[TheClimate.Vote] July 28, 2018 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Sat Jul 28 10:31:30 EDT 2018
/July 28, 2018/
*The fires ravaging parts of Europe show our forest policies are failing
<http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/07/27/fires-ravaging-parts-europe-show-forest-policies-failing/>*
Published on 27/07/2018
The death toll in Greece and suffering right up to the Arctic Circle
must prompt a move to sustainable and resilient forest management...
- - - -
The official map <http://effis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/> charting the forest
fires raging across Europe conjures visions of an occupying army
advancing malevolently across the continent: swathes of orange
(signifying "danger" areas) encircle patches of dark red (places of
"high danger"), and smaller black blotches ("extreme danger").
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/07/27/fires-ravaging-parts-europe-show-forest-policies-failing/
- - --
Emergency Management Service <http://effis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/>
http://effis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/applications/fire-news/
http://effis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/static/effis_current_situation/public/index.html
- - - -
[brand new global view]
*Emergency Management Service Global View
<http://gwis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/static/gwis_current_situation/public/index.html>*
http://gwis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/static/gwis_current_situation/public/index.html
[Planning ahead]
*7 States Urge Pipeline Regulators to Pay Attention to Climate Change
<https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26072018/ferc-natural-gas-pipeline-approval-states-environmental-economic-cost-climate-change>*
FERC is considering revising how it approves natural gas pipeline
projects. These states want it to focus more on costs to the environment
and consumers.
Phil McKenna - New natural gas pipelines may not be needed and may not
justify damage to the environment, the attorneys general of seven states
and the District of Columbia argue in comments filed Wednesday with
federal regulators in charge of pipeline approvals.
The comments came in response to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's request in April for comments on whether the commission
should revise its current policy for pipeline approvals, set in 1999...
- - - - -
*Environmental advocates are concerned that continued pipeline approvals
will lock in U.S. dependence on fossil fuels for decades to come.*
"Building pipelines that are not needed will lead to billions of dollars
of stranded assets and slow down our process to building cleaner energy
solutions," Gillian Giannetti, an attorney with the Natural Resources
Defense Council, said.
With the rapid decline in the cost of renewables, the economics of
building gas pipelines that are meant to last 40 to 60 years no longer
adds up, Jonathan Peress of the Environmental Defense Fund said. "In 15
or 20 years, it is clear that alternatives to gas are going to be more
economic than building pipelines, but yet these pipelines will still be
under contract, people will still be paying for them," he said...
- - - -
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26072018/ferc-natural-gas-pipeline-approval-states-environmental-economic-cost-climate-change
[abnormal is the new normal]
*Extreme global weather is 'the face of climate change' says leading
scientist
<https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/27/extreme-global-weather-climate-change-michael-mann>*
Exclusive: Prof Michael Mann declares the impacts of global warming are
now 'playing out in real-time'
The extreme heatwaves and wildfires wreaking havoc around the globe are
"the face of climate change", one of the world's leading climate
scientists has declared, with the impacts of global warming now "playing
out in real time".
Climate change has long been predicted to increase extreme weather
incidents, and scientists are now confident these predictions are coming
true. Scientists say the global warming has contributed to on the
scorching temperatures that have baked the UK and northern Europe for weeks.
The hot spell was made more than twice as likely by climate change, a
new analysis found, demonstrating an "unambiguous" link.
Extreme weather has struck across Europe, from the Arctic Circle to
Greece, and across the world, from North America to Japan. "This is the
face of climate change," said Prof Michael Mann, at Penn State
University, and one the world's most eminent climate scientists. "We
literally would not have seen these extremes in the absence of climate
change."
"The impacts of climate change are no longer subtle," he told the
Guardian. "We are seeing them play out in real time and what is
happening this summer is a perfect example of that."
"We are seeing our predictions come true," he said. "As a scientist that
is reassuring, but as a citizen of planet Earth, it is very distressing
to see that as it means we have not taken the necessary action."
