[✔️] April 7, 2024 Global Warming News | Camel milk and meat, Communicate climate, Clouds, Kolbert, Disinformation, Documentary, 2009 Georgi Porgie

[Richard Pauli]

/*April 7*//*, 2024*/


/[  Avoiding eggs and beef?  Is this a great time to go Vegan? ]/
*Turning camels into cows: megafarms are being set up to produce camel 
milk on industrial scales*
Published: April 5, 2024

https://theconversation.com/turning-camels-into-cows-megafarms-are-being-set-up-to-produce-camel-milk-on-industrial-scales-223485



/[   College professors reaching students  ]/
*Faculty Discusses Effective Ways to Communicate With Climate Change 
Skeptics*
Emery Furgason, Contributing Writer
April 5, 2024
Professors, staff and students gathered in the Pinchin Hall lobby on 
Thursday, March 28, to discuss how to effectively communicate with 
climate skeptics. The event was hosted by the Colgate University Office 
of Sustainability and Dart Colegrove Commons.

As part of the event, a panel consisting of staff and professors led the 
discussion. Associate Professor of Music Seth Coluzzi introduced the 
panelists. In attendance were Jennifer LeMesurier, associate professor 
of writing and rhetoric, Rachel Dinero, visiting assistant professor of 
psychological and brain sciences and John Pumilio, director of 
sustainability at Colgate.

The event aimed to answer the question of how to start a conversation 
about climate change with someone who may not believe the reality of it. 
LeMesurier emphasized recognizing who your audience is and understanding 
what contributes to their mindset. She explained that to understand your 
audience is to understand their behaviors and beliefs without 
invalidating their character.

According to LeMesurier, when talking with someone who has a different 
belief, it is important to realize they may not have all the same 
information that you are aware of and understand. In order to have 
discussions without them turning into debates, LeMesurier stressed it is 
necessary to find places where open dialogue is supported.

Dinero introduced whether or not the audience’s mind should be changed. 
Understanding if an individual’s particular mindset is open to changing 
their mind or hearing another perspective is key. In fact, Dinero 
claimed sometimes the most important thing is to change someone’s 
behaviors, rather than beliefs.

“For me, it’s really about recognizing what are situations and contacts 
in which this is an opportunity for dialogue and which are situations 
[that are not] really an opportunity for dialogue,” Dinero said.

Dinero continued by wondering how we can communicate with people with 
fundamentally different mindsets. She explained that high emotional 
reactivity limits individuals from considering alternative perspectives. 
Dinero finds that each conversation that involves some discussion around 
climate change is one step closer to closing the gap and finding common 
ground with skeptics. A staggered approach aids in acclimating skeptics 
to these climate-centered discussions.

In response to Dinero, Pumilio found that if people change their minds, 
they will also change their behavior when making small and large 
decisions. While Pumilio explained that changing minds and behavior is 
the end goal, he recognized this change will not happen overnight.

“It takes some patience and persistence to do the things that we are 
talking about today, and that is to change behavior and minds on an 
issue,” Pumilio said. “It doesn’t happen in one conversation or one 
debate or one set of facts. This takes time and it takes [many] 
consistent approaches.”

Dinero observed that consequential scenarios, such as climate change, 
can scare people and make them not think about these scenarios. Rational 
behavior would suggest we would respond to consequential threats, but 
the opposite can happen with climate change. It’s the very fact that 
climate change is so utterly consequential which causes many people to 
not care about it; they disengage, since the threat is overwhelming.

First-year Sophie Wohlstadter found the methods used to incline climate 
skeptics to change their behavior without necessarily changing their 
minds eye-opening.

“I thought the panel was very insightful and found the results-oriented 
approach interesting. Encouraging sustainable practices by bringing up 
benefits that climate skeptics might agree with — like cost savings, for 
example — is an approach I had not really thought about before,” 
Wohlstadter said.

