Tag Archives: Climate change

environmental news, national news

Trump finds religion on climate change?

rtr_al_gore_jc_150813_16x9_992

I thought Donald J. Trump called the issue of climate change a “hoax” promoted by China as a way to harm U.S. industries.

Isn’t that what he said while campaigning for president of the United States?

OK. He did say that.

Why, then, did he and his daughter Ivanka meet with former Vice President Al Gore today? Gore’s signature issue is — yep — climate change. He’s written books about it. He has delivered countless lectures about how he believes human beings have contributed greatly the changing climate around the world. He won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on the subject.

Gore also has taken more than his share of ridicule from political conservatives who debunk the notion he puts forth and which has been supported by the vast majority of scientists worldwide.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2016/12/al-gore-trump-meeting-232203

Gore was quite circumspect when talking to reporters after the meeting. He revealed next to nothing about what they discussed.

My guess? Gore talked to the president-elect about climate change and sought to persuade him that it is far from a hoax.

environmental news, national news, religious news

Why not debate climate change in public schools?

books

As a believer in the view that human beings are contributing to Earth’s changing climate, it causes me some pain to say the following.

I believe the Portland Public Schools system has made a mistake in banning texts that question the causes of climate change.

Oregon’s largest public school district has issued a directive that bans texts that cast doubt on what many scientists have said: that human activity has created a global warming crisis that threatens the planet’s ecosystem.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-05-20/portland-public-schools-ban-educational-materials-denying-climate-change?src=usn_fb

I grew up in suburban Portland, Ore., so this decision strikes me close to my heart. I attended Portland schools until the seventh grade; my parents moved us to the ‘burbs in East Multnomah County in 1962.

I have long feared that human activity — deforestation and the emission of carbon gases into the atmosphere — have contributed to the changing climate. Did you see the latest report that said April was the 12th consecutive month of record temperatures worldwide?

That doesn’t mean, though, that we cannot allow our students access to those who doubt the results of such activity.

This isn’t even close to the same thing as teaching the biblical version of Earth’s creation alongside Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory. One theory is based on a faith-based belief; the other is based on science. Teach the scientific theory in public schools and teach other in church.

Climate change and its causes, though, seems to be fair game for an open discussion in our public schools.

The Portland school system has slammed the door on those who have raised legitimate concerns about the notion that Earth’s climate is changing and that humans are the primary cause of that change.

Do I accept those concerns? No. That doesn’t mean they’re coming from crackpots.

The students would do well to be exposed to competing ideas on this important global issue.

 

national news, political news

Memo to Trump: Abortion is not an ‘off the cuff’ issue

trump

Here comes the defense of Donald J. Trump’s hideous declaration on national TV this week that women should be “punished” if they obtain an illegal abortion.

He was speaking “off the cuff” during a town hall meeting that was televised by MSNBC. That’s what the Republican presidential campaign frontrunner’s spokeswoman told Fox News.

Many of us heard Trump make the statement under intense questioning from Chris Matthews. We also heard about his immediate reversal.

Trump needs to understand something if he has a prayer of avoiding a complete implosion of his presidential candidacy.

It is that there are a number of issues that require deep thought and nuance when the candidate is pressed to discuss them.

They include, oh: nuclear proliferation, climate change, immigration reform, health care reform and, yes, abortion.

I’m sure others are out there, too.

Trump’s flack, Katrina Pierson, told the Fox News Channel, “Well I say when you are a political candidate for eight months, you are speaking off the cuff. That’s one of his appeals, that he’s not a scripted politician.“

What is so wrong with thoughtfulness?

Scripted pols learn that their words matter. Unscripted pols need to get that, too. When the subject turns to abortion — an issue that gets zealots on both sides of the divide worked up into a frothing frenzy — then those words matter a great deal.

Trump hasn’t gotten it. He likely never will get it. He’ll keep on speaking “off the cuff” on issues that require some study, soul-searching and a comprehensive understanding.

Pierson is right about Trump’s “appeal” to those who keep laughing off this stuff.

It’s not funny.

 

national news, political news

Sen. Graham shows what’s wrong with GOP

graham_ap_328

Don’t get me wrong.

Sen. Lindsey Graham — himself — is not what is wrong with today’s Republican Party. The South Carolinian’s departure this week from the 2016 presidential race illustrates what’s so troubling about others within the GOP.