The rapid scientific assessment of the northern European heatwave was
done by Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, at the Royal Netherlands
Meteorological Institute and also colleagues in the World Weather
Attribution (WWA) consortium. "We can see the fingerprints of climate
change on local extremes," he said.
The current heatwave has been caused by an extraordinary stalling of the
jet stream wind, which usually funnels cool Atlantic weather over the
continent. This has left hot, dry air in place for two months - far
longer than than usual. The stalling of the northern hemisphere jet
stream is being increasingly firmly linked to global warming, in
particular to the rapid heating of the Arctic and resulting loss of sea ice.
Prof Mann said that asking if climate change "causes" specific events is
the wrong question: *"The relevant question is: 'Is climate change
impacting these events and making them more extreme*?', and we can say
with great confidence that it is."
Mann points out that the link between smoking tobacco and lung cancer is
a statistical one, which does not prove every cancer was caused by
smoking, but epidemiologists know that smoking greatly increases the
risk. "That is enough to say that, for all practical purposes, there is
a causal connection between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer and it is
the same with climate change," Mann said.
Other senior scientists agree the link is clear. Serious climate change
is "unfolding before our eyes", said Prof Rowan Sutton, at the
University of Reading. "No one should be in the slightest surprised that
we are seeing very serious heatwaves and associated impacts in many
parts of the world."
It is not too late to make the significant cuts needed in greenhouse gas
emissions, said Mann, because the impacts progressively worsen as global
warming increases.
"It is not going off a cliff, it is like walking out into a minefield,"
he said. "So the argument it is too late to do something would be like
saying: 'I'm just going to keep walking'. That would be absurd - you
reverse course and get off that minefield as quick as you can. It is
really a question of how bad it is going to get."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jul/27/extreme-global-weather-climate-change-michael-mann
[yes and yes. just follow the money]
*Is climate change a "ratings killer," or is something wrong with
for-profit media?
<https://grist.org/article/is-climate-change-a-ratings-killer-or-is-something-wrong-with-for-profit-media/>*
By Zoya Teirstein - on Jul 25, 2018
Environmental journalists came out in full force to set him straight.
The reason that newsrooms are failing to bring up climate change has a
lot to do with the way major news outlets are structured (profits first,
content second), they said, and less to do with people's interest in
climate change.
https://grist.org/article/is-climate-change-a-ratings-killer-or-is-something-wrong-with-for-profit-media/
['Skeeter watch]
*Mosquitoes in 3 Colorado cities test positive for West Nile virus
<https://www.9news.com/article/news/health/mosquitoes-in-3-colorado-cities-test-positive-for-west-nile-virus/73-578008397>*
Mosquitoes in Erie, Louisville, and Longmont have tested positive for
West Nile virus.
WNV is transmitted to humans by infected mosquitoes. As always, health
officials urge residents in the area to follow these steps:
*DRAIN:* Mosquitoes breed in water. Drain any standing water in your
yard each week. Bird baths, clogged gutters and kiddie pools are
common breeding sites.
*DRESS:* Wear lightweight, long-sleeved shirts and long pants while
outdoors. Spray clothing with insect repellent since mosquitoes may
bite through clothing.
*DEFEND:* Apply insect repellent sparingly to exposed skin. Use an
approved repellent according to its label. Click here to find the
repellent that is right for you
*DAWN/DUSK: *Limit time spent outdoors at dawn through dusk, when
mosquitoes are most active and feeding.
Mosquito season typically lasts from late April until mid-October. Last
year, nine people in Boulder County tested positive for the virus.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/health/mosquitoes-in-3-colorado-cities-test-positive-for-west-nile-virus/73-578008397
- - - -
*Number of mosquitoes in DeKalb carrying West Nile virus triples
<https://www.ajc.com/news/local/number-mosquitos-dekalb-carrying-west-nile-virus-triples/5g920C47yiuN1GTEPgaBGN/>*
The number of mosquitoes testing positive for the West Nile virus in
DeKalb County has tripled in one week.