Pumilio reiterated the value of finding common ground with climate 
skeptics or anyone with a differing belief. Continuing to have 
conversations and finding points of agreement will produce more results 
than arguing with others or dismissing them.
https://thecolgatemaroonnews.com/50525/news/faculty-discusses-effective-ways-to-communicate-with-climate-change-skeptics//
/

/
/

/
/

/[ Anytime is OK to look at clouds ]/
*People say clouds look different these days. It's not suspicious — it's 
climate change.*
Here's the scoop on why you might be seeing more people talking about 
clouds and conspiracies.
Annie Reneau
04.06.24
Have you noticed that clouds are looking a bit different than you 
remember them when you were younger? Less fluffy and more wispy? Fewer 
billowing clouds against a bold, blue sky and more washed out skies with 
see-through cloud patterns?

There have always been different kinds of clouds, of course, but people 
are remarking that something seems to have changed, which has led to all 
kinds of conspiracy theories. Combined with the debunked theories about 
contrails being "chemtrails," a whole new wave of suspicions about our 
skies is taking hold. Some people say it's all in their heads, but 
others are insistent that the sky just isn't the same.

There is a scientific explanation for why clouds might actually be 
changing, but not one that conspiracy-minded folks are going to like. 
It's most likely due to climate change, as climate scientists predicted 
that these cloud changes would be coming years ago.
First, let's look at the different kinds of clouds and where they form 
in the atmosphere. Those billowy, cartoon-like cumulus clouds we all 
enjoy are formed at lower altitudes, while the wispy cirrus or spotty 
cirrocumulus clouds that make the sky look washed out or mottled are 
formed higher up in the stratosphere. In reality, all different cloud 
types are common, but climate change is making those higher, wispier 
ones more common.
https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy81MTkyMjA5My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTc0ODczMjQ4M30.MIrIZ-nYTHtq6m44RMOGOQGL1-G0Jym6xNHlniDkTV4/img.png?width=1280&quality=85
In 2016, Dr. Ilissa Ocko explained that models had predicted that 
climate change would push clouds higher in the sky and scientists were 
starting to see evidence of it happening. Ocko, who earned her Ph.D. and 
M.A. in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at Princeton University, wrote, 
"A warmer Earth elevates clouds because the troposphere, the lowest 
layer of our atmosphere where weather occurs, can extend higher with a 
hotter surface." As the
Not only are higher cloud formations an effect of climate change, but 
they also contribute to it. While clouds reflect the sun's light, higher 
clouds also trap heat, potentially accelerating the warming of the 
planet's surface. As Ocko explained:

"Anything that absorbs energy must also re-emit energy. How much is 
released depends on the temperature of the object.

Heat absorbed and then re-emitted by low clouds that are close to the 
ground is similar to the heat emitted by the surface because the 
temperature of the ground and the cloud are similar.

But the higher the cloud is in the sky, the colder it is. So when these 
high clouds absorb Earth’s heat, they re-emit it at a much lower 
temperature, forming a blanket that traps heat in the climate system 
similar to how greenhouse gases trap heat."
So what we end up with, in theory, is a self-perpetuating issue of 
higher cloud formation both being propelled by and amplifying climate 
change.

However, the science is still very much in flux when it comes to clouds 
and climate change. Predictive models aren't perfect, and some phenomena 
scientists expected have played out differently in real life, both for 
better and for worse. For instance, more recent research shows that 
trade cumulus clouds, which help cool the Earth, are affected less than 
expected by a warming atmosphere. That's good news. On the other hand, 
scientists have also found that mixed-phase clouds, which were predicted 
to have a dampening effect on climate change, don't help as much as they 
thought, especially when temperature rise accelerates. That's not good news.
There are a lot of cloud-climate change connections and scientists are 
continuously looking for clues and possibilities for how clouds can help 
or hinder our efforts to battle the climate crisis.

But what about the contrails that some folks erroneously call 
"chemtrails"? Despite being a well-known phenomenon of clouds formed 
from the condensation of a jet's exhaust, they too play a role in 
climate change. Contrails form when the humidity and temperature the 
plane is flying through are right (cold and humid), and the troposphere 
where modern planes fly provide tend to provide those conditions.

While contrails aren't some big government conspiracy to drop toxic 
chemicals on the unsuspecting populous, they aren't harmless. Some 
contrails dissipate quickly, but under certain atmospheric conditions, 
they can linger and spread out to create those wispy clouds that trap 
heat in the atmosphere. Some estimates cite contrails as being 
responsible for more than a third of the total aviation contribution to 
climate change.
Thankfully, the aviation industry is testing ways to best reduce 
contrails, including flying at different altitudes. There are tradeoffs 
with fuel consumption, so a balance has to be struck, but as we learn 
more there will surely be more innovations that help.

