Americans Lament Inability to Talk About Hurricanes or Mass Shootings Because of Need to Mourn Extraordinarily Frequent Hurricanes, Mass Shootings

This “news story” is a work of satire. All linked quotes, however, are 100% real.

6 November 2017

AP – Hours after a gunman killed at least 26 church-goers in Sutherland Springs, Texas, and in the wake of a string of national tragedies over previous weeks including the depraved massacre of 58 people by a “lone wolf” gunman in Las Vegas only 35 days earlier and the Puerto Rican landfall of Hurricane Maria just 11 days before that, Americans widely acknowledged on Monday they had entered a new Great American Mourning Episode (GAME) observed by tradition following any such travesty on U.S. soil. Variously held for a period of weeks or months, the GAME features, by mutual agreement of all patriotic American citizens and in respectful observance of the suffering of the victims of the tragedy, a usually unspoken moratorium on any insensitive public discourse related to possible root causes of the disaster or potential methods of preventing similar travesties in the future.

This exceptional American tradition was exemplified particularly well by presidential counselor Kellyanne Conlady immediately following the August landfall of Hurricane Harvey, the first of 4 major hurricanes to ravage the U.S. coastline during this year’s unusually active hurricane season.  Just hours after its landfall in Texas, a news reporter callously deviated from the spirit of the GAME by seeking to question Conlady about whether “climate change” might be a contributing factor to the hurricane’s ability to drop a record-smashing more than 4 feet of rain on Houston, whereupon Conlady justifiably responded, “…we’re trying to help the people whose lives are literally underwater, and you want to have a conversation about climate change. I mean, that is—I’m not going to engage in that right now because I work for a president and a vice president and a country that is very focused on helping the millions of affected Texans, and, God forbid, Louisianans.”

EPA administrator Scott Prune expressed a similar patriotic sentiment hours before the state of Florida was slammed by Hurricane Irma, a multi-record-setting hurricane roughly twice the width of that state.  When questioned by an indurate reporter about the possible role of “climate change” in stirring up the most savage hurricane season on record, Prune appropriately put the reporter in his place: “To have any kind of focus on the cause and effect of the storm versus helping people, or actually facing the effect of the storm, is misplaced.  …to use time and effort to address it at this point is very, very insensitive to [the] people in Florida.” Appropriate comments indeed from the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, who we must assume had by that time put a pin in all considerations of the Environment in expectation of personally performing manual labor as part of Florida relief efforts.

Hours after the October 1 Las Vegas massacre, White House press secretary Sarah Slanders similarly urged appropriate observation of the GAME. “There’s a time and place for a political debate, but now is the time to unite as a country,” Slanders solemnly reminded members of the media. “We haven’t had the moment to have a deep dive on the policy part. We have been focused on the fact that we had a severe tragedy in our country and this is a day of mourning, a time of bringing our country together, that has been the focus of the administration this morning.”

These exemplary demonstrations of patriotism epitomized the vital principle of the GAME, that any misguided efforts to identify and discuss the merits of potential policy adjustments to prevent future calamities would only serve as distractions from the proper acknowledgement and consideration of the suffering of fellow Americans.

Indeed, the GAME demands, for all who love America, that terrestrial considerations of practical human action should rather be transcended by prayer, in the form of devout appeals to any of various higher deities to ease the suffering of the afflicted and grant relief from such tragedies in the future. Americans widely admit no documented evidence of any of the major deities obviously meddling significantly in natural events or the collective fortunes of large groups of people for thousands of years. Even in those ancient times, literary evidence suggests interference of deities only in the context of vigorous efforts on the part of a human population to improve its own fortunes. Nevertheless, the documented power wielded by the deities in those times was unquestionably awesome, so the Strategy of Prayer is widely considered a “Hail Mary play” that might eliminate future human tragedies without resorting to the sorts of terrestrial human actions forbidden by proper observation of the GAME.

External observers have questioned the wisdom of the GAME, saying it might delay sorely needed actions that could prevent future horrific events. Foreign analysts have often referenced the apparent incongruity of the GAME with pragmatic American reactions to other types of problems. Aidan O’Sullivan of Limerick, Ireland pointed out, “If’n a baseball cums crashin’ through yisser picture windy, Oi’m juicy sure yer open de door roi away ter see wha’ wee kid did it, even as you’re also mournin’ de loss of yisser windy.” While true, Aidan’s example misses the point of the GAME, which has to do with the sheer size and depth of tragedy that can result only from a category 5 Atlantic hurricane or a crazy loner wielding an AR-15 legally enhanced with an ARMATAC SAW-MAG 150 round dual drum magazine, a Slide Fire bump stock, a Black Rain silencer, and a Vortex Optics Crossfire II Riflescope purchased on Amazon Prime with free overnight shipping.

Immediate, pragmatic action is entirely appropriate for day-to-day setbacks like busted picture windows.  A hurricane landfall on a major city or a gunman in an elevated firing position menacing a dense crowd of T-shirt and sandal clad concert-goers with 20 or more military grade firearms, however, is uniquely capable of generating a scale of mayhem – scores of dead and hundreds or thousands of human lives forever altered – that can only be properly observed by strict adherence to the GAME.

