Home | About | Donate

Nation's Top Science Groups Demand Bold Climate Action From Congress—Now!


#1

Nation's Top Science Groups Demand Bold Climate Action From Congress—Now!

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

The nation's top scientific organizations have an important reminder for members of Congress: human caused climate change is real, its impacts are already being felt in the U.S., and only a significant slashing of greenhouse gas emissions will stave off the worst risks.


#4

Keep it in the ground!

Related to the floods in West Virginia, I did not here much mention at all about the relationship between the flooding and mountain top removal coal mining and deforestation as exacerbating the problem. This information should be leading the story, right after immediate concerns for the people directly affected.


#5

Forty years ago drastic action would probably have made a difference.
Now?
As a final act of desperation we might avoid wholesale extinction of our species.
Certainly not gonna save us all.
And that is exactly what the elites are counting on.
Good luck to the rest of us!


#6

Just like we don't hear about the pine beetle infestations or the forest management that led to the infestations as essential ingredients in the apocalyptic Fort McMurry Tar Sands fires.


#10

Thank you Carol. It's mind boggling to me that certain "green groups", are pushing for Clinton and furthermore shaming those of us who believe that Clinton----- who takes massive amounts of money from corporations (including fossil fuel industry), promotes fracking and will not impose a carbon tax------is NOT the one that should lead this country.

From the League of Conservation voters to the latest from the NRDC:

This is beyond belief and literally turns my stomach. I realize that many of these groups have always taken money from TPTB and greenwash but still . . . . .

When I've tried to point this out on other blogs I'm framed as a troll who has been taken in by the Koch brothers and of course will help bring Trump to power.

I will contribute to Common Dreams today.


#12

Forget Congress. Mitch McConnal, Paul Ryan, Jeff Sessions, James Inhofe, etc. These Republicans are not going to budge and support climate change action.


#13

I agree mountain man. We are now in a state of climate chaos and I do not think there is any place on earth that will not be severely affected.

As the arctic melts and we near a blue ocean event (that name sounds too benign!) HRC is having the time of her life with her "Hillary Victory Fund" (maybe they serve Victory gin at these events?) at lavish fundraisers.

Here's the latest that features a performance of Hamilton. My suggestion would be instead of Hamilton, they show the movie Chasing Ice or Gasland 2.

"The event, titled Hamilton: An American Musical with special guest Hillary Rodham Clinton, aims to raise money for the Democratic presidential candidate's campaign.
Tickets for a matinee on 12 July start at $2,700 (£2,009) and go up to $100,000 (£74,442).
The Hillary Victory Fund purchased all 1321 seats for the performance.
They are available to buy on Clinton's website.
The cheapest ticket for the event provides guests a general seat, while the $100,000 "event chair" entry includes "two premium seats and wrap party with Hillary and other special guests, and invitation to the Democratic National Convention".
In an email sent to her supporters, Clinton is said to have written: "When I first saw the musical Hamilton last year, I was blown away."

IN THE MEANTIME:


#14

Those words gave me goosebumps-----they are true.


#15

They either (1) imagine they can survive in their gated communities, on their private islands (immune to sea level rise, of course!) or some kind of space hotel they imagine in their future or (2) they figure it's all going to hell in a handbasket & they just want their last hurrah to be a big one.


#18

unfortunately, from my years of observing "politics as usual" i feel certain that members of congress do not comprehend the word, "now!" they do understand "compromise" and "incremental" and neither of those words apply to the state of emergency all of earth's living beings face "now!" i see the push in some responses to write in sanders or stein's name, but let's remember that the president--whoever that may be--still has to deal with politicians.


#19

The watersheds hardest hit by the flooding (Elk, Greenbrier) have little or no coal mining - but yes, the impacts and death toll would have been far worse had the narrow heavy band of rain hit the MTR coalfield areas - not just floods but landslides, possibly failed slurry waste dams, and flooding of active underground mines.


#20

Try communicating the sense that we have reached a tipping point where from now on we experience a new climate where no climate has gone before to people who don't want to hear about anything that they don't want to know about! They don't want to know. It is hard to believe but it is true. They simply don't want to know.

The jet stream crossing the equator? Yeah so, they say! Yeah so, says Trump. Yeah so...the rallying cry of those who don't want to know.

Nice link ma'am.


#21

While his actions and propose actions have hardly been enough, Obama did not "expand the harm being done to the environment". A fair number of proposed and implemented new regulations were put in place by his administration. If he is so pro-pollution, why is he so despised and fought by every coal and oil company - plus even the UMWA! Ever heard of the "war on coal"?


