<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>October 13, 2018</i></font><br>
<br>
[time to vote]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/10/12/global-warming-usa-voting-guide/">Global
Warming: USA Voting Guide</a></b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/10/12/global-warming-usa-voting-guide/"><br>
</a>October 12, 2018<br>
If you think climate change is an important issue (like I do), and
you're wondering who to vote for in the upcoming U.S. election, who
should get your vote? Which politicians should you vote against?<br>
The easy answer is: vote for democrats, against republicans. That's
actually a excellent way to choose, but there's one even better:
look at your individual politicians and see what their record is on
the climate change issue.<br>
Fortunately, there are organizations that have done just that. One
is the League of Conservation Voters, who record every environmental
vote in the U.S. House and Senate and issue a "score" (on a scale of
0 to 100) for each member. They also score each one on separate
issues, including climate change. They score both their performance
in the most recent full year (2017) and their lifetime record.<br>
- - - -<br>
Only 2% of republicans have a score of 50 or higher, while 99% of
democrats do. The median score for republicans is 2 (on a scale of 0
to 100), median for democrats is 95. Yes, this is one of the most
partisan issues in the U.S. today.<br>
But there are exceptions, republicans scoring 50 or higher and
democrats scoring below 50. Here are the five republicans with good
scores, with their party (all republicans of course), the district
they represent, and their lifetime scores:<br>
<blockquote>Brian Fitzpatrick, R, PA-08, 100<br>
John Faso, R, NY-19, 100<br>
Brian Mast, R, FL-18, 83<br>
Carlos Curbelo, R, FL-26, 75<br>
Elise Stefanik, R, NY-21, 50<br>
</blockquote>
Note that two of them have a lifetime rating of 100! Let's keep
those people in congress. Extra note: Carlos Curbelo has a lifetime
score of 75 but only got a 50 for the year 2017, while Elise
Stefanik has a lifetime 50 but scored 100 in the year 2017.<br>
Here are the democrats with bad score:<br>
<blockquote>Collin C. Peterson, D, MN-07, 36<br>
Henry Cuellar, D, TX-28, 40<br>
</blockquote>
More at:- <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/10/12/global-warming-usa-voting-guide/">https://tamino.wordpress.com/2018/10/12/global-warming-usa-voting-guide/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[pay attention]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.thenation.com/article/1-5-to-stay-alive-says-landmark-un-climate-report/">1.5
to Stay Alive, Says a Landmark UN Climate Report</a></b><br>
A 2 degrees C rise would be catastrophic, and avoiding it requires
radical change and climate justice.<br>
By Tom Athanasiou OCTOBER 9, 2018<br>
- - - -<br>
The big, and very welcome, surprise in the IPCC report is that a 1.5
C future is technically achievable. When the world's governments
agreed at the 2015 Paris climate summit to limit global temperature
rise to "well below 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels," while
"pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 C," the
1.5 C reference was widely seen more as a political concession to
poor and vulnerable countries than as a realistic policy goal. Now,
in 2018, the IPCC has definitively declared that 2 C in fact invites
disaster. That would be dire news indeed except for the panel's
finding that a 1.5 C future is still within reach—a finding that
surprised some of the IPCC experts. "Two years ago, even I didn't
believe 1.5 C was possible," Jiang Kejun, a scientist at China's
Energy Research Institute and a co-author of the IPCC report, said
at the press conference where the report was released. "But when I
look at the options, I have confidence it can be done."...<br>
- - - - <br>
And if we don't heed the scientists' warning? Mainstream news
coverage has ably highlighted the IPCC report's list of projected
impacts if the earth warms by 2 C rather than by 1.5 C. Hundreds of
millions of people would be more likely to endure poverty. Heat
waves would get much worse. The record heat wave that struck Europe
in 2003, killing over 71,000 people, was a one-in-100-years event at
the time. Such extreme heat waves would be 50 percent more common in
a 2 C world than a 1.5 C world. At the poles, the difference between
1.5 C and 2 C will be particularly severe. Think ice-sheet
instability, which directly threatens sea-level increase. A 2 C
future would expose at least 10 million more people living along
coastlines to inundation. "Every fraction of a degree of warming we
can avoid matters," says Peter Frumhoff of the Union of Concerned
Scientists. "Human lives can be saved, and coral reefs, wetlands,
and other vulnerable species and ecosystems better protected. The
risk that the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets will ultimately
melt, leading to catastrophic sea level rise, will also be lower."<br>
<br>
The climate transition is going to be as hard as anything human
beings have ever done. It raises immense justice challenges,
challenges that require the same kind of concentrated attention that
has, to this point, been focused on the ins and outs of science and
technology. The IPCC report is a milestone in this long overdue
reorientation of the climate debate. Ultimately, however, it's not
going to be the IPCC that answers the fundamental questions facing
us, for those questions are not scientific questions. They are
questions of morality, justice, and the political and economic
actions needed to achieve them, and they involve all of us.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.thenation.com/article/1-5-to-stay-alive-says-landmark-un-climate-report/">https://www.thenation.com/article/1-5-to-stay-alive-says-landmark-un-climate-report/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Vote for it]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.cleanenergyforall.org/">Clean Energy For All</a></b><br>
A movement is building across the country to reject dirty fossil
fuels and embrace clean energy. And in the absence of federal
leadership, this movement's progress is taking hold in the states.
