[✔️] October 15, 2021 - Daily Global Warming News Digest
👀 Richard Pauli
richard at theclimate.vote
Fri Oct 15 09:46:53 EDT 2021
/*October 15, 2021*/
/[ British Royalty speaks ]/
*Queen slams ‘irritating’ world leaders who talk but don’t deliver on
climate change*/
/Queen Elizabeth II has been caught on a hot mic expressing her
annoyance at world leaders who grandstand but don't deliver on climate
change.
In a conversation with the Duchess of Cornwall and Elin Jones, presiding
officer of the Welsh parliament, the queen criticized "irritating"
leaders for not walking the talk on climate change ahead of the imminent
COP26 climate summit in Scotland.
“I’ve been hearing all about COP," the queen said. "Still don’t know who
is coming. No idea. It’s really irritating when they talk, but they
don’t do."
https://www.politico.eu/article/queen-slams-world-leaders-climate-change-cop26-glasgow/
- -
/[ Biden speaks ]/
*Climate change poses systemic threat to entire economy, Biden plan warns*
-- The roadmap accounts for how climate change will impact the companies
people are invested in and aims to protect the savings of American
families with retirement plans.
-- The... also identifies how agencies can strengthen the resilience of
infrastructure in response to worsening climate disasters.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/15/biden-unveils-plan-to-address-climate-change-risks-to-economy.html
/[Twitter activism, tell the NYTimes, WAPO and WSJ to stop carrying
fossil fuel ads]/
*End Climate Silence*
In collaboration with @YouGov, we asked @nytimes, @washingtonpost, and @WSJ
readers (who have not yet subscribed) about their views on fossil-fuel
advertising.
- - Majorities of such readers say that these newspapers should not
be making ads for oil and gas companies.
- - Majorities of such readers also report that fossil-fuel ads
make them trust a paper’s environmental journalism LESS, with WSJ
readers evenly split (52% NYT, 52% WaPo, 50% WSJ).
- - Strong subsections of readers say they are less likely to
subscribe to the papers they read because those papers take
fossil-fuel advertising (43% NYT, 41% WaPo, 39% WSJ).
- - In the age of climate change, fossil-fuel advertising is not
only a totally irresponsible and even dangerous business practice,
but also something that seems to make it *harder* not easier for
flagship newspapers to expand their subscription base. Just a bad
idea all around.
https://twitter.com/EndClimtSilence/status/1448722564273029124?s=20/
/
/- -//
/
/[tell advertiser funded news outlets, to let go of fossil fuel ads]/
*EndClimateSilence.Org*
*this is an emergency. climate silence is climate denial.*
#EndClimateSilence now.
climate change is not just a topic for the science or environment
section. it’s the essential context for stories about extreme weather,
energy, politics, business and finance, immigration, real estate,
travel, health, food, sports, and the arts.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b71db17365f0230bbf7aa7c/t/61687a1439ff8d58cddbbe01/1634236949009/Summary_+YouGov+polling+results.pdf
/https://www.endclimatesilence.org//
//
/
/
/
/
/[Earth's albedo has changed - 0=dark, 1 = bright white -- video]/
*Planet Earth Is Dimmer And Reflects Less Light Since The 1990s*/
/Oct 14, 2021
Anton Petrov
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk
about a new study that discovers the troublesome decrease of albedo of
planet Earth in last two decades
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gD46hzShthI/
/
/
/
/
/
/[More media "To Boldly Go.." where only information manipulation can go
- Shatner improvises]
/* "To Dirty it!" On how For-Profit News Obscured William Shatner's
Climate Emergency Warning after Suborbital Flight*
Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) - On Wednesday, pop culture icon William
Shatner, Star Trek's Captain James Tiberius Kirk, explained the enormity
of seeing the earth from a suborbital flight on Blue Origin's New
Shepherd space craft. Part of what he said when he returned from 66
miles up got lost in all of the news reports I've seen, and it is the
most important part.
Here’s a portion of what CNBC printed in what they alleged was the
complete transcript of Shatner’s remarks:
“I mean, the little things, the weightlessness, and to see the blue
color whip by and now you’re staring into blackness. That’s the thing.
This covering of blue is this sheet, this blanket, this comforter of
blue around that we have around us. We think ‘oh, that’s blue sky’ and
suddenly you shoot through it all of a sudden, like you whip a sheet off
you when you’re asleep, and you’re looking into blackness – into black
ugliness. And you look down, there’s the blue down there, and the black
up there, and there is Mother Earth and comfort and – is there death? Is
that the way death is?”
