What's the worse that could happen?

Greg Craven is the guy who injected himself into the AGW deniers propaganda war two years ago, with a simple risk analysis grid pointing out the obvious — that, if the scientists are wrong, the worst that could happen is that we move to a carbon free economy sooner in our history than otherwise, but if the AGW deniers are wrong (ie. the scientists are right), we are toast.

Then he did not sleep for the next two years, dealing with the objections to his YouTube piece, below:



Those two years of objections and Greg's defenses have been distilled into his book:

What's the Worst That Could Happen?: A Rational Response to the Climate Change Debate

The perfect gift for that stubborn climate change action denier friend or family member.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Aussie solar generation — where are you?

Casting around me in Sydney to see what our suburban twenty+ year olds are into today, and well, it seems to be, well,.... themselves only. iPoded up (it's not called the usPod, is it?) they listen long enough to think of what they are going to say next when in conversation.

My question: It's your future, where's the protest over the mismanagement of your environmental inheritance? The younger you are, the more you have at stake, I would have thought.

Not so in India with SolarGeneration.

Solar Generation India is a part of the Solar Generation, an international group of young people working in creative ways to demand 'Clean Energy Now!' We started as a group in the early months of 2005; February 16th, to be precise. There were about 60 students at the time of our first organized concert against climate change and since then we've moved on. From one tree to another- for those who saw our tree top concert Now we have support groups at 20 colleges in Bangalore and Hyderabad and well wishers at Cochin as well. We have a long way to go. Also, we are a bit more organized- not in the dangerous sense of the word which it proposes to be- quintessentially, more together....and we would like to leave things there! We have around 15 member in the core group and quite a number of volunteers who are there at crisis times. We have much to do and much to give back...

Good luck. Their modus operandi seems to be bearing witness to local impacts of climate change, and in this post they film the results of sea-level rise, and 'ecogees' that have fled Orissa on the east coast of India, near the Bay of Bengal.

Investigating Solar Generation further I find that Greenpeace is behind it, and it was launched in 2003:

Solar Generation taking their future in their own hands

Solar Generation is made up of young people from all over the world taking action against climate change and calling for a clean energy future. Solar Generation, initiated by Greenpeace in 2003, is now active in Germany, Switzerland, France, China, Thailand, the Philippines, India, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Indonesia, Togo, Kenya, Uganda, US and Australia

The number of countries involved in Solar Generation is rapidly growing. All around the world, we are showing that change is possible and you can make it happen yourself.

Waiting quietly for politicians to act is not an option; Solar Generation are taking the future into our own hands.

Here are just a couple of examples of our achievements and activities:

• Convincing several universities in the US and Australia to start purchasing clean energy and installing solar panels

• Involved in over 120 solar panel installation projects in Switzerland

• Solar Generation member Abigail from the Philippines gave the opening speech at the Renewables 2004 Conference

• Celebrated the Kyoto Protocol entering into force with activities worldwide.

Solar Generation raise public awareness about climate change and the solutions and move politicians to act. Solar Generation organise solar powered concerts and hand out information about our work at other concerts.

We also install solar panels, support energy efficiency and start discussions in our universities. We show that action against climate change works: "While politicians are still talking, we are getting active!"

You can do something too!

Are you interested in starting a Solar Generation Group and getting active in your own country? Look at the bottom of this page for the email of your local contact person or check out the websites from where you live.

Is your country not on the list?

Send an email to our international office and see what the possibilities are of starting a Solar Generation campaign in your country.

The answer to that is no. Though I note that some universities have had solar installed and are purchasing clean energy.

Explain

clipped from thoughtsonglobalwarming.blogspot.com "Found on a city street.. via :: Flickr

Very funny Fuel Watch spoof from Get Up

The bowser wowsers in Parliament House want to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic rather than address the real long-term solutions to rising petrol prices.

View this new ad we've made to cut through the oil slick - and chip in to put it on the air!


Well done! We've reached our first target of $50,000 - but let's keep going!!

