Just a few months ago, there was barely any mention of climate change at all. But now, after Sandy, the media is finally starting to really focus on the issue again. I honestly don't know whether it was thanks to massive popular outcry, or simply because of the hurricane's effect on New York, or perhaps both, but it's clear to me that something has changed. Let's keep the pressure up so they don't let this slip, eh?

That's different!

They really don't want to be living in Omaha, or Springfield, or even Chicago or Atlanta.

Wow - CBS went Jimmy Buffet on us

Sandy occurring during the end of the election season was the capper with Mitt's talk about privatizing FEMA.

Prior to that we had science and medicine-denying Republicans talking about women as god's brood mares.

Prior to that we had years of right wing reality-denying birthers and all that b.s.

Prior to that, and continuing, we had right wingers claiming homosexuality was a sin and could be cured and, therefore, homosexuals should be treated as second-class citizens.

This election also noted that a voting demographic as large as the youth vote, and growing, that is not religious and does not want to hear pseudo-science for the plutocrats on supposed news programs.

We do still have a ways to go, sadly, but I am personally very heartened to see a large number of people talking about climate change at the same time.

Of course, I betcha most of the Teabaggers will just stick their fingers further into their ears and saying, "Lalalala, I can't hear you!", and such.

when they cease to have the highest CO2 emmisions per capita of all developed nations.

what good is it going to do?

If the U.S. takes the lead, so will many other countries. This happened in the '90s when CFCs were eliminated, so I don't see how the same couldn't happen for emissions, as well.

the US has the worst record since the fifties : I guess the others are just catching you up.

And since you raised the subject China's per capita figure is less than a third of the USA's and Russia just over a half. India is less than a tenth.

resources.... and the U.S. military is the single greatest polluting entity on the planet. Makes me so proud..... not.

but the last one I'm not sure about. I think the ship has sailed in terms of reversing what's been done. The planet is going to get worse...much worse. There's little hope.

decline, but we can at least, do something about the Co2. The question we should be asking ourselves is "when?". Unfortunately, I think we both can agree that the longer we wait,the worse it does get.

It seems I was wrong. I was laying odds on at east two more Sandys before this shit got real for Americans.

http://www.desmogblog.com/conversion-fever-why-media-adores-former-climate-skeptics
“At this rate, Muller should be caught up to the current state of climate science within a matter of just a few years!” climatologist Michael Mann tweeted. Climate scientist Ken Caldeira also had an amusing take, as quoted by Joe Romm: “I am glad that Muller et al have taken a look at the data and have come to essentially the same conclusion that nearly everyone else had come to more than a decade ago.”

CBSNews just had to find a Koch Fucker to interview cuz that makes it better entertainment.

Maybe someday they will do a serious news article.

Guy McPherson and Malcolm Light on the other hand? They may not be covert shills, but they're still very bad news.

don't believe in Climate change is this.

If we can create energy using wind, solar and bio-fuels that is cleaner and less harmful to humans and the earth, then isn't that the more responsible thing to do? Why do you recycle? Because it saves room in landfills and it's the responsible thing to do right. Do you like the smell of diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, tar & coal? No, who does. Then why not fuel our homes and vehicles with hydrogen, natural gas and bio-fuels. You don't have to agree with global warming, but you can at least agree that there is smarter, more responsible and efficient ways that we can create energy. Plain and simple. The huge bonus is, cleaner air and we all like bright blue skies & fresh clean air.

I said "may have" because we need more data before we go off half cocked and spend a fortune on a natural gas infrastructure (expensive) that we should be spending on PV or wind etc. We should probably be working on a smart grid.

6 minutes
Robert Howarth and Larry Cathles, both scientists from Cornell University, stand divided over the size of methane emissions from natural gas wells and how those emissions effect global climate change.

This is long... Howarth presents his data 70 minutes

Robert W. Howarth, Professor of Ecology & Environmental Biology from Cornell University speaks at SoMAS on Friday, November 9, 2012. Host: Bob Aller
"The Sustainable Energy Dilemma"

Don't care about anything except the profit margins.

The oil companies, coal companies, etc. fund a bunch of advocacy research to muddy the waters, like Phillip Morris funds research to "debunk" claims that smoking causes cancer.

but who actually invest and even work for the biggest deniers of all.

After all, who doesn't like clean air, clear blue skies and fresh water?

Just sayin'

They concede that it exists and, just as important, that it is caused by humans. Now, the issue is what to do about it. I totally get that they may (o.k., will) try to exploit the situation, like T. Boone Pickens pushing natural gas. And it was creepy hearing that Koch stooge Richard Muller in the video suggesting natural gas and nuclear energy, along with wind and solar, as solutions.

invited the vampire into the house to admit the science from back then is right? These profiteers disgust me. Not only are they endangering innocents, but now the whole planet stands to be altered forever.

I mean, not just the global warming, but air & water pollution is still an issue too.

And have you ever seen any of those mega projects over in Dubai, btw? Holy shit.