<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><i><font size="+1"><b>May 7, 2021</b></font></i></p>
[must-hear podcast from The Guardian]<br>
<b>How has our thinking on the climate crisis changed? – podcast</b><br>
When the Guardian began reporting on the climate crisis 70 years
ago, people were worried that warmer temperatures would make it
harder to complain about the weather. Today it is the biggest
challenge humanity has ever faced.<br>
<br>
In the second special episode marking 200 years of the Guardian,
Phoebe Weston is joined by Jonathan Watts, Prof Naomi Oreskes and
Alice Bell to take a look at climate coverage over the years, how
our understanding of the science has changed and how our attitudes
and politics have shifted<br>
<br>
How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know -
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/07/how-to-listen-to-podcasts-everything-you-need-to-know?CMP=podcast-help">https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/oct/07/how-to-listen-to-podcasts-everything-you-need-to-know?CMP=podcast-help</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2021/may/06/how-has-our-thinking-on-the-climate-crisis-changed-podcast">https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2021/may/06/how-has-our-thinking-on-the-climate-crisis-changed-podcast</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2021/may/06/how-has-our-thinking-on-the-climate-crisis-changed-podcast">https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2021/may/06/how-has-our-thinking-on-the-climate-crisis-changed-podcast</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Drunken uncertainties]<br>
<b>Sea level rise uncertainties: Why all eyes are on Antarctica</b><br>
Latest models project a bumpy road with big risks.<br>
SCOTT K. JOHNSON - 5/6/2021<br>
- -<br>
<b>Avoiding the drunks</b><br>
Recognizing this Antarctic uncertainty, this study creates an
alternate set of scenarios using pessimistic assumptions for
Antarctica. These “risk-averse projections” emphasize the worst-case
simulations instead of the median. These scenarios shift the
Antarctic contribution from around four centimeters to around 20
centimeters in 2100—more similar to our first study. In that case,
the total global land ice contribution to sea level rise grows from
13-30 centimeters by 2100 to 30-48 centimeters.<br>
<br>
The lower set of numbers is pretty similar to the projections in the
2013 IPCC report, while the second set of numbers is a bit higher.
But it's still progress. Whereas that report had to sort of wave its
hands and say “it could be much worse,” the risk of higher sea level
rise—if a large portion of Antarctic ice destabilizes, for
example—has been better explored in the years since.<br>
<br>
Still, future sea level rise is fundamentally uncertain. There’s a
reason Richard Alley (an author on the first study) has described
Antarctic glaciers as the “drunk drivers” of sea level rise—a
low-probability but dangerous risk we work to manage on the
roadways.<br>
<br>
That means thinking about risk has to be at the center of the
conversation about sea level rise. As the authors of the second
study write, “Given this large range (between 13 centimetres [sea
level rise] using the main projections under 1.5 degrees Celsius
warming and 42 centimetres [sea level rise] using risk-averse
projections under current pledges), adaptation planning for
twenty-first-century sea level rise must account for a
factor-of-three uncertainty in the land ice contribution until
climate policies and the Antarctic response are further
constrained.”<br>
<br>
Nature, 2020. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03427-0,
10.1038/s41586-021-03302-y (About DOIs).<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/05/meeting-paris-agreement-ambition-could-save-a-lot-of-sea-level-rise/">https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/05/meeting-paris-agreement-ambition-could-save-a-lot-of-sea-level-rise/</a><br>
- -<br>
<p>[from the journal nature]<br>
<b>Projected land ice contributions to twenty-first-century sea
level rise</b><br>
Tamsin L. Edwards, Sophie Nowicki, […]Thomas Zwinger<br>
Nature volume 593, pages74–82<br>
Published: 05 May 2021<br>
Abstract<br>
The land ice contribution to global mean sea level rise has not
yet been predicted1 using ice sheet and glacier models for the
latest set of socio-economic scenarios, nor using coordinated
exploration of uncertainties arising from the various computer
models involved. Two recent international projects generated a
large suite of projections using multiple models, but primarily
used previous-generation scenarios9 and climate models10, and
could not fully explore known uncertainties. Here we estimate
probability distributions for these projections under the new
scenarios using statistical emulation of the ice sheet and glacier
models. We find that limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees
Celsius would halve the land ice contribution to
twenty-first-century sea level rise, relative to current emissions
pledges. The median decreases from 25 to 13 centimetres sea level
equivalent (SLE) by 2100, with glaciers responsible for half the
sea level contribution. The projected Antarctic contribution does
not show a clear response to the emissions scenario, owing to
uncertainties in the competing processes of increasing ice loss
and snowfall accumulation in a warming climate. However, under
risk-averse (pessimistic) assumptions, Antarctic ice loss could be