Clean Energy for All is a grassroots campaign that is moving our
country closer to 100 percent clean energy by 2050.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.cleanenergyforall.org/">https://www.cleanenergyforall.org/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.lcv.org/">https://www.lcv.org/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
[odd, strong storms]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-45831883">Queensland
storm: Tornadoes and huge hailstones wreak damage</a></b><br>
The nation's strongest tornadoes form during supercells - a type of
storm that is also frequently accompanied by damaging hail.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-45831883">https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-45831883</a></font><br>
- - - -<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/10/12/06/07/tornado-supercells-tansey-queensland-south-east">Tornado
hits Queensland bringing hail the size of tennis balls</a></b><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/10/12/06/07/tornado-supercells-tansey-queensland-south-east">https://www.9news.com.au/national/2018/10/12/06/07/tornado-supercells-tansey-queensland-south-east</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<i>BBC shows us a responsible mass media discussion..</i><br>
[with a touch of philosophy, BBC Radio discusses the moral maze]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/m0000nhn">Climate Change</a></b><br>
Twelve years to save the world. While we're squabbling about Brexit,
climate scientists are reminding us that the existential threat of
our day is global warming. This week's report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issues the most
extensive warning yet on the risks of rising temperatures. According
to its authors, keeping to the preferred target of 1.5C above
pre-industrial levels will mean cutting carbon emissions by 45% by
the year 2030. That will involve, they say, "rapid, far-reaching and
unprecedented changes in all aspects of society". Decades of
increasing prosperity, freedom and choice in the West have come at a
cost. The rest of the world wants rapid growth too, but should they
be allowed to have it? In a society that badly needs to learn the
meaning of 'delayed gratification', how should we, as individuals,
change our behaviour? When the priority is putting food on the
table, many choose economic expedience over sustainability - it can
be expensive to go green. Would it be right for the government to
make us all greener by taxing or even banning log-burning stoves,
gas-guzzling cars and cheap air travel? Many make the moral case for
saving the planet on behalf of our grandchildren. But what of our
moral obligation to those who don't yet even exist? Is it morally
dubious to put the theoretical interests of posterity before the
real and immediate needs of poor people today? If climate change is
the organising call of our age, how should we respond? Combative,
provocative and engaging debate chaired by Michael Buerk. With Shiv
Malik, Anne McElvoy, Tim Stanley and Giles Fraser. Witnesses: Leo
Barasi, Author of "The Climate Majority: Apathy and Action in an Age
of Nationalism"; Ross Clark, Journalist, author and political
commentator; Charlotte Du Cann, Core member of the Dark Mountain
project; and George Monbiot, Journalist, columnist and campaigner.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/m0000nhn">https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/m0000nhn</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[soggy seed bank being rebuilt]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2018/10/thawing-permafrost-troubles-longyearbyen">Thawing
permafrost makes big trouble for world's northernmost town</a></b><br>
Houses are sagging in Longyearbyen and the unstable ground around
the famous seed vault is now frozen artificially while the entrance
to the tunnel is being re-built.<br>
By Thomas Nilsen - October 09, 2018<br>
- - - <br>
Temperatures in the Arctic continue to soar. For 2017, average
temperatures in Longyearbyen were 4,5C higher than normal. While the
UN Climate Panel this week issued a report urging world leaders to
take action to limit global average warming to 1.5C, the same
scientists concludes that the Arctic is already warming two to three
times higher.<br>
Over the last 94 months, temperatures measured at Longyearbyen
airport have been above average since measurements started in 1936.
