Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

thomhartmann

(3,979 posts)
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 05:12 PM Oct 2012

Thom Hartmann: We're all going to die and no-one's talking about it



The Human Race may very well die out - and no one is talking about it. The fact that we've now gone through three Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates - and not once has global climate change been brought up - should be, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, an "Alarm bell in the night" for all of us. Especially because this last September was the hottest September ever recorded in the civilized history of the human race. Not only that - this last September produced the smallest amount of Arctic ice ever recorded in the civilized history of the human race.

Our planet is rapidly changing - scientists across the world are freaking out - farmers are getting hysterical and, in many countries, committing suicide in mass numbers - and yet our two Presidential candidates are fighting about who's going to pump more carbon pollution into the atmosphere: That would have been the perfect time for Candy Crowley to chime in an say - "Hey, guys what about the climate change crisis that's being worsened by all of this drilling?" But she didn't - and then Romney bashed the President over not approving the Keystone XL pipeline...Actually the President DID approve the Keystone pipeline - at least a large portion of it - and he'll likely approve the rest if he wins a second term.

Right now - Members of the Tar Sands Blockade are camped out in East Texas, engaging in civil disobedience to stop Transcanada’s bulldozers from clearing trees to make room for that very same Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline that Romney said the President blocked IS being built - and TransCanada - a foreign corporation - will make huge profits by having it run toxic tar-sands-oil across our nation - leaving us with danger of spills, aquafer contamination, and the asthma- and cancer-inducing pollution from refining that stuff. Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges called the Keystone pipeline, “part of the final phase of extreme exploitation by the corporate state.”

And climate scientists James Hansen warned that completion of the pipeline would be, “game over for the climate.” And yet - in the debate - we have Mitt Romney criticizing the President for not building it...while the President is building it. Which raises the very reasonable question - "Are these guys really that out of touch with what's going on with the planet?" Tragically, the answer is, "No - they're just scared as hell of big oil - and the power big oil has this election thanks to the Supreme Court."

Since Citizens United trashed any limits on corporate spending this election - big oil has moved to spend huge amounts of money promoting their industry and taking down any politicians who don't tow the line. As the New York Times reports - coal and oil interest groups have spent more than $150 million on nearly 140 different ads that have run tens of thousands of times this election year promoting their interests and criticizing the President's clean energy agenda. Big Coal and Big Oil have spent four times as much money this election as have clean-energy advocates. So Barack Obama and Mitt Romney know that if they say one bad word about coal or oil - then they're going to be hit with an avalanche of big oil spending.

Heck - President Obama already is getting hit, even though he's increased domestic oil production each year he's been in office. And bringing up climate change? Forget about it! That's political suicide in the post-Citizens United era since the Supreme Court has said that corporations can use unlimited funds to punish politicians. So that's why the elephant in the room - climate change - is being ignored in these debates. The Supreme Court has created a political climate in the United States where increasingly we're seeing an unmistakably changing planet that will render farm lands in the American midwest sterile - submerge coastal cities under water - and turn forests into wildfire traps.

Thanks to its Citizens United ruling - five right-wing corporate-sponsored justices on the Supreme Court are responsible for the destruction of our planet. And the only way we can reach a tipping point of elected lawmakers to talk about climate change and actually pass legislation to do something about it - is to end the insanity of that Citizens United ruling that said that corporations are people and money is speech. The fact is that corporations are not people - and money is property, not speech. And to stop the Supreme Court, we need to amend our Constitution to simply and plainly say so. Go to Move to Amend.org to get involved.

The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thom Hartmann: We're all going to die and no-one's talking about it (Original Post) thomhartmann Oct 2012 OP
Americans are starting petitions to reverse big money's Citizens United by US Constitutional DhhD Oct 2012 #1
yeah? heaven05 Oct 2012 #2
well at least we all die together Heather MC Oct 2012 #3
yep heaven05 Oct 2012 #6
I think they are spending their money to find a new planet earth to ruin Heather MC Oct 2012 #7
I heaven05 Oct 2012 #10
They would be overrun! Dustlawyer Oct 2012 #8
No. Just. Fucking. No. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #13
if you say so heaven05 Oct 2012 #15
As Al Gore has pointed out over and over, we have the resources to solve several climate crises bananas Oct 2012 #23
The Full Solution to Global Warming: Stabilizing at 450 ppm has a net cost near zero. bananas Oct 2012 #24
yep...no turning back now FirstLight Oct 2012 #4
No turning back? Says who? AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #14
I've been aware of ecological problems for 38 years They_Live Oct 2012 #5
I have been an avid salt water fisherman since I was old enough to hold a rod. Not only have Dustlawyer Oct 2012 #9
neither heaven05 Oct 2012 #11
But you know the trick: Jeebus will come back from his 2000-years hiding and... Amonester Oct 2012 #16
but, but heaven05 Oct 2012 #17
I liked most of what you said, but dammit...... AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #12
The earth has gone through many mass extinctions. Humans may survive but not in the current numbers. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #18
True on both counts. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #19
Actually, we are up against people who actually believe the earth was created by God for us,.... Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #20
Ta-da! That's exactly it. Too late now anyway. Amonester Oct 2012 #21
This is the first time in decades when a majority of voters don't have kids. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2012 #22

