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.”
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.”
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.
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.
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.
U.S. Senate Democrats on Tuesday unveiled energy legislation designed to hasten America’s adoption of cleaner energy, slash greenhouse gas emissions below the Obama administration’s goal, and help their party attract young voters in the 2016 elections.