I think this article is several years too late
A Step-by-Step Guide to Fighting Climate Change. Step One: Get Pissed Off
When people ask what they can do personally to fight climate change, the advice they get is normally not all that great. Riding your bike, avoiding drinking straws, eating less meat, boiling water more efficiently or undertaking any number of personal lifestyle actions is unlikely on its own to lead to the massive and immediate economic changes scientists calculate are required to avoid catastrophe.
Notice how climate cultists are always being told to not practice what they preach?
But it doesn’t mean you’re powerless. VICE recently spoke with organizers and strategists associated with Occupy Wall Street, the Sunrise Movement, Extinction Rebellion, Indivisible and “The Squad”—comprised of congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley—who said you have more leverage and influence over our planet’s fate than you’re likely aware.
Here are five practical ways you can wield it.
2. Directly confront the people in power (in person, if possible)
We are living through what movement advisor and former Occupy Wall Street organizer Jonathan Smucker calls “a crisis of legitimacy.” Our political and economic system is so obviously failing—to the point where it’s destabilizing the foundation for all human life and leading to inequality not seen since the Great Depression—that vast numbers of people are losing faith in it.
So, wait, this is essentially telling climate cultists to get violent. Because that’s what happens.
5. Commit an act of nonviolent civil disobedience
Actions like the above apply gradual but steady force on elected officials. But with time rapidly ticking down on our climate emergency, more pressure may need to be brought to bear.
Well, good luck with that. These are leftists, and they are anything but non-violent. Of course, those who do not get violent cause those around them to get pissed off and dismissive of the Cult when they’re days, and property, are ruined.
Committing nonviolent civil resistance shouldn’t be taken lightly. It can carry the risk of serious jail time. Hallam advises that anyone planning an action do so openly and publicly (which can lead to a more welcoming culture for participants) and be polite with the police to reduce the odds of an aggressive crackdown.
These are the same people who despise police, so, it won’t work out well.
First, you could educate yourself in the basics of physics, gas laws, heat transfer, and chemistry; the history of climate on Earth, so that you could better understand the basis of the controversy.
Or, you can be an ignoramous and go to the leftist revolutionary groups plotting to overthrow the western way of life for answers. Such as Occupy Wall Street, the Sunrise Movement, Extinction Rebellion, Indivisible and “The Squadâ€.
Basic physics, gas laws, heat transfer, chemistry and climate history all support the theory that CO2 being added to the atmosphere is causing the Earth to warm.
You could be an ignoramus and go the alt-right groups like the Senate, the GOP, Heartland, the trump administration, and WUWT.
Actuall, the earth’s climate history doesn’t support that view. https://iceagenow.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Temperature-and-CO2-thru-time.gif
Jl: Actuall, the earth’s climate history doesn’t support that view. https://iceagenow.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Temperature-and-CO2-thru-time.gif
That argument only makes sense if you think that CO2 is supposed to be the only influence on climate. However, there are long stretches of time where CO2 and temperature track closely (EPICA Dome C ice core in Antarctica), which strongly suggests a causal link.
By the way, this brings up a problem facing scientists a century ago. They were aware of ice ages, and considered that orbital variations might be a cause. However, any plausible orbital variations were not sufficient to account for the seesawing of the Earth’s climate between ice ages and ice-free ages. However, they found that if you included positive forcings the effect could be explained.
An orbital variation causes a warming. The Earth’s ice and snow cover begins to melt, reducing the Earth’s albedo. At the same time, the warmer oceans can’t hold as much CO2, which ends up in the atmosphere, increasing the greenhouse effect. The warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor, further increasing the greenhouse effect. This continues until the Earth stabilizes at a higher temperature. This process works in reverse when an orbital variation causes a cooling. The positive feedback leads to the noted seesawing of Earth’s climate.
See See Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, London, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1896.
