
(guest post by Taylor Marsh)
I had a completely different post planned, but on the news of Pennsylvania's worst flooding in 200 years, and flood warnings for upstate New York, as well as my own environmental tragedy last night, I decided to share with you something Al Gore said to a bunch of progressive bloggers on a recent conference call. It's going to make you mad, because when one Republican helped out Al Gore he was threatened.
First, let's get something straight. The climate crisis is real. Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" lays out the science of it, even if the wingnuts are walking away from the facts as fast as they can. The threats and attacks against Gore and people like Robert Redford's Apollo Alliance are all about politics, because Republicans put party before the people every time. I happened to meet Redford in D.C. recently (both of us having very bad hair days due to rain), because he asked for a special blogger forum to talk about climate crisis. He, too, is involved with Gore's film. Along with Gore and Redford, we also have John Kerry speaking out on energy independence, which he has done many times before. Front and center in this fight is ExxonMobil, whose policies Gore described in our call as the "worst" of the anti climate crisis crusaders.
PERHAPS THE MOST SURPRISING aspect of ExxonMobil’s support of the think tanks waging the disinformation campaign is that, given its close ties to the Bush administration (which cited “incomplete” science as justification to pull out of the Kyoto Protocol), it’s hard to see why the company would even need such pseudo-scientific cover. In 1998, Dick Cheney, then CEO of Halliburton, signed a letter to the Clinton administration challenging its approach to Kyoto. Less than three weeks after Cheney assumed the vice presidency, he met with ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond for a half-hour. Officials of the corporation also met with Cheney’s notorious energy task force.
ExxonMobil’s connections to the current administration go much deeper, filtering down into lower but crucially important tiers of policymaking. For example, the memo forwarded by Randy Randol recommended that Harlan Watson, a Republican staffer with the House Committee on Science, help the United States’ diplomatic efforts regarding climate change. Watson is now the State Department’s “senior climate negotiator.” Similarly, the Bush administration appointed former American Petroleum Institute attorney Philip Cooney—who headed the institute’s “climate team” and opposed the Kyoto Protocol—as chief of staff of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. In June 2003 the New York Times reported that the CEQ had watered down an Environmental Protection Agency report’s discussion of climate change, leading EPA scientists to charge that the document “no longer accurately represents scientific consensus.”
As the World Burns, by Chris Mooney
"An Inconvenient Truth," the movie, which is fantastic (go see it!), is now in wide distribution, with the paperback edition of his book going to #1 on the New York Times bestseller this weekend.
"The difference between being #1 and #2 pushes buttons for me." - Al Gore (during conference call)
Not surprisingly, Gore's being hit very hard, with Republican operatives from all corners challenging the science in his film. Too bad Gore's facts are correct. But wait until you hear what happened when Gore first offered to screen the movie for Congress.
During the call, I asked if "An Inconvenient Truth" had been screened for Congress, because Gore clearly wanted to reach across to Republicans so they would come to see the film and understand the urgency of our situation. Gore said Senator Harry Reid offered to shut down Senate business so everyone could see it. None of the Republicans showed up. I was thinking maybe we could put pressure on the anti-science - Flat Earth Republicans, if Gore offered a screening on the Hill. Maybe progressive constituents of Republicans could flood their offices demanding their Congressperson see the film. That's when Gore told his tale.
A couple of years ago Gore presented a slide show revolving around climate crisis for the Science Committee and the Committee on Energy & Commerce. The Democrats showed up. But something amazing happened. Not only did Republicans not show up, but one of the Republican House members was threatened for helping Gore out. It wasn't just any House member either.
Republican Representative Sherry Boehlert, as Gore called him, is Chairman of the Science Committee and he is retiring from Congress. He is a strong believer in global warming. It's real and he knows it and said so again on CNN recently. Well, back when Gore put together his briefing for Congress, Boehlert let Gore use the Science Committee room for his presentation. For his efforts Boehlert was threatened with losing his chairmanship. The Hammer came down.
Nothing has changed but who's holding the hammer.
I'd like to get another screening invitation of Gore's movie sent out to Congress. But would the Republicans show up?
I think some voters might care if their Republican representative or senator wanted their city to go by way of New Orleans. After all, you might not be threatened with hurricanes, but clean air, clean water and a melting planet effects everyone and the Republicans don't seem to care as long as Exxon-Mobil and others put money into their campaign coffers.