But here’s the crucial takeaway, the last phrase of which is omitted
by CNBC:
“What I would love to do is communicate as much as possible the
jeopardy, the moment you see how vuln– the vulnerability of
everything. It so small. This air which is keeping us alive is
thinner than your skin. It’s a sliver. It’s immeasurably small when
you think in terms of the universe. It’s negligible, this air. Mars
doesn’t have it. It’s so thin. And to dirty it…”
“The jeopardy . . . And to dirty it!” To fill this precious
atmosphere, unique in our solar system, with clouds of burned coal
dust and with greenhouse gases, Shatner says, is . . . what?
Despicable. Unthinkable.
Just when Shatner is getting on to the subject about how what he saw
reinforced his horror at the way we are polluting the atmosphere and
imperiling the earth with man-made global heating, Bezos interrupts
him: “It goes so fast.” Bezos doesn’t want Captain Kirk expounding
on the evils of climate change on his promotional clip. He gets him
talking about the experience again. Not the conclusion he drew from
that experience.
But we know what Shatner thinks. He thinks that the sunny optimism
of the original 1960s Star Trek TV series, which reflected the view
of the future held by its creator, Gene Rodenberry, was misplaced.
Shatner as Capt. Kirk played a role in helping the world imagine a
better future.
As Shatner lived through the succeeding decades, however, he
discovered the reality of the climate emergency and was filled with
alarm.
In a 2016 interview with Brian Fung at the Washington Post, Shatner
said:
“The biggest threat to our world today is climate change. The future
is exciting because the future is always hope … What seems to be
happening is that the future is filled with dread.”
In the same interview, he said of the science fiction writers he
worked with in the 1960s, “There was all kinds of interest in flying
vehicles and health and the state of the world. That we wouldn’t be
melting away, into the sixth extinction. It would be a much more
pleasant. Peaceful. Humane world. Than it is.”
Fung asked Shatner if any technologies scared him. The actor replied,
“The technology that worries me is the old technologies. The
technology of uses of energy and the spilling of toxins into Mother
Earth, and we’re killing our Earth and nobody is irate about it
enough. And not enough people are irate about it. People like
yourself — young people like yourself should be screaming at the top
of your lungs to the people who lead.”
That’s what Shatner wanted to say on his return to earth. He wanted
to say that our thin, fragile, vulnerable, unique atmosphere is in
danger from petroleum, gas and coal, that this mothering “blue
blanket” of the earth is in danger of being enveloped by the grim
blackness of galactic emptiness because of the way we are treating it.
That is what for-profit news did not report about Shatner’s profound
experience and his articulation of it. He wants you screaming at the
top of your lungs that our pale blue dot is in danger of being
burned up and engulfed by an unfeeling, black cosmos. And that only
we can stop it from getting worse, because we are the ones making it
worse.
https://www.juancole.com/2021/10/obscured-emergency-suborbital.html
- -
[Today show video interview]
*William Shatner Reacts To Seeing Earth From Space: ‘It’s So Fragile’*
Oct 14, 2021
TODAY
At the age of 90, “Star Trek” actor William Shatner made history
Wednesday when he and three others were launched into space on a Blue
Origin rocket. “I was overwhelmed with the experience of looking at
death and looking at life,” he tells TODAY. “The whole thing was
indescribable.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx_CdBcRexc
/[ ug, icky ]/
*Toxic algae blooms are multiplying. The government has no plan to help.*
A new watchdog report shows the Environmental Protection Agency doesn’t
have a cohesive strategy for dealing with freshwater harmful algal blooms.
https://grist.org/politics/toxic-algae-blooms-are-multiplying-the-government-has-no-plan-to-help//
/
/- -/
/[ especially next summer ]/
*Human Health Effects Caused by the Most Common Toxin-producing
Cyanobacteria*
When people are exposed to cyanotoxins, adverse health effects may range
from a mild skin rash to serious illness or in rare circumstances,
death. Acute illnesses caused by short-term exposure to cyanobacteria
and cyanotoxins during recreational activities include hay fever-like
symptoms, skin rashes, respiratory and gastrointestinal distress.
Exposure to drinking water contaminated with elevated concentrations of
microcystin and cylindrospermopsin could cause liver and kidney damage.
