<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="+2"><i><b>April 2, 2022</b></i></font><br>
</p>
<i>[ perhaps the most important question ] </i><br>
<b>With climate change accelerating and despair growing, how far are
activists willing to take their protests?</b><br>
By David Abel Globe Staff, April 1, 2022<br>
- -<br>
With few nations responding to the gravity of the mounting crisis,
activists in Boston and beyond are feeling a mix of resignation and
desperation. What else, they ask, can they — or should they — do to
call attention to the urgency of the warming planet? Their answers
vary, ranging from a kind of inertial despair to a determination to
take their protests to another level.<br>
<br>
Alison Page, who has spent years helping to organize local protests
on behalf of Extinction Rebellion and similar groups, has been
apoplectic and feeling a growing sense of existential dread, which
was compounded last month when temperatures in Antarctica surged to
70 degrees warmer than normal...<br>
“I’m going to continue with activism, because I’m not sure what else
to do, but I’m feeling extremely cynical,” said Page, 37, of
Andover. “It’s very frustrating and confusing that governments
aren’t doing more.”<br>
<br>
It’s worse than we thought: 15 numbers that show we’re not prepared
for climate change<br>
She added: “It seems like climate activism doesn’t make any
difference.”<br>
<br>
At a recent talk in London, Guterres insisted that decades of
efforts to persuade governments around the world to take action have
made a difference.<br>
But they and others are looking for similar opportunities to sound
the alarms and frustrate the distribution of fossil fuels — without
resorting to violence... <br>
- -<br>
“Blowing up pipelines replicates the violence of the fossil fuel
industry,” Phillips said. “We believe there are other ways to stop
them. That’s what I’m focusing on.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/04/01/science/with-climate-change-accelerating-despair-growing-how-far-are-activists-willing-take-their-protests/">https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/04/01/science/with-climate-change-accelerating-despair-growing-how-far-are-activists-willing-take-their-protests/</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/04/01/science/with-climate-change-accelerating-despair-growing-how-far-are-activists-willing-take-their-protests/">https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/04/01/science/with-climate-change-accelerating-despair-growing-how-far-are-activists-willing-take-their-protests/</a>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ Some wisdom from GQ magazine ]</i><br>
<b>The Razor's Edge of A Warming World</b><br>
As we hurtle toward an ever-hotter future, GQ spotlights eight
places whose very identities depend on a simple calculation: If we
limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels,
these places could be saved. In a 2-degree scenario, they would be
irredeemably lost.<br>
BY EMILY ATKIN AND CAITLIN LOOBY<br>
March 31, 2022<br>
- -<br>
This reality is one that all of the earth’s inhabitants are now
grappling with: If we want to preserve the places we love, we have
to focus on moving away from fossil fuels immediately. The latest
United Nations climate report, released in February, made it clear
that irreversible destruction can no longer be avoided. The question
is no longer “How can we fix climate change?” It’s “How much
irreversible planetary damage are we willing to accept in order to
continue extracting and burning fossil fuels?”<br>
<br>
Since the late 19th century, when, in the aftermath of the
Industrial Revolution, humans started burning fossil fuels on a
scale greater than ever before, the global average temperature has
increased by about 1.1 degrees Celsius. Today, the desperate hope of
climate scientists is that we prevent that number from rising to 1.5
degrees. Of course, some say that task is now impossible and that
the best we can wish for is to limit warming to 2 degrees above
pre-industrial levels. Those two thresholds have come to define the
discourse around climate change, and either would represent a
stunning reversal of current trends.<br>
- -<br>
Regions are becoming inhospitable for human life. In one future, the
world warms by 2 degrees or more and these trends continue to their
catastrophic ends. In another, we pull the hand brake now and limit
warming to 1.5 degrees. “People don’t realize that every tenth of a
degree matters,” Baum explains. Here are some places where they
matter the most.<br>
- -<br>
Indeed, if current trends continue, people might not have a choice.