So we see Milankovitch cycles and the oceans play a much larger role than CO2, so it’s not a primary driver. CO2 and temp don’t match during the recent Holocene, either. http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/gisp220temperaturesince1070020bp20with20co220from20epica20domec1.gif
Jl: So we see Milankovitch cycles and the oceans play a much larger role than CO2
Orbital cycles certainly play a role, as already noted, but they are not sufficient to account for the depth of the climate cycle without positive feedbacks.
Jl: http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/gisp220temperaturesince1070020bp20with20co220from20epica20domec1.gif
Again, that argument only makes sense if you think that CO2 is supposed to be the only influence on climate. We noted the correlation of CO2 and temperature over the last million years. Do you think this correlation is coincidence? Take another look.
We also noted the correlation over the last 500 million yrs, where there is no correlation. Or over the Holocene, where there is no correlation. In your earlier example, “orbital variation causes warming, earth’s albedo lessens, and the warm oceans out-gas CO2,,which ends up in the atmosphere….â€. Yes, and in that example CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around. There have been several papers on that.
Jl: We also noted the correlation over the last 500 million yrs, where there is no correlation.
That’s because when there are multiple influences on climate, correlations may not be readily apparent. To determine that, you have to look at all the various mechanisms involved.
Jl: Yes, and in that example CO2 follows temperature, not the other way around.
Some lag is expected as CO2 works as both cause and effect, a positive feedback. The Earth warms from whatever cause (e.g. orbital variations), the oceans being to emit CO2, which causes further warming. While temperatures ramp up, CO2 will tend to follow, but will then stabilize at a higher level along with temperature when the system reaches its new equilibrium.
So, why is there an apparent and very strong correlation over the last million years?
No, it doesn’t. Basic physics tells us the exact opposite.
PS Tell your sock puppet you can tap dance all you want. It’s still a crock.
formwiz: Basic physics tells us the exact opposite.
We’re always happy to learn. The Earth can be modeled closely as a rotating sphere bathed in the energy of the sun. If we calculate the black body radiation of the Earth, we find it to have a temperature of about -18°C. But the actual surface temperature of the Earth is about +15°C. What accounts for the discrepancy?
“So why a correlation over the last million yrs?†So why no correlation over the last 500 million yrs? Or why isn’t there during the Holocene? And the CO2 following temps is of course the direct opposite of what we’ve been told. CO2 seems to act more like a dependent variable than a driver.
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/gisp220temperaturesince1070020bp20with20co220from20epica20domec1.gif
Jl: So why no correlation over the last 500 million yrs? Or why isn’t there during the Holocene?
Already answered. Because there are other influences on climate besides CO2.
Jl: And the CO2 following temps is of course the direct opposite of what we’ve been told.
Already answered. Some lag is expected as CO2 works as both cause and effect, a positive feedback.
So, try to answer our question. So, why is there an apparent and very strong correlation over the last million years?
TEACH typed: “this is essentially telling climate cultists to get violent.”
Challenging elected officials is “getting violent”?
And civil disobedience can be an effective method for a majority to shake loose minority rule. Bit as the author pointed out, civil disobedience carries risk. In India, the British massacred thousands of Indians for disobedience. Today, the world is watching how China reacts to the civil disobedience in Hong Kong. Here, the inherently violent right-wingers would welcome trump’s encouragement.
No, but you lie again.
Teach wasn’t talking about confronting anyone. He was talking about how committing acts of nonviolent civil disobedience very often turn into violent acts of civil disobedience, the way it happened during ‘Nam.
Not only do you lie, you try to ignore the issue.
As always.
Teach/you were referring to Step 2, did you forget?
Directly confront the people in power (in person, if possible)
You/Teach might try reading the original post.
No, I didn’t.
You lie and lie again.
Well, of course the article is right! We can see, on this fine site, when a conservative has told everyone here what he, personally, has done, we see not the first bit of a response from Mr Dowd telling us what actions he has taken.
The left won’t show us that they take their arguments seriously.
The leftists on this site won’t even say which of the two dozen assorted idiots they’re voting for. Must be a real big secret or they haven’t been told yet by their handlers.
But you’ll most likely die of old age before any of the resident leftists make any effort to “do their part” to save Gaia.