<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>August 30, 2021</b></font></i><br>
</p>
[New future]<br>
<b>What We Know About Climate Change and Hurricanes</b><br>
Scientists are confident that the warming of the planet is changing
the way storms behave. Here’s how...<br>
- -<br>
Global warming is changing storms...<br>
- -<br>
<b>1. Higher winds...</b><br>
“Potential intensity is going up,” said Kerry Emanuel, a professor
of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
“We predicted it would go up 30 years ago, and the observations show
it going up.”<br>
<br>
Stronger winds mean downed power lines, damaged roofs and, when
paired with rising sea levels, worse coastal flooding.<br>
<b>2. More rain</b><br>
Warming also increases the amount of water vapor that the atmosphere
can hold. In fact, every degree Celsius of warming allows the air to
hold about 7 percent more water.<br>
<br>
That means we can expect future storms to unleash higher amounts of
rainfall.<br>
<br>
<b>3. Slower storms</b><br>
Researchers do not yet know why storms are moving more slowly, but
they are. Some say a slowdown in global atmospheric circulation, or
global winds, could be partly to blame.<br>
<br>
In a 2018 paper, Dr. Kossin found that hurricanes over the United
States had slowed 17 percent since 1947. Combined with the increase
in rain rates, storms are causing a 25 percent increase in local
rainfall in the United States, he said.<br>
<br>
Slower, wetter storms also worsen flooding. Dr. Kossin likened the
problem to walking around your back yard while using a hose to spray
water on the ground. If you walk fast, the water won’t have a chance
to start pooling. But if you walk slowly, he said, “you’ll get a lot
of rain below you.”<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>4. Wider-ranging storms</b><br>
Because warmer water helps fuel hurricanes, climate change is
enlarging the zone where hurricanes can form.<br>
<br>
There’s a “migration of tropical cyclones out of the tropics and
toward subtropics and middle latitudes,” Dr. Kossin said. That could
mean more storms making landfall in higher latitudes, like in the
United States or Japan.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>5. More volatility</b><br>
As the climate warms, researchers also say they expect storms to
intensify more rapidly. Researchers are still unsure why it’s
happening, but the trend appears to be clear.<br>
<br>
In a 2017 paper based on climate and hurricane models, Dr. Emanuel
found that storms that intensify rapidly — the ones that increase
their wind speed by 70 miles per hour or more in the 24 hours before
landfall — were rare in the period from 1976 through 2005. On
average, he estimated, their likelihood in those years was equal to
about once per century.<br>
<br>
By the end of the 21st century, he found, those storms might form
once every five or 10 years.<br>
<br>
“It’s a forecaster’s nightmare,” Dr. Emanuel said. If a tropical
storm or Category 1 hurricane develops into a Category 4 hurricane
overnight, he said, “there’s no time to evacuate people.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/29/climate/climate-change-hurricanes.html">https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/29/climate/climate-change-hurricanes.html</a>
<p>- -</p>
[Meteorology]<br>
<b>Catastrophic damage likely at key oil industry hub</b><br>
Ida’s eye scored a direct hit on Port Fourchon, a critical hub for
the U.S. oil industry. According to the Port Fourchon website:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://portfourchon.com/seaport/port-facts/">https://portfourchon.com/seaport/port-facts/</a><br>
<blockquote>Over 250 companies utilize Port Fourchon as a base of
operation.<br>
<br>
In addition to its huge domestic hydrocarbon significance, Port
Fourchon is land base for LOOP (Louisiana Offshore Oil Port),
which handles 10-15% of the nation’s domestic oil, 10-15% of the
nation’s foreign oil, and is connected to 50% of US refining
capacity. LOOP is the only US deep water port capable of
offloading VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers) and ULCCs (Ultra
Large Crude Carriers).<br>
<br>
Port Fourchon currently services over 90% of the Gulf of Mexico’s
deep water oil production.<br>
<br>
Overall, Port Fourchon plays a strategic role in furnishing this
country with about 18% of its entire oil supply.<br>
<br>
Over 400 large supply vessels traverse the port’s channels each
day.<br>
<br>
Approximately 15,000 people per month are flown to offshore
locations supported by Port Fourchon.<br>
<br>
Truck traffic studies have shown that up to 1,200 trucks per day
travel in and out of Port Fourchon.<br>
<br>
Over 1.5 million barrels of crude oil per day are transported via
pipelines through the port.<br>
</blockquote>
Ida is likely to cause catastrophic damage to the port, and leave it
cut off from the rest of the state as a result of storm surge
flooding of Highway 1. Potential serious oil spills in Port Fourchon
are also a concern given its numerous tank farms.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/08/catastrophic-hurricane-ida-hits-louisiana-with-150-mph-winds/">https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2021/08/catastrophic-hurricane-ida-hits-louisiana-with-150-mph-winds/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Books]<br>
<b>Penguin Classics Launches “New Canon” of Environmental Literature</b><br>