#22

You are welcome Thelma.

NRDC's endorsement came right before the California primary when they stated:

“Hillary Clinton is an environmental champion with the passion, experience and savvy to build on President Obama’s environmental legacy,” Rhea Suh, president of the NRDC Action Fund, said in a statement. “More than any other candidate running, Hillary Clinton understands the environmental challenges America faces, and her approach to solving them is grounded in the possibility and promise our democracy affords us.”

And this:

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/282856-sierra-club-endorses-clinton

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won the endorsement of the Sierra Club on Thursday.

Michael Brune, the group's executive director, said in a statement that Clinton “will be the strong environmental champion that we need to lead our country,” handing the former secretary of State her second major environmental endorsement of the week.

“The Sierra Club, like so many Americans, not only wants to protect President Obama’s legacy — we want to expand it,” Brune said in a statement.
“That is something we can accomplish with a Clinton White House, and it’s why the Sierra Club’s members and supporters will work tirelessly to make sure she’s elected this November.”


OK . . tell me how to find the glass half full in all of this?
Thoughts anyone? Anybody else feel like you're living in an alternate universe amidst this crazy making?


#23

http://www.ibtimes.com/fracking-2016-obama-administration-approves-drilling-coast-california-2376672

AS THE ARCTIC MELTS, OBAMA DOES THIS JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO:
President Barack Obama’s administration “is once again putting California’s beautiful coast in the oil industry’s crosshairs,” Miyoko Sakashita, director of the Oceans Program at the Center for Biological Diversity, the group that brought the lawsuit, said in a statement. “Our beaches and wildlife face a renewed threat from fracking chemicals and oil spills. New legal action may be the only way to get federal officials to do their jobs and protect our ocean from offshore fracking.”


#25

Actually they don't. They really don't think about needing to survive. They exist in a universe where if you ignore something long enough then it will somehow go back to the way it was. Floods in West Virginia to them doesn't mean they need to expect that to keep happening. Nope. The weather will go back to the way it always was sooner or later.

Drought, heat and fires out west? It'll go back to normal eventually, they think. They don't think about gated communities and survival on private islands. They don't think that thinking about survival is even necessary.

They see and yet they simply don't believe in what they don't want to be true. Climate change is impossible they say because they never had to think about climate change ever before.

Scary minds think alike.


#27

I know Wereflea. I've lost a few friends over the past few years trying to do just that.

There is a soul/spirit level barrier when one tries to connect with an AGW denier. It's virtually impossible to have an intimate relationship with someone who is in denial about AGW.

We (sorry S.R.) are all tied into this system that is industrial civilization that uses extractive resources. I can't figure out a way to get out of it but at least I'm trying . . . for what that's worth. This computer resulted in deaths, I'm certain and I'm using it.


#28

True!
My option (2) imagined a rational basis for their "I'm gonna get mine & fu" behavior .. but alas! that's likely just their sociopathic instincts at work!


#31

They made it political knowing that demagogues like Rush and Hannity would play it up as a liberal ploy and downplay the science. It soon became doubt the science like that even makes sense to rational people. By now the politics have taken the place of debate. They are like earplugs. Conservatives don't have to listen to science because they have made science politics. The fact that they don't have science backing them up doesn't bother them since they aren't interested in facts anymore but just in continually opposing those damn liberals.

It is most frustrating to rational people who use facts in their reasoning to encounter people who ignore the facts and treat everything like it is a debating game. They act as if climate change is fake and just some political position supported by liberals and opposed by conservatives. They literally never read the facts for themselves.
They simply don't think facts are real.


#37

Scientists are organizing as this letter to politicians shows. It is easy for some people to pontificate online and call for others to do stuff that they themselves should do. Scientists do the research and build up the facts we need. Others who are not scientists should be the ones who do the organizing part don't you think?

An old line from the fifties once described American fascism as stemming from a mentality of "Let George do it". The idea being that Americans always want someone else to do it instead of themselves.

Let George (someone else) do it. The comment still applies more than ever.

By the way, many scientists are actively part of the climate change movement. They cannot control events themselves. It still comes down to politicians and beyond that to corrupt politicians. What exactly should scientists be doing according to you? My experience is that most are fully aware and actively supporting the same issues as others and in fact even more so than most because they know better how serious it is. They cannot, however, force universities and foundations to focus solely on organizing and so forth.

Once again, what exactly do you think scientists need to do that they aren't doing already. I am curious as to what you meant when you said >>> 'organizing and power building'.

Power building?