DhhD

(4,695 posts)
1. Americans are starting petitions to reverse big money's Citizens United by US Constitutional
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 05:27 PM
Oct 2012

Amendment. There are petitions being signed. One is on Texas Group DU.

info@texansunitedtoadmend.org


 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
2. yeah?
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 05:49 PM
Oct 2012

Not a damn thing we can do about it. THE TIPPING POINT HAS ALREADY BEEN BREACHED/REACHED. Oh the PTB's will put out statistics saying it's all 'much ado about nothing'. Yet when the methane finishes with the human race, there will only be a remnant left if that. So put your head between your legs and kiss it goodbye, Adios.

 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
6. yep
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 06:56 PM
Oct 2012

I take small solace in the fact that people who truly knew this would happen, but chose profit over the human race will die also. Although the richies will probably build bubbles over their enclaves with oxygen generators run by gasoline and will be laughing as we all die out in the real world. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we.........

 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
10. I
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 08:01 PM
Oct 2012

postulated that theory a couple of weeks ago and was roundly criticized as misanthropic. So expect it. Not from me, I concur one hundred percent. They, the richies, are looking for another planet to destroy. No doubt about.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
13. No. Just. Fucking. No.
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 10:24 PM
Oct 2012

Last edited Fri Oct 19, 2012, 12:51 AM - Edit history (1)

C'mon man, are you serious? It's defeatism at work!

And believe me, I know for a fact the PTB would love us to believe one of two things; it's either that nothing's wrong, or that we're all going to go extinct.They don't care which one, as long as people are convinced that this problem can't be dealt with, and that's exactly what both extremes lead to. And that's a fact, Jack.

And you know what? Guess who else says climate change can't be stopped? None other than Christopher Booker, a skeptic:


"The fact is that there is no one in the world who can explain how we could cut our emissions by four fifths without shutting down virtually all our existing economy. What carries this even further into the higher realms of lunacy is that such a Quixotic gesture would do nothing to halt the world’s fast-rising CO2 emissions, already up 40 per cent since 1990. There is no way for us to prevent the world’s CO2 emissions from doubling by 2100"


http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-too-hard.htm

The sad thing is, if enough people start believing this baloney, then we are in real trouble. It's already hard enough fighting off Big Energy agitprop as it is; our job is made all that much tougher when bullshit like this gets out, because guess what? They can spin plenty of yarns with that wool, and people will lap it all up.

I'm sorry if it seems harsh, but that is the reality of how things are.
 

heaven05

(18,124 posts)
15. if you say so
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 12:01 AM
Oct 2012

I just don't believe that the planet can continue to be assaulted by our carbon imprint and survive. You can be skeptical as much as pleases you. Tell all this that you're telling me to the living creatures being destroyed by the massive ice melt because of co2. All rational models empirically arrived at are saying the same thing. The planet is suffering and only with a drastic reduction in fossil fuel use can we even hope to have a chance. Not defeatist, that's not it. Realistic is how I judge myself. Hey I hope you're right. Jack. If I'm missing your solution to the problem being discussed here, tell me. If we have the technology to halt global warming and massive climate change with a proven real danger, why are we not using it? The kock brothers won't allow it, is that it. Well, I'll see what you are saying in twenty years. I went to the link mentioned no solution except the alleged technology to stop global warming.

bananas

(27,509 posts)
23. As Al Gore has pointed out over and over, we have the resources to solve several climate crises
Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:37 AM
Oct 2012

and we only have to solve one.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2009/11/04/al-gore-advocates-for-gender-equality-political-action-to-slow-climate-change/

Al Gore advocates for gender equality, political action to slow climate change

By Katherine Harmon | November 4, 2009

Slowing climate change is neither inevitable nor impossible, former Vice President Al Gore said in a speech Tuesday night in New York City. Gore, who was launching his new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis, said that he has "absolute conviction that we have all the tools to solve (several) climate crises."

In that light, one climate in peril may not sound like such a tall order, the Nobel Peace Prize (and Oscar and Grammy) winner may hope. But with a myriad of gonzo geoengineering schemes in the air—and on the airwaves—and recent right-wing flack for touting solutions that he has financial interest in, Gore and his book may face a stiff challenge. The sold-out crowd at the American Museum of Natural History, however, applauded his work—tough topics and all—at length.