If you're reading this, Mr. Gore, send out another invitation to Congress. I'll back you up and I bet a lot of other progressives will too.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Obama the new Joe
First?
Outsanding, Taylor, and so critical for all here to internalize.
Go see the movie!
Excellent post, confirming what I knew about Boehlert.
The republican machine has shown that they will swiftboat anyone and everyone who confronts them with an inconvient truth–just this past few weeks
Al Gore
Jon Stewart
Kos
Murtha
the NY Times
and on and on. We just have to keep standing up to them and calling the crap, because they are bullied and know nothing else.
I suppose this is what happens when something like a credible, substantive case is out of the question? Or are there now economies of scale that make mass-production swiftboating more attractive?
Thank you Taylor
Every time I read you I get hot. Whats with that?
Yeah Gore! Bring it!
Thanks, Pach, I know you get how important this issue is, too.
Larry…. ;-)
Just paged through the book version of An Inconvenient Truth on my lunch break. Wow! It’s great! Amazing photos, graphs, charts. It’ll be my train-commute reading!
Re PA flooding - 200,000 expected to evacuate Wilkes Barre, PA
Our senior weatherman here in the DC area said that the rain we’ve gotten (14″ in the past three days) is an amount that happens once every three hundred years. We got more rain than we did during Hurricane Agnes in ‘72, which is the worst disaster to hit the area in my lifetime.
mass production swift-boating…
al scooter you kill me…hows about a warning sometimes…
… I’ll be right back…gotta get some paper towels…clean the ice tea off the monitor screen
As an Alaskan who HATES Exxon-Mobil because of what their oilspill here did to so many lives, and because they’re still stiffing us for billions, and who has had two friends in Cordova kill themselves because of the despair caused by their incredible negligence, I put nothing past their slimy scheming corporation.
They’ll really believe in global warming after they die and come to judgement. I hope it is more like universal eternal warming for them.
Anyone remember the commercial, I think it was Shell, about using junk underwater to create fish habitats?
Turned out they spent more money on the commercial than they did on the program.
Bastards.
OT Apologies I was EPU’ed when I wasn’t looking. Christopher Yoo as quoted from his Judiciary Committee testimony by Froomkin:
“First, I believe that the use of Presidential signing statements as legislative history is inherent in the system of checks and balances embodied in our Constitution. Second, I believe that Presidential statutory interpretation is also inherent in the President’s role as Chief Executive. Third, I suggest that recognizing Presidential signing statements as legislative history would better promote the democratic process.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...../11/LI2005 041100879.html
The sheer speciousness of his arguments is breathtaking. Notice how in his first point he says that the President’s use of signing statements is “inherent” and “embodied” in the Constitution which is to say that it is not stated anywhere in the Constitution. He could equally well have said that it is inherent in the Constitution that the President attend football games or chase pixies because the Constitution doesn’t say anything about these things either. Well Yoo thinks this inherency argument is quite something because he uses it again in his next point: signing statements are inherent to the role of Chief Executive. Why? Well gosh, just because they are. It’s that pixie thing again. Yoo’s third point is masterful doublespeak. You see signing statements “promote the democratic process” because they subvert and ignore it. How much more promotional can you get than that?
If how system fails, it will because of men and women who think like Christopher Yoo, which is to say that we have listened to those who do not think at all.
Another home run for Taylor! Thanks for sharing that call.
Also, the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car? opens today in Los Angeles and New York.
al-Scooter at 5: It’s always easier to be effective with BS than with a substantive argument, if you have no shame and care more about winning than about the truth or the will of the people. So I expect we’ll see endless swiftboating as long as it appears to have an effect; it’s just become a standard arrow in the GOP quiver of dirty tricks, along with vote suppression and push-polling and everything else.
Read Tim Flannery’s bulletproof scientific book “The Weather Makers.”
Those willfully encamped in “A Convenient Denial” got No Game, so all they can try to do is an ad hominem ad infinitum ad nauseum attack on Gore at the moment.
Global warming driven climate change caused in large measure by human activity is real and its effects are worsening right before our very eyes.
For those who may not remember Mr. Cooney:
June 1, 2005, Rick Peltz a government scientist recently resigned from the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (USCCSP) accuses Phillip Cooney, former lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute (industry thinktank), then chief of staff of the White House Council on Environmental Quality and a non scientist, of editing scientific papers so that they would agree with Administration policies on climate change.
