The Climate Reality Project - Great Info & Resources

[OilFreedom]

I just learned about The Climate Reality Project yesterday. This is a very informative and a helpful resource to all who prefer reality when it comes to the CO2 challenges we face -- and can solve. The polluters have been funding FUD campaigns against the science of climate change -- much like cigarette manufacturers sold us the idea that smoking is not harmful. The Climate Reality Project provides well established scientific facts, not propaganda with a corporate objective.

http://climaterealityproject.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The Climate Reality Project is bringing the facts about the climate crisis into the mainstream and engaging the public in conversation about how to solve it. We help citizens around the world discover the truth and take meaningful steps to bring about change."

"24 Presenters. 24 Time Zones. 13 Languages. 1 Message. 24 Hours of Reality is a worldwide event to broadcast the reality of the climate crisis. It will consist of a new multimedia presentation created by Al Gore and delivered once per hour for 24 hours, representing every time zone around the globe. Each hour people living with the reality of climate change will connect the dots between recent extreme weather events — including floods, droughts and storms — and the manmade pollution that is changing our climate. We will offer a round-the-clock, round-the-globe snapshot of the climate crisis in real time. The deniers may have millions of dollars to spend, but we have a powerful advantage. We have reality."

 

[Yodrak]

Founded and chaired by an ex-career politician. Doesn't give the organization any special credibility or "reality" as far as I'm concerned. Just the opposite, in fact. Those who liked Al Gore as a politician may feel differently.

I just learned about The Climate Reality Project yesterday. This is a very informative and a helpful resource to all who prefer reality when it comes to the CO2 challenges we face

 

[AndyH]

Founded and chaired by an ex-career politician. Doesn't give the organization any special credibility or "reality" as far as I'm concerned. Just the opposite, in fact. Those who liked Al Gore as a politician may feel differently.

I just learned about The Climate Reality Project yesterday. This is a very informative and a helpful resource to all who prefer reality when it comes to the CO2 challenges we face

That's an unfortunate view of the problem, Yodrak. The truth is the truth even if we hear it from a liar, is it not? (Not a comment on anyone's truthfulness but rather a distinction between the 'fact' and the 'presenter'...) As I understand it, former VP Gore was an environmentalist LONG before he was a politician.

The entire reason the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change exists is to act as a 'bridge' and/or a digester/translator so that Joe Public gets the info that was once circulated only in scientific circles. It's precisely that information vacuum - that REALITY vacuum - that the Heritage foundation and all six of the main climate deniers have been filling with their misinformation. And coincidently (?!) they're also the source of attacks against Mr. Gore during the Bush/Gore contest.

Here's another place to visit, OilFreedom: http://climatecrocks.com/

 

[Fabio]

speaking of ex-career politicians, it's very enlightening to compare the post-political activities of the last presidents and vice presidents, say from Carter on...

Founded and chaired by an ex-career politician. Doesn't give the organization any special credibility or "reality" as far as I'm concerned. Just the opposite, in fact. Those who liked Al Gore as a politician may feel differently.

I just learned about The Climate Reality Project yesterday. This is a very informative and a helpful resource to all who prefer reality when it comes to the CO2 challenges we face

 

[TRONZ]

Founded and chaired by an ex-career politician. Doesn't give the organization any special credibility or "reality" as far as I'm concerned. Just the opposite, in fact. Those who liked Al Gore as a politician may feel differently.

I just learned about The Climate Reality Project yesterday. This is a very informative and a helpful resource to all who prefer reality when it comes to the CO2 challenges we face

Clearly someone missed the part that the Climate really does not care about politics.

 

[Herm]

Are you guys going to be angry old men 20-40 years from now when AGW is passe and laughed about?.. at least you should feel relief that we dodged that bullet and have a good laugh at your youthful stupidities.. :lol:

 

[AndyH]

Are you guys going to be angry old men 20-40 years from now when AGW is passe and laughed about?.. at least you should feel relief that we dodged that bullet and have a good laugh at your youthful stupidities..

And somehow you think this is a joke Herm?

Those of you that have lived most of your life might want to pause, look around, and see what you've left for those that are next in line. They might also express a silent 'thank you' to those that have vanished from the planet in order to bring them that life.

The consensus among biologists is that we now are moving toward another mass extinction that could rival the past big five. This potential sixth great extinction is unique in that it is caused largely by the activities of a single species. It is the first mass extinction that humans will witness firsthand—and not just as innocent bystanders...

The average extinction rate is now some 1,000 to 10,000 times faster than the rate that prevailed over the past 60 million years. Throughout most of geological history, new species evolved faster than existing species disappeared, thus continuously increasing the planet's biological diversity. Now evolution is falling behind.

http://www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2004/update35

This info, Herm, and the other reports - like those from the IPCC - are not from some lower-level fringe pseudo-science that the 'rest of the world' considers outliers. This is important to understand! By the time the info is collected, racked and stacked, synthesized and digested in order to appear in IPCC reports and other documents like textbooks, the outliers are gone. While the denial crowd likes to cherry pick single strands of info as part of their smear campaigns, the reality is that the 'rope' that is the known truth is made up of millions of strands.

