Skip to main content

(Greenpeace)

Throughout the broadcast media where most people get their "news," coverage of climate change is not exactly what you'd call extensive. There are plenty of reasons why this should not be the case. For instance, Congress is now brimful of climate-change "skeptics," a euphemism for "deniers." These folks are either so ignorant they shouldn't be allowed anywhere near public office or so glued to the lies of their Koch-contributors that they shouldn't be allowed anywhere near public office. Then there is, of course, the reality of climate change itself. Which hasn't gone away.

The president himself won't use the term in speeches even on something as relevant to the climate-change discussion as energy policy. But he, at least, has reasons. No doubt his advisors argue against bringing the issue up in an election year given that the percentage of Americans who worry about global warming is well below what it was a dozen years ago.

But the media have no excuse other than that their bosses, both overt and behind the scenes, don't care to enlighten readers and viewers on the subject.

As Media Matters points out in a new study, coverage of climate change has plunged recently. Not that it was all that great to begin with. Nightly news coverage fell 72 percent between 2009 and 2011. That is, nightly news coverage on NBC, ABC, CBS went from two hours in 2009 to just 27 minutes in 2010 and 38 minutes in 2011. (Fox has no nightly news program.)

Think about that for a moment. Coverage of the most important issue of our era on the most-watched broadcast news programs for three years amounted to just 185 minutes. And if you think that this is made up for by MSNBC and CNN, who do a better job, think again. Four times as many Americans get their news from the three broadcast networks as they do the cable channels. Including Fox.

And the Sunday shows? Even worse. In three years, 98 minutes total for four networks, including Fox. Only nine minutes in 2011. Over the entire period, CBS's Face the Nation spent four minutes on climate change. In 2011, Donald Trump got more coverage than climate change on all four networks.

As if this pathetic showing wasn't bad enough, those invited to speak during the paltry time allotted helped frame the issue on the "skeptical" side:

In total, 68% of the political figures interviewed or quoted by the Sunday shows were Republicans, and 32% were Democrats. In 2011, the only people interviewed or quoted about climate change on the Sunday shows were Republican politicians. Fox News Sunday was the most skewed, featuring eight Republicans and only two Democrats over the three years. [...]

Our study finds that the Sunday shows consulted political and media figures on climate change, but left scientists out of the discussion. Of those hosted or interviewed on climate change, 50% were political figures—including elected officials, strategists and advisers—45% were media figures, and none were scientists. By comparison, 32% of those interviewed or quoted on the nightly news programs were political figures, and 20% were scientists.  

The agenda here is dead clear. And it seems to be working. Just one problem. Whether you are the president, a network CEO or just a spoon-fed viewer, ignoring climate change won't make it go away.

Originally posted to Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:27 PM PDT.

Also republished by DK GreenRoots, Climate Change News Roundup, and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Game over? nt (10+ / 0-)

    "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10

    by Bob Love on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:38:58 PM PDT

  •  look at the sponsors (28+ / 0-)

    of those shows; giant energy and agri business firms. I concluded long ago those shows are aimed specifically at the ruling elite, and they don't need to hear from any scientists to know what's good for them.

  •  I don't watch these shows because they think (19+ / 0-)

    that lies and more lies are two sides of an argument. They just repeat the lies. The MSM that is.

    The radical Republican party is the party of oppression, fear, loathing and above all more money and power for the people who robbed us.

    by a2nite on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:52:13 PM PDT

  •  Excuses, Excuses (14+ / 0-)

    and I'm sure that when the election is over we'll find more excuses.  Four years from now the adults in the room will tell us failure was the only reasonable option.  There's a reason why we keep losing on issue after issue and it's not the GOP.

    Climate change is an excellent example of everything that is wrong with the Democratic Party,  This is a case we should study over and over - and keep at it until we finally figure out why we lost and until we finally get it right.

  •  Our politicians are like my father. (27+ / 0-)

    My father is definitely in his later years of life, and he has expressed nearly absolute uninterest in anything beyond himself.  When confronted with realities like our house currently being eaten by termites, the roof needing to be replaced, the windows needing to be replaced, etc., despite his clearly having the money to do so, he has responded with comments to the effect of he's going to die soon enough so it doesn't really matter that the house is on a path to destruction.  He's not bothered by the thought of what he'll be leaving my mom if he dies.  So too do our politicians not give a rat's ass about what they're doing to the Earth or what'll be left behind for those that survive them.  They've got theirs, and that's all that matters to them.

    •  Does your mother have any financial autonomy? (0+ / 0-)

      Can she do anything?

      •  Nope. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cai, ms badger, wytcld, NoMoreLies, Matt Z

        My dad has gone apeshit so much over the spending of any money whatsoever (he once ranted and raved for an hour over Mom spending ten bucks on an exhaust fan to suck my dad's cigarette smoke out of the bathroom, for example) that my mom is too scared to spend money on anything noticible.  Regarding the termites specifically, my brother-in-law is going to try to talk my dad into letting him get the exterminator he had come get rid of a nest of hornets in a tree a few months ago to come deal with the termites.  My dad is more likely to listen to someone else, like my brother-in-law, than he ever is to listen to my mom.  It's like anytime he hears my mom say something, whatever it is she's saying is instantly invalid, but if someone else (though not me, as he sees me as nothing but an extention of my mom) says the exact same thing to him he'll listen more.

        •  That's horrible and sad. I'm sorry. n/t (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nimbus, vacantlook, Matt Z
        •  One thing our parents can do in some cases.... (4+ / 0-)

          ...is teach us how NOT to be.

          So sorry this is the situation with your dad.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 08:22:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  MB, I'm looking more closely at the Gallup Poll... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            nominalize

            In your intro you said:

            The president himself won't use the term [climate change] in speeches even on something as relevant to the climate-change discussion as energy policy. But he, at least, has reasons. No doubt his advisors argue against bringing the issue up in an election year...
            One wonders why the President and his advisers would be worried about bringing this up in an election year. Granted, concern about the issue has declined since an all-time high in 2000. However, the cited Gallup Poll clearly indicates that concern about climate change is still a winning issue among a solid majority of Americans, and especially among Democrats and Independent voters.
            Question: How much do you worry about global warming?

            ~Democrats -- 91% worried to varying degrees: 42% said a "great deal"; 32% said a "fair amount"; 17% said "only a little"; 10% said "not at all".