Disturbingly, an in-depth investigation by our reporters revealed that a small minority of Americans failed to uniformly observe the GAME. Indeed, in the same year that Americans from Puerto Rico to Texas were struggling to recover from a multi-record-setting string of ferocious hurricanes, Terry Dinan, an economist and environmental policy expert at the Congressional Budget Office, furtively wrote of her suggestions to link scientific knowledge about hurricanes to future public policy. “Hurricane damage in the United States is likely to increase substantially in the coming decades as a result of both climate change and coastal development,” she insensitively opined. “Two primary strategies for limiting such increases are mitigation, which entails reducing global emissions of greenhouse gases, and adaptation, which entails reducing exposure or reducing the vulnerability of exposed property. A coordinated global effort to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions could lessen hurricane damage between now and 2075…” Fortunately, Dr. Dinan wrote her crass comments in the obscure and little-read journal, Ecological Economics, sparing the collective psyches of Americans suffering the effects of 2017’s active hurricane season from the damage that might have been inflicted had the callous suggestions entered the mainstream media.

In private moments, several citizens quietly confessed some trepidation about the limits the GAME might place on Americans’ ability to engage in the collective discourse necessary to develop robust solutions to some of the nation’s most pressing problems. “It had been a full month since the Las Vegas shooting, and I‘d just gotten back to starting to think about whether some type of common-sense gun legislation might help reduce the body count when some nut becomes unhinged and decides to kill a bunch of innocent people in a school or at a concert,” explained Larry Swingvoater of Green Bay, Wisconsin. “Now, another maniac decided to open fire in a church, so of course I can’t think about policy while those poor people are suffering. But what I worry about is, if these hurricanes and mass shootings keep happening so close together, when WILL I think about that stuff? Anyway, I’m back to praying now – maybe that will eventually pay off.”

Others wondered aloud what the solutions from a supernatural deity might look like, should the Strategy of Prayer prove successful. Would future tragedies from climate change ultimately be averted by solutions resembling the “solar technology,” “wind technology,” or “battery technology” rumored to have been developed by human scientists and engineers? Or, might a deity prove capable of providing sustainable bioenergy derived from multitudes of burning bushes? Or, tidal energy afforded by repetitive parting of the earth’s seas? Might an entity akin to the Holy Spirit provide a bullet-proof energy field around the nation’s innocent civilians, enabling Americans to maintain casual public availability of thrilling, adrenaline-pumping battlefield style firearms without risk to young schoolchildren?

A handful of fringe citizens, who made their controversial remarks on condition of anonymity so as not to be identified as GAME-violators, expressed the cynical opinion that the GAME poorly serves American politics and is actually the result of a “cruel and selfish conspiracy” by a few well-funded special interests with outsized influence on U.S. legislative policy. “This is not patriotism, but simply a transparent political delay tactic,” claimed Jon Faiknaim, whose name has been changed in this article at his request. “Every time a hurricane or a gun-toting madman kills a bunch of people, politicians in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry and the National Rifle Association call it ‘insensitive’ to talk about policy changes that would solve some of our most urgent public problems but harm the narrow interests of those minority stakeholders. Then, everybody forgets about the problem the moment another issue of critical national interest demands consideration. Like the linguistic etymology of the word, ‘covfefe,’ or how football players arrange their limbs during pre-game performances of the National Anthem. Then, the next time one of these tragedies occurs, the irrational cycle repeats itself.” Fortunately, these cynical expressions of doubt were rare.

On the whole, proper observation of America’s GAME was alive and well Monday thanks, in no small part, to the stellar leadership example of President Donald Tweety, who so inspirationally addressed the nation following the earlier Las Vegas massacre. “I think the only message I can say is that we’re with you 100 percent,” Tweety remarked from the relative safety of his Secret Service perimeter, when asked by a reporter if he had a message for the citizens of Las Vegas. “I said, ‘If you’re ever in Washington, come on over to the Oval Office,’ and they’re all saying, ‘We wanna do it, how do we do it?’ And believe me, I’ll be there for them. But the message that I have is we have a great country and we are there for you, and they’re there for us,” Tweety continued, apparently extending his generous presidential invitation to the citizens of Las Vegas not dead of gunshot wounds.

But our national leader’s statements were most inspirational as he bravely defended the sanctity of the GAME when questioned by an unruly member of the press pool about whether “we have a gun violence problem.”

“We’re not going to talk about that today. We won’t talk about that,” Tweety responded, later adding that a gun policy debate “at some point, perhaps … will come.”

Possible Futures: My Political Hypothesis, Confirmed

 

I am a scientist. For me, most decisions about things involve a hypothesis and supporting evidence. I have had a particular political hypothesis for some time. Today, that hypothesis appears supported by evidence.

Political Hypothesis: The super rich guys who say climate change isn’t happening, or we shouldn’t be worried about climate change, or we can simply ADAPT to climate change, will vanish when the sh*t hits the fan.

Consider the following tweets from President Trump over the past few days:

“Ultimately, the government of Puerto Rico will have to work with us to determine how this massive rebuilding effort…will be funded.”  [The effort] “will end up being one of the biggest ever” [and Puerto Rico already has] “a tremendous amount of debt.” -President Trump, in a press conference on Friday.

The message? You’re already in debt and it’s super costly to rebuild your stuff.  You’re on your own.

This is a message that the town of Shishmaref, AK, I suspect, has already received loud and clear.