If we raise $75,000 we can reach an extra one million viewers, and get our ads to air even sooner.

TARGET: $75,000 - Let's get this ad on air!

$072,886 raised already!

UPDATE: NOW ON AIR

GetUp! gets $250K to put down Government climate campaign

Story so far ... John Howard, the Australian Prime Minister, still hasn't made that trip to the Governor General to call the election date. That's because he is so far behind in the polls that he is foisting every bit of taxpayer funded pro-Government advertising he legitimately can while the election hasn't been called. Kevin Rudd, leader of the Labor opposition, is saying the Liberal's spend is $1 million a day.

But, the air-time assault is annoying audiences, to the tune of $243,900. That's how much money Australians have given GetUp! Sydney at time of writing, to run the anti-ad below, pointing out that the Government's greenwash media blitz amounts to advertising puffery.



GetUp! bought the following media time during the AFL Grandfinal, smack bang in the ground zero of the Liberal's saturation advertising. It's a goal.

Good on everyone who dipped into their pockets to counteract the misappropriation of their own taxes. It's eye-opening for normally politically-relaxed Australians to see how powerful organised, grass-roots, community activism can be. Here is the time GetUp! bought:

These are the spots GetUp has purchased to show the ad on Saturday's AFL

AFL Grand Final in Melbourne - 15.08pm
AFL Grand Final in Sydney - 14.16pm
Pre-game in Brisbane - 12.07pm
Pre-game in Adelaide - 11.08pm

Based on the overwhelming response we have purchased a further 50 ad slots in Newcastle, Tamworth, the Gold Coast, Lismore, Taree, Coffs Harbour, Canberra, Wollongong, Albury, Shepparton, Ballarat, Bendigo, Gippsland, the Sunshine Coast, Rockhampton, Toowomba, Cairns, Bundaberg, Townsville, Mackay, Darwin, Launceston and Hobart. There are none left in WA.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Alexander downs Alexander Downer

There were atmospherics over climate when Alexander Meekin, 17 years old, from Canberra's Narrabundah College took Alexander Downer to task over the Government's logic behind its climate change/energy policy in a panel debate.

Reprinted in full from the new-look SMH:

Alex v Alex: verbal joust has Downer hot under collar

By Craig Skehan

THE Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, may have taken a cue from the Sesame Street character Oscar the Grouch yesterday when a 17-year-old got under his skin on a live panel interview dealing with climate change.

Alexander Meekin, from Canberra's Narrabundah College, was one of four high school students participating in a filmed session sponsored by the National Australia Museum and the Parliamentary Education Office.

He asked if Mr Downer was a climate change sceptic. Mr Downer calmly acknowledged that scientists did "tend to favour" the view that greenhouse gases were a contributing factor.

The persistent student asked whether it was "appropriate" that Government figures such as the Finance Minister, Nick Minchin, did not believe humans were to blame. Mr Downer shot back that people should "escape from intolerance" about others' views.

But Alexander wanted to know if Mr Downer saw a moral comparison between tackling climate change and the recent 200th anniversary of the British Government outlawing slavery.

"No," Mr Downer replied curtly.

But was not climate change enslaving future generations to today's conspicuous consumption, queried Alexander. His peer audience signalled its approval at that inquisitorial strike.

The minister hit back with "Not too many people I know support slavery."

Yes, agreed Alexander, but slavery was abolished by the British only after a long, bitter debate about whether or not it was justified.

As the jousts continued, Mr Downer's temper frayed.

His tormentor asked why a regional program to reduce greenhouse gases was only worth about $20 million a year for five years - less than the Government was spending on political advertising to get re-elected.

His interjection as Mr Downer was answering another student was too much. "I am trying to answer her question and you are trying to make some sort of cheap shot about the Liberal Party," he said, later implying some questions were Labor Party plants.

Alexander later made a point of shaking Mr Downer's hand and denied being affiliated with any political party. He said he thought the minister was being a "bit paranoid".