            ~Independents -- 78% worried to varying degrees: 31% said a "great deal"; 24% said a "fair amount"; 23% said "only a little"; 21% said "not at all".

            ~All Americans -- 77% worried to varying degrees: 30% said a "great deal"; 25% said a "fair amount"; 22% said "only a little"; 23% said "not at all".

            ~Republicans -- 60% worried to varying degrees: 16% said a "great deal"; 18% said a "fair amount"; 26% said "only a little"; 40% said "not at all".

            Clearly, the President would be well-advised to come out and show solidarity on the issue of global warming. He has nothing to fear, at least not from the electorate. Once again, Main Street has spoken, it remains to be seen whether our elected representatives care to hear what we have to say. (Pardon my populist moment.)
            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  •  The Free Press Model Doesn't Work (30+ / 0-)

    They're corporations, they're sponsored by corporations, and they're free of content obligation.

    What do you expect them to do, campaign against their sponsors?

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:55:58 PM PDT

    •  So much for an informed electorate nt (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, blueoasis, cai, Matt Z
    •  The Free Press Model is not in operation. (7+ / 0-)

      There is a coercive process of censorship in action.

      Journalists are coerced by their editors to establish friendly relationships with government officials and industry leaders, so they can print stories which quote "highly placed sources".

      Those same journalists are coerced by the relationships they've established with the "highly placed sources". They can't report anything that will anger their sources.

      If the journalists do somehow get an important story that doesn't alienate their "highly placed" sources, then the editors exercise their editorial powers to soften stories that are detrimental to their political viewpoints or sharpen stories that are aligned with their political viewpoints.

      Any editor or journalist who does not practice the requisite level of self-censorship will be fired by the publisher.

      While I don't hold Obama in high esteem, that doesn't mean I would say he's the Devil Incarnate and the lessor of evils. He is merely the lessee of evils.

      by xynz on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:40:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Climate Change reporting varies with the Weather (9+ / 0-)

    Climate change is still largely identified as "global warming" by the public.

    Media reporting favorable to efforts to reduce Climate Change is most intense when the US has uncomfortably significantly hotter weather (than the past 2 or 4 years) durning the summer nationally for extended time.

    Warmer winters don't spark the news reports, as most people few people are made uncomfortable by this.

    While there is far more to climate change than hot, uncomfortable summers -- that's all major media notices.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:55:59 PM PDT

    •  Slowly & surely, communities are getting 1st hand (11+ / 0-)

      doses of climate change: ferocious storms and tornadoes, green grassy ski slopes, cracked parched fields, plants leafed out in February and frozen to death in April...

      In other parts of the world, people understand what's happening.  The US has called the shots worldwide for decades on just about anything one can name...but this is The Brick Wall.

      Right-wing "beliefs and opinions" are irrelevant to the truth.  Climate change is not a "choice".  It is a fact.

      When enough Americans experience it personally they will finally understand. Unfortunately, it will be too late to mitigate the problem.  Even the vilest of braggarts will be forced to recognize that their "Exceptionalism!" is not worth one damned thing.  They are merely exceptionally ignorant.

      "Evil is a lack of empathy, a total incapacity to feel with their fellow man." - Capt. Gilbert,Psychiatrist, at the end of Nuremberg trials.

      by 417els on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 03:37:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You know (4+ / 0-)

      "Climate change" was the proposed renaming of "global warming" by a Republican strategist, along the lines of "things always change, so what?" It's purposely less alarming.

      The left might better stick to "global warming," or perhaps "weather disaster."

      •  Catastrophic climate modification. (4+ / 0-)

        It is more than warming.

        The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

        by captainlaser on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:33:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I thought it was the opposite (0+ / 0-)

        that "global warming," while accurate in the aggregate, overall scheme of things, was a strategic 'branding' mistake because it allowed deniers to dismiss the issue altogether the minute a colder -than-average winter (or even day) happened. Now deniers use it to mock climate science in general and say that "warming" is a lie. Just look at the snow outside the window.

        Climate variability and climate change are, to me, terms that are much more reflective of the nuances of the issue, including extreme weather events. But I can see what you mean about the "change" bit being vague and ambiguous.

        One problem is that it's a complicated story. Consequences vary in different parts of the country, and the world. I don't know how one would fit the complexity into a sound bite.

        •  See my comment above. n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "All the tales of miracles, with which the Old and New Testament are filled, are fit only for impostors to preach and fools to believe." ~ Thomas Paine

          by PreciousLittle on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:49:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That might be true. (0+ / 0-)

          But "Global Warming" is a more accurate description to what is happening.

          The average global temperature is rising.  It's an undisputed fact.  And the reason why the media rarely if ever mentions this fact.

          The problem scientists have is predicting how global warming will affect our climate and weather.

          We are sailing into uncharted territory and anything can happen.

          One thing scientists know for a certainty is that heat is energy and adding energy to a stable environment makes that environment unstable.

          Unfortunately Republicans go deaf when science is mentioned.

          Perhaps there's a clue in there on how scientists should begin framing the discussion?

      •  Meet Frank Luntz... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MZ12, Meteor Blades, Miggles, Matt Z

        Frank I. Luntz , American political consultant, pollster, and Republican Party strategist. From Wiki:

        Although Luntz later tried to distance himself from Bush administration policy, it was his idea that administration communications reframe "global warming" as "climate change" since "climate change" was thought to sound less severe.

        In a 2002 memo to President George W. Bush titled "The Environment: A Cleaner, Safer, Healthier America", obtained by the Environmental Working Group, Luntz wrote: "The scientific debate is closing [against us] but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science....Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field."

        Luntz has since said that he is not responsible for what the Bush administration did after that time. Though he now believes humans have contributed to global warming, he maintains that the science was in fact incomplete, and his recommendation sound, at the time he made it.

        In 2010, Luntz announced new research that shows the American people are eager for Congress to act on climate legislation that would promote energy independence and a healthier environment. Luntz said: "A clear majority of Americans believe climate change is happening. This is true of McCain voters and Obama voters alike. And even those that don't still believe it is essential for America to pursue policies that promote energy independence and a cleaner, healthier environment."

        It is remarkable that the public has clearly figured out the truth -- despite the torrent of denialism and 'skepticism' that spews from corporate media and the political class who are still, nonetheless, able to thwart the will of the majority.