five times higher, increasing the median land ice contribution to
42 centimetres SLE under current policies and pledges, with the
95th percentile projection exceeding half a metre even under 1.5
degrees Celsius warming. This would severely limit the possibility
of mitigating future coastal flooding. Given this large range
(between 13 centimetres SLE using the main projections under 1.5
degrees Celsius warming and 42 centimetres SLE using risk-averse
projections under current pledges), adaptation planning for
twenty-first-century sea level rise must account for a
factor-of-three uncertainty in the land ice contribution until
climate policies and the Antarctic response are further
constrained.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03302-y">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03302-y</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[wildfires]<br>
<b>Giant sequoia found still smoldering after 2020 California
wildfire</b><br>
6 May 2021<br>
Scientists have discovered a giant sequoia still smoldering in
California’s Sequoia national forest, months after wildfires tore
through the region last August.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/06/giant-sequoia-found-still-smoldering-after-2020-california-wildfire">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/06/giant-sequoia-found-still-smoldering-after-2020-california-wildfire</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Fossil fuel industry]<br>
<b>BP’s Suspicious Support for a Carbon Market in Washington State</b><br>
The oil giant owns a carbon sequestration company that could benefit
from the law, allowing BP to play both sides of the emissions
ledger...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://newrepublic.com/article/162313/bp-carbon-offsets-washington-finite-carbon-carlyle">https://newrepublic.com/article/162313/bp-carbon-offsets-washington-finite-carbon-carlyle</a><br>
- -<br>
[learning to greenwash]<br>
<b>How to spot the difference between a real climate policy and
greenwashing guff</b><br>
Damian Carrington<br>
Unless actions by governments and corporations cut emissions in the
here and now, a dose of scepticism is in order<br>
Thu 6 May 2021 <br>
So how to spot this greenwash? A good rule of thumb is whether the
proposal actually cuts emissions, by a significant amount, and soon,
and whether the proposer is in fact making the climate emergency
worse elsewhere...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/06/difference-real-climate-policy-greenwashing-emissions">https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/06/difference-real-climate-policy-greenwashing-emissions</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[China dominates]<br>
<b>China’s greenhouse gas emissions exceed those of U.S. and
developed countries combined, report says</b><br>
PUBLISHED THU, MAY 6 2021<br>
<blockquote>KEY POINTS<br>
-- China’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2019 exceeded those of the
U.S. and other developed nations combined, according to research
published Thursday by Rhodium Group.<br>
-- China is now responsible for more than 27% of total global
emissions. The U.S., the world’s second-highest emitter, accounts
for 11% of the global total.<br>
-- The findings come after a climate summit President Joe Biden
hosted last month, during which Chinese President Xi Jinping
reiterated a pledge to make sure the nation’s emissions peak by
2030.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/06/chinas-greenhouse-gas-emissions-exceed-us-developed-world-report.html">https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/06/chinas-greenhouse-gas-emissions-exceed-us-developed-world-report.html</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Global warming science lesson of the day]<br>
<b>Polar Drift Anomaly Has a Surprising Explanation...Humans</b><br>
May 6, 2021 -Anton Petrov<br>
I wrote a foreword for this awesome Sci-Fi book here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://amzn.to/3aGrg0I">https://amzn.to/3aGrg0I</a><br>
Get a Wonderful Person shirt: teespring.com/stores/whatdamath<br>
Alternatively, PayPal donations can be sent here:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://paypal.me/whatdamath">http://paypal.me/whatdamath</a><br>
<br>
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk
about the solution to a mystery of the magnetic polar drift.<br>
Study:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL092114">https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL092114</a><br>
Images: Cavit, CC BY 4.0 <br>
NATIONAL CENTERS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION , NOAA<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxiF8YQju2g">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxiF8YQju2g</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
[source materials]<br>
<b>Polar Drift in the 1990s Explained by Terrestrial Water Storage
Changes</b><br>
S. Deng S. Liu X. Mo L. Jiang P. Bauer‐Gottwein<br>
First published: 22 March 2021 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL092114">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL092114</a><br>
<blockquote><b>Abstract</b><br>
Secular polar drift underwent a directional change in the 1990s,
but the underlying mechanism remains unclear. In this study, polar
motion observations are compared with geophysical excitations from
the atmosphere, oceans, solid Earth, and terrestrial water storage
(TWS) during the period of 1981–2020 to determine major drivers.