June 8, 2005, Peltz story breaks; Scott McClellan, responding to charges about Cooney, responds by again questioning global warming’s scientific validity:
“No, no, no, let me just correct you on that one point. It’s to say that there are still — there is still a lot of uncertainty when it comes to the science of climate change, and that’s pointed out in the National Academy of Science report that the President requested when he came into office.”
June 10, 2005, Cooney resigns.
June 13, 2005, Cooney is hired by ExxonMobil.
I was just telling someone on the phone that I don’t think we have 10 yrs to turn this around. It has been raining forever in NH– the West is on fire. I pray we are not too late.
PS– Go see the movie.
Redshift you are right
butI’m five
al Scooters’ at four
This is not the first time ExxonMobil has been on the wrong side of history. Their predecessor — Standard Oil of New Jersey — was the largest pre-war investor in Nazi Germany. Plus, they supplied oil to the Nazis throughout the war.
Excerpts from Charles Higham’s Trading with the Enemy — The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949
http://www.thirdworldtraveler......erpts.html
…a number of financial and industrial figures of World War II and several members of the government served the cause of money before the cause of patriotism. While aiding the United States’ war effort, they also aided Nazi Germany’s. …
It thus came as a severe shock to learn that several of the greatest American corporate leaders were in league with Nazi corporations before and after Pearl Harbor, including I.G. Farben, the colossal Nazi industrial trust that created Auschwitz. Those leaders interlocked through an association I have dubbed The Fraternity. …
The tycoons were linked by an ideology: the ideology of Business as Usual. Bound by identical reactionary ideas, the members sought a common future in fascist domination regardless of which world leader might further that ambition. …
To this day the bulk of Americans do not suspect The Fraternity. The government smothered everything, during and even (inexcusably) after the war. What would have happened if millions of American and British people, struggling with coupons and lines at the gas stations, had learned that in 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey managers shipped the enemy’s fuel through neutral Switzerland and that the enemy was shipping Allied fuel? …
And it is important to consider the size of American investments in Nazi Germany at the time of Pearl Harbor. These amounted to an estimated total of $475 million. Standard Oil of New Jersey had $120 million invested there; General Motors had $35 million; 111 had $30 million; and Ford had $17.5 million. …
O/T, from Salon.com:
_____
With an eye on 2006, a Democrat embraces Bush
Republicans all over the country are running away from George W. Bush, but there’s one 2006 candidate who’s wrapping himself in the president’s embrace: Ben Nelson, the Democratic senator from Nebraska. As the Washington Post’s Chris Cilizza reports today, the Democratic Party in Nebraska is up with a TV spot that includes a 2005 video clip in which Bush calls Nelson “a man with whom I can work.”
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/
Thanks, Taylor. It’s a very important movie and I’m not surprised the GOP is running from it — if people wake up and “let’s stop trashing the planet” takes over as the dominant narrative and trumps the phony “war on terra” they’ve got real problems.
We’re in Harrisburg, PA. There are flood warnings here too.
Thanks Taylor -
Now I’m off to hike right after a weird (for late June on this part of the CA coast) rain and hail storm.
That followed last week’s utterly atypical days-long blast of hot, dry weather - the Santa Ana winds come to play north of the Golden Gate…
Global climate change - me worry?
Very, very, much.
Thanks again.
Dover Bitch - that documentary looks stellar, doesn’t it? Climate crisis is really gaining steam, as evidence comes out that the corporations backing Republicans are killing us.
And the Shell Oil execs are hitting the road! To talk about Global Warming you ask?
Hell, no.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Top executives at oil giant Shell have begun a 50-city tour across the United States this summer in hopes of persuading angry consumers that Big Oil is not ripping them off.
The move is the first such effort in the company’s history, as major oil firms try to dampen a political firestorm over soaring gasoline prices and record earnings for the companies that sell fuel products.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13582811/
Hey, Jane. Good to hear from you, lady.
Taylor, I’m going to see it tonight. Hopefully I won’t add a couple degrees to the planet because I expect to be fuming when I leave the theater.
Jane –
Please, please be careful! You don’t by any chance have a portable radio with you that carries local “emergency” weather broadcasts from the National Weather Service? [We have one, they’re not expensive.]