The table below summarizes the health effects caused by the most common
toxin-producing cyanobacteria...
https://www.epa.gov/cyanohabs/health-effects-cyanotoxins/
/
/
/
/
/
///[ confirming common sense ]/
*Air conditioning in a changing climate: A growing rich-poor divide*
by Edward Lempinen, University of California - Berkeley
https://phys.org/news/2021-10-air-conditioning-climate-rich-poor.html
/[ Al Gore said it -- the news archive - looking back]/ *
**On this day in the history of global warming October 15, 2007*
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman ridicules right-wing outrage over
Al Gore's Nobel Prize win.
*Gore Derangement Syndrome*
By Paul Krugman
On the day after Al Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize, The Wall
Street Journal’s editors couldn’t even bring themselves to mention
Mr. Gore’s name. Instead, they devoted their editorial to a long
list of people they thought deserved the prize more.
And at National Review Online, Iain Murray suggested that the prize
should have been shared with “that well-known peace campaigner Osama
bin Laden, who implicitly endorsed Gore’s stance.” You see, bin
Laden once said something about climate change — therefore, anyone
who talks about climate change is a friend of the terrorists.
What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?
Partly it’s a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American
people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White
House. Both the personality cult the right tried to build around
President Bush and the often hysterical denigration of Mr. Gore
were, I believe, largely motivated by the desire to expunge the
stain of illegitimacy from the Bush administration.
And now that Mr. Bush has proved himself utterly the wrong man for
the job — to be, in fact, the best president Al Qaeda’s recruiters
could have hoped for — the symptoms of Gore derangement syndrome
have grown even more extreme.
The worst thing about Mr. Gore, from the conservative point of view,
is that he keeps being right. In 1992, George H. W. Bush mocked him
as the “ozone man,” but three years later the scientists who
discovered the threat to the ozone layer won the Nobel Prize in
Chemistry. In 2002 he warned that if we invaded Iraq, “the resulting
chaos could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States
than we presently face from Saddam.” And so it has proved.
But Gore hatred is more than personal. When National Review decided
to name its anti-environmental blog Planet Gore, it was trying to
discredit the message as well as the messenger. For the truth Mr.
Gore has been telling about how human activities are changing the
climate isn’t just inconvenient. For conservatives, it’s deeply
threatening.
Consider the policy implications of taking climate change seriously.
“We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals,”
said F.D.R. “We know now that it is bad economics.” These words
apply perfectly to climate change. It’s in the interest of most
people (and especially their descendants) that somebody do something
to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases,
but each individual would like that somebody to be somebody else.
Leave it up to the free market, and in a few generations Florida
will be underwater.
The solution to such conflicts between self-interest and the common
good is to provide individuals with an incentive to do the right
thing. In this case, people have to be given a reason to cut back on
greenhouse gas emissions, either by requiring that they pay a tax on
emissions or by requiring that they buy emission permits, which has
pretty much the same effects as an emissions tax. We know that such
policies work: the U.S. “cap and trade” system of emission permits
on sulfur dioxide has been highly successful at reducing acid rain.
Climate change is, however, harder to deal with than acid rain,
because the causes are global. The sulfuric acid in America’s lakes
mainly comes from coal burned in U.S. power plants, but the carbon
dioxide in America’s air comes from coal and oil burned around the
planet — and a ton of coal burned in China has the same effect on
the future climate as a ton of coal burned here. So dealing with
climate change not only requires new taxes or their equivalent; it
also requires international negotiations in which the United States
will have to give as well as get.
Everything I’ve just said should be uncontroversial — but imagine
the reception a Republican candidate for president would receive if
he acknowledged these truths at the next debate. Today, being a good
Republican means believing that taxes should always be cut, never
raised. It also means believing that we should bomb and bully
foreigners, not negotiate with them.
So if science says that we have a big problem that can’t be solved
with tax cuts or bombs — well, the science must be rejected, and the
scientists must be slimed. For example, Investor’s Business Daily
recently declared that the prominence of James Hansen, the NASA
researcher who first made climate change a national issue two
decades ago, is actually due to the nefarious schemes of — who else?
— George Soros.
Which brings us to the biggest reason the right hates Mr. Gore: in
his case the smear campaign has failed. He’s taken everything they
could throw at him, and emerged more respected, and more credible,
than ever. And it drives them crazy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/opinion/15krugman.html?_r=0
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/
/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 mailing is text-only. It does not carry
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers. A
text-only message can provide greater privacy to the receiver and
sender. This is a hobby production curated by Richard Pauli
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.
To subscribe, email: contact at theclimate.vote
<mailto:contact at theclimate.vote> with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe,
subject: unsubscribe
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at
https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for
http://TheClimate.Vote <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/20211015/647c976d/attachment.htm>
More information about the TheClimate.Vote
mailing list