2. That climate change this powerful was triggered by warming roughly equivalent to what's projected for our current pollution emissions trajectory is ... almost too much to bear.
3. Right around now many of my friends are making their winter holiday plans, buying tickets to fly all sorts of lovely places around the world. All of these people claim to understand the reality of climate change.
First point: Nesbit reported that his research shows that trying to inoculate teenagers against tobacco advertising by telling them that smoking will make them die before their time doesn't work. But....
Telling teenagers that they're being targeted and manipulated by tobacco companies who are shamelessly trying to addict them actually *does* make them much less likely to take up smoking.
I really wanted to like @NathanielRich's @NYTmag piece about 70's & 80's climate politics. It does put AGW front-and-center for once. But I'm crushed to say that Rich suppresses important facts, covering up how organized climate denial created our current predicament.
For just one example: let's look at how Rich narrates the role of the scientist William Nierenberg in writing and disseminating “Changing Climate,” the @theNASciences report released in 1983.
This is how Rich credentials Nierenberg (N)👇🏽. He doesn't report that N was a physicist, not a climate scientist. Nor does he say that N worked on the Manhattan Project. He hides the parts that undermine N's expertise on climate & that suggest N used science politically.
1. I happened to listen to @NPR for a few hours this morning, and I heard three stories that are very much connected to #climatechange without anyone on the radio mentioning climate change even once.
It was surreal and disturbing.
2. The first story was about the current drought in Oregon. It focused on a rancher who is currently paying to have 18,000 gallons of water a day trucked in to water his livestock. (Yes, you read that right.)
3. The story discussed how much this water and its transport was costing the rancher; how long this drought has affected ranching in the West; and what the ranchers might do if the weather doesn't eventually return to normal (as if it would one day return to normal).
Where are the peer-reviewed papers by “renowned climatologists” arguing that a tripling of CO2 concentrations would have only minor impacts on temperatures? They don’t exist. Because this claim is a lie.
From page 47. This claim is also a lie. Current warming is over 100% attributable to human activity.
The citation leads not to a scientific study, but to congressional testimony by Dr Will Happer, a Emeritus Prof of Physics, who specializes in optics, and who...