A total of 34 mosquitoes have tested positive for the virus as of July
24, said the DeKalb County Board of Health. Last week, only 11
mosquitoes had tested positive.
https://www.ajc.com/news/local/number-mosquitos-dekalb-carrying-west-nile-virus-triples/5g920C47yiuN1GTEPgaBGN/
- - - -
*West Nile Virus Spreads To 11 South Dakota Counties
<https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/west-nile-virus-spreads-to-11-south-dakota-counties/1326956887>*
https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/west-nile-virus-spreads-to-11-south-dakota-counties/1326956887
[video of moose in trouble]
*Moose in NH under severe threat from climate change, expert warns
<http://www.wmur.com/article/moose-in-nh-under-severe-threat-from-climate-change-expert-warns/22578202>*
Shorter winters mean more ticks feeding on moose
Video http://www.wmur.com/620c506c-b9f6-48c4-b648-7b11f150ec30
NEW HAMPTON, N.H.
Climate change is threatening the survival of moose in New Hampshire as
the population of the iconic animal continues to shrink, experts said.
There were 7,000 moose living in New Hampshire when Kristine Rines
became the Fish and Game Department's first moose expert. Thirty-five
years later, the biologist said, the herd is less than half that size
and shrinking.
http://www.wmur.com/article/moose-in-nh-under-severe-threat-from-climate-change-expert-warns/22578202
[Nordhaus, the optimist says]
*The Earth's carrying capacity for human life is not fixed
<https://aeon.co/ideas/the-earths-carrying-capacity-for-human-life-is-not-fixed>*
Today's warnings of impending ecological collapse mostly focus on rising
consumption, not population growth.
- - - -
Ultimately, one need not advocate the imposition of pseudo-scientific
limits on human societies to believe that many of us would be better off
consuming less. Nor must one posit the collapse of human societies to
worry deeply that growing human consumption might have terrible
consequences for the rest of creation.
But threats of societal collapse, claims that carrying capacity is
fixed, and demands for sweeping restrictions on human aspiration are
neither scientific nor just. We are not fruit flies, programmed to
reproduce until our population collapses. Nor are we cattle, whose
numbers must be managed. To understand the human experience on the
planet is to understand that we have remade the planet again and again
to serve our needs and our dreams. Today, the aspirations of billions
depend upon continuing to do just that. May it be so.
https://aeon.co/ideas/the-earths-carrying-capacity-for-human-life-is-not-fixed
- - - - -
[is this a debate?]
*Ted Nordhaus Is Wrong: We Are Exceeding Earth's Carrying Capacity
<https://undark.org/article/ted-nordhaus-carrying-capacity-ecology/>*
The co-founder of the Breakthrough Institute has a cheery vision of the
future. If only that vision were plausible.
07.26.2018 - BY Richard Heinberg
IN HIS ARTICLE, "The Earth's Carrying Capacity for Human Life is Not
Fixed," Ted Nordhaus, co-founder of the Breakthrough Institute, a
California-based energy and environment think tank, seeks to enlist
readers in his optimistic vision of the future. It's a future in which
there are many more people on the planet and each enjoys a high standard
of living, while environmental impacts are reduced. It's a cheery vision.
If only it were plausible.
Nordhaus's argument hinges on dismissing the longstanding biological
concept of "carrying capacity" - the number of organisms an environment
can support without becoming degraded. "Applied to ecology, the concept
[of carrying capacity] is problematic," Nordhaus writes, arguing in a
nutshell that the planet's ability to support human civilization can be,
one presumes, infinitely tweaked through a combination of social and
physical engineering.
Few actual ecologists, however, would agree. Indeed, the concept of
carrying capacity is useful in instance after instance - including
modeling the population dynamics of nonhuman species, and in gauging the
health of virtually any ecosystem, be it ocean, river, prairie, desert,
or forest. While exact population numbers are sometimes difficult to
predict on the basis of the carrying capacity concept, it is
nevertheless clear that, wherever habitat is degraded, creatures suffer
and their numbers decline.