The bottom line is that yes, clouds may actually be different from what 
we remember in our youth, but it's not because of anything nefarious or 
suspicious. It's most likely what scientists have seen coming for years 
and we are now seeing the effects of—climate change. All the more reason 
for us to take action to slow it down now.
https://www.upworthy.com/people-say-clouds-look-different-these-days-it-s-not-suspicious-its-climate-change



/[//interview with Elizabeth Kolbert - her book "H is for Hope"]/
*Elizabeth Kolbert: H Is for Hope*
Climate One
Elizabeth Kolbert began reporting on the increasingly devastating 
effects of climate change in the early 2000s – before Al Gore’s 
breakthrough documentary “An Inconvenient Truth.” Kolbert’s reporting 
became the foundation of her book “Field Notes from a Catastrophe,” 
which sounded the alarm on the causes and effects of global warming. In 
the two decades since then, the frequency and intensity of 
climate-induced disasters has only intensified. And yet, Kolbert’s 
latest book is titled “H Is for Hope: Climate Change from A to Z.” So 
where does she see cause for hope? What is the world finally doing 
right? And what work still needs to be done?

Join Climate One Co-Host Ariana Brocious for a live-streamed 
conversation with Pulitzer Prize-winning author and journalist Elizabeth 
Kolbert as we unpack the state of the world’s climate and on-going 
efforts to mitigate future disaster.

Guest:
Elizabeth Kolbert, Journalist and Author
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01smszR6Gnk


/[ Report from the Disinformation battleground-  from DeSmog blog ]/
*IEA Think Tank Contributes to Climate Science Denial Documentary*
The group, which received money from BP for at least 50 years, is 
“cementing its role as a major mouthpiece for climate change 
scepticism”, campaigners say.

By Sam Brighton
Apr 5, 2024
A senior figure at the influential Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) 
think tank contributed to a new documentary that spread numerous myths 
about climate change.

Stephen Davies, an academic who has worked in educational outreach roles 
at the IEA since 2010, appeared several times in Climate The Movie: The 
Cold Truth – a new film directed by climate science denier Martin Durkin.

In the documentary, Davies claims that climate activists want to impose 
an “austere” life on ordinary people. “Behind all the talk about a 
climate emergency, climate crisis” is “an animus and hostility towards” 
working-class people, “their lifestyle, their beliefs and a desire to 
change it by force if necessary,” he says.

According to the website Skeptical Science, which debunks climate 
misinformation, Climate The Movie contains more than two dozen myths 
about climate change. The film suggests that we shouldn’t be worried 
about greenhouse gas emissions, because plants need carbon dioxide. 
“We’re in a CO2 famine,” one interviewee claims.

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s 
foremost climate science body, has stated that carbon dioxide “is 
responsible for most of global warming” since the late 19th century, 
which has increased the “severity and frequency of weather and climate 
extremes, like heat waves, heavy rains, and drought”.

Climate The Movie producer Thomas Nelson told DeSmog that “I see the 
misguided fight against carbon dioxide as being as crazy as fighting 
against oxygen or water vapour, and I think scaring innocent children 
about this is deeply evil”.

The IEA said that “Steve firmly believes that climate change is 
happening and carbon emissions are having an impact. His view that 
climate policy imposes costs, particularly on working-class communities, 
is entirely mainstream. IEA publications and spokespeople have supported 
action on climate change, including carbon pricing.”

In 2018, Greenpeace’s investigative journalism unit Unearthed revealed 
that the IEA had received funding from oil major BP every year since 
1967. In response to the story, an IEA spokeswoman said: “It is surely 
uncontroversial that the IEA’s principles coincide with the interests of 
our donors.”

The IEA also received a £21,000 grant from U.S. oil major ExxonMobil in 
2005.

The IEA has extensive influence in politics and the media. It was 
pivotal to Liz Truss’s short-lived premiership as prime minister, and 
has boasted of its access to Conservative ministers and MPs. During the 
year ending March 2023, the IEA appeared in the media on 5,265 
occasions, a figure 43 percent higher than its previous peak in 2019.

