New findings could throw (another) huge wrench in the workings of climate denier rhetoric. After correcting for an error in satellite data acquisition, scientists report not only that global warming taking place in the lower atmosphere – but that it’s way worse than we thought.
Short enough for Trump’s truncated attention span, here is John Oliver’s classic climate debate –a “statistically representative” discussion, framed according to the actual scientific consensus about global warming, rather than the conventional idiocy dictating that both sides deserve equal weight.
Last year was the hottest year on record, beating the record set in 2015. And 2015 topped the record set in 2014, according to NASA. Scientists say that this is the first time that temperature records have been broken three years in a row. For all the time spent worrying about jihadist terrorists and Mexican criminals, they don’t constitute an existential threat to humanity. Climate change does.
Science is the most useful tool we have to adapt to climate change and avoid its worst outcomes. But it requires critical thinking and a big-picture perspective to ensure we consider all available evidence. With so many people scrolling through social media feeds for news rather than reading entire articles, facts and clarity can become elusive. It’s up to us all—media and consumers alike—to dig deeper for the full story.
The boycott in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee delayed the transition to a new administrator for the agency. Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat, said he could not support Pruitt, a Republican and the attorney general of Oklahoma, because he “denies the sum of empirical science and the urgency to act on climate change.”
Minutes after the inauguration of Donald J. Trump, Obama’s White House energy page was swiftly replaced with a box of text under the headline “An America First Energy Plan.” Climate change was still mentioned on the energy page, but only once, and only to dismiss any concern. The missing piece is a plan to address climate change.
Democratic governors Jerry Brown of California, Jay Inslee of Washington and Katherine Brown of Oregon warn that climate change is harming the Pacific Ocean, and plan to fight climate change in the face of the incoming administration of Donald Trump, who has dismissed global warming as a hoax.
Weather Channel meteorologist Kait Parker explained to Breitbart, “Science doesn’t care about your opinion. Cherry-picking and twisting the facts will not change the future, nor the fact — not opinion — that the earth is warming.”
Trump seemingly can’t, or chooses not to, distinguish fact from fiction, and he has a long history of adopting conspiracy theories and Tweeting about them.
U.S. companies that have expressed the most fervent public support for President Barack Obama’s environmental agenda are also funding its biggest enemies – the scores of U.S. lawmakers who are climate change skeptics and oppose regulation to combat it, according to a Reuters review of public records.
With political surprises across the globe happening more frequently, suddenly a Trump presidency seems possible. So what would it mean for action on our climate? A legally binding deal may just force his hand into continuing these policies, or similar ones, in order to fulfill international obligations.
While the experts rarely link a single event to global warming — and climate scientists have not said that it caused the devastating Louisiana floods — they point to increased rainfall and flooding as a likely result of a warmer climate.
The disaster has led some to suggest, if carefully, that we might finally be witnessing a catastrophic event in a western country that can be linked directly to climate change. At the very least, events like the Fort McMurray wildfire will happen more regularly in the future, and will be more fierce.
“We tend to think we have a lot of time and this study shows we have maybe 30 years less time,” said lead author Chris Langdon, a University of Miami marine biologist. “We need to get serious sooner rather than later.”
The ceremony comes four months after the deal in Paris and marks the first step towards binding countries to their greenhouse gas emissions promises.
Peabody Energy’s Chapter 11 filing will likely yield further proof that Big Coal and climate science deniers are in cahoots.
The Democrats have respected his candidacy. And it has given him a platform he’d never have gotten on his own. But the welcome mat shows holes.
The Pentagon has concluded that climate change represents “immediate risks” to national security. But the latest GOP debate contained nary a reference to it — instead it was a carnival of bravado and bluster. How much longer can they refuse to discuss it?
This is far from a natural phenomenon. A handful of corporate interests are causing these catastrophes. Oil, coal, auto and a few other industrial powers have profited for decades by spewing fossil fuel contaminants into the world’s atmosphere.
The state that spawned a generation of activists committed to shutting down nuclear reactors and crippling the industry has lately become a hotbed of advocacy and financial support for fighting global warming with, of all things, nuclear power.
The long slog to slow global warming and avoid its worst environmental, economic and security consequences is hard and often thankless political work. Republicans running for president are obviously not keen on picking up that shovel. They treat the issue as not a problem, a problem for others to solve or unsolvable.
With time running out to meet a self-imposed deadline, negotiators Wednesday released a new draft agreement on fighting climate change that was slimmer than earlier versions while still leaving major issues unresolved.
As world leaders convene in Paris this week to confront the long-term threat of global warming, the fact that their talks are taking place in a city still recovering from a deadly terrorist attack has amped up a long-running debate about how much climate change contributes to extremist violence.