The controversy deepens in applying the carrying capacity concept to
humans. Nordhaus seems to think we are exceptions to the rules. Still,
as archaeologists have affirmed, many past human societies consumed
resources or polluted environments to the point of collapse. Granted,
societies have failed for other reasons as well, including invasion,
over-extension of empire, or natural climate change. Yet in cases where
societies depleted forests, fisheries, freshwater, or topsoil, the
consequences were dire.
But that was then. The core of Nordhaus' case is that we are now living
in a magical society that is immune to the ecological law of gravity.
Yes, it is beyond dispute that the modern industrial world has been able
to temporarily expand Earth's carrying capacity for our species. As
Nordhaus points out, population has grown dramatically (from less than a
billion in 1800 to 7.6 billion today), and so has per capita
consumption. No previous society was able to support so many people at
such a high level of amenity. If we've managed to stretch carrying
capacity this much already, why can't we do so ad infinitum?
To answer the question, it's first important to understand the basis of
our success so far. Science and technology usually glean most of the
credit, and they deserve their share. But sheer energy - the bulk of it
from fossil fuels - has been at least as important a factor.
- - - -
EVISE YOUR own scorecard. What warning signs would you expect to see if
we humans were pressing at the limits of global carrying capacity?
Resource depletion? Check. Pollution? Check. Dying oceans? Check. Human
populations subjected to increasing stress? Double check.
Here's one more that we probably should be paying more attention to:
Wild terrestrial mammals now represent just 4.2 percent of terrestrial
mammalian biomass, the balance - 95.8 percent - being livestock and
humans. Maybe we could make some inroads on that remaining 4.2 percent,
but it's pretty clear from this single statistic that we humans have
already commandeered most of the biosphere.
Optimism is essential; it draws us toward the best possible futures. But
when it turns into wishful thinking, it can blind us to the consequences
of our present actions. In the worst potential case, the results could
be collectively suicidal.
Richard Heinberg is the author of 13 books and a Senior Fellow with the
Post Carbon Institute. His essays and articles have appeared in print or
online at Nature, Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, The American
Prospect, Public Policy Research, the Quarterly Review, Resilience, The
Oil Drum, and Pacific Standard, among other publications.
https://undark.org/article/ted-nordhaus-carrying-capacity-ecology/
- - - - -
[Nature sustainability paper]
*A good life for all within planetary boundaries
<https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-018-0021-4>*
We find that no country meets basic needs for its citizens at a
globally sustainable level of resource use. Physical needs such as
nutrition, sanitation, access to electricity and the elimination of
extreme poverty could likely be met for all people without
transgressing planetary boundaries. However, the universal
achievement of more qualitative goals (for example, high life
satisfaction) would require a level of resource use that is 2-6
times the sustainable level, based on current relationships.
Strategies to improve physical and social provisioning systems, with
a focus on sufficiency and equity, have the potential to move
nations towards sustainability, but the challenge remains substantial.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-018-0021-4
[Classic essay, print version title: "Hear no climate evil"]
August 2014
*Understand faulty thinking to tackle climate change
<https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/>*
The amorphous nature of climate change creates the ideal conditions for
human denial and cognitive bias to come to the fore
By George Marshall
DANIEL KAHNEMAN is not hopeful. "I am very sorry," he told me, "but I am
deeply pessimistic. I really see no path to success on climate change."
Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel prize in economics for his research on the
psychological biases that distort rational decision- making. One of
these is "loss aversion", which means that people are far more sensitive
to losses than gains. He regards climate change as a perfect trigger: a
distant problem that requires sacrifices now to avoid uncertain losses
far in the future. This combination is exceptionally hard for us to
accept, he told me.
Kahneman's views are widely shared by cognitive psychologists. As Daniel
Gilbert of Harvard University says: "A psychologist could barely dream
up a better scenario for paralysis."
People from other disciplines also seem to view climate change as a
"perfect" problem. Nicholas Stern, author of the influential Stern
Review on the economics of climate change, describes it as the "perfect
market failure". Philosopher Stephen Gardiner of the University of
Washington in Seattle says it is a "perfect moral storm". Everyone, it
seems, shapes climate change in their own image.