One study projects that with 1.5 degrees of warming, 13.8 percent of
the world would regularly be exposed to severe heat waves—a figure
that would nearly triple, to 36.9 percent, with 2 degrees of
warming. It seems that much more of the world might soon see what a
Jacobabad summer feels like. —Emily Atkin<br>
- -<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.gq.com/story/eight-places-to-save-climate-change">https://www.gq.com/story/eight-places-to-save-climate-change</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[ bringing chaotic politics and force to future ] </i><br>
<b>Stemming The Rise Of Ecofascism with Sam Moore & Alex Roberts</b><br>
March 26, 2022Activism, Climate Policy, Human Chaos, Justice &
Equity, Psychology & Philosophy<br>
Nick Breeze<br>
Climate journalist and host of the ClimateGenn podcast.<br>
<br>
In this ClimateGenn episode, I am speaking to authors, podcasters,
and activists, Sam Moore and Alex Roberts whose recently published
book, The Rise Of Ecofascism, explores the characteristics of past,
present, and potentially future ‘ecofascism’.<br>
The risks posed to society from extreme politics on the right and
the left has been rising in recent years. Even in the last week or
so, a cache of information was leaked via the Anonymous hacking
group linking Putin’s regime to the financing of far right-wing
groups across Europe.<br>
<br>
More evidence of the rise in far-right and fascist groups is seen in
places like the UK, France, Italy, or Hungary, where political
ground can become an objective.<br>
<br>
Sam and Alex’s work aims to be a pragmatic guide to identify these
tendencies and emerging ideas in order to be able to stop them from
rising into dominant movements, which as they evidence in the book,
never deliver on the grand promises they make.<br>
<br>
They also provide a long history of how the far-right has developed
relationships to nature that recur in history and are also echoed
today in political narratives around climate denialism and delays in
ridding ourselves of the fossil fuel era that is destroying the
world as we know it.<br>
<br>
Thank you for listening to the ClimateGenn series. In the next
episode I am speaking with Dr Paul Behrens on the risks of food
system shocks arising from the Ukraine crisis and how this is a
signal of how vulnerable our overall food system is in a worsening
climate and ecological crisis.<br>
<br>
We also had our first Cambridge Climate Series event last week with
Professor Lord Martin Rees and Professor David Keith discussing the
complexity and major issues surrounding the deployment of
geoengineering. The session was moderated by students from Cambridge
and covered a lot of ground, so if you are interested in
geoengineering then it is worth a watch:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeytTkICcDI">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeytTkICcDI</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://genn.cc/blog/stemming-the-rise-of-ecofascism-with-sam-moore-alex-roberts/">https://genn.cc/blog/stemming-the-rise-of-ecofascism-with-sam-moore-alex-roberts/</a><br>
<p>- -</p>
<i>[ fundamental video discussion of Geo-engineering -- (the G
word) start video 4:45 in ]</i><br>
<b>CCLS: The G Word, do we have time to ignore it?</b><br>
Mar 25, 2022<br>
Cambridge Climate Lecture Series<br>
Recording from session March 24th, 2022<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeytTkICcDI">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeytTkICcDI</a>
<p>- -<br>
</p>
<i>[ a quick summary of Geo-engineering from Anthropocene magazine ]
</i><br>
<b>Sooner or later someone is going to flip the shades</b><br>
Is solar geoengineering inevitable or can we still fix the climate
without it?<br>
By Mark Harris<br>
Few concepts have gone from science fiction to science news as
swiftly as solar geoengineering (aka solar radiation management, or
SRM). The reason is terrifyingly simple. On the one hand, humanity
seems incapable of reducing the amount of carbon dioxide it is
releasing into the atmosphere. On the other, controlling incoming
radiation from the sun appears to be feasible and fast. It also
promises to be orders of magnitude less expensive than rolling back
emissions, or capturing carbon directly from the atmosphere.<br>
<br>
In fact, SRM’s price tag is estimated to be low enough that a single
country—or even a super wealthy individual—could launch a climate
intervention that would drag us all into a massive global
experiment. <br>
<br>
Some experts argue that this alone should prompt heavy investment in
understanding the wider impacts and potential unintended
consequences of SRM. Others fear that SRM could become our Plan A
for addressing climate change, skirting the emissions cuts and
carbon mitigations that are far less controversial. To them, SRM
embodies precisely the careless, technology-driven hubris that got
us where we are today, with the added drawback of committing us to
an expensive, risky activity for potentially centuries to come. <br>
<br>
<b>The Case for More Research</b><br>
1. The science is still up in the air. The eruption of Mount
Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991 reduced the global average air
temperatures by as much as 0.5C in the year following, so the
underlying science seems sound. But much more research needs to be
carried out to quantify the positive—and negative—impacts of
deliberately introducing massive amounts of sulfate or chalk
aerosols into the atmosphere.<br>
<br>
2. Balancing the books. Highly developed nations have historically
been responsible for the vast majority of carbon emissions from
fossil fuel use. SRM research gives polluters the opportunity –
perhaps even the responsibility – to address climate injustice, by
funding research around the world, focused on local concerns and
impacts <br>
<br>
3. We’re already conducting a vast global climate experiment. To
worry about meddling with the weather might seem rich when we are
already altering the chemistry of the earth’s air and water system
in an almost completely uncontrolled manner, through the combustion
of fossil fuels. In In this viewpoint, understanding how to mitigate
the worst effects of climate change should be encouraged, not
obstructed.<br>
<br>
<b>The Slope Is Too Slippery</b><br>
1. Unpredictable and ungovernable. In January, a group of 60
scientists called for a moratorium on SRM technologies, including no
outdoor experiments, no public funding, no patents, no support from
international institutions, and certainly no deployments. They worry
that the impacts of SRM are difficult to predict, and would be
impossible to govern fairly and effectively in the existing
international political system. <br>
<br>
2. Beware the quick fix. If you think something is keeping you
safe, you are more likely to act in a risky way. This “moral hazard”
has been proven time and again – not least in road deaths that
continue to rise despite cars that are physically safer than ever.
Research from the UK suggests that deploying SRM would deter some
people from reducing their personal carbon footprint. Some nations
(yes, I’m looking at you America) could embrace SRM as a
technological Band-Aid to perpetuate a society based on profligate
energy use.<br>
<br>
3. Long term commitments aren’t humanity’s strength. Aerosols in
the atmosphere only remain effective at reflective incoming sunlight
for a few months. So once you start doing SRM, you need to keep it
up indefinitely or risk a potentially disastrous termination shock,
where temperatures could shoot up over a very short period. Looking
at our experience managing nuclear waste, a similarly long-term
endeavor, provides a sobering perspective.<br>
<br>
<b>What to Keep An Eye on</b><br>
1. The weather. An uptick in catastrophic heat waves, floods, and
other extreme weather events might increase demand for solutions
that promise results in seasons rather than decades.<br>
<br>
2. Fence-sitters. Degrees is an UK-based non-profit funded by
scientists and environmentalists. It aims to fund large-scale
modeling efforts around SRM, including voices from the Global South,
but remains firmly neutral on whether the technologies should be
deployed. How the positions of such organizations evolve in the
years ahead could indicate whether SRM will become part of the
mainstream carbon effort. <br>
<br>
3. The funding. Will the $100 to $200 million that the National
Academies of Science recommended for SRM research materialize? If
the funding faucet is opened, some proposed SRM techniques do seem
inherently less dangerous than others, including a marine cloud
brightening project that would use little but sprays of seawater to
make clouds more reflective.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2022/03/is-solar-geoengineering-inevitable-or-can-we-still-fix-the-climate-without-it/">https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2022/03/is-solar-geoengineering-inevitable-or-can-we-still-fix-the-climate-without-it/</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<i>[ emotional, masspersonal social engineering -- explained in
video book review ]</i><br>
<b>Robert W. Gehl and Sean T. Lawson: Propaganda, Deception, and the
Manipulation of Information</b><br>
Mar 25, 2022<br>
Town Hall Seattle<br>
<br>
The United States is awash in manipulated information about
everything from election results to the effectiveness of medical
treatments. Corporate social media is a particularly effective
channel for manipulative communication — Facebook being a
particularly willing vehicle for it, as evidenced by the increased
use of warning labels on false or misleading posts. Not to mention
the inconsistent, confusing, and controversy-stirring ways that
comments and posts are moderated in social media spaces.<br>
<br>
While the methods of distributing misinformation have shifted with
technological advancement, the principles of manipulative
communication are nothing new. In Social Engineering, authors Robert
Gehl and Sean Lawson explore how online misinformation is rooted in
earlier techniques: mass social engineering of the early twentieth
century and interpersonal hacker social engineering of the 1970s.