        "All the tales of miracles, with which the Old and New Testament are filled, are fit only for impostors to preach and fools to believe." ~ Thomas Paine

        by PreciousLittle on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:47:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  A few dozen more tornados (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SottoVoce, LLPete, nominalize

      A few more hurricanes.

      A drought or two. Followed by wildfires.

      Farmland blown away as dust.

      The deniers will finally come to their senses: it's all Obama's fault.

      Sometimes . . . I feel . . . like a redneck with chopsticks . . . Dreaming of squirrel while I'm sucking down squid . . .

      by Pale Jenova on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:08:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Imagine if... (10+ / 0-)

    We have an August like the March we just had?  Would that change the conversation?

    'Osama Bin Ladien is still dead and GM is still alive' - Joe Biden

    by RichM on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 12:56:32 PM PDT

    •  Washington wasn't motivated to act on soil (33+ / 0-)

      conservation during the Dust Bowl until the Dust Bowl came to Washington.

      On May 10, 1934, a collection of dust storms moved over the Midwest carrying, Egan says, "three tons of dust for every American alive." It dumped 6,000 tons on Chicago that night. By morning, the storm was 1,800 miles wide -- "a great rectangle of dust" weighing 350 million tons -- and was depositing the surface of the Great Plains on New York City, where commerce stopped in the semi-darkness.

      On the southern plains, dust particles, one-fifth the size of the period at the end of this sentence and high in silica content, penetrated lungs, jeopardizing newborns and causing "dust pneumonia" in others. Houses were so porous that the only white part of a pillow in the morning was the profile of the sleeper. Storms in March and April 1935 dumped 4.7 tons of dust per acre on western Kansas, denting the tops of cars. During one storm, the wind blew at least 40 mph for 100 hours. Egan reports that it would have required a line of trucks 96 miles long, hauling 10 loads a day for a year -- 46 million truckloads -- to transport the dirt that had blown from western to eastern Kansas.

      In Washington, in a Senate hearing room, a man was testifying to bored legislators about the need for federal aid for the southern plains. A senator suddenly exclaimed, "It's getting dark outside." The sun vanished, and the air turned copper-color, thanks to red dust that the weather bureau said came from the western end of Oklahoma's panhandle. The aid was approved the next day.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/... (Unfortunately, the lesson of this article was lost on the author.)

      "And now we know that government by organized money is just as dangerous as government by organized mob." -- FDR

      by Mogolori on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 01:11:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fox News' Senior Science Correspondent begs to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh, Shockwave

    differ MB.........Yep....This is a puzzle....lol

  •  the only climate change I can see on TV (11+ / 0-)

    is the thick fog the TV news channels produce to cover up, distract or hide the real news. In the end all I remember are the anti-depressiva drug ads. Them bosses there in media land know that their viewers need those after having tried for hours to see something through the fog  ... so there is a happy end to it. Pharmaceutical companies make more sales, media news channels make their income, viewer get all druggy-happy and nobody knows what's in the news.

  •  Would the ADL be bamboozled if the media started (12+ / 0-)

    … relabelling Holocaust deniers Holocaust "skeptics" and featuring them prominently on every talk show?

    Why are we allowing this to happen?

    The Dutch kids' chorus Kinderen voor Kinderen wishes all the world's children freedom from hunger, ignorance, and war.

    by lotlizard on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 01:12:21 PM PDT

  •  Even worse are the jokes that (5+ / 0-)

    with the take that climate change is inevitable (waddja gonna do?). It's like the subject is ubiquitous, but there's no debate, no action. Ack!

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 01:25:00 PM PDT

  •  Other countries (and the Pentagon)... (14+ / 0-)

    ...are planning for global warming;

    YOKOSUKA, Japan (AP) — To the world's military leaders, the debate over climate change is long over. They are preparing for a new kind of Cold War in the Arctic, anticipating that rising temperatures there will open up a treasure trove of resources, long-dreamed-of sea lanes and a slew of potential conflicts.
    The religious right (and Repugs) and oil companies are so wrong on this one it's pathetic.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 01:26:45 PM PDT

    •  The Pentagon (7+ / 0-)

      Kudos their reality-based assessment on climate change.

      In addition: I recall an article c. 20 years ago, about how insurance industry actuaries were already figuring premium rates using global warming models.

      Grab all the joy you can. (exmearden 8/10/09)

      by Land of Enchantment on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:37:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I am not always a fan (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, NoMoreLies, Matt Z

      of how the military handles things, but I am extremely proud of their clearheaded approach to climate change, including an embrace of fuel standards, research into alternatives and implementation of existing renewables.  When I look at politicians like Inhofe or that guy who said, "God won't let us run out of oil," (his name escapes me) I'm amazed at more much saner the Pentagon is than so much of the country.

      Of course, the military mind knows that "a slew of potential conflicts" won't go away just because you really really want them to not exist.

    •  Too bad militaries, ours in particular, (7+ / 0-)

      is one of the major contributors to global warming.

      As Barry Sanders documents in The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs of Militarism, the U.S. military's planes, tanks, aircraft carriers, warships, vehicles of every size and description, spew absolutely enormous amounts of greenhouse gas pollution.

      (And that's before we even get to -- as Sanders does -- how we've poisoned the soils of Iraq and Afghanistan in perpetuity with depleted uranium.)

    •  Near term profits trump multi-generational... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hester

      ...obligations.

      Our Financial Overlords only care if they died with as many marbles as they could get their filthy mitts on (pun intended).

      When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative. --Martin Luther King Jr.

      by Egalitare on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:55:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Other countries include the next 10,000lb. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave

      gorilla; China. They are investing big time. They are positioning themselves for the short and long term.

    •  And don't forget the Insurance Companies (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PreciousLittle, Shockwave, Matt Z

      Try to get insurance on a home on the shore of the Chesapeake Bay.

      Nope.  Too risky.

      Insurance companies have decided that THEY are not going to take the risk that Global Warming might be happening.

      The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

      by captainlaser on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:35:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I once canvassed for the environment (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shockwave

        well inland in Massachusetts. and a guy smirked that he didn't mind global warming because he'd then have beachfront property.  He lived in Worcester.  That's some 45 miles from the Bay, and 300 feet above sea level.

        People will come up with any excuse to be lazy.  We can't forget that.

        Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

        by nominalize on Wed Apr 18, 2012 at 07:59:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  US Military, World's Biggest User of Fossil Fuel. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave

      Literally, for a fact. And yes, now they're making way to drill for more Texas tea in the melting Arctic. In the meantime, they're supplementing their insatiable appetite for oil with a soupcon of renewables.

      See: Greenwashing the Pentagon, by Joseph Nevins, Truthout, 13 June 2010:

      The U.S. military is the world's single biggest consumer of fossil fuels, and the single entity most responsible for destabilizing the Earth's climate...

      "Greenwashing" helps to mask the fact that the Pentagon devours about 330,000 barrels of oil per day (13,860,000 gallons), more than the vast majority of the world's countries. If the U.S. military were a nation-state, it would be ranked number 37 in terms of oil consumption - ahead of the likes of the Philippines, Portugal, and Nigeria - according to the CIA Factbook...

      A 2010 study by Deloitte, the financial services company, reports that the Pentagon uses 22 gallons of oil per day per soldier deployed in its wars, a figure that is expected to grow 1.5 percent annually though 2017. The worst offender is the Air Force...a F-16 fighter jet burns up to 2,000 gallons of fuel per flight hour. The resulting detrimental impact on the Earth's climate system is much greater per mile traveled than motorized ground transport due to the height at which planes fly combined with the mixture of gases and particles they emit.

      Among the ironies of all this, given that a central goal of U.S. military strategy is to ensure the smooth flow of oil to the United States, is that the Pentagon's voracious appetite for energy helps to justify its very existence and seemingly never-ending growth...

      Onward to the Arctic. The US military is expending obscene amounts of fossil fuel to enable the plundering of more fossil fuel from a formerly frozen location that is now accessible as a consequence of the military's consumption of fossil fuel throughout the rest of the world. Capital plan. Par for the course.
  •  Spot on... (7+ / 0-)

    ...conclusion. History will judge harshly, provided someone's left to tell this history.

  •  I say again (5+ / 0-)

    Climate change will cull the planet of millions of consuming human beings until finally the ones that remain will live in stasis with a recovering ecosystem. So?

  •  I'm reminded of the movie 2012 (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shockwave, jayden, NoMoreLies

    Silence for the general public
    And tickets to be on the boat 1 billion euros ea

  •  THIS should be on the Front Page (8+ / 0-)

    There was a earlier diary complaining about the content of the front page diaries.  (Lots of nice comments from different points of view).  Major debate was: should Front Page be filled with things that frequent readers want to read or should it be filled with diaries that catch the interest of the new visitor?  Some people wanted diaries with depth.  Some folks stressed the need to put clear talking points and/or diaries that give a newbie a clear indication of what the site is about.

    This kind of diary does it all.  Well written.  Pretty picture.  Topical.  Has some meat on its bones.  Gives a good taste of what kind of diaries a reader can expect to find here.  Gives the daily visitors a taste of something different.  

    And it is something, that IMHO, has the potential to get reposted or linked to, because it engages the meme of "liberal media" and presents some data that helps dispel that myth.  And driving traffic to the site helps sell ads, which DKos has got to do.

    "Keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars" --Casey Kasem

    by netop on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:00:48 PM PDT

  •  I'm a skeptic and these guys are an insult (12+ / 0-)

    to skeptics.  A skeptic is supposed to accept scientifically proven theories.

    Only scientists are allowed to have opinions on global warming.  You wouldn't ask a lawyer how to put satellite into orbit, and you wouldn't ask a rocket scientist to defend you in court.  Politicians don't get to have an opinion on the reality of climate change.  Religious leaders don't either.

    Politicians and religious leaders only get to have an opinion about what to do about what the scientists are telling us.

  •  Some numbers .... (11+ / 0-)

    280 ppm: Preindustrial atmospheric CO2 level

    300 ppm: The level in1950's

    350 ppm: The generally accepted by scientists,  point of no return (1990)

    390+ ppm (& rising fast): Today's reading

    Current total annual carbon emissions are SIX TIMES what they were in 1950.

    The polar ice-caps ARE melting.  Ocean circulation patterns ARE changing.  The oceans ARE acidifying.  Countless species ARE going extinct.  Droughts ARE spreading.  Crops ARE failing.  Millions ARE starving.  Tornadoes and hurricanes ARE increasing.  ETC., ETC........

    Hey, all the well meaning entreaties aside, we are truly, and permanently screwed as a civilization.  We are not just in trouble, we have failed.

    I have come to believe that human culture, now and numerous times in our history,  has proved incapable of adapting to ecological change.  The question is not: what can we do to fix it?; but rather: how bad is it going to get?

    GRAPH: 50 Year CO2 Rise

    The above graph was measured at the Mauna Loa Observatory, high above the middle of the Pacific Ocean.  These measurements, being away from all variable influences, are accepted as valid proof by all credible climate scientists.

    Labor was the first price paid for all things. It was not by money, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased. - Adam Smith

    by boatwright on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:21:15 PM PDT

  •  Small Typo in your diary (9+ / 0-)

    You wrote

    Fox has no nightly news program
    It should read:

     

    Fox has no news program

    While I don't hold Obama in high esteem, that doesn't mean I would say he's the Devil Incarnate and the lessor of evils. He is merely the lessee of evils.

    by xynz on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:28:11 PM PDT

  •  It's because there is no doubt. (5+ / 0-)

    It doesn't matter what you call it; it's just obvious to anyone who is paying attention that the weather is wigging out. The scientists are nearly 100% certain it is caused by anthropogenic C02 warming of the atmosphere and oceans.

    I think it is just too overwhelming for most people to contemplate. It does feel like game over and we've done next to nothing yet and are paralyzed so it doesn't look like a happy outcome any way you slice it.

    Think about it this way:
    Given what is known now, sober reporting on climate change should sound quite(!) alarming. Who is going to be that messenger in the MSM? Nobody that I see save the self-important crackpot bloviator Thomas Friedman, who may be motivated by his desire to be taken seriously and who is credibility-impaired.

    Scary.

  •  Have you noticed in bookstores (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mindful Nature, NoMoreLies, Matt Z

    the lack of books on wild animals for children?
    And even the lack of wild animal photos.

  •  Every few years (6+ / 0-)

    It didn't get any attention on the heels of 9/11.  Not till Katrina, when it spiked in public attention for awhile.  And it go abandoned, like a stale fashion trend, when the economy tanked.