<snip>


bananas

(27,509 posts)
24. The Full Solution to Global Warming: Stabilizing at 450 ppm has a net cost near zero.
Sat Oct 20, 2012, 08:50 AM
Oct 2012

"Stabilizing at 450 ppm has a net cost near zero."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/01/10/207320/the-full-global-warming-solution-how-the-world-can-stabilize-at-350-to-450-ppm/

The full global warming solution: How the world can stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm

By Joe Romm on Jan 10, 2011

In this post I will lay out ‘the solution’ to global warming.

This post is an update of a 2008 analysis I revised in 2009. A report by the International Energy Agency came to almost exactly the same conclusion as I did, and has relatively similar wedges, so I view that as a vindication of this overall analysis.

Stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide at 450 ppm or lower is not politically possible today — not even close — but is certainly achievable from an economic and technological perspective, as I and others have said for years.

<snip>

I also agree with McKinsey Global Institute’s 2008 Research in Review: Stabilizing at 450 ppm has a net cost near zero. For a longer discussion on cost, see “Introduction to climate economics: Why even strong climate action has such a low total cost.”

<snip>

Also, I tend to view the crucial next four decades in two phases. In the first phase 1, which I now expect begins circa 2020, the world finally gets serious about avoiding catastrophic global warming impacts (i.e. Hell and High Water). We increasingly embrace a rising price for carbon dioxide and a very aggressive technology deployment effort.

In phase 2, 2030 to 2050, after countless climate Pearl Harbors and the inevitable collapse of the Ponzi scheme we call the global economy, the world gets truly desperate, and actions that are not plausible today “” including widespread conservation “” become commonplace (see “Veterans Day, 2030” for a description of what that collapse might look like).

<snip>

This is what the entire planet must achieve:

1 wedge of albedo change through white roofs and pavement (aka “soft geoengineering) “” see “Geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation, Part 2: White roofs are the trillion-dollar solution“
1 wedge of vehicle efficiency “” all cars 60 mpg, with no increase in miles traveled per vehicle.
1 of wind for power “” one million large (2 MW peak) wind turbines
1 of wind for vehicles -another 2000 GW wind. Most cars must be plug-in hybrids or pure electric vehicles.
3 of concentrated solar thermal (aka solar baseload)- ~5000 GW peak.
3 of efficiency “” one each for buildings, industry, and cogeneration/heat-recovery for a total of 15 to 20 million GW-hrs. A key strategy for reducing direct fossil fuel use for heating buildings (while also reducing air conditioning energy) is geothermal heat pumps.
1 of solar photovoltaics “” 2000 GW peak
1 wedge of nuclear power – 700 GW
2 of forestry “” End all tropical deforestation. Plant new trees over an area the size of the continental U.S.
1 wedge of WWII-style conservation, post-2030 [this could well include dietary changes]

Here are additional wedges that require some major advances in applied research to be practical and scalable, but are considered plausible by serious analysts, especially post-2030:

1 of geothermal plus ocean-based renewables (i.e. tidal, wave, and/or ocean thermal)
1 of coal with biomass cofiring plus carbon capture and storage “” 400 GW of coal plus 200 GW biomass with CCS
1/2 to 1 wedge of cellulosic biofuels for long-distance transport and what little aviation remains in 2050 “” using 8% of the world’s cropland [or less land if yields significantly increase or algae-to-biofuels proves commercial at large scale].
1 of soils and/or biochar- Apply improved agricultural practices to all existing croplands and/or “charcoal created by pyrolysis of biomass.” Both are controversial today, but may prove scalable strategies.

That should do the trick. And yes, the scale is staggering.

<snip>

Note to all: I am not proposing to build all those nuclear plants nor do I think we would need to — but with CCS becoming less plausible for delivering a wedge, let alone more, nuclear may take up some of the slack. Also, I do think we will have to swallow a bunch of nuclear plants as part of the grand bargain to make this all possible and that other countries will build most of these.

<snip>

FirstLight

(13,360 posts)
4. yep...no turning back now
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 06:20 PM
Oct 2012

just keep drilling and burning those fossil fuels like there's no tomorrow...oh, sorry...

the Oil Co's are Global and have more money than some mid-size countries... what makes anyone think they can be stopped?
Our only hope is really for something big, like an EMP or something to just grind the gears of technology and oil burning to a halt...of course that's a scarier scenario... at least as global warming happens, even though coming faster than expected, we may have a shot at 'adapting'

but ya, we may have a good 20 yrs left, but the new 'normal' will be unlike anything we have ever seen. And I personally think all bets are off, it can happen faster than any of the models can relate...