Pretty much your whole route from here on in will take you through potentially flooded areas. Pennsylvania is having the worst flooding in 200 years. Areas of Philly are under water. New York’s having a big problem, too. Haven’t heard anything about Connecticut, but it surely wouldn’t surprise me to hear it’s waterlogged too. Please do your best to get info while on the road about what’s up ahead.
We need you and the pups to stay safe!
Thank you, Taylor. Haven’t seen the movie yet, but I did get the book. I hope that Mr. Gore feels the support of the people - he should know better than anyone that we’re not exactly being well-represented by those D.C. naysayers.
Hugh at 16, do you mean John Yoo?
angie - I too think we are at crisis point already. Gore is right when he says in the film that we can still take the steps to reverse this, but the urgency is increasing every day. And even if we do everything needed, I think (like Iraq) that there will still be long-term consequences from the damage already done.
DB @30, one of the best things about the film is that it ends on a wonderful note of hope. I really do encourage everyone who hasn’t seen it yet to do so - it will scare you, yes, but it will also inspire you.
You will simply love the movie. It’s wonderful and more important than that, a very important film.
OT: In case you talk to anyone who isn’t clear on the importance of the Democrats taking back one or both houses this fall, consider this bit about signing statements (via Froomkin):
So to be quite clear — there are Republicans who are concerned about the executive power grab, but as long as there’s one-party rule, they’ll be more concerned about their re-election.
When they make enough cash they should show it on public television.
Taylor, sorry about your coi. Thanks for this post.
Can anyone who has seen the film say whether this is an appropriate film for ten year olds?
Exxon makes me sick. Literally.
Quite a few years ago when I lived in Philly I used to see a great allergist in NJ. He had written a big article for the Sunday magazine section of one of the major Philly papers about how air pollution was causing astonishing increases in allergies and asthma.
Interestingly, the chemicals in the air which he fingered as being the most likely culprits were chemicals being spewed into the air by Exxon (and others) at their refining/processing plants.
Once “people in high places” got wind that my allergist was going to publish, he got phone calls in the middle of the night from “strangers” unwilling to give their names, threatening him AND his family if he didn’t shut up.
To his credit, he was a brave guy not about to let himself be bullied, and he published anyway. These folks who buy out “scientists” to get their greedy way are really gangsters, nothing more.
Great post Taylor, this is a serious threat and I hope people start taking it seriously. If you live in the Midatlantic Area, you go to www.cleanyourair.org and choose alternative sources of electricity.
If the goverment won’t do anything except stand in the way like Warner from VA,
http://americablog.blogspot.co.....l-hes.html
than creating the market, and supporting the companies trying to make a difference is a citizen action that we can take. It may be directed at the goverment, it’s still action none-the-less
Look at how organic foods are going mainstream, it’s taken a while, however it can be done. It HAS to be done.
OT - On CNN’s 360 tonight.
“Democrats and religion: Why they’re speaking out on a subject kept private so long. Is it an election year tactic. Tune in at 10 p.m. ET.”
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Program.....ooper.360/
That didn’t take long.
Larry:
butI’m five
al Scooters’ at four
It depends whether you see a zero comment or not. For me, the first comment is ‘1′ and al-Scooter’s at 5. (From my experience, I think if you load the page before there are any comments and post or use the refresh button, they’ll start with zero; if you load it when there are already comments, they’ll start with one.)
Leslie in CA: That’s the thing both Gore and Redford stressed when they spoke to us. People have to understand that it isn’t too late to do something. These are the 5 points of consensus, according to Gore:
I have been boy-cotting Exxon since the Valdez.
Feel free to do the same.
Leslie in CA 34,
Sorry for the confusion. Yes, I already saw “An Inconvenient Truth.” Outstanding. Everyone should watch it.
In my message above, I was referring to “Who Killed the Electric Car?” which comes out today.
I saw this at digby’s by tristero a few days a ago but it is an article and review of 3 books including the Weather Makers by Jim Hansen who is Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Adjunct Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University’s Earth Institute.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19131
It’s an excellent article. Hansen says we have 10 years within which to turn things around or at least keep them within manageable limits. Otherwise things could get much worse. How bad?
Venkman: “This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.”
Mayor: “What do you mean, biblical?”
Ray: “What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor… real Wrath-of-God-type stuff. Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies.”
Venkman: “Rivers and seas boiling!”
Egon: “40 years of darkness, earthquakes, volcanos.”
Winston: “The dead rising from the grave!”
Venkman: “Human sacrifice, dogs and cats, living together… mass hysteria!”