I am working on a draft article on the link between climate change and hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria. Please look for it soon, but it takes some time. (Real research takes longer than impulsive tweets!) Suffice it to say, every expectation is that warmer oceans and atmosphere will bring us increasingly strong hurricanes (see evidence in my upcoming post!)

Please pay attention to that evidence, and consider where you, personally, come down on it. Because, …

When our leaders say, “don’t worry about climate change,” they are saying it with the exact attitude and intentions as the guy who encouraged you to steal the farmer’s apples, then took off when the farmer appeared with his shotgun.  The same as the guy who encouraged you to drink while under-age, then ran off and left you with the keg when the cops rolled up. They are having their fun, lying to you while their rich fossil fuel executive buddies get richer off fossil fuel technologies that, if rationality governed, should be going the way of rotary dial phones right now. But they have NO INTENTION of taking responsibility for the predicted consequences of climate change.

That will be up to you.

#rescuethatfrog

World’s Scientists Predict Impending Astrophysical “Eclipse” Event; American Leaders Urge Caution, Further Study and Discussion

This article is a work of satire intended to highlight, in an entertaining way, the absurdity of our ongoing public “debate” about climate change, despite a virtually unanimous consensus among scientists. See other articles on this fact-based website for more information about that consensus, a primer on the science of climate change, and a compendium of climate change effects we can already plainly see.

AP — On Wednesday, with an air of confidence reminiscent of their controversial “climate change” allegations, the world’s scientists were apparently nearly unanimous in predicting a strange astrophysical event, during which they outrageously claimed portions of the Earth’s population will experience partial, or even nearly total, darkness in the middle of the day. During this event, which scientists dubbed a “solar eclipse,” astronomers and astrophysicists explained that the moon will pass directly between the Earth and the sun from the vantage point of some observers in North America and around the world, temporarily blocking, or “occulting” the sun’s light.

NASA shadow 2006
Image credit: NASA. Photograph purportedly showing the “shadow of the moon” falling on a portion of the Earth during a “total solar eclipse” that scientists say occurred in 2006. Scientists claim the photograph showing the “shadow” was captured by a camera on a “space station,” populated by “astronauts,” that has been orbiting the Earth since 1998. On the strength of previous experiences like this, as well as “mathematical calculations” not well understood by lay people, scientists predicted a similar event will occur on August 21, 2017.

“It’s a sort of weird and very cool phenomenon, but actually not as rare as many people think,” said University of California — Berkeley astrophysicist, Rhonda Rokitpantz, Ph.D. “In fact, a solar eclipse is visible somewhere on the Earth’s surface about once every 18 months. A total solar eclipse only occurs at a given location on the Earth about once every 360 years, though, so if you get a chance you should definitely check it out. You’ll be able to see stars in the middle of the day!”

As if these outlandish claims weren’t enough, scientists further claimed the ability to forecast exactly when this event will occur at any given point on the Earth. Indeed, NASA, an American organization dedicated to space and earth sciences, was found to have wantonly expended American taxpayer money on an entire webpage dedicated to the phenomenon and alleged upcoming event including, among other content, tables of calculated locations and times of “solar eclipses” as far into the future as the year 2100.

Many people and organizations worldwide, particularly in Europe, appeared to be taking the world’s scientists’ astrophysical forecasts at face value. A company based in Stavanger, Norway, timeanddate.com, was displaying on its website highly specific predictions. For example, a search on “Hudson, Wisconsin” on that website alleged the 2017 “solar eclipse” would commence at precisely 11:44 am on Monday, August 21, reaching maximum coverage of the sun at 1:07 pm and ending at 2:29 pm.

When questioned about how they could possibly have any confidence in such specific predictions, scientists widely referred to astronomical studies that have occurred since a mathematician and astronomer named Nicolaus Copernicus, a European, first proposed in the 1500’s that the Earth orbits the sun.

“The work of Copernicus was a breakthrough,” said NASA astronomer Morgan Meteorlicker. “It enabled the correct understanding of astronomical observations over the centuries since, and the development of mathematical equations that now empower us to predict a variety of astrophysical phenomena, like eclipses, with great accuracy.”

It was difficult to find scientists dissenting from the sensational view that darkness will occur in the afternoon next Monday in many American cities. In fact, even scientists in very different disciplines appeared to accept the claims with a high degree of confidence, citing a “scientific method” evidently discussed frequently in scientific circles. Scientists widely professed an almost religious faith in this “scientific method,” by which they claimed observations by scientists are reviewed by rival experts prior to detailed publication in “peer reviewed journals,” whereupon researchers in other disciplines perform related experiments to verify consistency with the published research, resulting in the correction of errors and emergent “scientific theories” widely held as revealed truths about the natural world.

Mayo Clinic neurologist Georgina Graymattur, a scientist not expert in astronomy, explained, “I’m not an expert in astro-anything, but astronomers have been applying the scientific method to this since Copernicus and publishing their work in peer reviewed journals like Science and Nature. They have a long history of making accurate predictions with those equations of theirs. Heck, they’ve successfully landed remote control cars on Mars! At this point, if NASA says there’s going to be a solar eclipse next Monday, I’d say you can take that to the bank.”