“This series feels like a collective expression of love and grief
for the living world.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2021/08/penguin-classics-launches-new-canon-environmental-literature-books/">https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2021/08/penguin-classics-launches-new-canon-environmental-literature-books/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
["survival migrant" interview <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://youtu.be/sweXVUuPhYY">https://youtu.be/sweXVUuPhYY</a>]<br>
<b>Alice Hill | Adaptation Critical To Our Global Climate
Preparedness Strategy</b><br>
Aug 30, 2021<br>
Nick Breeze<br>
<br>
In this episode of Shaping The Future, I am speaking with Alice Hill
who was Special Assistant to President Obama at the White House and
Senior Director for Resilience Policy at the National Security
Council, working on climate change and pandemic preparedness.<br>
<br>
Timestamps based on interview questions:<br>
<blockquote>01:20 Most of the narrative around our climate change
response at the moment is very focussed on mitigation and debate
rages on, regarding whether we are doing enough, fast enough. Your
book is a very pragmatic and, in many ways reassuring, breakdown
of what we need to do to adapt to climate impacts. Can you start
by giving us some background on what led you to write a book that
is essentially a global climate preparedness strategy?<br>
03:16 Early on in the book you refer to failures of imagination
that mean we cannot prepare effectively. Can you elaborate on what
this means and the tools that will need to be developed and
deployed in order to fill the imagination gap?<br>
06:40 We are getting strong signals now of what extreme
climate-driven impacts look like. You discuss preparedness for
concurrent and consecutive disasters. Can you give an example of
this kind of scenario and the resilience that would be needed?<br>
09:00 If you take the US, or Europe, for example, we don’t seem to
hear much talk about preparation for adaptation, compared to
places like Bangladesh, despite the impacts becoming more severe
and widespread. Why is it so hard for developed nations to get
ahead on this?<br>
14:10 You outline some excellent examples of leadership success
and leadership failures, making the point that leadership matters.
Looking at how countries have responded to the pandemic, there are
obvious winners and losers but, generally, are you seeing the
leadership qualities we need to steer us through the critical
resilience building years ahead?<br>
15:40 Another major theme you highlight is the borderless nature
of climate change and how our response should be equally
borderless. If you take a country like the UK and even the US, it
seems that we have an unhelpful obsession with borders. How does
greater resilience relate to greater cross-border cooperation?<br>
*Include water sharing (17:25).<br>
19:10 You use the term ‘survival migrants’ in the book - what are
these and how do they fit into the landscape of global change we
are entering?<br>
20:05 Is this one issue perhaps a great test of our empathy and
humanity?<br>
28:00 How close are we to the point where insurers (and
re-insurers) stop insuring?<br>
31:25 In a press conference a few days ago with an agricultural
producer in the US I asked how much of their climate strategy was
allocated towards adaptation. The answer came back that the focus
was purely on mitigation. Can you end by summarising why
adaptation planning and mitigation strategies must be treated with
equal seriousness right now?<br>
</blockquote>
[END]<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sweXVUuPhYY">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sweXVUuPhYY</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[Elizabeth Kolbert is the queen of climate reporting]<br>
<b>The U.N.’s Terrifying Climate Report</b><br>
Scientists predict hotter heat waves and worse flooding in the
decades ahead, but the catastrophe is evident everywhere this
summer.<br>
<br>
By Elizabeth Kolbert<br>
<br>
August 15, 2021<br>
In 1988, the World Meteorological Organization teamed up with the
United Nations Environment Programme to form a body with an even
more cumbersome title, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, or, as it quickly became known, the I.P.C.C. The I.P.C.C.’s
structure was every bit as ungainly as its name. Any report that the
group issued had to be approved not just by the researchers who
collaborated on it but also by the governments of the member
countries, which today number a hundred and ninety-five. The process
seemed guaranteed to produce gridlock, and, by many accounts, that
was the point of it. (One of the architects of the I.P.C.C. was the
Reagan Administration.) Indeed, when the scientists drew up their
first report, in 1990, the diplomats tried so hard to water down
their conclusions that the whole enterprise nearly collapsed. Every
five or six years since then, the group has updated its findings,
using the same procedure.<br>
<br>
It’s in this context that the latest I.P.C.C. effort, released last
week, has to be read—or, more likely, not read. Even the shortest
and snappiest version of the report, the so-called Summary for
Policymakers, which, at forty-one pages, is just one per cent of the
length of the full document, is, in its mix of the technical and the
turgid, pretty much impenetrable. Still, it manages to terrify.