This year, spring came abnormally early, with a mean temperature of
1,8C in May. That is 6C above normal in a month where the frost
should still remain.<br>
No strange the ground is melting underneath people's houses.<br>
Permafrost is defined as ground where the temperature is below zero
degrees Celsius for a minimum two years in succession. In summer at
Svalbard, the upper one-meter of soil thaws and plants can grow. It
is this one-meter that now melts deeper, making the traditional
wooden pillars houses in Longyearbyen are build on unstable. <br>
<br>
Two snow avalanches and landslides, in 2015 and 2017, is another
reason some houses nearest to the steep mountain have to be moved.
The avalanches are also linked to climate changes as the snow piles
and warmer weather cause higher risk for avalanches.<br>
- - - - -<br>
The entrance to the Global Seed Vault, where some 45,000
international varieties are stored deep into the mountain, is being
rebuilt.<br>
Climate change has caused more snow and rain and the entrance has
been flooded several times. Although built only 10 years ago, nobody
at that time anticipated the water troubles could be so severe.<br>
During reconstruction, the ground around the new waterproof entrance
is artificially frozen to avoid further erosion. Big white-frozen
pipes are visible in long distance from the vault, stabilizing a
five meters thick and 20 meters high ice-wall. The tunnel from the
entrance into the mountain will be made much smaller than the
original one, only three meters in diameter.<br>
All heat sources in the vault have been moved out and will be placed
in a separate service building to be built next to the vault, while
extra cooling capacities will be installed inside the mountain.<br>
The freezing elements will be removed when stones and rocks again
covers the entrance area. Reconstruction will be completed in May
2019. <br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2018/10/thawing-permafrost-troubles-longyearbyen">https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2018/10/thawing-permafrost-troubles-longyearbyen</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Nordhaus and Romer]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/10/meet-the-winners-of-this-years-nobel-prize-for-economics/">They
won this year's Nobel for economics. Here's why their work
matters</a></b><br>
Simon Brandon - Oct 2018<br>
- - - - -<br>
William Nordhaus, a professor of economics at Yale, has been
recognized by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences for his work –
dating back to the 1970s – in understanding and modelling how the
global economy and the climate interact.<br>
Nordhaus shares the $1 million Nobel prize with Paul Romer – a
professor at New York University's Stern School of Business – who
has won for his work demonstrating the fundamental importance of
internal factors, such as technological innovation, in driving a
nation's economic growth...<br>
- - - -<br>
Together, the Nobel Committee says, the two laureates have "designed
methods that address some of our time's most fundamental and
pressing issues: long-term sustainable growth in the global economy
and the welfare of the global population".<br>
<br>
Nordhaus began his work on climate change in the 1970s, when the
evidence of manmade global warming had begun to emerge. He developed
a set of simple but dynamic models of the relationship between the
global economy and climate. These tools – called 'integrated
assessment models' – enable us to simulate the consequences for both
economy and climate of the decisions, assumptions and policies made
and enacted today...<br>
<br>
Nordhaus' work has led him to conclude that the best way to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate their effects is a globally
enforced system of carbon taxes – a course of action is recommended
in the IPCC's report...<br>
Romer's work, meanwhile, has led him to develop a set of ideas
called endogenous growth theory. Traditionally, economists have held
that a nation's economic growth is driven largely by external
factors – outside investment, for example. But Romer's theory holds
that the opposite is true; that it is internal – or endogenous -
factors that hold the key to a country's prosperity. This is
important because it demonstrates to governments and policymakers
that sustainable growth is achievable by directing resources and
investment internally towards drivers of technological innovation,
such as education and research...<br>
<br>
While Nordhaus' work is the most overtly concerned with combatting
climate change, Romer's is also key, because we need technological
innovation on our side in the fight against climate change. Asked to
name the most important lesson from his during the interview with
the Nobel Prize Committee included above, Romer answered: "What
happens with technology is within our control."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/10/meet-the-winners-of-this-years-nobel-prize-for-economics/">https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/10/meet-the-winners-of-this-years-nobel-prize-for-economics/</a></font><br>
- - - -<br>
[audio interview with Romer]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://youtu.be/o1tX9TOYJxM">"What
happens with technology is under our control."</a></b><br>
Nobel Prize<br>
Published on Oct 8, 2018<br>
Paul M. Romer, the 2018 Economic Sciences Laureate, reminds us that
technology isn't like the weather. It doesn't just happen to us. It
is a tool we can use to do good in the world.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/o1tX9TOYJxM">https://youtu.be/o1tX9TOYJxM</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[Private Idaho]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theolympian.com/news/state/article219849970.html">The
2019 forecast for climate-change effects on Idaho is 'not
looking good'</a></b><br>
BY NICOLE BLANCHARD<br>
October 11, 2018 10:13 AM<br>
More fires. More smoky air. More of what made August in the Treasure
Valley so unpleasant.<br>
That's what 2019 could bring to Idaho, thanks in large part to the
warming of the earth's atmosphere, a University of Idaho scientist
says.<br>
Days after a United Nations report called climate change "a
life-or-death situation," an Idaho climate scientist pointed out the
effects of climate patterns over the past year in the Pacific
Northwest...<br>
- - - -<br>
"The smoke issue is one we're going to have to face in terms of how
to cope and adapt," Abatzoglou said.<br>
"When you have large-scale fires, there's definitely a link to
climate, despite what some people may think," Abatzoglou said.<br>
"Some people just don't trust scientists, unfortunately," he added.
