What's new
By:

The 2018 UN Climate Report

A million species of life are threatened with extinction worldwide. And this is how Trump responds. Doesn't surprise me at all, sadly. I agree with my mentor Tom Engelhardt, that history will judge this man guilty of crimes against humanity, for his position on climate change, and for the actions taken by his EPA. Now this, establishing himself as an enemy of life on Earth.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-act-trump-administration-protection-changes

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/8/12/20802132/endangered-species-act-trump-weakening

"In May, a United Nations panel on biodiversity released a massive, troubling report on the state of the world’s animals. The bottom line: As many as 1 million species are now at risk of extinction if we don’t act to save them.

Species of all kinds — mammals, birds, amphibians, insects, plants, marine life, terrestrial life — are disappearing at a rate “tens to hundreds of times higher than the average over the last 10 million years” due to human activity, the report stated. It implored the countries of the world to step up their actions to protect the wildlife that remains — like the endangered gray wolves and caribou that roam the United States, or the threatened polar bear in the Arctic.

The Trump administration has just done the opposite.

On Monday, the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced they were pushing through changes to the Endangered Species Act that will, in effect, weaken protections for species, and possibly give industry more leeway to develop areas where threatened animals live. A draft proposal of these rule changes was announced last summer. And now the rules go into effect in 30 days after they are officially published in the federal register (which the New York Times expects will happen this week)".
 
So, where temperature is concerned, extreme climate change has already reached large areas of the United States. Which is to say average temperatures have risen 2c or more since 1895. Although Alaska is our fastest warming state, my own home state has seen the greatest temperature rise in the lower 48, at about 2.5C higher since 1895. My home is also experiencing the greatest amount of sea level rise in that time frame.

If you run into a Washington Post paywall, you can read this in incognito mode with Chrome browser.

You can use a tool at the link to check if average temps have risen where you live...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/national/climate-environment/climate-change-america/

....global warming does not heat the world evenly.

A Washington Post analysis of more than a century of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration temperature data across the Lower 48 states and 3,107 counties has found that major areas are nearing or have already crossed the 2-degree Celsius mark.

— Today, more than 1 in 10 Americans — 34 million people — are living in rapidly heating regions, including New York City and Los Angeles. Seventy-one counties have already hit the 2-degree Celsius mark.

— Alaska is the fastest-warming state in the country, but Rhode Island is the first state in the Lower 48 whose average temperature rise has eclipsed 2 degrees Celsius. Other parts of the Northeast — New Jersey, Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts — trail close behind.

— While many people associate global warming with summer’s melting glaciers, forest fires and disastrous flooding, it is higher winter temperatures that have made New Jersey and nearby Rhode Island the fastest warming of the Lower 48 states.

hotstates-map-xxlarge.jpg
 
Last edited:
The 6 things you most need to know about Trump’s new climate plan
It could actually increase air pollution, and it’s a pretty bad deal.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/sc...12243/trump-epa-climate-plan-ace-cpp-6-things

EPA just couldn’t make the numbers work for it.

And so, as Lisa Friedman first reported for the New York Times, according to the EPA’s analysis, “the new rules could also lead to as many as 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 from an increase in the extremely fine particulate matter that is linked to heart and lung disease, up to 15,000 new cases of upper respiratory problems, a rise in bronchitis, and tens of thousands of missed school days.” (And the Resources for the Future analysis shows that those numbers are almost certainly conservative.)

Yes, the EPA is proposing a policy that it concedes will lead to 1,400 premature deaths, 48,000 new cases of “exacerbated asthma,” and at least 21,000 new missed days of school every year, through 2030. That should be fun to justify to a court.
 
The right wing populist wave is a threat to the climate:

https://news.google.com/articles/CA...AowlOzSATCaiDUwg7tz?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

The Amazon rainforest is on fire — and the consensus is that Brazil’s far-right populist leader, Jair Bolsonaro, is to blame.

Bolsonaro, who took office in January and has been referred to as “Captain Chainsaw,” gutted funding for agencies protecting the massive rainforest, essentially giving wink-and-nudge approval for illegal loggers to do their thing. Fire is used as a tool for clearing Amazon land for ranching, and the more trees are cut down, the more vulnerable the rainforest is to wildfires. There have been almost twice as many fires detected in 2019 so far as there were in the entirety of 2018.

It’s hard to overstate how threatening this policy is to the climate. The Amazon is the world’s largest rainforest: its trees scrub the Earth of a significant amount of CO2 and have captured a huge amount of carbon and methane within their branches and roots. If you lose the trees, a lot of greenhouse gases get released and it becomes harder to capture emissions from other sources. Continued fires and clear-cutting in the Amazon could cripple the fight against climate change.

All of this goes to underscore an important and poorly understood point: The wave of right-wing populism sweeping the world is not only dangerous for the countries who succumb to it, or even to immigrants wishing to move to those nations. It’s a fundamental threat to progress against climate change — and thus the entirety of the human race.
 
https://theintercept.com/2019/07/06...ndigenous-conservation-agribusiness-ranching/

"This is the fruit of a delayed but deepening dialogue between occidental science and Indigenous cultures. After decades of watching from the margins, Indigenous groups have moved close to the center of the ring at global environmental and conservation summits, in tandem with a wave of research that backs up their historical claims to being the forest’s most natural and effective protectors. Last November, an Amazonian delegation delivered a document — the “Bogota Declaration” — to the 14th U.N. Biodiversity Conference held in the Egyptian coastal city of Sharm el-Sheikh. It outlined a plan, devised by 400 ethic groups across the basin, to establish a “sacred corridor of life” of contiguous Indigenous territories reaching from the Andes to the Atlantic. Inside this 500-million-acre stretch of rainforest, Indigenous nations would pool their ancestral knowledge and showcase alternative modes of development and ways of living. The declaration described the proposal as “a first step to guaranteeing the existence of all forms of life on the Planet.”

patrol-04-1562185569-1024x683.jpg


This is the biggest story in the world today....

 
Last edited:
According to liberal environmentalist Martha's Vineyard is going to sink and not exists in 10 years, if this is true WHY would the Obamas buy a house located there? Some other person known for climate change just bought oceanfront property on the west coast. Can someone help me with who that was?
 
Never mind I found it...Al Gore west coast beachfront mansion, obama east coast beachfront mansion; that settles it . Climate change is OVER . Why else would they buy mansion on the beachfront knowing the seas are rising? By the way football season is starting, so I will be spending less time on here for a while.
 
jazzrule said:
According to liberal environmentalist Martha's Vineyard is going to sink and not exists in 10 years, if this is true WHY would the Obamas buy a house located there? Some other person known for climate change just bought oceanfront property on the west coast. Can someone help me with who that was?
Click to expand...

This is simply not true, not sure where you're getting that. MV has some good elevation to it. Unless the sea rises several hundred feet in 10 years, lol, MV is fine....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top