Owing to humans, the report states, the world has warmed by more
than one degree Celsius—nearly two degrees Fahrenheit. Global
temperatures are now higher than at any other time in the past
hundred and twenty-five thousand years. Anthropogenic warming, the
report observes, is already producing fiercer heat waves, heavier
rainstorms, and more violent cyclones. In the coming decades, still
hotter heat waves and worse flooding are to be expected, as events
that are now considered extreme become commonplace. On Twitter, the
climate activist Greta Thunberg described the I.P.C.C. report as a
“solid (but cautious) summary of the current best available
science.” The U.N. Secretary-General, António Guterres, called it a
“code red for humanity.”<br>
<br>
Of course, these days, you don’t need to be a climate scientist to
know which way the smoke is blowing. As Corinne Le Quéré, a climate
modeller at the University of East Anglia and one of the authors of
the I.P.C.C. report, told the Washington Post, “It’s now become
actually quite obvious to people what is happening, because we see
it with our own eyes.” Just before the report came out, the Dixie
Fire, burning northeast of Sacramento, became the largest single
fire on record in California. (Last summer’s August Complex Fire is
still the largest over all, but it was made up of multiple fires
that started separately.) On Wednesday, the National Weather Service
warned, “Stifling summer heat to stretch from coast-to-coast.” That
day, about two hundred million Americans were under some kind of
heat advisory.<br>
<br>
Elsewhere in the world last week, the situation was similarly grim.
The city of Siracusa, in Sicily, set what appears to be a new
European temperature record of 119.8 degrees. More than sixty people
were killed by wildfires in Algeria, which was also experiencing
intense heat. Wildfires in Greece prompted the country’s Prime
Minister to declare a “natural disaster of unprecedented
dimensions,” and in the Chinese province of Sichuan more than eighty
thousand people were evacuated because of flooding caused by
torrential rains.<br>
<br>
As the world fried and boiled, Washington continued to do what it
does best, which is argue. On Tuesday, the Senate approved its much
touted bipartisan infrastructure package. It allocates billions of
dollars for climate-related projects, such as upgrading the
electrical grid and improving public transportation. But the level
of funding falls far short of what is needed, and key
provisions—including standards that would compel utilities to move
away from fossil fuels—are missing. Meanwhile, the bill contains a
great deal of spending that’s likely to increase carbon emissions.
Senate Democrats have promised to do better in their $3.5-trillion
budget-reconciliation bill, the broad outlines of which they
approved last week, on a party-line vote. The reconciliation bill is
supposed to include, among many other climate-related measures,
incentives for utilities to switch to cleaner energy sources, and
penalties for those that fail to. But, in an awkward twist, drafting
the details of this program will fall to the Senate’s Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, which is headed by the
fossil-fuel-friendly Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia. In the
House, progressive representatives have pressed Speaker Nancy Pelosi
not to schedule a vote on the infrastructure package until the final
budget-reconciliation bill has been approved by the Senate.