When contributions from the atmosphere, oceans, and solid Earth
are removed, the residual dominates the change in the 1990s. The
contribution of TWS to the residual is quantified by comparing the
hydrological excitations from modeled TWS changes in two different
scenarios. One scenario assumes that the TWS change is stationary
over the entire study period, and another scenario corrects the
stationary result with actual glacier mass change. The accelerated
ice melting over major glacial areas drives the polar drift toward
26°E for 3.28 mas/yr after the 1990s. The findings offer a clue
for studying past climate‐driven polar motion.<br>
<br>
<b>Plain Language Summary</b><br>
The Earth's pole, the point where the Earth's rotational axis
intersects its crust in the Northern Hemisphere, drifted in a new
eastward direction in the 1990s, as observed by space geodetic
observations. Generally, polar motion is caused by changes in the
hydrosphere, atmosphere, oceans, or solid Earth. However,
short‐term observational records of key information in the
hydrosphere (i.e., changes in terrestrial water storage) limit a
better understanding of new polar drift in the 1990s. This study
introduces a novel approach to quantify the contribution from
changes in terrestrial water storage by comparing its drift path
under two different scenarios. One scenario assumes that the
terrestrial water storage change throughout the entire study
period (1981–2020) is similar to that observed recently
(2002–2020). The second scenario assumes that it changed from
observed glacier ice melting. Only the latter scenario, along with
the atmosphere, oceans, and solid Earth, agrees with the polar
motion during the period of 1981–2020. The accelerated terrestrial
water storage decline resulting from glacial ice melting is thus
the main driver of the rapid polar drift toward the east after the
1990s. This new finding indicates that a close relationship
existed between polar motion and climate change in the past.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL092114">https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020GL092114</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Do the right thing]<br>
<b>Emissions Cuts Could Drop the Impact of Melting Ice on Oceans by
Half</b><br>
A new study said that limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius could
reduce sea level rise from melting ice sheets from about 10 inches
to about five by 2100...<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/climate/climate-change-sea-level-rise.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/climate/climate-change-sea-level-rise.html</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Headline of the week]<br>
<b>Study Predicts “Rapid and Unstoppable” Sea Level Rise Unless
Paris Climate Goals Are Met</b><br>
A new study finds the world faces “rapid and unstoppable” sea level
rise in the coming decades, unless nations meet their pledges to cut
emissions under the Paris Climate Agreement. The study in the
journal Nature warns that failure to meet the Paris goals could mean
a global temperature rise of 3 degrees Celsius by the end of the
century, enough to cross a tipping point that would lead to the
irreversible melting of Antarctica’s vast ice sheets. The resulting
sea level rise would flood coastal communities around the globe,
with a “catastrophic” 33 feet of sea level rise by 2300.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.democracynow.org/2021/5/6/headlines/study_predicts_rapid_and_unstoppable_sea_level_rise_unless_paris_climate_goals_are_met">https://www.democracynow.org/2021/5/6/headlines/study_predicts_rapid_and_unstoppable_sea_level_rise_unless_paris_climate_goals_are_met</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[Telling us the truth before we were listening]<br>
<b>‘Decades ahead of his time’: history catches up with visionary
Jimmy Carter</b><br>
<br>
Megan Mayhew Bergman - 4 May 2021 1<br>
<br>
A new film rejects the popular narrative and recasts the former
president, 96, as hugely prescient thinker, particularly on climate
change<br>
<br>
When I reach Jimmy Carter’s grandson by Zoom, he answers wearing a
Raphael Warnock campaign T-shirt. Jason Carter is a lawyer and
politician himself, mid-40s, animated and well-read, with blue eyes
reminiscent of his grandfather’s. He’s just got off the phone with
his 93-year-old grandmother, Rosalynn. It’s a special day; Joe Biden
is on his way to the Carter house in Plains, Georgia.<br>
<br>
“My grandfather has met nearly everyone in the world he might want
to,” Jason Carter says. “Right now, he’s meeting with the president
of the United States. But the person he’d say he learned the most
from was Rachel Clark, an illiterate sharecropper who lived on his
family’s farm.<br>
<br>
“He didn’t pity her,” Carter says. “He saw her power. My grandfather
believes in the power of a single human and a small community.