Which points to the real problem: climate change is exceptionally
amorphous. It provides us with no defining qualities that would give it
a clear identity: no deadlines, no geographic location, no single cause
or solution and, critically, no obvious enemy. Our brains scan it for
the usual cues that we use to process and evaluate information about the
world, but find none. And so we impose our own. This is a perilous
situation, leaving climate change wide open to another of Kahneman's
biases - an "assimilation bias" that bends information to fit people's
existing values and prejudices.
So is climate change really innately challenging, or does it just seem
so because of the stories we have shaped around it? For example, the
overwhelming and possibly hopeless struggle portrayed by the media and
many campaigners provokes feelings of powerlessness. Scientists
reinforce distance with computer predictions set two generations in the
future and endless talk of uncertainty. The latest report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change uses the word "uncertain" more
than once per page.
Discussions about economics, meanwhile, invariably turn into self
defeating cost-benefit analyses. Stern offers a choice between spending
1 per cent of annual income now, or risking losing 20 per cent of it in
50 years' time. This language is almost identical to that Kahneman used
two decades earlier in his experiments on loss aversion. Is it
surprising that when a choice is framed like this, policy-makers are
intuitively drawn towards postponing action and taking a gamble on the
future?
"Is it any surprise that policy-makers are tempted to postpone action
and gamble on the future?"
If cost and uncertainty really are universal psychological barriers, it
is hard to explain why 15 per cent of people fully accept the threat and
are willing to make personal sacrifices to avert it. Most of the people
in this group are left wing or environmentalists and have managed to
turn climate change into a narrative that fits with their existing
criticisms of industry and growth.
Conservatives may justify climate inaction on the grounds of cost and
uncertainty but they, too, are able to accept both as long as they speak
to their core values. As former US vice-president and climate sceptic
Dick Cheney said: "If there is only a 1 per cent chance of terrorists
getting weapons of mass destruction, we must act as if it is a certainty."
Strongly held values can explain the convictions of those at the ends of
the political spectrum, but they do not adequately explain the apparent
indifference of the large majority in between. If asked, most agree that
climate change is a serious threat, but without prompting they do not
volunteer it.
This silence is similar to that found around human rights abuses, argued
the late Stanley Cohen, a sociologist at the London School of Economics.
He suggested that we know very well what is happening but "enter into
unwritten agreements about what can be publicly remembered and
acknowledged".
Our response to climate change is uncannily similar to an even more
universal disavowal: unwillingness to face our own mortality, says
neuroscientist Janis Dickinson of Cornell University in New York. She
argues that overt images of death and decay along with the deeper
implications of societal decline and collapse are powerful triggers for
denial of mortality.
There is a great deal of research showing that people respond to
reminders of death with aggressive assertion of their own group
identity. Dickinson argues that political polarisation and angry denial
found around climate change is consistent with this "terror management
theory". Again, there is a complex relationship between our psychology
and the narratives that we construct to make sense of climate change.
For all of these reasons, it is a mistake to assume that the scientific
evidence of climate change will flow directly into action - or,
conversely, that climate denial can be dismissed as mere misinformation.
The systems that govern our attitudes are just as complex as those that
govern energy and carbon, and just as subject to feedbacks that
exaggerate small differences between people. The problem itself is far
from perfect and the situation is not hopeless, but dealing with it will
require a more sophisticated analysis of human cognition and the role of
socially shared values in building conviction.
This article appeared in print under the headline "Hear no climate evil"
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/
- - - - -
George Marsahll's Climate Change Denial blog
*GET RADICAL- ENGAGING CONSERVATIVES ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE: 1
<https://climatedenial.org/2015/05/06/get-radical-engaging-conservatives-about-climate-change-1/>*
George Marshall
I regard myself to be a radical. However, I now believe that the most
radical thing that I can do is to break out of the safety zone of
left/liberal environmentalism and actively engage with conservatives.
I have two decades in the radical environmental movement, and I believe
strongly that the crisis of climate change requires systemic changes. I
make no apology for this and am utterly convinced, from my reading of
history, that these changes will only emerge from strong and outspoken
political movements.
