"US conservatives falsely blame renewables for Texas storm outages" - when the reality is that this blast of cold weather in the US is driven heating in the Arctic effecting the polar vortex (see tweets below). #ClimateCrisis theguardian.com/us-news/2021/f…
Despite the mounting evidence of polar vortex disruption by global heating, causing unusual warming of the Arctic, driving unusual cold conditions in the southern US (see this article from 2019), it is not being mentioned much. nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/1…
As the above article was from 2019 it was quite prophetic in forecasting the record breaking cold conditions causing chaos in the US at the moment (as was the article below, published before the current cold blast). nationalgeographic.com/environment/20…
US Conservatives and vested interests bizarrely see this as an opportunity to attack concerns over the climate crisis and the drive for renewable energy, simply because it's counter-intuitive that blasts of cold air in specific southern location can be driven by a warming Arctic.
As usual, lies and propaganda centres on trying to distract the public from seeing the big picture. This is a localised cold blast (temporary) in one particular location, whilst the big picture is one of global heating.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) In a bold move the UN is once again linking the climate crisis to the rest of the ecological crisis as it originally was at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. I've a bold request, please make the COP talks starting with COP 26 only consider solutions which address the whole crisis.
2) Originally, climate change was separated from the rest of the ecological crisis in the hope of rapidly getting a global agreement to start rapidly reducing CO2 emissions by the 1990s, much in the manner the Montreal Protocol had ended the production of CFCs.
3) With hindsight it was a massive mistake to separate the climate crisis from the much bigger ecological crisis, because dishonest politicians and vested interests have dishonestly pretended that climate change was the only crisis and as such have focused on techno-fixes.
1) There are many people nitpicking Greta's very fine tweet, generally taking issue with what they presume or present to be Greta's definition of both democracy, with the underlying tacit assumption being that Greta is naive about both, in definition and practise.
2) Firstly, and most importantly, Greta just made a single tweet, to make a very cutting observation about what is happening today in countries which previously described themselves as bastions of democracy. Greta was not writing a detailed academic essay.
3) Self-evidently, if you just make a single tweet, or say some in few words, you can't go in the definitions of the terms you have used, the concepts, the caveats etc. Therefore, making up your own definition and arguing against is the straw man logical fallacy.
1) On 24 February 2020 last year, I not only accurately predicted the COVID-19 global pandemic, but the wider impacts on our economy and system of governance. The way governments would be hamstrung by their need to maintain economic growth. See link below. theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/f…
2) Here it is, please read the tweets below the first.
3) There are many countries that only experienced a relative handful of deaths from COVID-19, or even none at all in January 2021. The only reason the UK received the highest death rates in the world in January is because it needlessly ended lockdown before Christmas.
1) This is fair question and I want to answer how I think we can address the climate and ecological emergency and create a sustainable society. This is a summary of 50 years of deep thinking about how to achieve it. @GeorgeMonbiot@GretaThunberg@ClimateHuman@GreenRupertRead
2) I believe the greatest single obstacle is the culture wide misconception that to achieve this we need to create a great big plan, or even a rough outline. This seems so obvious to most people, but I can't think of a single successful historical precedent for this.
3) Historical precedent demonstrates that all such grand preconceived plans fail, or at least have to be seriously modified or entirely changed. Historical precedent demonstrates that only total commitment to addressing the crisis succeeds, and the solutions emerge from this.
1) It is vital that all those committed to addressing the climate and ecological crisis, understand the dynamic I've described in the 3 tweet thread I've linked to below. @GeorgeMonbiot@Fridays4future@ClimateHuman
2) For 30 years, in fact longer, we've been trapped in an unproductive cycle of our leadership promising to address the climate and ecological crisis, and then doing nothing except making a few token gestures.
3) This is very dangerous because we've lost lots of valuable time we no longer have. 25-30 years ago it would have been possible to transition to a sustainable society in an incremental way. But this is no longer possible and only radical action now will work.
1) This illustrates the whole climate and ecological emergency in a nutshell. The world is heading towards a climate catastrophe, but the most obvious ways to reduce our carbon emissions are being ignored, because billionaires can't profit from the solutions.
2) The most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions are to restore the Earth's peat bogs, rewild the land, restore natural forests, eat drastically less meat, and stop extracting and burning fossil fuels. It really is that simple. nature.com/articles/d4158…
3) These are quite simple to achieve, we could start straight away, none require magic technology, and have been known about as effective solutions for decades. So why don't we pursue these simple natural solutions? @GretaThunberg@GeorgeMonbiot naturalclimate.solutions