Protect people’s freedoms, he says, and they can do great things. It
all comes back to an enormous respect for human beings.”<br>
<br>
Recent biographer Jonathan Alter calls Carter “perhaps the most
misunderstood president in American history”.<br>
<br>
Carter, who lost his bid for re-election in a so-called landslide to
Reagan in 1980, is often painted as a “failed president” – a hapless
peanut farmer who did not understand how to get things done in
Washington, and whose administration was marked by inflation, an
energy crisis and the Iran hostage disaster.<br>
<br>
Subsequent presidents, especially fellow southern Democrat Bill
Clinton, kept a distance – assumably not wanting to be seen as part
of a political narrative that emphasized piety over getting things
done. Even Obama was apparently wary of being associated with the
sort of soft-hearted ineffectuality ascribed to Carter.<br>
- -<br>
In his 2020 biography of Carter, Alter speaks to a more nuanced
interpretation of Carter, calling him “a surprisingly consequential
president – a political and stylistic failure, but a substantive and
far-sighted success”. It is, perhaps, the far-sighted nature of
Carter’s ambitions, particularly around energy, that allows us to
appreciate him more four decades after his term concluded.<br>
<br>
Born in 1924, Carter is now 96. Americans must process his mortality
and the onset of climate change, which Carter explicitly warned the
nation about 40 years ago.<br>
<br>
Carterland, a just released documentary, offers a particularly sharp
focus on Carter’s extensive work on conservation, climate and
justice.<br>
<br>
<b>Carterland: preview of the documentary on former president Jimmy
Carter – video </b><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/MFt8sZR4ljw">https://youtu.be/MFt8sZR4ljw</a><br>
<br>
“Here’s what people get wrong about Carter,” Will Pattiz, one of the
film’s directors tells me. “He was not in over his head or
ineffective, weak or indecisive – he was a visionary leader, decades
ahead of his time trying to pull the country toward renewable
energy, climate solutions, social justice for women and minorities,
equitable treatment for all nations of the world. He faced nearly
impossible economic problems – and at the end of the day came so
very close to changing the trajectory of this nation.”<br>
<br>
Will’s brother, Jim, agrees. “A question folks should be asking
themselves is: what catastrophes would have befallen this country
had anyone other than Jimmy Carter been at the helm during that
critical time in the late 1970s?”<br>
<br>
Those late 1970s were defined by inflation, the cold war, long lines
at gas pumps, and a shift in cultural mores. Carter himself showed a
willingness to grow. Although Carter served in the navy himself, he
pardoned Vietnam draft-dodgers. Though from a segregated and racist
background in Georgia, Carter pushed for affirmative action and
prioritized diversity among judicial nominees, including the
appointment of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Amalya Lyle Kearse. He
employed Mary Prince, a Black woman wrongly accused of murder, as
his daughter Amy’s nanny, a move criticized by some contemporary
thinkers as perpetuating domestic servitude.<br>
<br>
What was radical in the 1970s can appear backwards decades later;
the public narrative works in both directions. Carter is, in some
respects, difficult to narrativize because he could be both
startlingly conservative – financially, or in his appeal to the deep
south’s evangelicals – and progressive, particularly on human rights
and climate. He seemed to act from his personal compass, rather than
a political one.<br>
<br>
He startled the globe by personally brokering the critical Middle
East peace treaty between Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin at Camp
David. He ceded access to the Panama canal, angering conservatives
who thought he was giving away an American asset. Through the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act, he doubled the national
