an op-ed by Bill McKibben, author and founder of 350.org, narrated and illustrated by Stephen Thomson of Plomomedia.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-link-between-climate-change-and-jopl…
transcript of original article:
“Caution: It is vitally important not to make connections. When you see pictures of rubble like this week’s shots from Joplin, Mo., you should not wonder: Is this somehow related to the tornado outbreak three weeks ago in Tuscaloosa, Ala., or the enormous outbreak a couple of weeks before that (which, together, comprised the most active April for tornadoes in U.S. history). No, that doesn’t mean a thing.
It is far better to think of these as isolated, unpredictable, discrete events. It is not advisable to try to connect them in your mind with, say, the fires burning across Texas — fires that have burned more of America at this point this year than any wildfires have in previous years. Texas, and adjoining parts of Oklahoma and New Mexico, are drier than they’ve ever been — the drought is worse than that of the Dust Bowl. But do not wonder if they’re somehow connected.
If you did wonder, you see, you would also have to wonder about whether this year’s record snowfalls and rainfalls across the Midwest — resulting in record flooding along the Mississippi — could somehow be related. And then you might find your thoughts wandering to, oh, global warming, and to the fact that climatologists have been predicting for years that as we flood the atmosphere with carbon we will also start both drying and flooding the planet, since warm air holds more water vapor than cold air.
It’s far smarter to repeat to yourself the comforting mantra that no single weather event can ever be directly tied to climate change. There have been tornadoes before, and floods — that’s the important thing. Just be careful to make sure you don’t let yourself wonder why all these record-breaking events are happening in such proximity — that is, why there have been unprecedented megafloods in Australia, New Zealand and Pakistan in the past year. Why it’s just now that the Arctic has melted for the first time in thousands of years. No, better to focus on the immediate casualties, watch the videotape from the store cameras as the shelves are blown over. Look at the news anchorman standing in his waders in the rising river as the water approaches his chest.
Because if you asked yourself what it meant that the Amazon has just come through its second hundred-year drought in the past five years, or that the pine forests across the western part of this continent have been obliterated by a beetle in the past decade — well, you might have to ask other questions. Such as: Should President Obama really just have opened a huge swath of Wyoming to new coal mining? Should Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sign a permit this summer allowing a huge new pipeline to carry oil from the tar sands of Alberta? You might also have to ask yourself: Do we have a bigger problem than $4-a-gallon gasoline?
Better to join with the U.S. House of Representatives, which voted 240 to 184 this spring to defeat a resolution saying simply that “climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for public health and welfare.” Propose your own physics; ignore physics altogether. Just don’t start asking yourself whether there might be some relation among last year’s failed grain harvest from the Russian heat wave, and Queensland’s failed grain harvest from its record flood, and France’s and Germany’s current drought-related crop failures, and the death of the winter wheat crop in Texas, and the inability of Midwestern farmers to get corn planted in their sodden fields. Surely the record food prices are just freak outliers, not signs of anything systemic.
It’s very important to stay calm. If you got upset about any of this, you might forget how important it is not to disrupt the record profits of our fossil fuel companies. If worst ever did come to worst, it’s reassuring to remember what the U.S. Chamber of Commerce told the Environmental Protection Agency in a recent filing: that there’s no need to worry because “populations can acclimatize to warmer climates via a range of behavioral, physiological, and technological adaptations.” I’m pretty sure that’s what residents are telling themselves in Joplin today.”
A few fun facts about glaciers: 1) The past six years (2005–2010) have been the warmest period ever recorded in the Arctic. Higher surface air temperatures are driving changes in the cryosphere. 3) The extent and duration of snow cover and sea ice have decreased across the Arctic. Temperatures in the permafrost have risen by up to 2 °C. The southern limit of permafrost has moved northward in Russia and Canada. 7) The Arctic Ocean is projected to become nearly ice-free in summer within this century, likely within the next thirty to forty years. 12) Loss of ice and snow in the Arctic enhances climate warming by increasing absorption of the sun’s energy at the surface of the planet. It could also dramatically increase emissions of carbon dioxide and methane and change large-scale ocean currents. The combined outcome of these effects is not yet known.
An amazing look at the power of human proactivity. For more graphics, click here: An Illustrated Guide to the Science of Global Warming Impacts: How We Know Inaction Is the Gravest Threat Humanity Faces
Yes, CO2 can have benefits… http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2007/0603-can_carbon_dioxide_be_a_good_thing.htm But too much of anything is poisonous. For example, “The downside is that an excess of CO2 in ocean waters increases acidification and can kill marine organisms.” So there you go: do your research before you embarrass yourself on the entire internet with an ignorant protest sign.
(via Scientific Link Between Skepticism and Inaction Revealed: Or, Why Koch & Exxon Spread Climate Lies)
Like coffee and chocolate, beer is one of the common pleasures of life being damaged now by global warming. Good beer depends on water, barley, and hops — all of which are being disrupted by greenhouse pollution from burning fossil fuels.
Now. Not in 50 years, or 15. Now.
I’m so tired of living in a world where people pay more attention to their invisible friends than to basic overwhelming scientific evidence.
Inspirational:
the village of Wildpoldsried is producing 321% more energy than it needs! The small agricultural village in the state of Bavaria is generating an impressive $5.7 million in annual revenue from renewable energy.
Tear-jerker of the day.
(via Baby Harp Seals Being Drowned, Crushed Amid Melting Ice)
Hank explains the power of solar energy and describes how it may fit into our diversified energy future, by using brightly-colored graphics.
This map pinpoints some of the many examples of how the climate is changing and what that means for humanity.

We still eat way more meat than is good for us or the environment, not to mention the animals. But a 12 percent reduction in just five years is significant, and if that decline were to continue for the next five years — well, that’s something few would have imagined five years ago. It’s something only the industry could get upset about. The rest of us should celebrate.
Confidence Level & Projection (Worldwide through 2100)
“Virtually certain” globally; ”very likely” over land - Extreme temperatures: Increasingly frequent and intense heat waves and record warmth; decreases in extreme cold.
“Very likely” - Coastal flooding: Rises in the average sea level will contribute to more frequent bouts of “extreme high coastal water levels.”
“Likely” - Heavy precipitation: Frequency of heavy precipitation or the percentage of total rainfall coming from heavy rainfall will increase in many areas.
“Likely” - Stronger tropical cyclones (hurricanes, tropical storms, typhoons, etc.): Average maximum wind speed will increase, but the number of tropical cyclones will decrease or remain unchanged.
“High confidence” - Mountain weather: Heat waves, glacial retreat, and reduced permafrost will affect high mountain terrain, including landslides and floods from glacial lakes.
“Medium confidence” - Drought: More intense droughts in parts of Europe, the central U.S. through Mexico and Central America; northeast Brazil; and South Africa. Other areas are “low confidence.”
“Low confidence” - Severe thunderstorms: Tornadoes and hail are too small-scale and involve too many complexities for climate models to forecast confidently.
“Low confidence” - River flooding: Limited evidence and local complexities prevent a confident forecast of changes in flooding.
“Low confidence” - The various climate models do not agree about future changes in large-scale patterns such as El Nino or monsoon seasons.


must. reblog. infinitely.
I’m sure that will wash off eventually.
I masturbate however I like....
They know. Oh God, they know…
Is he now a Science Bros...
You don’t understand how bad I crave for this ship to be...
Joss Whedon totally just made science bros canon!