The two methods converge today into what they call “masspersonal
social engineering.” Through a mix of information gathering,
deception, and truth-indifferent statements, the practice has one
goal: to get people to take the actions desired by the social
engineer. <br>
<br>
Are there better ways to understand the manipulation methods at play
instead of reducing all information to a true/false binary?
Together, Gehl and Lawson discuss manipulative communication of the
past and present and how we might improve the ways that information
is shared and consumed in the future.<br>
Robert W. Gehl is F. Jay Taylor Endowed Research Chair of
Communication at Louisiana Tech University and the author of Weaving
the Dark Web.<br>
<br>
Sean T. Lawson is Associate Professor of Communication at the
University of Utah, Non-Resident Fellow at the Brute Krulak Center
for Innovation & Future Warfare at the Marine Corps University,
and author of Cybersecurity Discourse in the United States.<br>
Presented by Town Hall Seattle.<i><br>
</i><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d872rc4kSNE">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d872rc4kSNE</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<i>[The news archive - looking back at a moment of deliberate
disinformation]</i><br>
<font size="5"><b>April 2, 2002</b></font><br>
The New York Times reports:<br>
<blockquote>"After a year of urging from energy industry lobbyists,
the Bush administration is seeking the ouster of an American
scientist who for nearly six years has directed an international
panel of hundreds of experts assessing global warming, several
government officials have said.<br>
<br>
"The specialist, Dr. Robert T. Watson, chief scientist of the
World Bank, is highly regarded as an atmospheric chemist by many
climate experts. He has held the unpaid position of chairman of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since the fall of
1996. Now his term is expiring and the State Department has chosen
not to renominate him to head the panel, which is run under the
auspices of the United Nations and the World Meteorological
Organization.<br>
<br>
"Dr. Watson is an outspoken advocate of the idea that human
actions — mainly burning oil and coal — are contributing to global
warming and must be changed to avert environmental upheavals.<br>
<br>
"Last night, a State Department official said the administration
was leaning toward endorsing a scientist from India, which along
with other developing countries has been eager for a stronger role
in the climate assessments.<br>
<br>
"But many influential climate experts say they have written to the
department supporting Dr. Watson."<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/02/science/02CLIM.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/02/science/02CLIM.html</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://youtu.be/6NcSOUJUBfY">http://youtu.be/6NcSOUJUBfY</a><br>
<br>
<p>======================================= <br>
<br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>More
daily summaries<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> <br>
--------------------------------------- <br>
<br>
*Climate Nexus <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*">https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/*</a>
<br>
Delivered straight to your inbox every morning, Hot News
summarizes the most important climate and energy news of the day,
delivering an unmatched aggregation of timely, relevant reporting.
It also provides original reporting and commentary on climate
denial and pro-polluter activity that would otherwise remain
largely unexposed. 5 weekday <br>
<br>
================================= <br>
<br>
<b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>Carbon
Brief Daily <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up">https://www.carbonbrief.org/newsletter-sign-up</a><span
class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> <br>
Every weekday morning, in time for your morning coffee, Carbon
Brief sends out a free email known as the “Daily Briefing” to
thousands of subscribers around the world. The email is a digest
of the past 24 hours of media coverage related to climate change
and energy, as well as our pick of the key studies published in
the peer-reviewed journals. <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief">https://www.getrevue.co/publisher/carbon-brief</a>
<br>
<br>
================================== <br>
<br>
*The Daily Climate Subscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*">https://ehsciences.activehosted.com/f/61*</a>
<br>
Get The Daily Climate in your inbox - FREE! Top news on climate
impacts, solutions, politics, drivers. Delivered week days. Better
than coffee. <br>
Other newsletters too <br>
more at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/">https://www.dailyclimate.org/originals/</a>
<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<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
moz-txt-link-freetext" 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>