park system and conserved over 100m acres of land – the most
sweeping expansion of conserved land in American history.<br>
<br>
He was not afraid to make unpopular moves, or ask for personal
sacrifice. He was old-fashioned and a futurist, and nowhere did his
futurism matter more, or seem more prescient, than on climate and
conservation. He risked speaking directly to the American public,
and asking them to do a difficult thing – focus on renewable energy
and reduce reliance on oil.<br>
<br>
He paid the price for this frank ask, and so did we.<br>
<br>
In advance of his trip to Plains, Georgia, Biden participated in a
video tribute to Carter, joining an all-star cast of Georgia
politicians, the familiar faces of Senator Jon Ossoff, Senator
Raphael Warnock and Stacey Abrams serving as an affirming nod to
Georgia’s return to political importance.<br>
<br>
The messages address the substance of the film, but also serve as a
heartfelt thank you to a former president who has only recently
begun to look prescient on climate, and singular in his moral
bearing.<br>
<br>
“He has always lived his values,” Abrams says in the video.<br>
<br>
“Our world cries out for moral and ethical leadership,” Warnock
offers. “Few have embodied it as clearly and consistently as
Carter.”<br>
<br>
“He showed us what it means to be a public servant, with an emphasis
on servant,” Biden says.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://youtu.be/y7WVi_RFzTw">https://youtu.be/y7WVi_RFzTw</a><br>
<br>
Many Americans can’t help but spot a link between Carter and Biden –
who became the first elected official outside of Georgia to support
Carter’s bid for the presidency in 1976. Biden’s colleagues decried
him as an “exuberant” idealist at the time.<br>
<br>
There’s also an increasingly stark comparison between the Carter and
the Trump administration.<br>
<br>
James Gustave Speth served as the chairman of Carter’s Council on
Environmental Quality. As Carter’s chief adviser on environmental
matters, Speth helped brief Carter on climate change and direct
policy. He finds the contrast between Carter and Trump “striking”.<br>
<br>
“People see now that Carter was at a pole,” Speth tells me. “Carter
was the opposite of Trump – and everything that people despised
about him. Carter had integrity, honesty, candor and a commitment to
the public good of all else. Carter was a different man, totally.”<br>
<br>
Carter’s vice-president, Walter Mondale, died a month ago at 93,
perhaps putting an exclamation mark on the need to expedite overdue
praise and understanding. Speth agrees that it would be best to
speed up our recognition of Carter. “So many fine things are said
over the bodies of the dead,” Speth said. “I’d love to have the
recognition occur now.”<br>
<br>
Speth is also working on his own book on the Carter administration,
that covers the Carter and subsequent administrations on climate and
energy and highlights the failure to build on the foundation that
Carter laid. His project, soon to be published with MIT, carries a
damning title: They Knew.<br>
<br>
One of the most profound– even painful – parts of watching
documentaries like Carterland is bearing witness to the fact that
Carter was right on asking us to drive less, to reduce our
dependence on foreign oil, to focus on conservation and renewable
energy. Not only was Carter’s vision a path not taken, it was a path
mocked. Reagan removed the solar panels from the White House,
politicized the environmental movement and painted it as a fringe
endeavor.<br>
<br>
“Carter was our only president who had a visceral environmental and
ecological attachment. That was part of his being,” Speth says. “We
had an opportunity in 1980 – but we’ve lost 40 years in the pursuit
of a climate-safe path. We can no longer avoid serious and
destructive changes, period. That didn’t have to happen.”...<br>
<br>
I ask Speth why getting Carter’s legacy right matters. First, Speth
says, it’s important to recognize the example Carter set for looking
ahead, in a culture that prizes soundbites and short-term gains.