Graham represents what — for the time being — appears to be a dying breed of Republican. He’s one of those individuals who works with Democrats, not against ’em.

His reputation, thus, has become of one what hardcore Republicans call RINO, a Republican In Name Only.

Graham isn’t a RINO. The label is undeserved, except for the fact that he has many friends on the other side of the Senate chamber, which I guess has become something of a kiss of death these days among the Republican Party “base.”

He became quite critical during his presidential campaign of much of the rhetoric coming from his fellow candidates. Remember when he called Donald Trump a “jackass”? He became one of the first targets that Trump singled out, reciting Graham’s cell phone number aloud at a public event.

Graham, though, had the bad form — in the eyes of his GOP base — to work with Democrats on such issues as climate change, immigration reform and tax reform. It didn’t matter that the former Air Force lawyer has been a staunch advocate for a strong defense and that he has been at the forefront of calling for more — and pardon my use of the euphemism that I detest — “boots on the ground” in the fight against Islamic terrorists.

Perhaps it was Graham’s vote against articles of impeachment against President Clinton in 1998 — as a member of the House Judiciary Committee — that sealed the deal for the GOP base.

Whatever, this faithful Republican is now out of the presidential race because he isn’t hardcore enough to suit the red-meat Republicans who still see Democrats as “enemies” and not more “opponents.”

That’s too bad.

For Graham and for his Republican Party.

 

 

 

environmental news

Why is cutting carbon emissions so bad?

banner_emissions

President Barack Obama is singing high praise for the worldwide climate deal brokered in Paris this past week.

No surprise there, right? The president believes, as many of us out here do — me included — that human activity has contributed to the worsening of our worldwide environment.

However, you know what? I’m not going to debate that point. Skeptics of the climate change crisis have their minds made up; those of us on the other side have made up our minds, too.

So, we’ll go on with the rest of the discussion.

The agreement calls for reducing carbon emissions, those pollutants that come from fossil fuels. They increase carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and create a gradual warming of the atmosphere.

Beyond that, though, why is it a bad thing — as some interested parties contend — to cut those fossil fuel emissions.

This deal, they say, is “no better” than the Kyoto Protocol worked out during the Clinton administration in 1997. It never was ratified by Congress. President George W. Bush, Bill Clinton’s successor, said the agreement would cost American jobs and would give emerging powers — such as China and India — a free pass.

I keep coming back to the notion, though, that reductions in these emissions — which are indisputably harmful to Earth’s ecosystem — will produce a net positive impact on the future of the planet.

We can conserve those fossil fuels, which are a finite resource. We can invest in alternative energy sources, such as wind, solar and — yes! — nuclear power.

As Politico reports as well, there was some water down of the language in the agreement, which initially stipulated that developed nations “shall” cut those greenhouse gases; Secretary of State John Kerry got the conferees to change that language to “should” with the hope it would stand a better chance of being ratified by the Republican-controlled Congress.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/paris-climate-talks-tic-toc-216721

Shall or should? Whatever.

The goal remains the same: to reduce greenhouse gases that harm the only planet we have.

How can that be a bad thing?

 

environmental news, national news, political news

Climate change produces terrorism … huh?

1 Comment

climate-change

I thought maybe I misheard Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday night when he blamed climate change for the terrorism that’s plaguing the planet.

Then he said it again the next day, on CBS News’ “Face the Nation.”

Here’s part of what the Democratic presidential candidate said: “The reason is pretty obvious: If we are going to see an increase in drought and flood and extreme weather disturbances as a result of climate change, what that means is that peoples all over the world are going to be fighting over limited natural resources.”

Then he said: “If there is not enough water, if there is not enough land to grow your crops, then you’re going to see migrants of people fighting over land that will sustain them, and that will lead to international conflict.”

You know, many of us have had plenty of laughs courtesy the Republicans running for president. Sen. Sanders is not going to be outdone, apparently.

I get that he believes that Earth’s changing climate is caused greatly by human activity. What I don’t get is his linking it directly to terrorism.

The cause of terrorism comes from lunatics who think nothing of killing innocent people, of terrorizing civilized society to further some crackpot philosophical or political cause.

There might some link to climate change on the fringes of the terrorism plague. However, the issues are unique and separate. They might not be mutually exclusive.

Direct linkage? Come on, Sen. Sanders.