    It's kinda depressing how much such things get determined by similar forces as whether or not people wear platform shoes.  As if the effects of climate change were somehow determined by public opinion.

    And then there's the weird turn that conservative religious types have taken on climate denial as an element of faith.

    Weird, and also discouraging.

    Grab all the joy you can. (exmearden 8/10/09)

    by Land of Enchantment on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 02:34:08 PM PDT

  •  If they cared... (6+ / 0-)

    They wouldn't keep airing the same pundits on the Sunday shows, despite how often they are wrong.  They are rarely (if ever) fact-checked or held accountable for what they said in past weeks.  Just move on to another new lie that nobody will bother checking out.  How else can these shows be dominated by the likes of George Will and Cokie Roberts?  It's disgusting to me that G. Will is even on the air.  He is wrong (by my estimates) at least 85% of the time.

    I find all of those shows unwatchable.  They can't be honest about anything, much less climate change.  It's probably better they don't bring it up.  They'll just lie about it anyway...

    •  Is Bill Kristol (Mr. 100% Wrong) still on the (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cai, ms badger, wytcld, TomFromNJ, Matt Z

      FuxNooz Sunday pukeathon with C. Wallace?
      I used to watch that for the few shots of Mr. Special K quivering in fear if he was challenged (not a common event), or choking and looking like a three-year old caught in the cookie jar, as he lied (an extremely common event).
      I stopped watching all of them a few years ago after decades of watching, gots better things to do.

      "Double, double, toile and trouble; Fire burne, and Cauldron bubble... By the pricking of my Thumbes, Something wicked this way comes": Republicans Willkommen auf das Vierte Reich! Sie Angelegenheit nicht mehr.

      by Bluefin on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 04:41:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Daily Kos doesn't have much to do (7+ / 0-)

    with environmental subjects.
    Rec'd environmental diaries are rare.

  •  Saw a segment on Weather Channel yesterday (8+ / 0-)

    about a cruise ship that left South Africa in a rough storm; as the ship started listing and taking on water the crew left, leaving the passengers to fend for themselves.  That is a pretty good analogy for what is going on here; the VIPs are setting up their lifeboats to let the rest of us passengers fend for ourselves.  Please don't think for a moment that the people in power don't believe in AGW, they just don't want to advertise that fact.  

  •  It just doesn't make good TV (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ms badger

    Who is going to watch a couple scientests talking about numbers, statistics, probabilities, and consequences that won't come to roost for years. Sure, this is an incredibly important issue, but without some "crisis point", it's human nature to just tune it out.

    That's one thing a couple movies have tried to address... to make a compelling story about climate change. But, it takes time to tell that story, and that simply doesn't work on TV.

    Others have tried to boil it down to a really simply message - like "350". But, when 350 comes and goes... and the sky doesn't turn purple, and birds don't drop out of the sky... people just shrug and continue on their way.

    Instead, what we get is a bunch of gotcha stories, and loudmouth pundits. What does make good TV is an argument... no matter what the science says.

    I wish this was different too. Maybe someone will find that magic story that will really bring this issue home in a compelling, relatable, and sustainable way.

    Freedom isn't free. So quit whining and pay your taxes.

    by walk2live on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 03:18:41 PM PDT

    •  When I was a journalist, it was considered... (9+ / 0-)

      ...part of my job, as reporter and later editor, to find stories that were compelling.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 04:14:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But how do you do that with climate change? (0+ / 0-)

        I think it's a compelling story. You do... But, there just is no sizzle... and nobody is "going to die tomorrow" if nothing is done. Sadly, that's what it takes these days to get people to focus on an issue.

        Millions may die in 50 years... Millions may be displaced... but that's years away. People don't relate to it - they think "Oh, someone will fix it", and worry about more pressing problems.

        If I'm a producer, I have to think about what people are going to watch... "missing blonde 20-something on a tropical island?" bingo. "secret service sex scandal?" you betcha! But, graphs, charts, stats, and wonky scientists? nah... maybe if there is someone arguing with the scientists... but otherwise, how do I get ratings?

        Freedom isn't free. So quit whining and pay your taxes.

        by walk2live on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:05:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What have you been reading and where? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Meteor Blades

          The climate crisis is not "50 years" away. It's here now. People are starving and being displaced and killed in droves worldwide.

          As to whether reporting on the climate crisis can generate public interest and market share, take a tip from Stephen Colbert:

          After months of scoffing at global warming, Colbert suddenly reversed his position, conceding its existence, not because of scientific evidence, but because of the box office success of An Inconvenient Truth, a sign that "the free market has spoken".
          Of course, there was also a wildly successful book of the same title, not to mention a Nobel Peace Prize for the author.

          There's ample "sizzle" in the climate crisis, literally and metaphorically.

          "All the tales of miracles, with which the Old and New Testament are filled, are fit only for impostors to preach and fools to believe." ~ Thomas Paine

          by PreciousLittle on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 07:39:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Climate crisis/extreme weather is bloody good TV! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dinazina

        It's called storm-porn. Gawd, even bad reporters (Cooper Andersen) can do a smashing job in the eye of a hurricane (Katrina). Good reporters, like Meteor Blades, can take it to another dimension altogether.

        Problem is, post-Katrina, nobody sees an extreme weather event in the same way; meaning the weather has become political in more ways than one.

        People still want to watch, probably now more than ever. But the news entities know that the public now readily associates extreme weather with global warming. Hence, the weather channel doesn't even churn out the storm-porn like they used to. Don't anybody tell me there's no demand though. If you film it they will come.

    •  Not human nature (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PreciousLittle

      But certainly an American cultural tendency

  •  getting paid to deny should get treason labeling (0+ / 0-)

    having a valid argument or being ignorant is fine, but getting paid by the think tanks and exxon for obstructing action and lying should get special enemy-of-the-country status and the giving air time to those shits would come with similar condemnation.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 03:28:21 PM PDT

  •  "if we don't break the Media Cartel's (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cai, NoMoreLies, PreciousLittle

    monopoly on mass-reach media we'll keep losing."

    That was more or less my sig here for a few years. I abandoned it because apparently very few seem to realize that Media Central pretty much decides political outcomes; what can even be spoken about; how issues and people are painted; what is most important. All decided by mass-reach media.