That bad.
Calling these willfully ignorant idiots ‘Flat Earthers’ is giving them too much credit.Harken back to ,say, the 9th century. That’s about where these folks belong. No buttons,forks,plates etc.
Their ability to drag people backwards scientifically is mind boggling.Ask one of these dimbulbs what a quark or a muon is and they will start piling wood.Repeatable scientific theory is thrown out the window and replaced by fear of the unknown and witch hunting.This is one thing that fries my cookies about this bunch. Imagine where we could be right now with what could have been.That jackass at NASA is a perfect example of what I am trying to get across. I’m just too furious to let the words come.
I’m actually confused about what point #4 means. Does that mean we have to develop a way to _cool_ the planet? Or what?
Sidebar–the DOD road-blocking wind power farms while they “study” whether it affects radar.
Yeah, right.
Can’t resist using this link among many from google–the FDL Times:
http://www.fdlreporter.com/app.....89/FONnews
Pardon if I missed this upthread, but wasn’t the Commerce Committee supposed to vote yesterday on net neutrality?
Seriously, what are the theoretical limiters to the swiftboating process?
It appears to have become the all-purpose communications tool of choice, a kind of weapon of decision for the GOP re: every national issue, so learning to counter the machine that’s been built to execute it would seem to be somehow important to anyone who wants to win elections or even maintain some kind of public discourse.
So what does it take to do swiftboating?
How much does each one cost?
How long does the process last?
How many swiftboatings can be executed simultaneously?
How many swiftboatings can be done per unit of time - per quarter of per election cycle or…?
What are the real objectives of swiftboating, and what metrics are used to gauge success?
Are there any signs that the public is building an immunity to swiftboat attacks?
Have any swiftboat attacks been repelled? If so, would the tactical set employed be a template for others?
I’m sorry for asking all these quasi-rhetorical questions, but it’s been two years since J. Forbes Kerry faced this problem, and I’ve yet to see anything like a doctrinal counter by the Dems. Profound apologies if there is one, I’m a complete outsider. Sometimes great strategies can be built around a single brilliant tactic, and I don’t want to lose the planet because nobody thought through how to deal with a high level of lying.
egregious 50,
That was postponed until, possibly, today. They are hearing arguments from “experts on both sides” today.
Ed*ard Teller:
We have the technology today to turn this around. There is no one magic bullet but we must radically reduce CO2 emissions. The US is responsible for 1/3 of the world’s CO2 emissins and we could save the world in this way on our own, if we act
Find out more at www.climatecrisis.net
Stevens stalling the vote? And all of a sudden there are all kinds of ads on the news networks–read: inside-the-beltway-bubble–urging people to contact re speeding up the internet. [yeah, and swallowing up your net freedom in the process….]
Taylor you have been on fire with your blogs for the last month. Thanks! Keep it up!
I never buy exxon or mobil or chevron… why buy from them when there are alternates…
I buy CitGo to support Chavez and drive less!
It’s about becoming carbon neutral:
I understand the Dallas area of TX is in a drought state. That’s another point to investigate.
Leslie in CA #33
Christopher Yoo has been a professor of law at Vanderbilt University since 1999. Previously, he clerked for Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy and Judge A. Raymond Randolph of the United States Court of Appeals. He also practiced law with Hogan & Hartson in Washington.
John Yoo is I believe at Berkeley.
TEN THINGS YOU CAN DO TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING
#48 -
If we begin to ALL find ways to consume/burn less carbon NOW the rate or speed of gloabal warming will decrease.
You really should see Gore’s powerpoint (I want my own personal copy!) he lays it all the math very neatly. In a way that anyone can easily understand — and it is not dumbed down!
DefJef –
Good for you!
It’s Citgo for us, too. [At least we know the money is going to bring healthcare to the poor.] And now we have a zero-emissions hybrid car, thank goodness.
Ed*ard Teller @ 48, also see #56.
It is vanity to think that we can destroy a whole planet before that planet will shudder like a big dog shaking itself dry to rid itself of us and start over.
We can only change it, and maybe ruin it for us. Life goes on. We might even live through a catastrophic planet changing disaster, but we won’t live through it like this.
Changing light bulbs isn’t going to dissuade or prevent it. Driving a more fuel efficient car isn’t going to stop or change it. Having fewer or more babies isn’t going to fix it. It’s coming because we can’t stop it any more than the dinosaurs could stop a ball of fire from space.