But no movement will win unless it has strength of numbers and
influence. We should not delude ourselves that a highly motivated
minority - what Marxists used to call the vanguard- can ever win this.
This issue is far too large to be overcome without a near total
commitment across society.
Yet, throughout the Anglophone world there is a dangerous political
polarisation around climate change. In one particularly disturbing US
poll, attitudes to climate change were a better predictor of
respondents' political orientation than any other issue- including gun
control, abortion and capital punishment. Denial of climate change is
not just an opinion, it has become a dominant mark of people's political
identity.
This is no small problem. People with conservative values (some of whom
may also vote for centre-left parties) constitute the majority in almost
all countries. In US surveys people who identify strongly with these
values outnumber those who identify with liberal/left values by a factor
of 2:1.
In my book, Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to
Ignore Climate Change, I argued that climate change exists for us in the
form of socially constructed narratives built upon our values and
identity. It is these narratives- not the underlying science or even the
evidence of our own eyes- that leads us to accept or reject the issue.
Unfortunately one of the dominant values in the climate movement is a
disregard , if not outright contempt, for the right-leaning mainstream
and their concerns. Activists often talk with disgust of the
selfishness, greed and stupidity of conservatives. This is intolerant
and unpleasant. The denigration conveniently ignores the diversity of
opinion and life experience among conservatives. A struggling rural
family, an elderly Christian on a small pension, a community shopkeeper
and a Wall Street Banker are combined into one faceless enemy.
More often, though, conservatives are just ignored. Few people in the
climate movement want to deal with them, talk to them, or find out more
about them. They simply don't exist.
Last week I led a communications workshop for one of the largest
international environmental networks: one I respect and have worked with
for many years. I asked them "do you think that the climate change
movement has a problem with its diversity?" Absolutely, they replied,
it's too dominated by middle aged men, too white, too middle-class, not
enough involvement from minorities or indigenous peoples, not many
disabled people. Nobody mentioned the absence of conservatives, and
certainly no-one in the room was admitting to being one.
Diversity' is a powerful frame for progressives but its components have
been entirely defined by the struggles of marginalised groups for
representation. It makes us blind to our own failure to involve the
majority of our fellow citizens.
Last year I was thrilled to attend the People's Climate March in New
York (I think I can justify the carbon-I was there on a six -state book
tour). 350,000 people marched with placards declaring "To Change
Everything We Need Everyone". But, just as diversity only includes the
groups that conform to the progressive ideology, the definition of
everyone excludes the majority of the population. There was a great deal
of progressive diversity at the march: indigenous peoples headed it up,
followed by environmental justice groups of all colours and ethnicities
and labour unions. As someone who has campaigned for over twenty years
for indigenous rights, and led large programmes with trades unions, I
was thrilled to see such broad representation.
But as I watched the banners and placards pass by, I imagined how this
would seem to mainstream America. The dominant messages were about
banning, stopping, protecting, boycotting things. Among them were hard
left-wing messages about overthrowing capitalism and destroying Wall
Street. A woman with a placard reading Never, Never, Never, Ever Vote
Republican (see above) was clapped and whistled. To balance this a posse
of cigar-chomping Republican frat boys turned up with cut outs of Ronald
Regan to wind up the lefties. But there was nothing, not even a word,
that so much as hinted that mainstream conservatives had a place
alongside everyone in the climate struggle. A small pack of Nebraskan
ranchers, converted to the cause by their fight against the Keystone XL
Pipeline, told me freely, proudly, that they were lifelong Republicans.
They were hidden within the mass of the march when they should have
been at its very front: a symbol of an extraordinary unity of purpose
and our shared destiny.
Ironically we know how to change this. The process to increase
representation of conservatives in the climate change movement can be
taken directly from previous experience with building diversity- whether
it be economic, gender, or race. First of all actively hire new people
from the underrepresented group who can work through their networks.
Then enable them to develop communications that speak to others like
themselves using their own values.