The slavery argument is a doozy. The parallel holds under scrutiny. Slave-labour powered past economies just as cheap fossil-fuels powers our modern economy. The transition out of slavery to a free labour market didn't hurt the economy in the long run, back then , and made the society we inherited much better. The transition out of our carbon-slavery powered economies won't hurt us anywhere as much as not transitioning out will hurt.

That Downer could not respond in a civil manner to straight-forward questions from a bright 17 year old says volumes about the Government's inability to defend its climate change policy and, being kind, nothing about Downer. I'll make a prediction. Note this as the first face-off of many to come between an older generation addicted to preserving power in all its trappings — at the ultimate expense of the very climate stability they enjoyed all their lives — and the younger generation who will have to live with the devastating consequences of a global climate thrown out of kilter.

If people 25-45 are whinging now about home ownership or mortgages now, they should think about trying to chase the great Australian dream when the climate keeps changing on you. That is what today's teenager will face when he or she starts to think about partying less and making babies more — if the 10-year window that we have to get our global-warming act together is correct. That 10-year prediction comes from James Hansen, chief scientist at NASA.

Alexander Meekin can proudly claim to have won the opening salvo in this intergenerational contest that must happen. Tomorrow's voters must wrest the control over their future from the status-quo now — if they are to have a half-decent one. Clearly some don't want to wait until they vote to start the good fight. Good on 'em: They either fight hard now, or spend the rest of their lives fighting much, much harder just to survive. We need more Alexander Meekins to stand up, speak out and stake their claim on their futures.

In the sixties the younger generation challenged a self-serving status-quo with peace, love-ins and flower-power, rock 'n roll and pot. This time there is far more at stake, and Meekin just showed how today's young people can challenge far more effectively with unforgiving logic, and a handshake. That was a deft touch.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

The War on AGW Denial, Part 2

(Second 5 of 10) By PeakEngineer:

clipped from peakoildesign.com 6. Scientists get paid big bucks to skew their data to indicate global warming. It is far more lucrative to produce research denying global warming. And with tens of thousands of scientists producing research indicating human-induced global warming, the task to compromise the ethics of so many esteemed professionals would be, to say the least, challenging. 7. Variations in solar output cause global warming. Solar variability plays a very small role, if any, in global warming. 8. All temperature data is suspect due to the urban heat island effect. That argument might be valid if all measurements were taken in the heart of cities. But they aren’t. 9. Because it snowed a great deal and got very cold in some areas, global warming isn't happening. Global warming is about the long-term average trend. 10. It isn't possible to distinguish the effects of human activities from natural processes with regard to CO2. We know how much CO2 a barrel of oil and we know how many barrels of oil we use. Global Warning Climate Change Energy

The War on AGW Denial, Part 1

Holocaust denial is illegal in civilised countries of the world.

So why shouldn't we render the orchestrated efforts of the well-funded global warming denial industry to nought, by making anthropogenic global warming denial illegal (unless it's genuine scientific research published in peer-review journals)?

Advertisers are not allowed to make false and misleading claims about their products. Isn't it time we subjected fossil-fuel funded think-tanks and 'foundations' to the same scrutiny as advertisers?

Until political will makes it happen, we need to destroy the vast army of denialist zombies they have spawned, ourselves. Persuade the dumb-relays of thinktank-crafted propaganda to be part of the solution, by driving a PeakEngineered stake through the hearts of their malformed, miscreant arguments. Choose your stakes below:

(First 5 of 10)

clipped from peakoildesign.com This is my collection of rebuttals for the most prominent arguments put forth by the folks who deny anthropogenic climate change. 1. Mars is undergoing global warming, therefore humans can not be causing it on Earth. No. Mars is not undergoing global warming. 2. Volcanoes release much more carbon dioxide than humans. No. Volcanic activity is 0.02 to 0.05 Giga-tons/year. 3. The Earth (and its carbon cycle) is too big for humans to affect it. During 1850-2000, through a combination of fossil fuel burning, cement manufacturing, and land-use changes, humans added a net 174 Gt of carbon. This caused the majority of an increase from 288 ppm (parts per million) to 369.5 ppm of CO2. Without human influence, this regulatory process produces a net carbon increase of 0.0 Gt/year. 4. The sea level has not changed. Since 1900, sea level has risen by about 35 cm (13.8 inches). This change in sea level is accelerating. 5. Scientists predicted imminent global cooling in the 1970s. No, they did not. Global Warning Climate Change Energy