The group has also received donations from a number of philanthropic 
trusts accused of channelling funds from the fossil fuel industry and 
helping to support climate science denial groups. The IEA is a member of 
the Atlas Network – an international collaboration of “extreme” free 
market groups that have been accused of promoting the interests of 
fossil fuel companies and other large corporations.

It’s not known if the IEA has received funding from BP since 2018.

The IEA is a prominent supporter of the continued and extended use of 
fossil fuels. The group has advocated for the ban to be lifted on 
fracking for shale gas, calling it the “moral and economic choice”. The 
IEA has also said that a ban on new North Sea oil and gas would be 
“madness”, has criticised the windfall tax imposed on North Sea oil and 
gas firms, and said that the government’s commitment to “max out” the 
UK’s fossil fuel reserves is a “welcome step”.

The IEA is part of the Tufton Street network – a cluster of libertarian 
think tanks and pressure groups that are in favour of more fossil fuel 
extraction and are opposed to state-led climate action. These groups are 
characterised by a lack of transparency over their sources of funding. 
The IEA does not publicly declare the names of its donors.

“From Brexit to Trussonomics, the IEA has consistently peddled and 
promoted destructive and damaging policies,” Green Party MP Caroline 
Lucas told DeSmog. “Yet perhaps nothing will prove more dangerous long 
term than the stream of climate denialism and calls to delay action that 
have been pouring out of Tufton Street for many years.

“Clearly the IEA is now ramping up its climate culture war and the 
Conservative Party has been following suit. The cross-party consensus on 
climate action we used to have in Parliament is under strain like never 
before.”

The IEA and Stephen Davies were approached for comment.

/        [ Climate The Movie: The Cold Truth – may have been taken down 
from YouTube - it should be available on the web archive at: 
https://web.archive.org/web/20240318183052/https://www.eventbrite.com/e/climate-the-movie-film-premiere-tickets-858133358977 

/

*Climate The Movie*
During the documentary, Davies suggests that action to reduce greenhouse 
gas emissions is being used to limit the freedom of individuals. He 
claims that climate activists want to impose “a much more austere simple 
kind of lifestyle” on people “in which the consumption choices of the 
great bulk of the population are controlled or even prohibited.”

Davies adds that: “What you have here is a classic example of class 
hypocrisy and self-interest masquerading as public spirited concern. You 
could take these kinds of green socialist more seriously if they lived 
off grid, they cut their own consumption down to the minimum, they never 
flew. Instead you get constant talk about how human consumption is 
destroying the planet but the people making all this talk show 
absolutely no signs of reducing their own.”

The documentary also features an interview with Benny Peiser, the 
director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) – the UK’s 
leading climate science denial group. Peiser has previously claimed that 
it would be “extraordinary anyone should think there is a climate 
crisis”, while the GWPF has expressed the view that carbon dioxide has 
been mischaracterised as pollution, when in fact it is a “benefit to the 
planet”.

The film was favourably reviewed by commentator Toby Young in The 
Spectator magazine, who described it as “a phenomenon”. Young has 
previously said that he’s sceptical about the idea of human-caused 
climate change.

The IPCC has stated it is “unequivocal that human influence has warmed 
the atmosphere, ocean and land”, while scientists at NASA have found 
that the last 10 years were the hottest on record. Earth’s average 
surface temperature in 2023 was the warmest since records began in 1880.

The IPCC has also warned that false and misleading information 
“undermines climate science and disregards risk and urgency” of climate 
action.

The documentary also features Claire Fox, a member of the House of Lords 
who was nominated for a peerage by former prime minister Boris Johnson 
in 2020.

Fox used the documentary to claim that, by tackling climate change, 
people will be forced to pay more “to simply live the lives that they 
were leading”.

She suggests that supporters of climate action are trying to “take away 
what we consider to be not luxuries but necessities.”

The UK’s Climate Change Committee, which advises the government on 
measures to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, estimates that the 
combined policies will cost less than one percent of the country’s 
national output.

The Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK’s independent economic 
forecaster, has also said that “the costs of failing to get climate 
change under control would be much larger than those of bringing 
emissions down to net zero”.