"But the thing to drive home is that climate matters."<br>
In a nod to the UN's recent report, the U of I professor said there
are "great benefits to reducing warming," though in the meantime
people must figure out how to manage the unavoidable, such as the
worsening droughts hitting the Northwest.<br>
<br>
So what's in store for Idaho and the surrounding region in 2019?<br>
It's hard to say, Abatzoglou said. Experts are predicting an El Niño
weather pattern that would bring unseasonably warm temperatures
through the coming winter.<br>
Abatzoglou's short-term predictions echo the details of other recent
climate change reports:<br>
<br>
"If the guesses are right, if the models are right, things are not
looking good," he said.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theolympian.com/news/state/article219849970.html">https://www.theolympian.com/news/state/article219849970.html</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[interpreting the IPCC report]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.boell.de/en/2018/10/10/15-grad-bericht-des-ipcc-fokus-auf-striktes-klimaziel-ohne-overshoot">IPCC
Special Report on 1.5: Limiting global warming without
temperature "overshoot"</a></b><br>
Analysis The IPCC Special Report on 1.5 opts for a rigorous
interpretation of the 1.5 limit of global warming. It has good
reasons to do so: "Overshooting" that target risks irreversible
impacts and damage for societies and ecosystems, and increases
reliance on unproved, high-risk geoengineering technologies.<br>
10. October 2018 by Linda Schneider<br>
- - - -<br>
The key messages of the IPCC's SR1.5 are surprisingly unwavering:
1.5 is feasible if radical emissions cuts, transformative pathways
and the protection and restoration of natural ecosystems are
implemented. But also: 1.5 is absolutely vital in order to contain
the impacts of climate change and the risks for humans and
ecosystems that are associated with it.<br>
- - - <br>
<b>Climate change impacts at 1.5</b><br>
Based on most recent scientific estimates, the report finds that
warming of 1.0C (+/- 0.2C) has already occurred and that climate
change impacts resulting from this warming are already being felt in
many regions.<br>
Global warming of 1.5C, therefore, is a real danger for millions of
people around the world and requires comprehensive adaptation
measures as well as financial and technological support on the part
of those historically responsible for climate change... <br>
- - - -<br>
Radical emissions reductions and transformative pathways<br>
Due to all of these risks and potentially irreversible impacts, the
report opts for a rigorous interpretation of the 1.5 target and
focuses on mitigation scenarios that minimize or avoid overshoot
altogether.<br>
<br>
To that end, the report issues a clear call for radical emission
cuts: Global CO2 emissions need to be reduced by around 45% by 2030
(compared to 2010 levels), and reach zero in around 2050...<br>
- - - -<br>
Technologies for Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) such as Bioenergy with
Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) are viewed critically in the
report as well. In particular at scales that most of the „overshoot"
pathways rely on, their deployment will not be feasible, the report
finds.<br>
CDR technologies predominantly modelled in 1.5 pathways are BECCS
and large-scale afforestation (usually monoculture tree
plantations). The IPCC confirms them to carry enormous risks and
adverse impacts on ecosystems, biodiversity and food security due to
to the fact that they require exorbitant amounts of land as well as
water, energy and resources...<br>
- - - -<br>
<b>Radical Realism at the IPCC?</b><br>
The IPCC's language on issues of social justice and equity is
surprisingly bold as well: The report describes social justice and
reduced inequality as key pillars of climate-resilient (and
climate-just!) futures...<br>
- - - -<br>
Even if the negotiations almost fell apart at the last minute when a
small number of oil-exporting countries did everything they could to
prevent mention of nationally determined contributions (NCDs)
submitted under the UNFCCC as well as mention of the Paris Agreement
altogether (!), on balance, the report offers a good and
forward-looking result.<br>
<br>
The political messages coming out of the IPCC at this point are
precisely what the world needs to hear: It is possible to limit
global warming to 1.5, and it is necessary to contain the impacts of
the climate crisis. 1.5C, essentially, is the new 2C. However,
limiting global warming to 1.5C requires fast and spirited climate
action and deep emissions cuts that can be achieved through a timely
and managed decline of fossil fuel production, the comprehensive
upscaling of renewable energy, but also through changes in
production and consumption patterns as well as the protection and
vast but carefuly restoration of our natural ecosystems...<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.boell.de/en/2018/10/10/15-grad-bericht-des-ipcc-fokus-auf-striktes-klimaziel-ohne-overshoot">https://www.boell.de/en/2018/10/10/15-grad-bericht-des-ipcc-fokus-auf-striktes-klimaziel-ohne-overshoot</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[video lecture personal science overview of glaciers and Ice sheets]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY-8mJHMUpg">Glaciers and