100 things YOU can do to save the environment

clipped from www.seql.org Conserve Energy Reduce Toxicity If you have central air conditioning, do not close vents in unused rooms. Wrap your water heater in an insulated blanket. Turn down or shut off your water heater when you will be away for extended periods. Turn off unneeded lights even when leaving a room for a short time. Set your refrigerator temperature at 36 to 38 and your freezer at 0 to 5 . Purchase appliances and office equipment with the Energy Star Label; old refrigerators, for example, use up to 50 more electricity than newer models. Use an electric lawn- mower instead of a gas-powered one. Shut off electrical equipment in the evening when you leave work. Burn seasoned wood - it burns cleaner than green wood. Use solar power for home and water heating. Ignite charcoal barbecues with an electric probe or other alternative to lighter fluid. Shop with a canvas bag instead of using paper and plastic bags. Buy rechargeable batteries for devices used frequently. Compost your vegetable scraps. Create Less Trash Global Warning Climate Change Energy

The Greenpeace green guide to electronics

If you ever wondered which electronics brands are greenest, Greenpeace has now calibrated a handy reference scale.


Apple is rotten, but I am pleased Nokia is doing best, although there is a lot of room for improvement. It will be fascinating to see how the industry responds to this Greenpeace initiative. :::[Your guide to green electronics]

Nokia and Dell share the top spot in the ranking. They believe that as producers they should bear individual responsibility for taking back and reusing or recycling their own-brand discarded products. Nokia leads the way on eliminating toxic chemicals, since the end of 2005 all new models of mobiles are free of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and all new components to be free of brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from the start of 2007. Dell has also set ambitious targets for eliminating these harmful substances from their products.

Third place goes to HP, followed by Sony Ericsson (4th), Samsung (5th), Sony (6th), LG Electronics (7th), Panasonic (8th), Toshiba (9th), Fujitsu Siemens Computers (10th), Apple (11th), Acer (12th) and Motorola (13th).

Lenovo is in bottom position. It earns points for chemicals management and providing some voluntary product take back programmes, but it needs to do better on all criteria.

Download the full scorecard or the ranking criteria in pdf.

UPDATE: Well, Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs has responded to the Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics 'shame and name' campaign by pointing out that they have a policy of not telegraphing their plans, but in actuality they are in the same bracket, or ahead of many of their competition. The case he stated was that Apple did need to do better, not at 'greening', but at communicating that greening to customers, shareholders and the media. :::[PC World]

To kick off a change in that policy, Jobs noted that Apple no longer sells CRT monitors, which contain significant amounts of lead. He also said the company has completely eliminated hexavalent chromium and some brominated flame retardants from its products. Competitors, including Dell, HP and Lenovo Group Ltd., still market tube monitors, and as for the toxics he mentioned, Jobs said, "Some electronics companies, whose names you know, use these toxic chemicals in their products today."

Jobs also promised that Apple would eradicate arsenic and polyvinyl chloride from its products by the end of next year.

Fair enough. "I hope you are as delighted as I was when I first learned how far along Apple actually is in removing toxic chemicals from its products and recycling its older products," Jobs concluded. "We apologize for leaving you in the dark for this long." Apple goes green.

Environment

What Is Denialism?