“Carter was a trained engineer who believed in science,” Speth
points out. “He understood things on a global scale, and believed in
forecasting. Preparing for the long run is rare in politics.”<br>
<br>
Carter’s biographer Alter agrees. “If there is a gene for duty,
responsibility and the will to tackle messy problems with little or
no potential for political gain,” he writes, “Jimmy Carter was born
with it.”<br>
<br>
While none of these recent documentaries or biographies seeks to
portray Carter as a saint or even politically savvy, they do insist
that his presidency was more successful than history has
acknowledged, particularly on the energy, conservation and human
rights fronts. Still, there are aspects of his single term that will
probably remain embedded in his narrative, such as his tenuous
relationship with Congress, early catering to segregationists to win
votes, and Iran’s hostage crisis.<br>
<br>
What can we learn from the shifting narrative around Carter’s
presidency?<br>
<br>
“You can talk about how Carter was an underrated president,”
film-maker Jim Pattiz says. “But can you ask yourself: what
qualities do you actually want in a leader? Do you want someone who
will challenge you to be better, or speak in catchphrases and not
ask much of you?<br>
<br>
“This film is a cautionary tale,” Pattiz says. “We can elect another
Carter. Let’s reward leaders willing to do the right thing.”<br>
<br>
Jason Carter has lived with the nuances and inconsistencies in the
narrative surrounding his grandfather’s presidency his entire life.
“Stories are always summaries,” he says. “They leave out so much so
that we can understand them in simple terms. Public narrative, these
days, is so often about politics. It should really be about the
great, public problems we’re solving. There’s a difference.<br>
<br>
“I don’t want history to be kind to my grandfather,” Jason Carter
tells me. “I just want history to be honest.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/03/jimmy-carter-climate-change-carterland-film-biography">https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/03/jimmy-carter-climate-change-carterland-film-biography</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Sarcastic humor from The Onion]<br>
<b>The Worst Tornadoes In U.S. History</b><br>
Spring is tornado season, putting millions of people across the
country on high alert for the sometimes devastating storms. The
Onion looks back at the worst tornadoes in U.S. history.<br>
<blockquote><b>1896: </b>The St. Louis Tornado kills 255 and
injures 1,000, most of whom were storm chasers attempting to get
up close and capture its beauty on canvas.<br>
<b>1899: </b>The New Richmond Tornado, originally known as the
Big Swirly Uh-Oh, is given a more formal name after it becomes
clear that 117 lives were lost.<br>
<b>1925: </b>The Tri-State Tornado travels 300 miles through
Missouri, Illinois and Indiana, killing hundreds before being
brought down by a sharpshooter.<br>
<b>1936: </b>The Gainesville Tornado earns MVP of the ’36
Jefferson High School football season after destroying the rival
town.<br>
<b>1951: </b>An absolutely terrible tornado touches down just
outside Sioux City, IA—uneven funnel, droopy anvil, just a
flat-out pathetic showing as far as tornados go.<br>
<b>1994: </b>Despite the extreme predictions for the Las Vegas
Automotive Trade Show Cash Tornado, not a single one of those
total fucking losers managed to grab more than 11 bucks.<br>
<b>2011: </b>The Joplin Tornado kills 115 people, prompting the
Missouri legislature to ban all future tornados.<br>
<b>2023: </b>Oh, just you wait.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theonion.com/the-worst-tornadoes-in-u-s-history-1846828174">https://www.theonion.com/the-worst-tornadoes-in-u-s-history-1846828174</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
[Digging back into the internet news archive]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming May
7, 2001 </b></font><br>
<p>May 7, 2001: In a response to a question about whether President<br>
George W. Bush would encourage energy conservation, White House
press<br>
secretary Ari Fleischer states: "That's a big no. The President<br>
believes that it's an American way of life, and that it should be
the<br>
goal of policy makers to protect the American way of life. The<br>
American way of life is a blessed one. And we have a bounty of<br>
resources in this country. What we need to do is make certain
that<br>
we're able to get those resources in an efficient way, in a way
that<br>
also emphasizes protecting the environment and conservation, into
the<br>
hands of consumers so they can make the choices that they want to
make<br>
as they live their lives day to day."<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/briefings/20010507.html">http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/briefings/20010507.html</a><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<br>
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html"><https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html></a>
/<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a><br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
- 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.<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you 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><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>