    We can break through a little bit here and there, but there's nothing like the power to reach practically every single person in the nation in a day or two with precisely the same message.

    The pipe-dream that the internet will change things has been pushed for 15 years, near 20, but the reality is, on balance -- we keep losing. I can hear some already saying "well, turn off the tv" and, I guess "tweet more" or whatever. But it doesn't matter. If tomorrow the Media Cartel features the topic "Is wearing plaid a plot by gay communists to destroy America" then tomorrow night 4 front pagers will be ridiculing the idea, somebody will start up a "Plaid Is Cool Group" and there will be diaries about how some of the world's leading anti-communists themselves wore plaid. We see this every day, how the internet is the tail of the Corporate Media dog.

    It's almost criminal negligence that we on the left have not focused on directly dismantling the very thing which is the lynchpin of the 1%'s hold on power: Mass-reach Media's effective monopoly on the public space.


    Today, if you exist... that's already suspicious.

    by Jim P on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 03:58:49 PM PDT

  •  On the other hand, pretending that "all we need... (2+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    SpeedyGonzales, bryfry
    Hidden by:
    Miggles

    ...to do" is make glib promises about so called "renewable energy" and everything will be better will also do nothing about climate change.

    If I spent much of my time railing about, say for instance, "nuclear subsidies" - without stopping to look at the DOE budget - while failing to acknowledge that 100's of billion euro, dollar, yen, yaun, etc subsidies to solar, wind have failed to produce even 5 of the 500 exajoules of energy on which humanity depends, I wouldn't be very smug about my knowledge of or investment in addressing climate change.

    Nuclear energy is still by far, the world's largest source of climate change gas free primary energy, out producing all others combined, despite decades of irrational railing against it, while cheering but otherwise oblivious people people took money food, education, security, health care and other issues basic to human decency and scattered it, literally, to the wind.

    It's now more than 30 years since the construction of the Altamont Pass wind farms, and still we're hearing that wind power is the answer.

    The Danes can't drill oil and gas fast enough.

    And the number of cities in the world that have shut fossil fuel plants because they live on so called "renewable energy" remains pretty constant, zero.

    In 2011 the world set a record for dangerous fossil fuel waste dumping.

    Maybe it's good for some of us on the left that no one pays attention to our opinions on energy.    The fine Secretary of Energy and the fine President notwithstanding, I am often embarrassed by what passes for an "energy policy" around here.  

    If I correctly diagnose a patient's cancer, and then prescribe holy water as a cure, I'm still not a very useful physician.

    Have a nice evening.

  •  Reality is that which, when you don't believe in (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ms badger, gsenski

    it, does not cease to exist.

    Like how it's dry and hot in the Northeast to the point where farmers are already irrigating.

  •  They'll keep on ignoring climate change, right up (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cai, NoMoreLies, boatwright, Matt Z

    until the day that Florida (flattest State in the nation, from someone who's driven across Kansas, Wyoming and the Dakotas and Montana) slips silently below the waves of the encroaching Atlantic Ocean...

    until the day that the predictions about California quaking itself to pieces & sliding off into the Pacific Ocean become the images of Orange County at the bottom of 35 feet of water, like most of the rest of southern California...

    until the day... well, you get the idea.

    * * *
    I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization
    -- SCOTUS Justice O.W. Holmes Jr.
    * * *
    "A Better World is Possible"
    -- #Occupy

    by Angie in WA State on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 04:39:09 PM PDT

  •  We need to write about it more, even here (7+ / 0-)

    There's far too little discussion about climate change and energy issues here at daily kos.  We can't change the subject on the Sunday talk shows, but we can change what we discuss.  Instead of talking about ephemera and the latest non-controversy, let's start talking about things of consequence.

    contraposition.org - thoughts on energy, the environment, and society.

    by barath on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 04:39:31 PM PDT

  •  No longer a future problem. (9+ / 0-)

    As someone else has pointed out, this is no longer some future bogeyman.  It's happening all around us.  RIGHT NOW.  The ice caps are melting.  An extinction event has apparently begun.  This has the potential to leave all life on Earth devestated in its wake and we do nothing, or rather, worse than nothing given that this is a problem of our own making.  A clearer sign of the failure of our civilization is impossible to imagine.

    Oh, this planet has been through some rough times, and this is hardly her first extinction event.  If it takes her a million years to recover, well, she has nothing but time.  Our time however, might be in shorter supply than we think.

    Maybe this will be good for us.  It's been a long time since we faced any serious threat to our survival and had to recognize the sheer tenuousness of our situation.  Let me lay it out:  We inhabit a vanishingly thin membrane of habitable space on the surface of an infinitesimal speck of dust spinning through an infinite lifeless vacuum.  There is nowhere to run to within the scope of our technology.  There is neither God nor superintelligent race of aliens to save us if we damage this tiny sphere beyond its ability to support our life forms.  Counting on outside intervention, or persisting in our bizarre sense of exceptionalism, must be considered a form of suicidal insanity.

    I can only hope that a thousand years from now children can read history books detailing how breathtakingly stupid humans of our time were.  We won't look good, but at least it will mean we're not extinct.

  •  It's time we sidelined the politicians (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NoMoreLies, PreciousLittle, LLPete

    What is it about Sunday talk shows that they pretend that understanding the times should come through hearing the mutterings of poilticians? Or just as bad, the mutterings of talking heads whose whole world is made of politicians?

    Nobody inside the world of politics 100% of the time can see a damn thing. They're not just in a bubble, they're in a black hole. And it warps them all. They're experts at nothing, knowledgeable about nothing. It's almost as bad as government by Bishops - whether Catholic or Mormon - but not quite. And so we must support Obama, who hasn't closed Gitmo, who feels fine about continuing the damage to our society from pot prohibition even when a majority of the population would end it, who drags on a losing war in Afghanistan, and who does nothing to punish the criminal bankers who threw the world into economic crisis.

    Maybe if the press still cared about the world instead of only caring about politics and entertainment, we'd have a chance. Fifty years ago science got constant coverage. These days, none.

  •  What are you going to do? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seeds, gsenski, LLPete, Matt Z

    Americans are too stupid to survive and they'll fight you to the death for their right to be stupid.