The world's insurance and reinsurance industries are already changing risk tables, increasing costs for those they still cover (and ceasing to cover others) because of climate change. The US military is changing on multiple fronts due to climate change. The medical community is changing because of climate change. The Federal Government is paying out more and more disaster relief cash - including money to Texas to fight fires and pay for billions of dollars of crops and livestock lost.

Herm, based on experience gained in a military career, I regret to inform you that one cannot 'dodge a bullet' by running head-long at the gun that fired it. I strongly suggest an immediate course change. The alternative is to become a permanent part of the graffiti on the wall behind you. It's your choice, but make it quick. (hmmm...600 fps times... aw crud - too late. Nice design, though...)

 

[Herm]

And somehow you think this is a joke Herm?

No way we will avoid mass extinctions with 7 billion humans on the world, but it will be hilarious when we go into another ice age and CO2 counts are up 50ppm from today. I hope you and I are around to laugh about it, perhaps in a virtual reality retirement home Matrix style..

Have faith Andy, mother earth came up with all those animals and it can do it again.

 

[Yodrak]

Agreed.

speaking of ex-career politicians, it's very enlightening to compare the post-political activities of the last presidents and vice presidents, say from Carter on...

 

[Yodrak]

No, the two interests were coincident, beginning in 1976-77 when he was 28 years old.

I respect Al Gore for many of the decisions that he has made during his life, although I do not share some of his political views. And I think his environmental positions go to an unjustifiable extreme.

Regarding extremes, I was no fan of Ralph Nader, either. While I do not agree with extremists at either end of any particular spectrum, I do believe that the action at the extremes play a big role in establishing where the middle is going to be. So, while extremists play a valuable role in a discussion, that does not mean that they are the ones who are 'right' and everyone else is 'wrong' on an issue.

As I understand it, former VP Gore was an environmentalist LONG before he was a politician.

 

[Fabio]

I'd like to take a class on Climatology from you Herm. In which university do you teach? Or maybe you can show me your peer reviewed studies which disprove AGW, that certainly you have read in order to make your conclusions.

Maybe next time you need medical advice (which I hope you do not, btw) you should ask your doctor to use a medical theory only 2% of his field believe in, and those who do are paid, say, by the tobacco industry.

The only place where there is a debate on AWG is the US, which, coincidentally, is also the only place where a significant part of the people (including, sadly, the most likely next president) don't believe in evolution (even the Vatican has given up on that) with even a Creation museum and laws to try and teach it in school.

Are you guys going to be angry old men 20-40 years from now when AGW is passe and laughed about?.. at least you should feel relief that we dodged that bullet and have a good laugh at your youthful stupidities.. :lol:

 

[AndyH]

And somehow you think this is a joke Herm?

No way we will avoid mass extinctions with 7 billion humans on the world, but it will be hilarious when we go into another ice age and CO2 counts are up 50ppm from today. I hope you and I are around to laugh about it, perhaps in a virtual reality retirement home Matrix style..

Have faith Andy, mother earth came up with all those animals and it can do it again.

Just a bit more and your head will be in the sand up to your waist.

Since the industrial revolution we've increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels more than 40%. That has resulted in ocean acification and a 1.4°C global average temperature increase. What has that done already, and where's it heading?

- 85% of people live along coasts
- Higher heat means higher sea level due to expansion of water
- Higher heat means lower crop production (10% less corn for each 1°C rise)
- higher heat means ice is melting - and it's faster than the 1.4° average might suggest because the fastest rate of temperature increase is at the poles
-- Sea level rise if Greenland melts: 6.55 meters
-- West Antarctic ice sheet: 8.06 meters
-- East Antarctic ice sheet: 64.8 meters
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/

At 60 meters, Herm, Florida is gone, the refineries along the Gulf Coast are under water, and folks in Richmond, VA are living on the beach.
http://geology.com/sea-level-rise/

- Higher heat is disrupting the hydrologic cycle, weather, and climate. Rain patterns are shifting, drought is spreading, moisture is leaving the ground, crops are failing. These lead to higher food prices and increase hunger. 50% of the planet's population is living in poverty today - will higher food prices help them? Or maybe the new folks on the poverty list as the scale slides?

- About 25% of that CO2 is absorbed by the world's oceans. The acidification has increased ocean pH by 0.1 (an additional 0.3 - 0.5 pH drop is expected by 2100) - which is already negatively affecting ocean life (the base of the planet's food chain...). Humans cannot survive more than a couple of minutes if the blood's normal pH 7.4 drops or increase 0.4 - biologic systems are sensitive to small changes (or...objects in mirror are larger than they appear...)

The 'good news' is that there's about a 40 year lag so even if we stop 100% of carbon emissions today it'll take more than 40 years for the planet to settle into a new pattern...if we don't hit a tipping point and trigger a faster change. The planet's already demonstrated an ability to go from very warm to very cold in about 20 years...

When's the best time to hit the brake when the car in front of you has stopped, Herm?

 

[AndyH]

No, the two interests were coincident, beginning in 1976-77 when he was 28 years old.