Nine tenths of the problem is ego. Pride. A “green” car isn’t an environmentally sound choice, it’s a fashion statement. Give up the car, build a buggy tame a wild horse. Eco friendly is a new snobbery. A great selling point. It’s the kill me softly approach. IT’s not AS bad for the environment. But it’s still bad. We are a species gear toward destroying the world around us. Our cities alone are a sure sign that we are as bad as colonies of voracious insects. We only think we are not.
The best thing we could do for our planet right now would be to die off or to move on. And one way or another we’ll end up doing either one, it’s just a matter of it being a concious choice or not.
I live in NYC - it is usually sweltering in the summer and almost everyone has air conditioning. While I will leave my AC in the window for now (in case it gets to 105 - which is possible — I have invested in some high tech fans, which eliminate the need for my AC most of the time.
Unfortunately, I live in an old building and cannot control a thermostate to the heat in my apt so there is not much I can do in that regard.
I also buy food at the Green market — saves fuel burned in transporting food long distances (huge amount used in this way) and also fertilizers made from petroleum. There are so many things that we can all do, if we can just begin to take some concrete steps now.
fyi… Al Gore also had some encouraging words to say about Shell Oil.
#63 I don’t know what you are smoking, but what you wrote sounds like a scenario from Revelations:
The end times are here, good excuse to not give a flying f*ck about anyone or anything else.
Good one.
Poet with a Gun - I understand your take on this, believe me, but scientists are convinced that we DO have time to make a difference and change the course we’re on. We have to believe it and not despair or what good is the knowledge and science?
I stopped buying exxon after their skipper Mr Hazelton took the Valdez onto a reef and destoyed part of our beautiful Alaska.
Another thing we can all do that’s really easy is just promote the issue:
Climate Crisis is Real
susan #38, if the ten-year-old is particularly prone to anxiety about large-scale global issues, as some very sensitive kids are, that might be a concern. But that’s the only reason I could think of; other than that, I’d say it’s an excellent film for kids to see. The arguments and evidence are laid out very simply and clearly, so a kid that age could definitely follow them - and the more young people who get this message, the better off we’ll be.
Dover Bitch #45, my mistake. The electric car film won’t be in my neck of the woods for another month, but I’ll be sure to see it - thanks for the link.
Hugh, my mistake again - it was just hard to believe that there were two Yoos both making such appalling arguments in favor of executive power!
Taylor, yes - I love the fact that Gore’s film emphasizes the feasability of making changes. I know people who don’t want to see the film because they think they already know what it will say, and don’t want to be depressed. I’m trying to persuade them that that’s not the case.
The http://www.realclimate.org/ review:
10 May 2006
Al Gore’s movie
Filed under: Climate Science Reporting on climate%u2014 eric @ 3:21 pm
by Eric Steig
How well does the film handle the science? Admirably, I thought. It is remarkably up to date, with reference to some of the very latest research. Discussion of recent changes in Antarctica and Greenland are expertly laid out. He also does a very good job in talking about the relationship between sea surface temperature and hurricane intensity. As one might expect, he uses the Katrina disaster to underscore the point that climate change may have serious impacts on society, but he doesn’t highlight the connection any more than is appropriate (see our post on this, here).
http://www.realclimate.org/ind.....res-movie/
The ten things you can do… was a handout at the screening of Inconvenient Truth when we saw it. It should be up on billboards around the nation.
Did anyone beside me see the “commercial” on Keith Obermann last night. He did a story about this commercial done by some energy lobby group about how “zealots” are trying to falsely label co2 as a pollutant and if we let them get away with that we will all be back in the stone age.
I swear to godess, it looked like it was an outtake from “thank you for smoking”. I laughed until tears came.
Sadly, it was NOT A SPOOF.
Hugh @ 16
The Art of War by Sun Tzu
Meet Christopher Yoo
This is the second in a series of two, if you want to read the 1st one, click on search and type in Unitary Executive
I don’t know if he’s related but remember John Yoo?
It’s a great point you made about becoming carbon neutral Taylor. I think that’s extremely important to talk about when discussing this.
It boggled my mind when I figured out my carbon footprint,
http://www.carbonfootprint.com
It really drove the point home how much of an impact I have on a daily basis.