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
14. No turning back? Says who?
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 10:26 PM
Oct 2012

Guess who else has a similar opinion?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-too-hard.htm


"The fact is that there is no one in the world who can explain how we could cut our emissions by four fifths without shutting down virtually all our existing economy. What carries this even further into the higher realms of lunacy is that such a Quixotic gesture would do nothing to halt the world’s fast-rising CO2 emissions, already up 40 per cent since 1990. There is no way for us to prevent the world’s CO2 emissions from doubling by 2100"

This quote, btw, is from none other than Christopher Booker, one of the so-called 'skeptics'.

Please, wake up. This kind of crap isn't helping. AT ALL.

They_Live

(3,233 posts)
5. I've been aware of ecological problems for 38 years
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 06:55 PM
Oct 2012

or since I was 10. Nobody cared and brushed off those crazy hippies. The majority of people won't panic until their electricity goes out for good and they can't watch TV or surf the internet anymore, or when gas is suddenly $50 a gallon.

Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
9. I have been an avid salt water fisherman since I was old enough to hold a rod. Not only have
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 07:26 PM
Oct 2012

I witnessed a dramatic decrease in the numbers of fish, I have watched the warnings develop over how much of them you could eat in a month. That caused me to read a lot about the sea and learn as much as I can. The most precarious situation that faces us is actually the phytoplankton. The phytoplankton produces about 80% of the world's oxygen. The growing acidity of the oceans is not just killing all of the world's coral reefs, it is starting to affect the phytoplankton. If it suddenly dies, it's lights out. We are killing ourselves in so many ways. For all of our accomplishments, it will be ironic that we will kill ourselves through our inability to get along. Our constant desire to segregate ourselves by race, sex, national origin, religion, politics, and countless other ways, prevents us from working together to save ourselves. It is not like the movies where we build a giant spaceship or Ark that will preserve our species (at least that I know about). If there is, I know I will not be invited (I am a lawyer). Lol

Amonester

(11,541 posts)
16. But you know the trick: Jeebus will come back from his 2000-years hiding and...
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 04:30 AM
Oct 2012

Rapture!

In the meantime: Casino Ca$h-ing (adelson & co)



Had to edit to add the /sarcasm icon.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
12. I liked most of what you said, but dammit......
Thu Oct 18, 2012, 10:13 PM
Oct 2012

Last edited Thu Oct 18, 2012, 11:13 PM - Edit history (1)

....will some people PLEASE, for the love of all that is good and dear, including our planet, stop saying that Humanity is going to go extinct?!?!?

Listen, Thom, I know climate change is a very serious problem(believe me when I say this!), but I have to be bluntly honest, and point out this kind of stuff seriously isn't helping us getting the message out. Not only is it making us look bad, and is turning people away, but this is actually giving ammo to WattsUpWithThat and other deniers & anti-AGW 'skeptics', and their enablers(Exxon, the Kochs, etc.) all across the world to fuel their twist & spin. Here's just one example:

http://pgosselin.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/die-welt-earth-could-become-like-venus-875%C2%B0f/

This is what we have to face nowadays, and sadly, this type of "Chicken Little" stuff is part of the reason why.

Thom, if nothing else, let me speak from personal experience: I used to be a skeptic, some years ago. And this is exactly the kind of thing that made me turn away from reality(and I am as far from being alone as one can get), and it was thanks to people like Peter Sinclair(he's on DU too, btw), and SkepticalScience that I did finally wake up to the truth as it stands.

I'm sorry if I came across as being a bit angry but believe me, if I didn't know and care so much about this problem, I wouldn't be saying all this right now.

I hope you can understand where I'm coming from.

-A Concerned Listener.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
19. True on both counts.
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:41 PM
Oct 2012

My only problem is, if we focus too much on the absolute worst-case scenarios, it'll cause many to stick their heads in the sand and we don't need that right now.

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
20. Actually, we are up against people who actually believe the earth was created by God for us,....
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 09:59 PM
Oct 2012

...and we should do whatever we want with it and they say it is the height of arrogance to think anything we do could have an effect on God's creation. Keep in mind that before the right-wing took over the church they used to say we had a responsibility to preserve God's beautiful creation. Ministers used to march with environmentalists. Now they claim environmentalists are anti-capitalist which is anti-American which is godless communism....

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
22. This is the first time in decades when a majority of voters don't have kids.
Fri Oct 19, 2012, 10:51 PM
Oct 2012

And Republicans want to get rid of birth control.

They are so tone deaf.

It's no wonder they aren't known for their music...

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Thom Hartmann: We're all ...