Moderates have countered by threatening that they won’t vote for the
resolution that would begin the budget process in the House until
there is a vote on the infrastructure package.<br>
<br>
Every delay matters. Three decades have passed since the I.P.C.C.
released its first report. During that time, annual global emissions
have nearly doubled, and the amount of carbon in the atmosphere put
there by humans has more than doubled. As a result, the world is
rapidly approaching thresholds that no sane person would want to
cross. The goal of the Paris Agreement, approved in 2015, was to
hold “the increase in the global average temperature to well below”
two degrees Celsius and to try to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees.<br>
<br>
The I.P.C.C. considered five possible futures. Under one
scenario—the most optimistic, though by no means the most
realistic—carbon emissions w<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/08/23/the-uns-terrifying-climate-report">https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/08/23/the-uns-terrifying-climate-report</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[Lies and ethics]<br>
MARCH 2, 2021<br>
<b>Liars - Falsehoods and Free Speech in an Age of Deception</b><br>
Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein offered his thoughts on how to
limit false information in the public forum while protecting free
speech. This virtual program was hosted by the National Archives in
Washington, D.C.<br>
[transcript available on page ]<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?509533-1/liars-falsehoods-free-speech-age-deception">https://www.c-span.org/video/?509533-1/liars-falsehoods-free-speech-age-deception</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
[his book]<br>
<b>Liars: Falsehoods and Free Speech in an Age of Deception
(INALIENABLE RIGHTS) 1st Edition</b><br>
by Cass R. Sunstein <br>
Editorial Reviews<br>
Review<br>
<br>
"A passionate and forceful argument from America's pre-eminent legal
scholar that our law ought to do more to protect the public from the
harms of falsehood." -- Robert Post, Sterling Professor of Law, Yale
Law School<br>
<br>
"An increasing amount of what we hear and read is demonstrably
factually false, and the acceptance of falsity has grave
consequences for democratic decision-making. Drawing on legal
doctrine, psychological research, and an impressive command of the
dynamics of modern media, Cass Sunstein offers a<br>
sobering explanation of why factual falsity is increasingly
prevalent in contemporary public discourse and why American free
speech doctrine may do more to exacerbate than alleviate the
problem. This book is essential reading in the modern political and
media environment." -- Frederick Schauer,<br>
David and Mary Harrison Distinguished Professor of Law, University
of Virginia<br>
<br>
"An insightful, balanced, and readable book, by one of America's
leading legal scholars ― whether you ultimately agree with its
suggestions or not, you will learn much from its analysis." --
Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law<br>
About the Author<br>
<br>
Cass R. Sunstein is the Robert Walmsley University Professor at
Harvard University. From 2009 to 2012, he was Administrator of the
White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. In 2018,
he received the Holberg Prize from the Government of Norway, often
described as the equivalent of the<br>
Nobel Prize for law and humanities. Founder and director of the
Program on Behavioral Economics and Public Policy at Harvard Law
School, he has been involved in law reform activities in nations all
over the world. He is the author of many articles and books,
including Nudge, How Change Happens, and<br>
Too Much Information.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.amazon.com/Liars-Falsehoods-Speech-Deception-INALIENABLE/dp/0197545114">https://www.amazon.com/Liars-Falsehoods-Speech-Deception-INALIENABLE/dp/0197545114</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[Disinformation sadism]<br>
<b>As denying climate change becomes impossible, fossil-fuel
interests pivot to 'carbon shaming'</b><br>
Aylin Woodward - -Aug 28, 2021<br>
Fossil-fuel interests no longer bother denying that climate change
is real.<br>
So they've pivoted to new tactics, including painting climate
advocates as hypocrites.<br>
Drawing attention to advocates' non-eco-friendly habits undermines
their credibility and distracts from policy changes.<br>
<br>
After Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey that climate change and mental
health are two of the "most important issues facing the world
today," the New York Post threw the words back at him. In a story
earlier this week, the Post reported that the "double-talking
dilettante" had taken a private plane from Colorado to California.<br>
<br>
Sky News and The Times too, have lambasted Harry's carbon-intensive
jetsetting. All three publications are tied to Rupert Murdoch's News
Corporation, which previously denied the science of climate change.