“They eat that stuff up at 10.” - Taylor’s husband
I just talked to my husband who has 6 children. He said DEFINITELY take your kid to see it. He also mentioned that at 10 years old, some people can have their life changed. I bet some of you remember that, because I sure do. Important films and events seen at a young age can change everything.
I hate to go off-topic in such a great thread about such an important issue (Taylor, feel free to tell me to drop it)…
But here’s an update on Stevens’ Senate committee:
Broadcast flags are in, which means that your audio and video decoders will have to recognize “flags” from broadcasters that say you cannot record the content.
Kerry’s amendment was voted down, 12-10, which means that there will be no governmental pressure for the telecoms to bring their super-duper new video services to low-income areas. What a shocker.
Still no vote on Net Neutrality, but Sen. Wyden has reiterated that he will block any bill that does not protect the Internet as we know it. Go Wyden!
Dover thanks for the update.
Don’t know who has moderating privileges but I have corroboration for Hugh @ 16
P.s. And now I see after scrolling down that Hugh knows of him
Thanks, Taylor and Pach for the links, especially to the article by Dan Day. But I’m still confused. I already do all the things recommended for reducing carbon output, make my own compost, drive a diesel golf or ride my bike, but am not sure whether it would be wise to try to reverse a planetary warming trend which has been going on for tens of thousands of years - since before humans were wearing clothes or engaged in agriculture.
I’m all for doing what we can to slow global warming enough to bring the clock back to where it would have been had we not sped things up through our activities, but where do you stop once you click into that regime?
OT - until there’s a n/t - from Froomkin today, roundup of hearings on signing statements - Bruce Fein (!) suggested Congress “should contemplate impeachment.” !!!
Is Christy taking a well-deserved rest after filling in for Jane? Hope so - but I miss her cogent arguments on this issue (yeah, I know, can’t stand to go one day without..)
Taylor, I’m just trying to get caught up from when I was in the office this morning, so thanks for both of your outstanding posts!
I just came back inside from having an improptu conversation with one of my GOP neighbors. He introduced the topic of weird weather and didn’t object at all to my pointing out the bigger picture.
I really believe that Katrina, horrible as it was, is the Halley’s Comet of climate change. The goofy weather everybody seems to be having now is just adding more data points. One thing about the weather is that it’s pretty undeniable.
So let’s see if we can get a sound bite of W in a rain slicker and hip waders in the Rose Garden telling Washingtonians that it isn’t really raining. Or that it’s all Al Gore’s fault.
#79: ET, you profess to fear that for which you dare not hope.
accumulated stock of CO2 suddenly released over last 100 years due to human activity will promote warning. Anything economically feasible that will be done is just tapping on the brakes.
Excellent post, Taylor. The movie’s great; go see it, firepups.
looseheadprop @ 12:54 pm (#73) - I saw a commercial on TV not too long ago that said something like “we don’t think of CO2 as a problem, we think of it as life”. No kidding, I about busted a gut when I heard that one.
Unfortunately, most people don’t have either the intellectual curiosity or the time to check out all this stuff. Sad as it may be, I think these commercials actually work on the people they’re intended to work on.
For pessismists, from the realclimate.org review (see link above):
For the most part, I think Gore gets the science right, just as he did in Earth in the Balance. The small errors don’t detract from Gore’s main point, which is that **we in the United States have the technological and institutional ability to have a significant impact on the future trajectory of climate change.** This is not entirely a scientific issue — indeed, Gore repeatedly makes the point that it is a moral issue — but **Gore draws heavily on Pacala and Socolow’s recent work to show that the technology is there (see Science 305, p. 968 Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies)**.
Asterisks style emphases added.
tejanarusa - Because of the torrential rain, Christy had to drive someone to the airport, because her original flight was grounded. It was a quick development, so here I am.
wesgpc,
I just distrust the concept of, oh let’s just say Archer Daniels or Monsanto or Dow - or, we’ll call it Exxon Environmental Solutions - being the companies which we trust to put these reversing mechanisms into operation.
Larry 6
Thank you Taylor
Every time I read you I get hot. Whats with that?
blog-gal warming
I don’t think it was a coincidence that Al Gore brought up the subject of the anti smoking movement. Even after the Surgeon General’s report in 1964, there were legions of paid industry stooges who denied that tobacco caused cancer. It wasn’t until the 80s that I can recall seeing the effects of a growing grassroots anti-smoking movement. Nowadays, it’s hard to believe that just 20 years ago, most public buildings still allowed smoking and that many university libraries had smoking rooms.