Indeed, astronomers and scientists specializing in ophthalmology were teaming up on Wednesday to warn of potential health hazards arising from the impending astrophysical “eclipse” phenomenon.

“You do need to take care not to look directly at the occulted sun during the solar eclipse,” said ophthalmologist Bartholomew Beedyiyes. “The sun appears less bright during an eclipse, which prevents the normally unconscious things, like squinting, that you usually do to protect your eyes from the sun’s UV radiation. Because of that, your eye won’t properly protect its delicate retina when you look at an eclipse, and you could sustain permanent eye damage.”

For those interested in viewing the upcoming “eclipse,” scientists recommended wearing protective eye wear, so-called “eclipse glasses,” which were being offered for sale by many companies.

Many American leaders were more circumspect about the scientists’ alarmist claims. President Donald Tweety took to social media early Thursday morning, tweeting, “This is obviously yet another Chinese hoax aimed at tricking middle class Americans into spending their hard-earned wages on ridiculous Chinese-manufactured cardboard glasses.”

EPA administrator Scott Prune lent his considerable technical authority to the argument, stating in a press conference, “I think that measuring with precision the motions of celestial bodies is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact of the moon on the sun’s shininess, so no, I would not agree that we are certain to experience darkness during the day next Monday.” Prune then argued for a “Red Team/Blue Team” process to discuss the merits of the astrophysical claims, over the objections of scientists who alleged that proposal, in fact, precisely described their obscure “scientific method.”

A Reuters poll revealed that a majority of Americans believed there was something to the scientists’ claims, though a minority of those polled believed it was likely to impact them directly. Some strenuously questioned the elitist scientists’ claims.

“The moon and the sun both shine, so it seems to me that if they teamed up they would only shine brighter together,” said Ronald Randumpurson of Sundusky, OH. This commonsense argument, apparently highlighting an obvious fact the egghead scientists had missed despite their years of college and self-important faith in complicated “equations,” cast substantial doubt about the scientists’ claims for many observers.

A web search on the issue revealed many dissenting views as well. Willard Wannabegeek, a self-described entrepreneur and blogger, wrote on his blog, “The moon has a diameter of only 2,159 miles, while the sun has a diameter of 864,576 miles. Since the area of a disc is proportional to the square of its diameter, this means the frontal area of the sun is 160,362 times that of the moon. It’s simply not mathematically possible for a disc to obscure another disc that is over 160,000 times larger.” This alternative explanation, involving numbers, mathematics, and technical language, was as convincing to many as the assertions of the “mainstream scientists.”

Still other Americans, including lawmakers, emphasized their inability to fully evaluate the claims. Senator Dirk Dumbutt (R-WI), said in a press interview, “Look, I’m not a scientist, so I can’t comment on whether it’s possible for the moon to pass in front of the sun, and I can’t recommend buying so-called eclipse glasses. The fact that the government, in which I have a leadership role, employs a multitude of expert scientists to study this stuff surprisingly turns out to be of no use to me in evaluating the issue one way or the other.”

Many lay people seemed to echo Senator Dumbutt’s views questioning the knowledge of so-called “experts.” “I know the Earth experiences frequent periods of darkness,” explained Athens, Georgia resident, Kenny Kluliss, “but I can’t say for sure the cause or whether the sun or moon is mainly responsible. It could just as well be primarily the luminosity of the blessed sap, as others have purported. Or, it could be that the UN just wants to control the glasses I put on my face.”

Our reporters asked NOAA climatologist, Doreen Damitshot, if the scientists’ sensational claims about the upcoming “eclipse” were analogous to their similarly outrageous assertions regarding “anthropogenic global warming.”

“Well yes,” she said, “that issue is similar in that scientists in a variety of disciplines have been studying it for a long time and have reached a compelling consensus that it’s something we should be paying attention to and doing something about.”

By and large, while largely sympathetic to the scientists’ point of view, Americans appeared to be taking a wait-and-see attitude with respect to the controversy. President Tweety offered one suggestion: “If you’re worried about the sun hurting your eyes, you’ll be safe from the sun mining coal underground. I love coal miners!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

An announcement in the Rose Garden. Before Our Eyes: Larsen C. And my new appreciation for federalism.

Last Thursday, President Trump was strolling out to the Rose Garden podium, following the U.S. Marine Band’s rendition of “Summertime” (“Summertime” – seriously? – you couldn’t make this stuff up), to explain to us how the U.S. will join the other two global technical superpowers, Nicaragua and Syria, in uniquely having this climate and energy thing all figured out. Meanwhile, this was happening a few thousand miles away:

Image credits: NASA. A crack in the Antarctic Larsen C ice shelf as imaged in November, 2016.

Showing both events on a split screen would’ve made for some good TV.

The photos above, of a crack in the Antarctic Larsen C ice shelf, were taken last November. But throughout last week, scientists watched as the greater than 120-mile long crack advanced 11 miles, leaving the crack tip only 8 miles from the edge of the ice shelf. This chunk of the ice shelf is expected to break off soon, freeing an iceberg roughly the size of the state of Delaware.

Image credit: CNN. Progress of the crack in the Antarctic Larsen C ice shelf.