Those suffering during the cost of living crisis have seen their energy 
bills increase by nearly £2.5 billion, in turn reducing their disposable 
incomes, due to successive governments failing to implement green reforms.

Claire Fox and the GWPF were approached for comment.

*A Charitable Cause?*
The IEA is a registered charity, meaning that it receives generous tax 
breaks.

The group justifies this charitable status partly on the basis of its 
educational outreach programme, which aims to “equip tomorrow’s leaders 
with a deep understanding of free market economics”.

The IEA claims that: “Our aim is to change the climate of opinion in the 
long term and our work with students is a key part of this.”

In the year ending March 2023, the group claimed to have engaged with 
3,500 students and 1,200 teachers via its seminars, internships and 
summer schools.

Formerly the IEA’s head of education and now a senior education fellow, 
Davies is a senior member of the group’s outreach programme. He is the 
first person listed in the IEA’s student speakers brochure, which 
advertises the IEA staff members who are available to speak at schools 
or universities.

The brochure also lists the IEA’s chief operating officer Andy Mayer, 
who has said that the government should “get rid of” its target of 
achieving net zero emissions by 2050, which he called a “very hard left, 
socialist, central-planning model”.

The non-profit Good Law Project recently made a complaint to the Charity 
Commission about the IEA, claiming that the libertarian group had 
breached charity rules. Namely, the Good Law Project claims that the IEA 
is in breach of rules stating that charities must avoid presenting 
“biased and selective information in support of a preconceived point of 
view”.

The Charity Commission rejected this complaint, stating that: “We have 
assessed the concerns raised and have not identified concerns that the 
charity is acting outside of its objects or the Commission’s published 
guidance.”

Good Law Project campaigns manager Hannah Greer told DeSmog: “It won’t 
be a surprise to anyone that the IEA is cementing its role as a major 
mouthpiece for climate change scepticism. It’s a huge scandal that the 
IEA is still allowed to peddle fringe views under the guise of being an 
‘educational charity’ while benefiting from taxpayer subsidies.

“This has been allowed to happen because we have seen alarming and 
unambiguous regulatory failure from the Charity Commission – who have 
been presented with evidence of how the IEA is flouting charity law, but 
have chosen to look the other way.”
https://www.desmog.com/2024/04/05/institute-of-economic-affairs-iea-think-tank-climate-the-movie-science-denial-documentary/



/[ journalism -- powerful video documentary of heat and bushfires ]/
*Life at 122 °F: Surviving in the Hottest Places on Earth | Free 
Documentary*
Free Documentary
  Apr 5, 2024  #FreeDocumentary #Documentary #heatwaves
Life at 122 °F: Surviving in the Hottest Places on Earth

Heatwaves - Most Powerful Forces on Earth:| Fatal Forecast | Free 
Documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEpSfYMGUyQ

As the world gets hotter, survival gets harder. One of the most deadly 
results of the climate crisis is extreme heat. How do the millions of 
people who have to live with increasingly high temperatures survive? 
This BBC investigation explores the impact of global warming on 
different communities across the globe and their struggle to adapt. From 
Nigeria to Pakistan, this is a timely deep dive into how our lives are 
being permanently changed by the earth heating up.
Subscribe Free Documentary Channel for free: https://bit.ly/2YJ4XzQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS7XXimRB2I



/[The news archive -  ]/
/*April 7, 2009 Georgie Porgie, G.F. Will
*/April 7, 2009: In a story entitled "New Data Show Rapid Arctic Ice 
Decline," the Washington Post observes: "The new evidence -- including 
satellite data showing that the average multiyear wintertime sea ice 
cover in the Arctic in 2005 and 2006 was nine feet thick, a significant 
decline from the 1980s -- contradicts data cited in widely circulated 
reports by Washington Post columnist George F. Will that sea ice in the 
Arctic has not significantly declined since 1979."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/06/AR2009040601634.html



/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe 
<mailto:subscribe at theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request> 
to news digest./

/Archive of Daily Global Warming News 
https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/

Privacy and Security: *This mailing is text-only -- and carries no 
images or attachments which may originate from remote servers. Text-only 
messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and sender. This is a 
personal 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/20240407/776174cd/attachment.htm>