It looks like the global warming movement is going to be another case of the people having to lead the politicians by the nose. I think after last year’s hurricane season and this summer’s flooding on the East Coast, that Americans are going to be more receptive to the idea that our climate is changing. I just hope that idea can reach a tipping point, just as with the anti smoking movement, where no amount of pro-industry propaganda can stop it.
Also google economist William Nordhaus
Wel, here it is:
http://www.econ.yale.edu/~nord.....mepage.htm
Nordhaus is very respected mainstream market blah blah blah economist, has estimated that we could tap on brakes effectively without large economic costs. He has been right on these issues before where others have been wrong wrt to pollution control. If energy economics were not considered a “junky field” in economics (it has actually applications, how coarse!) he would/should/could get a economics Nobel prize IMVHO.
Larry @ #13, thanks! Must’ve missed during the post reshuffle.
ET: check out Nordhaus! He may change your mind. I agree with you. Nordhaus ain’t talking about greenwashing the thing.
Re flooding, one block from my home a bridge had to be closed when water pushed a 12-foot section of the road over to the other side.
Don’t know when my comment is coming out of moderation so here is the msot relevant part
Hugh @ 16
Here’s more from Christopher Yoo on the Unitary Executive
Taylor at 87 -
Thanks. I’m sorry to hear she’s NOT resting..but, boy, that fits right in with the topic of your post, doesn’t it?
BTW, FWIW, I found 2 recycling containers on my porch this morning. It seems my town has decided to re-institute curbside recycling, cancelled several years ago. This time they’ve included a small, handled basket to use in-house to collect recyclables, then carry out to the larger curbside container. Interesting.
And I’m thinking of getting a bicycle, if I can find one I can afford. Mostly because of the price of gas, but that just confirms that price drives people more effectivly than ideals, I guess. I can’t bike to work - it’s 22 miles, on the other side of town, but I do live in a neighborhood where I could bike to grocery and drugstores, etc. And since a foot problem is keeping me from walking much, a bike seems justifiable.
Geez, egregious, is this summer?
lhp at 73: I also saw that commercial. I had seen it before. It’s selling a huge misrepresentation — suggesting that global warming alarmists want to ban Co2. This is nonsense. No one proposes that. CO2 is, of course, essential to life, as is O2.
The point of the movie is that the balance and stability are important. With too much heat-trapping gases being created, and too rapidly (as is occurring now) we get global climate change that we may not be able to control or respond to, and some of those changes are potentially catastrophic. The challenge is learning how to live in balance and to stop doing things that cause radical changes.
I was not aware that “An Inconvenient Truth” was out in paperback but it is. I just called and reserved a copy at my local booksellers to pick up tomorrow … cool !
tejanarusa - Try your local recycler newspaper or alternative newsweekly. Maybe they’ll have a used bike you can buy. Cosco’s prices aren’t bad either.
dOn Camillo - go even a little later than the 80s - Bob Dole in his presidential run - I’m pretty sure he opined that there was no proof that cigarettes were harmful.
The road that got washed out has just been repaired. Meanwhile, there is a scary big yellow thing up in the sky. What can it be? And where did all the rain go?
Where I live, we’re already suffering 100-plus degree temperatures — and we usually don’t get those until August.
Taylor, I have koi in my backyard pond too. One guy is so big, we call him Moby Koi. I know, not too original. But he’s a sweetie. I never thought I’d think fondly of a fish!
I’m going to see An Inconvenient Truth tonight. Sigh. Feingold notwithstanding, I long for Gore 2008.
Alaska senator Ted Stevens, “legendary pork barreler-$646 million in goodies for Alaska last year alone,- wants to turn Washington state’s Cherry Point port on Puget Sound into an “international oil superport.” Puget Sound’s ecosystem “is already on the verge of collapse and nothing threatens the future of Puget Sound more than the risk of catastrophic oil spills.”
Why is Ted Stevens hellbent on turning the Sound into a super byway for oil tankers?
Hmmmm…could it be this….”According to federal election reports, the oil and gas industry ranks first on his 1989-2006 aggregate donors list, giving him $370,000
Of course maybe it’s just the revenge factor: Ted Stevens wants to get back at Washington state’s Senator Maria Cantwell for standing up to him, defeating his amendment to drill for oil in ANWR, and