The floating ice shelves slow down the draining of land-based glaciers into the ocean, a draining process which directly causes sea-level rise. I posted previously about the 2002 collapse of a large section of the nearby Larsen B ice shelf that had previously been stable for at least 10,000 years. Following the collapse, the land-based glaciers previously buttressed by Larsen B began draining an additional 6.5 cubic miles per year of water into the ocean. 15 years later, those glaciers are still flowing at an accelerated rate.

As I explained in my previous post, these ice shelf collapses in Antarctica are attributed directly to human-caused global warming. They are getting bigger and bigger. Along with thermal expansion of the oceans as they warm, melting polar ice is among the climate change driven processes that are actively destroying coastal communities in Alaska. These processes threaten to flood Manhattan, New Orleans, and Miami if the industrial nations of the world fail to work together to decarbonize our energy sources.

#AskYourDenierIfTheyveSeenThis

“…by 2040, compliance with the commitments put into place by the previous administration would cut production for the following sectors: … coal – and I happen to love the coal miners – down 86 percent.”
-President Trump, explaining in the Rose Garden a shocking prediction that informed his thinking on exiting the Paris Climate Agreement

Um, duh. Replacement of CO2-emitting fuel sources with renewable ones is, literally, the point of the Paris Climate Agreement. So, yeah, parties to the agreement will be burning less coal. On account of trying to prevent the flooding described above, among other terrible consequences predicted if we continue “business as usual.”

A partial list of other industries that have succumbed to the relentless march of progress: horse and buggy manufacturing; rotary dial phone manufacturing; typewriter manufacturing; Betamax, VHS, 8-track, and cassette tape manufacturing; vinyl records; floppy discs; phone booths; dial-up modems; parachute pants (at least, until they come back); cathode ray tube televisions.

Does President Trump weep for the disappearance of those obsolete industries, each of which previously employed Americans? Most of us don’t weep, because those industries have all been replaced by new ones, to everyone’s benefit. Coal is no different. It’s served a valuable purpose, enabling much of the world to industrialize. But now we have economical solar energy, and it’s better.

The single part of Trump’s speech that had merit was his concern for workers in the coal industry, who are suffering from diminishing employment opportunities. As it turns out, this has very little to do with the Paris Climate Agreement, however. As has been widely reported (link, link, link), coal jobs are disappearing primarily due to automation (human coal miners get black lung; machines don’t), cheap natural gas, and cheap renewables. So, in the case of this one meritorious element of Trump’s argument, he has prescribed the wrong medicine for the right diagnosis. It may make some people feel good when they watch him on TV, but it’s not going to work, and in literally giving the entire Earth a fever, it has some serious side effects.

If Trump really cares about coal miners, one can envision productive policies that might actually help them. For example, upgrades to the U.S. electrical grid can help utilize renewable energy sources more efficiently (easy-to-read article, scientific study). The President’s $1 trillion infrastructure plan could include some of these upgrades, with a provision to re-train coal miners to do the work.

In an impressive feat of linguistics, President Trump managed to deliver his 2,000 word speech about exiting the Paris Climate Agreement, an agreement directed at preventing the worst potential consequences of climate change, without even once mentioning, well, climate change. EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, in a follow-up interview, further clarified this:

“This is not about whether climate change is occurring or not.”
-Scott Pruitt, head of a federal agency with “environmental protection” in its name, clarifying his takeaways from the President’s statement Thursday announcing plans to withdraw the U.S. from the cooperative international effort to protect the environment from climate change, which is occurring

If climate change is occurring (it demonstrably is), then its terrifying potential consequences – destruction of the Palm Beach Mar-a-Lago, followed by an existential threat to the survivability of humans on Earth – would surely outweigh any of the purely short-term economic harms Trump mentioned in his speech. So, of course, this is precisely about whether climate change is occurring or not.

With respect to climate change, our federal government is failing us. The executive branch has just aligned us with Nicaragua and Syria in some sort of Axis of Environmental Villainy, spouting nonsensical declarations about climate change along the way (that it’s a hoax, it’s not happening, the science is “not in,” etc.) But Congress is entirely complicit. As I documented on another page, the attitudes of Congress members with regard to climate change fail to reflect those of the general public, let alone the scientists whose attitudes have been informed by actual data. The Supreme Court largely put Congress up for sale with its Citizens United decision. By equating monetary contributions with “speech,” this decision handed a virtually infinitely sized bullhorn to any corporate interest with deep pockets, an unimaginative business plan, and a callous disregard for future humans. As described in this New York Times article, Koch Industries and other fossil fuel interests have used this to great effect, systematically funding successful primary challenges to Congress members expressing concern about climate change, among other activities.

Here’s the thing, though. The Earth doesn’t care. As long as we continue “business as usual,” ice chunks equated with the sizes of ever larger U.S. states will continue breaking off of Antarctica and Greenland. This will happen whether Trump talks about it or refuses to talk about it, whether the EPA has a global warming website or not, or whether Trump is successful in his efforts to de-fund the very science activities with which we observe the climate.

A group of people – any group of people, including the President’s administration – who remains too thoroughly and too long divorced from reality will inevitably become irrelevant, because truth will eventually show them to be ridiculous. If an ice shelf collapses in Antarctica and no scientists are funded to see it, does it make a sound? Yes. Eventually, the sound of waves lapping at the base of the Mar-a-Lago.