    If Obama doesn't deserve credit for getting Bin Laden because he didn't pull the trigger, Bin Laden doesn't deserve the blame for 9-11 because he didn't fly the planes.

    by Bush Bites on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:48:25 PM PDT

  •  it's like (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WarrenS, NoMoreLies, Meteor Blades, Matt Z

    Climate Change, talking about it,

    is the new Kryptonite.


    What is necessary to change a person is to change his awareness of himself.
    -- Maslow ...... my list.

    by jamess on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:51:28 PM PDT

    •  Let's see, and we shouldn't talk about (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jamess, PreciousLittle

      Abortion

      Religion

      Fracking

      Taxes

      Medicare

      Medicaid

      Social Security

      ......

      When they frighten you into not talking about all the things that matter you are left with:

      Sex with Prostitutes.

      The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

      by captainlaser on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:43:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  All republicans, no scientists! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gsenski, Bush Bites

    From my point of view, there aren't any republicans smart enough to be a scientist.

    •  There's probably a few whacked out... (0+ / 0-)

      ....libertarian types who are scientists.

      They're the ones who think the geeks would be on top in a totally free economy, little aware that the jocks would take away their lunch money in a second.

      If Obama doesn't deserve credit for getting Bin Laden because he didn't pull the trigger, Bin Laden doesn't deserve the blame for 9-11 because he didn't fly the planes.

      by Bush Bites on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:18:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I know plenty of Republican Scientists (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PreciousLittle, Meteor Blades

      and many understand that Global Warming is occurring.

      This is NOT a left/right issue.

      It is an ignorance/knowledge issue.  Fred Singer stated to the Heartland Institute last year:

      This is not about science. It is about power and politics.

      The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

      by captainlaser on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:45:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The stupidity and denial... (0+ / 0-)

    ...are every bit as depressing as the climate phenomena themselves.

    Stupidity and denial are short-term depressing, and climate is long-term depressing.

    I was casting about for some way to make "game over" a little more concrete for people.  Then I realized: some of the time, "game over" means a fucking riot.  When it's "game over," people die.

    Freedom isn't "on the march." Freedom dances.

    by WarrenS on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:55:58 PM PDT

  •  Strange... (0+ / 0-)

    particularly given the fact that there was no winter in many parts of the US.
    :/

    Let The Wild Rumpus Begin!

    by dclawyer06 on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:56:41 PM PDT

  •  I would be willing to bet you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    boatwright

    that Climate change denial is most prevalent in those geographic regions most dependent upon air conditioning.

    I find that deliciously ironic.

    "By your late thirties the ground has begun to grow hard. It grows harder and harder until the day that it admits you.” Thomas McGuane, Nobody's Angel

    by Keith930 on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 05:57:33 PM PDT

  •  "He has reasons" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PreciousLittle

    The exact same argument that let those who ordered torture and other war crimes walk totally unscathed into plush corporate sinecures and government offices at all levels where they get to inject their special brand of humanitarianism into every element of our lives.  

    No.  It's the president's job to lead.  Not to evade, backpedal, pass the buck.  The buck stops there.  Nowhere else.  The buck stops THERE.  Moral cowardice in the service of craven personal careerist opportunism is NOT the road to a better day ahead.  Never has been, never will be.   The political culture of these handmaids of hegemony that pose as our rulers today is stunning in its vacuity, its absence of anything but ambition.

    The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges. ~ Anatole France

    by ActivistGuy on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:04:48 PM PDT

    •  I agree, but he needs a magic wand (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PreciousLittle

      to get rid of the filibuster, sweep the ALEC Republicans from the House and the Democratic leadership from the Democratic party.

      Then, Obama would crush the opposition and triumph.

      Now, where did I leave that wand? Did Harry Potter snap it in half? ARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

      Sometimes . . . I feel . . . like a redneck with chopsticks . . . Dreaming of squirrel while I'm sucking down squid . . .

      by Pale Jenova on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:15:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think you know my views on the subject... (0+ / 0-)

      ...well enough to recognize that I am not giving him a pass. But he at least can offer reasons (it will hurt my reelection chances), even if this is unacceptable to us, whereas the media have no reasons.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 08:37:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I believe the President and the media... (0+ / 0-)

        would actually both proffer the same spurious reason for their failure to explore the subject of climate change.

        They would both say there isn't any interest/support for the topic among a majority of viewers/voters.

        That dim view of public interest is as offensive as it is fallacious. However, the truth is far less complementary to the media and our political leadership.

  •  A dose of cold water (5+ / 0-)

    I must commend the author of this diary, and the many thoughtful commenters.  I only wish that many more KOS'ers would join in the sort of rational, scientifically based discussion that occurred here.  We are facing a deep crisis and our society is childlike in its persistent denial of the situation.

    It would do us well to reflect on the basic laws of nature here, particularly the laws of thermodynamics.  For those unwilling to do the heavy lifting, I'll make it simple:  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH. There is no magic car that runs on water, or solar cell on the roof, or windmill, or bio-gas that can meet more than a small fraction of today's large and dense energy demands.  Most of the energy we use today took nature millions of years to create. We're burning it up in a few hundred.  The very food we eat is in the store for us to buy because of a huge input of fossil fuel.  I am not suggesting that we are collectively responsible for the reckless greed of the oil companies, but we are ALL consumers, large or small of the poison they sell.

    The reality is grim folks.  The long-term SUSTAINABLE population number for a world not fueled by coal and oil is, AT BEST, about one-third of the current 7+ billion.  And even at that number, without the fixed nitrogen fertilizer inputs that now come from oil and natural gas, we will be living back on the farm, lucky to have ANY fuel at all for tractors and other machinery.  Today's agriculture, with one farmer's fossil-fueled output feeding hundreds of city dwellers will be a thermodynamic impossibility.

    I hope we can get to that necessarily simpler world without a dark age of famine, pestilence and war.

    Labor was the first price paid for all things. It was not by money, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased. - Adam Smith

    by boatwright on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:07:15 PM PDT

  •  It is time to go after the advertisers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PreciousLittle

    Pay attention to the commercials on the evening news, I actually monitored commercials during three local newscasts over a two week period when I was in college and I found that 30% of the commercials were from the auto industry.  The auto industry has a major financial interest in making sure nothing is done to address climate change, the fact that they are providing such a large amount of money to fund the news is hugely significant.  We need to make it clear that we know that advertising dollars influence the news we hear, we can not allow the media to continue to pretend that the interests of their advertisers has no effect on the content of the news.

