pdf
Hansen House of Rep. Testimony Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/testimony_26april2007.pdf
Hansen polemic - State of the Wild: Perspective of a Climatologist - .Are we close to a series of tipping points? Human-made greenhouse gases are near a level such that important climate changes may proceed mostly under the climate systems own momentum. Impacts would include extermination of a large fraction of species on the planet, shifting of climatic zones due to an intensified hydrologic cycle with effects on freshwater availability and human health, and repeated worldwide coastal tragedies associated with storms and a continuously rising sea level'. See http://www.giss.nasa.gov/~jhansen/preprints/Wild.070410.pdf
The IPCC and the Conservatism of Consensus - analysis of the state of climate science and whether the gravity of the crisis is being underplayed. Ian Angus writes - The IPCCs reports on the extent and dangers of climate change fall far short of identifying the worst case possibilities. They are useful resources, but poor guides to policy http://climateandcapitalism.blogspot.com/2007/04/ipcc-and-conservatism-of-consensus.html
Last autumn-winter season was Europe's warmest for more than 700 years, researchers say. The last time Europeans saw similar temperatures to the autumn and winter of 2006-07, they were eating strawberries at Christmas in 1289.. See http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12098-freak-winter-is-europes-warmest-for-700-years.html
Political Corruption of the IPCC report? David Wasdell alleges that the IPCC process has told us less than the whole truth: http://www.meridian.org.uk/_PDFs/IPCC.pdf
Positive Feedback and the Acceleration of Climate Change - Wasdell approach to planetary dynamics: http://www.meridian.org.uk/_PDFs/BeyondTippingPoint.pdf
Wasdell review of the Vostok ice data - and what it might imply for the analysis of the sensitivity of the Earth's climate to CO2: http://www.meridian.org.uk/_PDFs/ClimateSensitivity.pdf
Wasdell Climate Change documents all available from: http://www.meridian.org.uk/Res-Studies_In_Global_Dynamics.htm
IPCC Working Group 1 lodges a refutation of the Wasdell claims: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19325960.900-climate-with-care.html
Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions. The major NAS recent paper that demonstrates that current CO2 emissions reach the highest levels used in IPCC scenarios, and maybe set to increase..... http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0700609104v1
A short discussion of Lovelock's views: http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/gaia.shtml Lovelock says that we humans have pushed Earth's systems over the edge and past the point of no return. "It's far too late, hopelessly too late. We are wasting our time and energies on all the wrong things. We have to face up to the fact that we are about to enter a major war with our own planet."
The Truth about Climate Change Denial. Since the late 1980s, this well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change. Through advertisements, op-eds, lobbying and media attention, greenhouse doubters . http://www.whistleblower.org/content/press_detail.cfm?press_id=1124&keyword=
The Government Accountability Project has released a report about politicization of US climate science, based on the findings of a year-long investigation into interference at federal climate science agencies. It demonstrates how policies have ... restricted the flow of scientific information emerging from publicly-funded research. This has negatively affected the media's ability to report on scientific issues, public officials' capacity to respond with appropriate policies, and full public understanding of environmental concerns. See:
http://www.whistleblower.org/doc/2007/Final%203.28%20Redacting%20Climate%20Science%20Report.pdf
Overgrown Kids, Unshackled Ids, and the Death of the Superego - Frightening as it may be, the Earths fate rests in the hands of children. With incredibly formidable military firepower at its disposal, the United States could catalyze Armageddon at any time. And while they may be adults chronologically, our sociopolitical structure is dominated by emotional infants. http://www.bestcyrano.org/avenger212/?p=56
A review of the Pentagon 2004 climate change report: http://reclaimdemocracy.org/articles_2004/pentagon_report_global_warming.html
Until avoidance fails: system collapse and cultural change: http://culturechange.org/cms/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=103 Jan Lundberg writes that - 'as conditions worsen, eventually the rich too will be brought down by ecological collapse and social upheaval. Meanwhile, we all seem to be sleepwalking in a regimented line toward the cliff, despite various wake-up calls and reasonable suggestions for changing our ways as a culture. Until avoidance fails and the avalanche is falling, we wait as a crowd currently receiving our last generous doses of petroleum food and drugs. Then mass hysteria will ensue as people face the fact that there is no more job over at the corporate office tower, and no more oil-burning trucks delivering corporate food to the supermarkets chains. Keeping our heads and transitioning toward sustainable living will probably be a real fringe activity, then as now, until its suddenly the only way for everyone. See you there.'..........
The Engine of Eco Collapse - Jared Diamond Ignores His Own Lessons
A thorough and well-thought through analysis of recent 'collapse of civilisation' literature:
http://climateandcapitalism.blogspot.com/2007/02/engine-of-eco-collapse-jared-diamond.html
A recent book looking at why and how economies might be close to collapse:
http://www.theupsideofdown.com/theargument.html In The Upside of Down, political scientist Thomas Homer-Dixon argues that converging stresses could cause a catastrophic breakdown of national and global order a social earthquake that could hurt billions of people.
The Return of Limits by Ashley Dawson. How societies face clear limits to growth: http://www.wpunj.edu/~newpol/issue43/Dawson43.htm
Taking Action In The Face Of Collapse: http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/1955/81 'The intensity you are likely to hear in this piece is driven by the urgency which I and many of my peers are feeling at this moment. Quite frankly, it's time to quit screwing around with talking about collapse and start acting. The Rubicon has been crossed, we're not living in Kansas anymore, and we are living in the closest thing we've seen to pre-World War II Germany than anything since then. Suit up and stop theorizing and speculating. It's showtime'.
Monbiot Heat book extract: http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1875760,00.html
Monbiot article: Stop doing the CBI's bidding, and we could be fossil fuel free in 20 years - Prospects for renewables are promising. But not if public interest is drowned by corporate power - http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2117234,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=29
TMKOWAL___ Thank you for the work on writing that great blog.
I have my own pessimestic prediction, ten to twelve years tops, before the planet's poles are just small white blobs,___ maybe less. All of the coastal cities on Earth will be under water, most of the world's islands will have sunk beneath the waves and Geenland will be a much smaller island; what's left will be green. Think I'll move there now.