Sorry, no. While he first spoke in Congress about the environment in 1976, his interest goes back to 8th/9th grade.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/14/u...80-s-mix-idealism-shrewd-politics.html?src=pm

I respect Al Gore for many of the decisions that he has made during his life, although I do not share some of his political views. And I think his environmental positions go to an unjustifiable extreme.

Do NOT suggest - even obliquely - that the core of science is somehow extreme!

Beeping Geiger counters, dying canaries, fish floating belly-up, ocean dead zones, and failing crops are not extremist - and neither are those that bring these indicators into the public arena.

I highly recommend you visit your local university and take a chemistry or biology course. I am - and I'll absolutely guarantee you that things have changed since 1982...

 

[Yodrak]

I see from this that his mother was interested when he was in the 8th or 9th grade.

No, the two interests were coincident, beginning in 1976-77 when he was 28 years old.

Sorry, no. While he first spoke in Congress about the environment in 1976, his interest goes back to 8th/9th grade.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/14/u...80-s-mix-idealism-shrewd-politics.html?src=pm

"the core of science"? I made no mention of that. I was writing about Al Gore's positions.

I respect Al Gore for many of the decisions that he has made during his life, although I do not share some of his political views. And I think his environmental positions go to an unjustifiable extreme.

Do NOT suggest - even obliquely - that the core of science is somehow extreme!

 

[AndyH]

I see from this that his mother was interested when he was in the 8th or 9th grade.

No, the two interests were coincident, beginning in 1976-77 when he was 28 years old.

Sorry, no. While he first spoke in Congress about the environment in 1976, his interest goes back to 8th/9th grade.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/14/u...80-s-mix-idealism-shrewd-politics.html?src=pm

Sigh. Come on - you can do better than that!

- Gore's book "Earth in the Balance" contains an intro dated Sep 16, 1992 with these statements:

Writing this book is part of a personal journey that began more than twenty-five years ago, a journey in search of a true understanding of the global ecological crisis and how it can be resolved...

My earliest lessons on environmental protection were about the prevention of soil erosion on our family farm, and I still remember clearly how important it is to stop up the smallest gully "before it gets started good."...

Our farm taught me a lot about how nature works, but lessons learned at the dinner table were equally important. I particularly remember my mother's troubled response to Rachel Carson's classic book about DDT and pesticide abuse, Silent Spring...

He was also a reporter during the Viet Nam war, where he witnessed the early effects of Agent Orange...
http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Balance-Ecology-Human-Spirit/dp/0452269350
Twenty-five years before 1992, according to my calculator, is 1967. This is prior to 1976. This appears to support my position that Al Gore was concerned about the environment before he was a politician.

"the core of science"? I made no mention of that. I was writing about Al Gore's positions.

I respect Al Gore for many of the decisions that he has made during his life, although I do not share some of his political views. And I think his environmental positions go to an unjustifiable extreme.

Do NOT suggest - even obliquely - that the core of science is somehow extreme!

Really? Is it not clear that when one attacks Mr. Gore's positions on the environment, they are also attacking the science on which those positions are based?

http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2009/1204climate_statement.shtml

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has reaffirmed the position of its Board of Directors and the leaders of 18 respected organizations, who concluded based on multiple lines of scientific evidence that global climate change caused by human activities is now underway, and it is a growing threat to society.

The AAAS Board of Directors asserted in a statement issued 9 December 2006 that “the scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.” Clear evidence of climate change is based upon “accumulating data from across the globe” that reveals “a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, increases in extreme weather, rising sea levels, shifts in species ranges, and more,” the AAAS Board reported. Reliable sensor data show an upturn in average temperatures for at least the past 30 years.

The AAAS Board noted that “the pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.”

AAAS joined the leaders of 17 other leading organizations in signing a letter sent 21 October 2009 to the U.S. Senate, emphasizing based upon rigorous research that human-induced climate change is ongoing and will have broad impacts on society—including the global economy and the environment.

 

[TRONZ]

Are you guys going to be angry old men 20-40 years from now when AGW is passe and laughed about?.. at least you should feel relief that we dodged that bullet and have a good laugh at your youthful stupidities.. :lol:

... and nicotine was not addictive or harmful huh?

 

[Yodrak]

No, it is not clear. Two different people can take the same basic information and come to two different conclusions as to what should, or should not, be done on the basis of that information.

Really? Is it not clear that when one attacks Mr. Gore's positions on the environment, they are also attacking the science on which those positions are based?

 

[TRONZ]

No, it is not clear. Two different people can take the same basic information and come to two different conclusions as to what should, or should not, be done on the basis of that information.

Really? Is it not clear that when one attacks Mr. Gore's positions on the environment, they are also attacking the science on which those positions are based?

Doubt is your "product" right?!

 

[Fabio]

Funny how the same discredited person who was pushing "research" on the safety of cigarettes has moved on to the camp of the AGW deniers providing falsehood to fill the right-wing blogoshpere with.

Are you guys going to be angry old men 20-40 years from now when AGW is passe and laughed about?.. at least you should feel relief that we dodged that bullet and have a good laugh at your youthful stupidities.. :lol:

... and nicotine was not addictive or harmful huh?

 

[Yodrak]

Wrong.

Doubt is your "product" right?!