Five general tactics are used by denialists and the modern-breed of global warming skeptics to sow confusion. They are:

1. conspiracy;
2. selectivity or cherry-picking;
3. fake experts;
4. impossible expectations or moving goalposts; and,
5. general fallacies of logic.

clipped from scienceblogs.com Denialism is the employment of rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none. These false arguments are used when one has few or no facts to support one's viewpoint against a scientific consensus or against overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They are effective in distracting from actual useful debate using emotionally appealing, but ultimately empty and illogical assertions. Examples of common topics in which denialists employ their tactics include: Creationism/Intelligent Design, Global Warming denialism, Holocaust denial, HIV/AIDS denialism, 9/11 conspiracies, Tobacco Carcinogenecity denialism (the first organized corporate campaign), anti-vaccination/mercury autism denialism and anti-animal testing/animal rights extremist denialism. Denialism spans the ideological spectrum, and is about tactics rather than politics or partisanship.

Dear ALP: Keep the 'no more uranium mines' policy

The ALP are currently on the verge of changing their current 'no new uranium mines' policy. A party vote is expected in the next couple of days. I have sent an email to give voice to my protest but - I have a blog - I can do more, and I might inspire others to do same.

Open e-letter to Senator Stephens of the Australian Labor Party:

Senator Ursula Stephens
[email protected]

Dear Senator,

As your classic swinging voter, I want to voice my extreme disapproval of the proposed move away from the current ALP 'no new mines' policy, and I want you to know that I will be actively campaigning against uranium mining on my blog, Global Warming Watch.

My objections are based upon the following reasons:

• India is not a sig. to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
• Our uranium may end up as plutonium in Iran, Pakistan, or a resources-hungry China in the near future.
• Once Iran develops their nuclear capabilities, we can expect the rest of the middle-east to. Australia should not be party to this proliferation.
  
• Much of the world, and Australia, has left it way too late to build nuclear power stations in order to combat global warming. Most experts say we have a window of 10 years to make deep cuts to our GHG emissions in to avoid hitting the global warming tipping points that are expected to push us into run-away climate change. If we start building now, most nuclear power stations will only be three-quarters complete in then years and would have generated hundred of thousands of tonnes of GHG in their construction.
• Uranium mining, processing, transportation, and the storage of spent uranium all involve processes that generate carbon dioxide. It is not as green some people say. Until you are glowing like Homer, that is.
• The mining and processing of uranium that is proposed in Australia requires using a lot of water, water we currently don't seem to have enough of. In addition, prevention of contamination of the water-table and aquifers cannot be guaranteed.
• Nuclear power stations cost a fortune to decommission.
• The cost of nuclear power does not survive the free-market without government subsidy. How is this a long term energy solution?
• There still is no solution to the nuclear waste problem.
• A 'dirty-bomb' is the holy grail of terrorist groups - if we can't stop individuals in our Army from covertly selling weapons to criminal elements sympathetic to these terrorists, especially during the so called 'war-on-terror', what hope do we have of stopping uranium and derivatives from being subjected to same. Put another way, if a rocket launcher is worth $5,000 on this black market, how much is an ounce of uranium worth?

These reasons are off the top of my head, so may not be finessed as yet. But you can be sure they will be further explored, as my campaign develops, should the ALP persist with abandoning their no new mines policy.

Despite these objections, I am prepared to reconsider once we develop a way to detoxify spent uranium rods, say, within an individual's lifetime, and I would be happy to support any political party prepared to spend money researching this.

Kind regards,

Wadard
Global Warming Watch

I will keep readers posted. Thanks to Don Henry, Executive Director of the Australian Conservation Foundation for his email alerting me. You can make donations to the ACF here.

Global Warning Climate Change Australia Energy

Good Style Watch

One of the things I want to do with Global Warming Watch is to pick out any good writing style and expression that I come across in my reading. If it is expression that delights, or something that I disagree with but is argued well, it will make the cut.

With this in mind, I came across a new site for me, Conscious Earth, and the following:

The Washington Times -
"Global warming has become
the catechism of a new-age
religion, with Mr. Gore as its
topmost prelate, entitled to cassock,
miter, incense and hot holy water.
Anyone who dissents risks a session
on the rack, as we have lately seen in
calls for punishing 'deniers'.".

Deniers of global warming are likely screaming in glee at the quotes above, as a sense of vindication and affirmation sweep over their science battered souls.