Murdoch is on the advisory board of Genie Energy, an energy company
that invests in oil and gas projects. <br>
<br>
London mayor Sadiq Khan, an anti-pollution advocate, got similar
treatment from The Sun, another Murdoch-owned publication, for
flying 32,000 miles between 2016 and 2019 and purchasing 4.3 million
paper towels in a year.<br>
<br>
According to Michael Mann, an atmospheric science professor at
Pennsylvania State University, these types of stories are part of a
larger strategy: Groups that support the continued use of fossil
fuels have increasingly begun to point out climate advocates'
seemingly hypocritical behavior, rather than denying that climate
change is real. It's one of many new strategies the fossil-fuel
industry has adopted, according to Mann's latest book "The New
Climate War." <br>
<br>
Mann told Insider that in his view, "2009-2010 was the last hurrah
for good old fashioned climate-change denialism." By 2019, 62% of
Americans agreed that climate change was affecting their day-to-day
lives.<br>
<br>
"It's beyond not being able to deny the science," he said. "It's now
a matter of having to deny reality."<br>
<br>
Hurricane delta flooding louisiana car street baker<br>
A car moves through a flooded street as Hurricane Delta approaches,
in Baker, Louisiana, October 9, 2020. Marco Bello/Reuters<br>
So instead of hammering the "climate change isn't happening"
message, the fossil-fuel industry now seems to be fostering
finger-pointing and infighting among environmentalists. That siphons
time and attention away from efforts to bring about systemic changes
to cut emissions — policies like carbon taxes, incentives for
renewable energy, or restrictions on fossil-fuel infrastructure. <br>
<br>
"What better way to discredit thought leaders and key messengers
than to tar them as hypocrites based on accusations that they don't
walk the walk?" Mann said.<br>
<br>
'Mr. Global Warming?'<br>
Leonardo DiCaprio, Al Gore, and Barack Obama have all been targets
of this "climate hypocrisy" line of attack.<br>
<br>
DiCaprio started a multi-million dollar environmental conservation
fund and used his 2016 Oscars speech to talk about the climate
crisis. But when he flew from France to New York in a private jet to
accept an environmental award later that year, the headlines
followed.<br>
<br>
"Hollywood hypocrite's global warming sermon," the Herald Sun's
read. (The Herald Sun also belongs to Murdoch's news empire.) The
New York Post called DiCaprio a "megapolluter" and "Mr. Global
Warming," and suggested that the actor's flight "expanded his carbon
footprint by 8,000 miles in about 24 hours." <br>
<br>
Gore, meanwhile, is known for the 2006 documentary "An Inconvenient
Truth." But after he starred in a sequel to the film in 2017, an
op-ed in The Daily Caller suggested that Gore's home devoured 34
times more energy than the average US household. The Daily Caller,
founded by Tucker Carlson, received $3.5 million in funding from the
Koch Family Foundations and the Charles Koch Institute in the last
decade. According to Greenpeace, the Koch brothers spent $15 million
to finance 90 groups that attacked climate science and policy
between 1997 and 2018.<br>
<br>
The Daily Caller piece was written by Drew Johnson, founder of the
Beacon Center of Tennessee, a libertarian think tank. Johnson was,
for the most part, doubling down on a tactic that had worked for him
a decade earlier. <br>
<br>
"He tells other people how to live and he's not following his own
rules," Johnsen told ABC in 2007, after the center published a
report describing how Gore's 20-room home used 20 times as much
electricity as the average American house.<br>
<br>
The criticism of Obama came in 2019, when an op-ed in the Hill
blasted him for buying a house in Martha's Vineyard. Purchasing
ocean-front property, the piece argued, suggests one isn't actually
worried about sea-level rise. The article was written by Katie
Pavlich, an alumna of the Young Americans' Foundation — an outreach
organization of the conservative movement with financial ties to the
Koch Brothers.<br>
<br>
"If the former president is truly concerned about sea levels rising
as a result of climate change," Pavlich wrote, "his latest real
estate purchase places doubts on his sincerity."<br>
<br>
That type of argument, Mann said, directs attention away from the
companies emitting the carbon that contributes to sea-level rise.<br>
<br>
"It would be funny if it weren't so pernicious," he added.<br>
<br>
'Carbon shaming'<br>
<br>
Shaz Attari, a climate-communications researcher at Indiana
University Bloomington, thinks this new tactic is working. Her
research suggests that scientists and communicators with large
carbon footprints have less credibility than those with reduced
carbon consumption, and that people are more likely to support
policies or recommendations if the leader promoting them has a small
carbon footprint.<br>
<br>
"When it comes to message uptake, advocates are judged for
inconsistency between their behavior and advocacy," Attari told
Insider. "This judgement is dominated by flying or home energy
consumption."<br>
<br>
Attari said she even once gave a talk in New York City about
reducing personal energy use, and someone in the audience asked:
"Hey, you flew to this meeting — why should I listen to what you
say?"<br>
<br>
"The tactic of carbon shaming is quite an effective way of inciting
infighting among climate advocates," Mann said. "There are armies of
bots and trolls deployed to generate these arguments online of, 'Why
do you fly?' 'Why aren't you a vegan?'"<br>
<br>
'Climate sadism'<br>
Mark Maslin, an Earth science researcher at the University College
London, told Insider that "attacking the messenger has always been
part and parcel" of fossil-fuel interests' strategy to counter
environmental movements.<br>
<br>
What's changed, he said, is the tenor of these attacks, which Maslin
says have escalated into a vicious pageantry of "climate sadism."<br>
<br>
Take, for example, the backlash against Greta Thunberg. The teenage
activist is a difficult target for the hypocrisy argument, since she
doesn't eat meat or fly. One staff member at the Heartland
Institute, a Koch-funded think tank, did point out that the boat
Thunberg once used to cross the Atlantic was made of plastic, but
for the most part, conservatives and anti-environmentalists have
chosen to target Thunberg's personality instead.<br>
<br>
Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg speaks at the 'Friday
Strike For Climate' on March 6, 2020, in Brussels, Belgium. Thierry
Monasse/Getty Images<br>
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro called her a "little brat" in
2019. Donald Trump said she had an "anger management problem."<br>
<br>
Conservative commentator Michael Knowles called Thunberg, who has
Asperger's syndrome, "a mentally ill Swedish child" on Fox News. Fox
host Laura Ingraham, meanwhile, compared the Thunberg's youth
climate movement to a murderous cult of children from a Stephen King
novel.<br>
<br>
"The blowback is directly related to the impact you're having," Kim
Cobb, a climate scientist from Georgia Tech, told Insider.
Thunberg's movement, she added, was "striking a nerve with every
single human on the planet at that point."<br>
<br>
The Heartland Institute even briefly worked with the German
anti-environmental group EIKE to hire a German teenager, Naomi
Seibt, to fashion herself as an antithesis to Thunberg.<br>
<br>
"Many people believe I'm being pushed as an 'Anti-Greta,'" Seibt
told Insider last year.<br>
<br>
"It's wrong to look up to her as a climate puppet and symbol," Seibt
said of Thunberg, adding, "I don't want people to panic about the
world ending."<br>
<br>
Over the course of four months, for a monthly salary of $2,000,
Seibt produced videos for the institute like "Naomi Seibt vs. Greta
Thunberg: Whom should we trust?" and spoke at the 2020 Conservative
Political Action Conference. Seibt quietly parted ways with
Heartland in April 2020.<br>
<br>
"The Anti-Greta just shows how cynical they are," Mann said, adding,
"they think it's all a shell game about distraction and deception —
that's what they've got left." <br>
<br>
In Prince Harry's case, reports about his plane flights do seem to
have discredited the prince's climate agenda. A recent Newsweek poll
in the UK found that 66% of respondents viewed the prince as
"hypocritical on air travel." But the number most stories about
Harry's trip left out is the US's total emissions from fossil fuels:
4,853 million metric tons of carbon in 2019 alone.<br>
<br>
Harry's private flight from Aspen to Santa Barbara, meanwhile,
emitted at most 9 metric tons of carbon dioxide.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fossil-fuel-interests-target-climate-advocates-personally-2021-8">https://www.businessinsider.com/fossil-fuel-interests-target-climate-advocates-personally-2021-8</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[The news archive - looking back]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming
August 30, 2005</b></font><br>
<font size="+1">In an essay published in the Boston Globe, and
republished the next day in the New York Times, Ross Gelbspan
writes:</font><br>
<font size="+1">"The hurricane that struck Louisiana yesterday was
nicknamed Katrina by the National Weather Service. Its real name
is global warming."</font><br>
<font size="+1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20130618033413/http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0830-22.htm">http://web.archive.org/web/20130618033413/http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0830-22.htm</a></font><br>
<br>
<font size="+1"></font><br>
<p>/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/</p>
<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"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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. This is a hobby production curated by Richard
Pauli<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain 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" moz-do-not-send="true">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote" moz-do-not-send="true"><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"
moz-do-not-send="true">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"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://TheClimate.Vote</a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"
moz-do-not-send="true"><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>