The silver lining in all this, for me, is it has been a powerful civics reminder of the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, who created a federalist government replete with checks and balances, not only at the federal level, but between the various levels of government themselves. In the event that the federal government goes off the rails, states and cities retain substantial independence and power. In the wake of Trump’s shameful and irresponsible announcement of his administration’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, the following events have unfolded:

  • In response to the part of Trump’s speech in which he explained his shameful decision by saying he was “elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” the mayor of Pittsburgh tweeted, “As the Mayor of Pittsburgh, I can assure you that we will follow the guidelines of the Paris Agreement for our people, our economy & future.”
  • The governors of New York, California, and Washington announced the formation of the United States Climate Alliance to convene states that will uphold the commitments of the Paris Agreement no matter what the federal government does (read more). Together, these states are the 5th largest economy and the 6th largest carbon emitter in the world.
  • The mayors of over 85 U.S. cities signed a letter making a similar commitment.
  • Many of America’s most innovative corporations also expressed their intention to support the Paris Agreement.

While the federal government could (and should) certainly help, the fact is, in our federalist nation, it need not define us. If a sufficient number of states, cities, and corporations only want to buy renewable energy, then fossil energy will go the way of Betamax.

I started this blog because I was worried the events of last Thursday might unfold. They unfolded. Now, we need to shift our attention and support to the leaders who remain engaged with reality. Being as informed as possible is an important part of that.

Onward. #rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

Some things in the news, and a call for 5 minutes of action this weekend

In case you haven’t seen them in the news, you may wish to be informed about a number of recent developments related to our shared ability to apply scientific knowledge and reasoning to our public polices, including those related to climate change. I’d also like to share a couple quick things you can do to show our leaders you are paying attention and you care. If you are reading this, you likely care enough to take 5 minutes of action this weekend (see bottom of this post).

THE MYSTERIOUS CASE OF THE EPA’S DISAPPEARING CLIMATE CHANGE WEBSITES

Check out the EPA’s climate change website that your tax dollars are paying for: click here. For the past 20 years and up until April 28, the website was, well, much more informative. Here is a snapshot of what it looked like on January 19, 2017: click here. The information was all about scientific findings. For example, that 2016 was the warmest year on record and that scientists have linked that fact directly to anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.

According to its archiving rules, EPA makes the January snapshot of the website available on its new “This page is being updated” page. However, it will not be updated and some critical links do not work. For example, as reported by The Washington Post, a popular youth-focused educational resource on climate change, comprising over 50 pages, is no longer accessible from either the archived snapshot page or the EPA’s main pages. In fact, it has become very difficult to find even using Google. As a public service, I’ll make it available here (as long as it remains in existence), so you can see exactly what scientific, EPA-developed content certain of our leaders evidently no longer want our kids to see: A Student’s Guide to Global Climate Change.

Screen shot of the buried EPA educational website, A Student’s Guide to Global Climate Change, no longer accessible from EPA’s main pages, former climate change page (now archived), or through a casual Google search. Educational items like “Learn the Basics,” “See the Impacts,” “Think Like a Scientist,” and “Be Part of the Solution!” are evidently no longer considered desirable youth reading material by the EPA. Your tax dollars paid for this content!

Here are excerpts from the EPA’s May 28 press release regarding the updating of its web-based materials related to climate change:

Do you smell something? It’s smoke, because this is the modern equivalent of burning books. Of course, the above signals the Administration’s intention to weaken or destroy the Clean Power Plan, our government’s current primary policy vehicle for complying with our commitments under the Paris Climate AgreementBut what should these policy deliberations have to do with the availability of educational content your tax dollars paid the EPA to develop about the scientifically proven facts related to climate change? Nothing, that’s what.

For more information, see the website of the Environmental Data & Governance Initiative, a group that has been tracking changes to public science and environmental sites.

REMOVAL OF SCIENTISTS FROM THE EPA BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC COUNSELORS (BOSC)

On April 30, the EPA dismissed about half of an 18-member scientific board. The function of the board is to provide independent peer review of the work of EPA scientists to help ensure EPA policies are underpinned by sufficiently rigorous scientific findings. According to an agenda of an April meeting of the board, among the topics discussed was, “the growing need for information on, and understanding of, climate change and responses to its impacts.”

The board is filled primarily with academic scientists who may serve two 3-year terms, their tenure after the first term having almost always been renewed. On April 30, scientists up for renewal were informed they had been dismissed. J. P. Freire, a spokesman for EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, said, “The administrator believes we should have people on this board who understand the impact of regulations on the regulated community,” and indicated he would consider replacing the dismissed academic scientists with industry representatives whose very industries the EPA regulates.

More changes at the EPA are almost certainly in the works. This fall, over a third of a larger and more important 45-member EPA Science Advisory Board are up for renewal. As reported in the Washington Post, a budget for that panel slates it for an 84% cut for 2018, citing “an anticipated lower number of peer reviews.” (Of course, peer reviews happen to be the primary way scientists ensure the continued integrity of science.)

Read more: New York Times, The Washington PostScience, The Chronicle of Higher Education

SUSPENSION OF SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARDS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, ordered on May 5 a freeze of the work of over 200 advisory boards, committees, and subcommittees that advise the Department on issues ranging from invasive species to threats and impacts from climate change. About a third of these bodies were reported to be science-based.