A good line. Comes with a good headline, too. Read the rest of the post, The Environment - A Religion of Fact.

After exposing the attempts by Denialists to paint the climate change concerned as irrational neo-pagan green religists (doesn't sound so bad), the poster snapped at the logical Achilles Heel in this argument.

If Al Gore does represent a new religion, then it is one founded on rationality over hysteria, on hope for humanity, on care for the planet, and concern for those who will come after us. That is a moral compass worth following and one that can create a better world for us all.

More to the point Gore's message - unlike the religious zeal of the National Post - is grounded in fact.That single point gives him credibility that the Post can't hope for, and it is the most tangible reason why millions are willing to listen to his message.

If Denialists thinks they can get traction by painting global warming understanding as a new green religious hysteria, let's oblige and come out. Repeat after me:

Our Gaia,
who art spinning in the heavens,
say hellow as you circle thy Sun.

Thy green kingdom come,
may natural law be done,
on earth
as it is in heaven.

Spin us this day, to make our daily bread,
and allow us to trade our trespasses,
but tax those who trespass against Thee.

Lead us not into CO₂ emissions.
and deliver us from Evil Fossil-Fuel.

For thine is the Katrina,
and the power
of Hurricane Glory.

Forever stay clever.

Amen

Global Warning Climate Change Environment Science

How do you tell Jesus you stuffed the climate?

At first glance it's hard to understand what the Exclusive Brethren religious sect has against the Greens political party? :::[SMH]

A MYSTERY Sydney businessman belonging to the Exclusive Bretheren sect spent $370,000 on advertisements and pamphlets during the 2004 federal election, according to the Australian Electoral Commission.

This finding follows a year-long investigation sparked by Senator Bob Brown into the funding of seven sets of advertisements and pamphlets in the last federal election. All attacked the Greens and called for the re-election of the Howard Government.

The Greens are interested in preserving the environment; I assume the Exclusive Brethren are across the Christian concept of Stewardship. The Greens are interested in social justice; I assume the Exclusive Brethren are also tuned into that key message of Jesus'.

So far they could seem natural allies. But a scroll down the NSW Greens policy page throws up a this clue: :::[The Greens NSW: Policies]

The Greens NSW Policy Summaries

Bushfires

Climate Change and Energy

Coal

Drugs and Harm Minimisation

Education

Electoral Funding, Donations & Disclosure

Firearms

Forests and Wilderness

Health

Housing

Indigenous Australians

Industrial Relations

Justice

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex

Marine Environment

Multiculturalism

Planning and Infrastructure

Public Ownership

Rural Land Use

Transport

Water (Rural and Agricultural)

Water (Urban)

Wetlands

For policies relating to Federal issues please go to the Australian Greens website.

I guess they just don't like anyone that's not heterosexual. Really, of all the issues to get you fired up enough to spend $370,000 to campaign against... someone's sexuality?

Why? There is very limited censure of homosexuality to interpret in the Old Testament, about as much as there is against eating shellfish or getting a tatoo. All three injunctions are found in Leviticus if my memory still serves. And there's bugger-all in the New Testament, so to speak. Ironically, if Judas hadn't kissed Jesus greatings in Gethsemane there would be no Exclusive Brethren in Australia today to secretly seek to outlaw same-sex kissing.

The Greens are the only party that seriously wants to fight climate change. Seventy percent of Australians seriously want to fight climate change.

If a Judas' kiss is to have implications on global warming in an Australian federal election 1,965 years later (how's that for chaos theory in action?) then let it not be motivated by homophobia, but by humanphilia. If Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for mankind, then surely it is not much for his believers to sacrifice little behaviours that we know are debilitating for the future of mankind's climate-dependent survival? Compared to Jesus' trials before his death, how hard is it to incrementally change from broad-base fossil energy to broad-base renewable energy?