Ice Sheets in a Changing Climate – Professor Andrew Mackintosh</a></b><br>
Victoria University of Wellington<br>
Published on Sep 16, 2018<br>
Part of Victoria University of Wellington's Inaugural lecture series<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY-8mJHMUpg">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fY-8mJHMUpg</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[A classic video - history documentary]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="https://youtu.be/ySnk-f2ThpE">How
Big Oil Conquered the World</a></b><br>
corbettreport<br>
Published on Dec 27, 2015<br>
TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=16888">https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=16888</a><br>
From farm to pharmaceutical, diesel truck to dinner plate, pipeline
to plastic product, it is impossible to think of an area of our
modern-day lives that is not affected by the oil industry. The story
of oil is the story of the modern world. And this is the story of
those who helped shape that world, and how the oil-igarchy they
created is on the verge of monopolizing life itself.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/ySnk-f2ThpE">https://youtu.be/ySnk-f2ThpE</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
["it brings on many changes"]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://thebulletin.org/2018/10/the-climate-impact-lab-studies-the-less-known-costs-of-climate-change-like-suicide/">The
Climate Impact Lab studies the less-known costs of climate
change. Like suicide.</a></b><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://thebulletin.org/2018/10/the-climate-impact-lab-studies-the-less-known-costs-of-climate-change-like-suicide/">https://thebulletin.org/2018/10/the-climate-impact-lab-studies-the-less-known-costs-of-climate-change-like-suicide/</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
[system collapse]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2VkC4SnwY0">Heading for
extinction and what to do about it</a></b><br>
RisingUp!<br>
Published on Sep 18, 2018<br>
This talk by Gail Bradbrook of Extinction Rebellion will cover two
main things:<br>
The ecological crisis- the latest science on what risks there are
and our current trajectory which includes the possibility of abrupt
(ie near term dramatic climate change) and human extinction<br>
Understanding our emotional response and about appropriate
responses.<br>
The basic premise of this talk is to tell the truth and ask us all
to act accordingly and consistently with the information, including
our understanding of what actually enables change to happen in the
world.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2VkC4SnwY0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2VkC4SnwY0</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/4256-1">This Day in
Climate History - October 13, 1988</a> - from D.R. Tucker</b></font><br>
October 13, 1988: In the second presidential debate, Republican
candidate and Vice President George H. W. Bush declares himself an
environmentalist and "an outdoorsman and a sportsman all my life,"
while Democratic candidate and Massachusetts Governor Michael
Dukakis states that Bush was "[a] charter member of the
environmental wrecking crew that went to Washington in the early
'80s and did a job on the EPA."<br>
(65:00--69:05)<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/4256-1">http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/4256-1</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+1"><i>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html">Archive
of Daily Global Warming News</a> </i></font><i><br>
</i><span class="moz-txt-link-freetext"><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a></span><font
size="+1"><i><font size="+1"><i><br>
</i></font></i></font><font size="+1"><i> <br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i><font size="+1"><i>To receive daily
mailings - <a
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request">click
to Subscribe</a> </i></font>to news digest. </i></font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><small> </small><small><b>** Privacy and Security: </b>
This is a text-only mailing that carries no images which may
originate from remote servers. </small><small> Text-only
messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and sender.
</small><small> </small><br>
<small> By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used
for democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
commercial purposes. </small><br>
<small>To subscribe, email: <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
with subject: subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject:
unsubscribe</small><br>
<small> Also you</small><font size="-1"> may
subscribe/unsubscribe at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a></font><small>
</small><br>
<small> </small><small>Links and headlines assembled and
curated by Richard Pauli</small><small> for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels.</small><small> L</small><small>ist
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
restricted to this mailing list. <br>
</small></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>