The process by which we respond to climate change creates the tramlines
for our future adaptation. If we use it to build a narrative around our
interconnectedness and shared humanity then we stand a good chance of
pulling through, just as divided communities can settle their
differences to pull together after a hurricane. If we build our
movement through distrust and division we create the preconditions for
future in-fighting, blame and scapegoating. The only reason why the
minority vanguards ever won was that they got their hands on guns and
then ruled by them.
So my challenge to all people concerned about climate change is this:
when are we going to accept the challenge of reaching across partisan
boundaries and building a broad social consensus for action? We do not
even have to agree about the details of the solutions- indeed I hope we
maintain a strong debate. But surely we can come together in the
recognition that dealing with climate change is the greatest calling of
our age?
***********************************************
Please share this piece and comment below. Over the next few weeks I
will be posting a number of articles to my blog exploring these themes.
https://climatedenial.org/
[Soon to be a horror movie...]
Siberian Times
*Worms frozen in permafrost for up to 42,000 years come back to life
<https://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/worms-frozen-in-permafrost-for-up-to-42000-years-come-back-to-life/>*
By The Siberian Times reporter 26 July 2018
Nematodes moving and eating again for the first time since the
Pleistocene age in major scientific breakthrough, say experts.
The roundworms from two areas of Siberia came back to life in Petri
dishes, says a new scientific study.
'We have obtained the first data demonstrating the capability of
multicellular organisms for longterm cryobiosis in permafrost deposits
of the Arctic,' states a report from Russian scientists from four
institutions in collaboration with Princetown University.
Some 300 prehistoric worms were analysed - and two 'were shown to
contain viable nematodes'.
'After being defrosted, the nematodes showed signs of life,' said a
report today from Yakutia, the area where the worms were found.
'They started moving and eating.'
One worm came from an ancient squirrel burrow in a permafrost wall of
the Duvanny Yar outcrop in the lower reaches of the Kolyma River - close
to the site of Pleistocene Park which is seeking to recreate the Arctic
habitat of the extinct woolly mammoth, according to the scientific
article published in Doklady Biological Sciences this week.
This is around 32,000 years old.
Another was found in permafrost near Alazeya River in 2015, and is
around 41,700 years old.
Currently the nematodes are the oldest living animals on the planet.
They are both believed to be female.
The worms came back to life in a laboratory at The Institute of
Physico-Chemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science in Moscow region.
The scientists say: "Our data demonstrate the ability of multicellular
organisms to survive long-term (tens of thousands of years) cryobiosis
under the conditions of natural cryoconservation.
'It is obvious that this ability suggests that the Pleistocene
nematodes have some adaptive mechanisms that may be of scientific
and practical importance for the related fields of science, such as
cryomedicine, cryobiology, and astrobiology."
The Russian institutions involved in the pioneering research were: The
Institute of Physico-Chemical and Biological Problems of Soil Science;
Moscow State University; Pertsov White Sea Biological Station, part of
Moscow State University; and the Higher School of Economics in Moscow.
The Department of Geosciences, Princeton University, was also involved.
https://siberiantimes.com/science/casestudy/news/worms-frozen-in-permafrost-for-up-to-42000-years-come-back-to-life/
*This Day in Climate History - July 28, 2016
<https://youtu.be/pnXiy4D_I8g>- from D.R. Tucker*
July 28, 2016: Accepting her party's historic nomination at the 2016
Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton declares, "I believe in
science"--a sharp contrast to her denialist rival, GOP nominee Donald
Trump. She also calls for strong action on human-caused climate change.
https://youtu.be/pnXiy4D_I8g
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//Archive of Daily Global Warming News
<https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html>
//
/https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote//
///
///To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request>
/to news digest. /
*** Privacy and Security: * This is a text-only mailing that
carries no images which may originate from remote servers.
Text-only messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender.
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
commercial purposes.
To subscribe, email: contact at theclimate.vote with subject:
subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe
Also youmay subscribe/unsubscribe at
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Paulifor
http://TheClimate.Vote delivering succinct information for
citizens and responsible governments of all levels. List
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
restricted to this mailing list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/attachments/20180728/e389bbd3/attachment.html>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list