Read more: The Washington Post, CNN

OPPORTUNITY FOR ACTION: EPA REQUEST FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS DUE MAY 15

On February 24, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777, directing federal agencies to setup a Regulatory Reform Task Force to evaluate existing regulations and make recommendations about potential repeal, replacement, or modification to “alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens.” Pursuant to that Order, the EPA is seeking public comments as part of its Evaluation of Existing Regulations. If you think we should keep existing regulations (like the Clean Power Plan) intended to empower EPA to create incentives for the adoption of carbon-free energy technologies and enable us to participate meaningfully in the 2016 Paris Climate Agreement, please take a couple minutes to make a comment. All comments must be submitted by next Monday, May 15.

How to submit a public comment:

Your comments can be short – even one sentence. Here is what I submitted: JPG.

OPPORTUNITY FOR ACTION: TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DELIBERATIONS AND UPCOMING ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT

The Trump Administration has reportedly been deliberating about whether to withdraw from or weaken the United States’ CO2 emission reduction targets under the Paris Climate Agreement. (Read more.) If you have been following any of the science-based content of rescuethatfrog.com, I hope you are convinced that withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement by the United States would be a disaster for all of us not exclusively interested in the short-term profits of the fossil fuel industry. Likewise, weakening our targets would be shameful and dangerous. The consensus among scientists is the Paris Climate Agreement is both our best hope and inadequate, as it is, to avert substantial environmental damage from global climate change. (Read more in the MIT Technology Review.)

Here is a letter I wrote to the President yesterday about these deliberations: Word, PDF.

Please consider taking a few minutes to write a letter or email of your own. To email, go to this website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact.

The Administration has signaled its intention to announce a decision soon.

#rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

March 2017: 2nd warmest March on record

In Episode 4 and Episode 5 of our brief history of the scientific evidence of global climate change, we saw how direct atmospheric CO2 measurements and measurements from air bubbles trapped in ancient ice provide us a record of the Earth’s atmospheric CO2 concentration since Biblical times. This record reveals a dramatic and accelerating increase in atmospheric CO2 beginning with the onset of our large scale combustion of fossil fuels during the Industrial Revolutions:

Publicly available Scripps ice core-merged data, downloaded and plotted by me. Green: Ice core data from Law Dome, 0 C.E. to 1957 (see references here and here). Blue circles: Average yearly data from atmospheric sampling at Mauna Loa and South Pole, 1958-2016. Blue square: Mauna Loa measurement made on March 30, 2017. Human experience milestones added by me.

A new graphic prepared by Climate Central uses NASA and NOAA temperature data to show how the monthly global average temperature for each month since 1880 has compared with the average temperature for that month during the “early industrial” years of 1881-1910, highlighted in red in the plot above. (Basically, how much cooler or warmer each month was compared with that month during the time period when Dr. Brown and Mr. Escombe were conducting their early CO2 measurements at the Royal Botanical Gardens.) Cooler months are blue and warmer months are red, with the saturation of the color indicating the departure from the average temperature for that month between 1881 and 1910:

Image credit: Brian Kahn, Climate Central. Underlying data are from NASA and NOAA (see here for details).

March, 2017 was the second warmest March on record, 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.4 degrees Fahrenheit) above the average March that Dr. Brown and Mr. Escombe experienced around their time at the Royal Botanical Gardens. It also marked the 627th consecutive month of warmer-than-average temperatures since that time.

This is not “fancy scientific data” or computer models. Just readings from thermometers at meteorological stations. Do you generally believe thermometers?

If you were born after December, 1964 (look for that lonely blue box above), you have never experienced a “cool” month.

#AskYourDenierIfTheyveSeenThis

#rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Some thoughts from the March for Science

On March 22, 2017, my family and I joined tens of thousands of scientists and supporters of science in over 600 cities on 6 continents in a nonpartisan March for Science.

At the Minnesota State Capitol, it was a beautiful Spring day. Here are some of the signs we spotted in the crowd of more than 10,000:

A montage of signs spotted at the March for Science at the Minnesota State Capitol, St. Paul, MN.

It felt good.

But there is still much to do to make sure we hold our federal, state, and local governments accountable for implementing rational policies informed by scientific knowledge, particularly with regard to global climate change. As Americans, we owe it to our Alaskan neighbors. As the #1 cumulative national emitter of fossil carbon, we owe it to the rest of humanity. We owe it to the other species with whom we share the Earth. As the potential beneficiaries of technologies that are available now and can limit the future economic havoc of hotter temperatures and rising oceans, while providing us complete energy independence and putting lots of people to work developing a global leadership position in sustainable energy, we owe it to our economy. As fathers and mothers and grandmothers and grandfathers, we owe it to the children to whom we will leave our planet.

The federal budget proposal on the table, if implemented, would cut the EPA’s budget by 31%, eliminating the jobs of 19% of its workforce and terminating the Clean Power plan which is the primary current policy vehicle for meeting our commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement. This is to be accomplished under the “leadership” of the newly appointed EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, who recently said he “would not agree that [carbon dioxide] is a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.” (Um, it is. It definitely is.) The proposed budget would even terminate NASA’s missions designed to monitor the Earth’s climate.

In an official statement on the March for Science, President Trump said, “Rigorous science is critical to my Administration’s efforts to achieve the twin goals of economic growth and environmental protection.” He went on to say, “My Administration is committed to advancing scientific research that leads to a better understanding of our environment and environmental risks.”