    •  The networks are the Pravda of the ruling class. (0+ / 0-)

      The content of news programming promotes overall corporate interests even more effectively than ads for individual products. The ads are just an additional revenue stream -- the icing on the cake.

      If they had to, the top 1% could easily afford to entirely underwrite the cost of news programming that is entirely favorable to their wealth and hellfare. Although, it's more likely the bottom 99% would be compelled to foot the bill for that as well.

  •  Who Are You??? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PreciousLittle

    I'm serious as a heart attack...Who are you, MB?  I only ask because I enjoy your contributions to this place so much, yet I know absolutely nothing about you.  I know more about a dozen other Kossacks, easily.  Have you ever written anything close to a autobiographical diary?  Something expository about your background?  What made you into the person you are?  What formed your life?

    You are the most universally admired contributor here, IMHO, yet I know next to nothing about you as a person.  Perhaps you prefer it that way...I don't know...but I suspect that if I have asked myself this question, a thousand others have.  Unless they are just better at the google than I am, or care to be.

    I know this isn't the proper forum to pose the question...but I couldn't help myself.

    "By your late thirties the ground has begun to grow hard. It grows harder and harder until the day that it admits you.” Thomas McGuane, Nobody's Angel

    by Keith930 on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:21:32 PM PDT

  •  It will come back when IPCC5 is released next (0+ / 0-)

    year.

    The confidence levels will be significantly improved and the demonstrated agreement between warming, melting ice, severe weather, and the models will become stronger.

    But as you note, it doesn't matter what they think.  Like the Neapolitan Senators in 79AD, when the shit hits the fan, it will do no good to say "I guess I was wrong".

    The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

    by captainlaser on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:32:03 PM PDT

  •  It's ALL Part of the Plan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gallatin

    The Christian Dominionists WANT the Climate to
    Be Destroyed.

    The Sooner we Have Armegedon, the Sooner Baby
    Jeebus Comes Back.

    It MUST Be True. The Mythical Holy Book SAYS SO.

    The IDIOTS want to See Baby Jeebus Soooo Badly that
    Destroying the Planet becomes Irrelevant.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 06:39:10 PM PDT

  •  Partisan contrast is oddly hollow on climate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Meteor Blades

    Democrats tend to underplay the issue from timidity.

    Republicans take care of big money, for big money takes care of them ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Apr 17, 2012 at 07:29:33 PM PDT

  •  Alex Wagner lets GOP hack praise fracking... (0+ / 0-)

    ...don't recall his nam but he claimed the GOP are beating Obama on issues like fracking - and Alex just went into a weird spiel about Solyndra. She's kind of a twit savant.

  •  What is Going On (0+ / 0-)

    The Republicans are trying to gain total control of our government. Admitting the severity of the biggest problem now would unite Americans and Americans would also recognize they need to come together to solve another problem, the destruction of the government the forefathers of this country  put together by the Republicans. Some point after the election and after they have control of all media  is when the Republicans probably plan to start to recognize some of the most dangerous environmental destruction.

  •  Climate Change is really important. (0+ / 0-)

    Its really bad news that the media is paying less attention to the issue of climate change now.  Its also really bad news that too few of the people they are interviewing about it are scientists.  Climate Change is a really important issue.  It maybe one of the most important issues of our time.  Maybe I should spend a bit more time on it.  Even if the worst case scenario is reality and there's nothing we can do to undo the damage mankind has caused with carbon emissions, than we should at least be talking about how we can better cope with global warming.

  •  What's so hard to believe in all of this is (0+ / 0-)

    that there are oil companies lining up to start drilling in the arctic.  Obviously the oil companies know that global warming is occurring.  Just look at the articles.  When it comes to oil exploration everyone knows global warming is occurring.

    http://eyeonthearctic.rcinet.ca/...

    http://www.inquisitr.com/...

    http://www.bloomberg.com/...

    I can't even believe that the very same companies that are causing the arctic to melt are scrambling to find oil under that ice.

    If this doesn't wake everyone up, nothing will.

skybluewater, Bob Johnson, JekyllnHyde, Angie in WA State, TXdem, Emmet, Mogolori, Trendar, Geenius at Wrok, MarkC, mimi, RunawayRose, wytcld, Bob Love, Shockwave, SanJoseLady, eeff, willyr, Creosote, silence, Zinman, 714day, Agathena, shanikka, barath, chimpy, roses, oceanview, thea lake, navajo, Alna Dem, Redfire, kalmoth, JayDean, Steven D, lyvwyr101, vacantlook, demandcaring, rapala, marina, NoMoreLies, jrooth, OpherGopher, Rezkalla, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, jimstaro, McMeier, Burned, joeotter, coolbreeze, JanF, mightymouse, Land of Enchantment, jay23, CJnyc, Jim P, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, Milly Watt, mjfgates, Kingsmeg, 417els, profundo, tonyahky, koNko, KenBee, rhetoricus, Magnifico, sailmaker, Lefty Coaster, blueoasis, MJ via Chicago, A Siegel, Ashaman, shaharazade, CharlieHipHop, OHdog, subav8r, One Pissed Off Liberal, BeninSC, Dartagnan, dclawyer06, certainot, burlydee, Uwaine, jayden, jedennis, millwood, gchaucer2, JML9999, Michael91, bythesea, lineatus, VL Baker, jamess, TomFromNJ, petulans, doppler effect, ekyprogressive, gsenski, enemy of the people, DontTaseMeBro, bushondrugs, The Dead Man, LeftOfYou, Kaneblues, maryabein, WakeUpNeo, asym, Question Authority, Livvy5, citisven, Larsstephens, Railfan, SquirmyRooter, gramofsam1, netop, cai, ericlewis0, no way lack of brain, Bluefin, xgy2, implicate order, freesia, thomask, Ojibwa, BarackStarObama, EagleOfFreedom, PhilJD, blue aardvark, jolux, DRo, ChiTownDenny, ParkRanger, Mathazar, nominalize, hamm, Mindful Nature, Siri, Joieau, a2nite, Trotskyrepublican, Mike RinRI, PreciousLittle, doroma, Buckeye54, Brown Thrasher, tytalus, Vote4Obamain2012, katiec, blueoldlady, John Crapper, FresnoBill314, metalflake, RichHubie, libraboom, OjaiValleyCali, Smoh, MZ12

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site