These guys hate gays so much that, according to Electoral Commission records, only three other organisations spent more than Willmac Enterprises (the aforementioned mystery Sydney business owed by the Exclusive Brethren sect member Mark William Mackenzie) to campaign on their own behalf during the 2004 elections. Willmac outspent the Wilderness Society, private health lobbyists, leading trade unions, the National Union of Students and even the Forest Industries Association of Tasmania.

They are sneaky too. The Funding and Disclosure Report Election 2004 shows that Willmac Enterprises have not lodged a third party return of electoral expenditure in relation to the 2004 election.

I have a message for Mark William Mackenzie and his brethren (in the unlikey case one of you have sneaked out to find a Internet terminal): Until doomesday, your After-Life is very much dependent on your After-You. What in heavens are you going to tell Jesus when he says, "Mate, what did you do to my planet? Judgement Day is not scheduled for yonks and now, because you cooked the climate, I'll have billions of refugees to resettle soon. It's going to take an eternity. Look around you, do you see another habitable planet? Quality liveable climate is not easy to make."?

You know, you only got the gig because my Father saw that it was good in the beginning?"

Global Warning Climate Change Environment Australia Religion The Greens

An Inconvenient Truth conveniently on YouTube

Please note: Video has been since been pulled by YouTube. Go and see it in the big screen.

It's not like YouTube needs its profile raised after featuring in Time Magazines Person on the Year article, but it is now hosting An Inconvenient Truth in nine 10-minute parts. Distributed freely to 16 million unique users per month, potentially, this give a huge reach to a powerpoint presentation that Al Gore's first started touting on the road 25 years or so ago. If you have seen the documentary, you could imagine Al Gore's gratification. This man who has devoted his life's work to his message, possibly the most unpopular one a messenger could have to bear, and got up and did it the old fashioned way, the hard way - going out and speaking to whoever would listen, and doing it again and again. And never quitting. City by city, family by family. At rotary town halls to the US Congress, and then some.



Jeff at Sustainablog is keeping an eye on whether it is an official release or a fan's initiative, favouring the latter possibility. If you, the newby, are blown away by what you see on YouTube, go and spend the $16.00 or so for the glacier cracking and shearing off into the ocean on the big-screen in dolby-stereo experience.





Global Warning Climate Change Environment Science CO2 Carbon Sink Earth Australia Kyoto Energy

Prophets of Hope preach sanity, War on Terror officially over in the UK

Battersea Power Station became the focus for an intelligent global warming protest statement on November 1st, highlighting the threat of climate change relative to terrorism.

Two pieces of projected text read "How ironic to live in fear of terrorism and die of climate change" and "The ultimate terror threat is climate change". The projections were carried out by a group calling themselves The Prophets of Hope. Global Warming Watch's own straw poll in the sidebar shows that 69.2% of people nominate global warming as their biggest fear, vs global terror at 18.8% and global pandemic at 12%.

Prophets of Hope Myspace Prophets of Hope Website

Running time: 05:10
H/t: Calvin Jones of Climate Change Action

In a sign of the times, not long ago this would have been seen as radical action, and on the margin, but events are moving fast these days, and the Prophet of Hope message is quickly becoming mainstream and at least the bit about terrorism has become the subject of British Government action, even if the Stern Report didn't. :::[SMH: Britain to drop 'war on terror' usage]

Britain's foreign affairs ministry has urged government officials to stop using the US term "war on terror" amid concerns it angers British Muslims and undermines government aims, a weekly newspaper said today.

The government wants to "avoid reinforcing and giving succour to the terrorists' narrative by using language that, taken out of context, could be counter-productive", a British Foreign Office spokesman told The Observer newspaper.

The Foreign Office has sent the same message to cabinet ministers as well as diplomats and other government representatives around the world, according to the report.

"We tend to emphasise upholding shared values as a means to counter terrorists," the spokesman was quoted as saying.

Many British officials and experts, the weekly said, suspect that Islamist extremists find it easier to recruit followers when western governments speak of a war on terror, by suggesting it is actually a war against Islam.

Global Warning Climate Change Activism Polotics UK Prophets of Hope War on Terror