These are very encouraging statements. If they are serious statements, that would suggest that the President will encourage his EPA Administrator to take the opportunity of talking with his own employees, who can explain to him the facts surrounding the known causal relationships between fossil fuel combustion, atmospheric CO2 concentration, and global warming. It would suggest that the President will begin championing infrastructure investments like this one, to create jobs, develop a leadership position in a sustainable energy economy, and protect the environment. I will be watching with excitement for signs of these developments.

But, just in case, let’s give our representatives in government some encouragement. The activities initiated with the March for Science continue. This week, we are encouraged to contact our representatives to motivate them on this issue. You can see the call to action on the March for Science website.

I’m providing my own letters (copy them if you want!) here, as well as some resources to help you write your own.

March on!

#MarchforScience

#rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Neil deGrasse Tyson on Science in America

On the day before Earth Day and the March for Science, it’s worth watching this 4-minute video commentary by astrophysicist and science communicator, Neil deGrasse Tyson on “Science in America”:

Video credit: StarTalk Radio. 4-minute commentary by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson on the past and present state of “Science in America”. The science related to global climate change is prominently discussed.

#rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Choosing a Bright Future: Kauai, Hawaii

In March, 2017, residents of the Hawaiian island of Kauai connected a 54,978-panel solar farm to giant battery packs provided by Tesla, creating the world’s largest photovoltaic-battery combination power plant. The batteries store electricity generated when the sun is up for use at night, enabling the 13 megawatt solar array to provide power around the clock.

This power plant has reduced Kauai’s fossil fuel consumption by 1.6 million gallons per year and brought the proportion of its power from renewables higher than 40%, well on the way to the island’s goals of 70% by 2030 and 100% by 2045.

Tesla has contracted with the Kauai Island Utility Cooperative to operate the solar plant, providing electricity to island residents at a guaranteed flat rate of 13.9 cents per kilowatt-hour for the next 20 years. This is well below the current Hawaiian average electricity rate of 28.3 cents per kW-h and competitive with the U.S. overall average rate of 12.2 cents per kW-h (source: U.S. Energy Information Administration).

Watch this short news report to learn more:

Video credit: CNNMoney. News report about the Kauai’s new 13 megawatt photovoltaic-battery combination power plant, the largest in the world, which came online in March, 2017.

Read more here.

This is the nature of renewable energy in 2017. It’s here now. It’s available. In many cases, it’s competitive in cost with fossil sources. (The installed price of solar photovoltaic systems has been falling year on year for decades.) It can provide complete, local-scale energy independence and insulation from the market forces that cause fossil fuel prices to vary. It has no greenhouse gas emissions. Its provision requires no miners to get black lung. With continued investment, it will only get better and better.

While many of us appreciate the seriousness of global climate change, I think many people may under-appreciate the rampant availability of the solutions.

When we are talking about choices between future scenarios, we are really talking about just that: choices. We have everything we need to make dramatic steps toward solving this problem and ensuring a livable future Earth for generations to come.

In fact, last month a group of scientists published in the prestigious journal, Science, a very readable, technical roadmap for meeting the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. It’s a short but sobering read. We definitely don’t have much time left to engage in idiotic arguments about whether global warming is even happening.

On the other hand, our President has vowed “massive infrastructure spending” to get Americans “off of welfare and back to work rebuilding our country.” I think that’s great. I can’t imagine a more impressive, job creating, value creating national infrastructure project than this one.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Happy World Meteorological Day! (hotter, drier, wetter, faster)

Today, March 23, is World Meteorological Day! Check out the website to see what the world’s meteorologists have observed about our changing climate.

Image source: National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration

In honor of World Meteorogical Day, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released its annual Statement on the State of the Global Climate for 2016. This report is a yearly product obtained by combining weather and climatic data from multiple independently operated global climate centers to create a “snapshot” of Earth’s weather for the year. On Tuesday, WMO released a summary of highlights from 2016 under the headline, “Climate breaks multiple records in 2016, with global impacts.” Check it out.

Last Thursday, when asked at a press conference about the elimination of climate funding (even to monitor it) in the President’s March 16 federal budget proposal, Mick Mulvaney, head of the President’s Office of Management and Budget, had this to say: “We’re not spending money on that anymore; we consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that.” (See video).

Here are a few things the world’s climate experts said about the 2016 WMO report (The Guardian, March 21):

“The need for concerted action on climate change has never been so stark nor the stakes so high.” (Prof. David Reay, emissions expert, University of Edinburgh)

“Earth is a planet in upheaval due to human-caused changes in the atmosphere. In general, drastically changing conditions do not help civilisation, which thrives on stability.” (Jeffrey Kargel, glaciologist, University of Arizona)

“Our children and grandchildren will look back on the climate deniers and ask how they could have sacrificed the planet for the sake of cheap fossil energy, when the cost of inaction exceeds the cost of a transition to a low-carbon economy.” (Sir Robert Watson, climate scientist at the University of East Anglia and former head of the UN climate science panel)

Read more about the President’s federal budget proposal here, and consider taking action to influence Congress to pass a budget more considerate of our children’s futures.

#AskYourDenierIfTheyveSeenThis

#rescuethatfrog

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.