One doesn’t cause the other.

 

environmental news

Big storm makes me think: climate change

climate-change

Hurricane Patricia roared ashore on the Pacific Coast of Mexico.

It brought immense wind and an enormous amount of rain. The rain has swept across much of Texas, flooding areas of the southern and eastern parts of the state.

One of my thoughts as I looked from afar at this unfolding misery? Climate change.

I do not know if this storm by itself is a result of the changing climate across Planet Earth. I am quite certain, though, that its ferocity is going to spark more discussion — and yes, even angry debate — about whether the planet’s climate is changing and whether humankind has played a major role in that event.

We’ll let the debate commence.

I just want to weigh in, though, with this thought.

The climate change deniers in public office and even those out here among us unwashed masses keep seeking to debunk the theories put forth by those who believe the planet is warming up and that human activity has played a role.  Their argument? Those who believe such things “aren’t scientists,” they say. They ridicule esteemed individuals, such as Pope Francis, in that category.

Actually, the Holy Father is a scientist, with a background in chemistry. Aww, that’s not a relevant area of expertise, the deniers keep saying. Well, OK. But the pope and others have based their arguments with findings and data compiled by actual scientists who have concluded that human activity is related directly to the changing climate on our planet.

My best response to all of that, though, is that the deniers to whom I refer aren’t scientists, either. Yes, they too present data from scientists who agree with their view that human beings’ abuse of Earth hasn’t contributed to the changing climate.

So, which non-expert do you choose to believe?

I tend to side with those who fear that Earth’s climate is changing and that we human beings have played a significant role in bringing it about.

 

International news, religious news

Listen to the pope on climate change

climate-change

Pope Francis’s critics are fond of dismissing his concern about climate change because, they contend, he “is not a scientist.”

Well, actually, he does have some background in science.

But the point here really is the utter lack of self-awareness from politicians who deny climate change largely on the basis that those who have concern about lack a background in the science that researches such issues.

The deniers would do well to ask themselves: Is our denial of climate change on any stronger scientific footing than those with whom we disagree on this issue?

Pope has science background

The debate over climate change veers into these distractions from time to time. The pope comes to America and delivers a wide-ranging message that covers a lot of topics. Climate change is one of them.

Pope Francis is an intelligent man who, I reckon, has done his share of reading on the important issues of the day. His critics have done their reading as well; of that I have zero doubt.

Let us not dismiss someone’s view of a critical issue that could have worldwide repercussions simply because — in the words of Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush — he’s just a “religious leader.”

Pope Francis called on Congress to be courageous and aggressive in working with the rest of the world on climate change. Yes, the cause of that change remains a source of intense debate: is it manmade or part of Earth’s cycle? The consensus, though, seems to be growing that humankind has played a large role in the gradual warming of the planet’s temperatures over many decades.

The Holy Father — a former chemist — is one of those who believes humans need to step up to clean up the mess we have made of the only planet we have.

 

environmental news

Believe it: Texas can benefit from clean-air initiative

Let’s be sure to clear the air — pun intended — on President Obama’s latest call to cut carbon emissions.

One is that Texas politicians are sure to condemn the plan, given that this president is proposing it.

Second, the condemnation will come even as Texas stands to benefit greatly over the long term from what the president has put forth.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/03/obama-unveils-climate-rules-texas-wide-implication/

Obama wants to cut carbon emissions by 32 percent by 2030.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Now final, the unprecedented regulations could significantly affect Texas. As an industrial juggernaut, the Lone Star State generates more electricity and emits far more carbon than any other state. Texas also leads the nation in producing natural gas – a fuel that policymakers could lean on while trying to shift from dirtier coal-fired energy. The state also is already feeling the effects of climate change, including sea level rise, extreme heat and drought, and more frequent flooding, experts say.”

It’s the natural gas element that is going to go largely unnoticed by the chattering class in this state.

We pump a lot of natural gas out here in West Texas. Down yonder, in places such as the Golden Triangle and along the Coastal Bend, we also pump a lot of carbon into the air. The president wants to reduce those emissions — while opening the door for exploration and development of cleaner fuels.

Such as natural gas.

Obama said it plainly and correctly when announcing the new rules. We have “only one planet,” and said “there is no Plan B” for finding a new planet to settle.

So why not do what we can to take care of the planet we have?

Make no mistake, however. The critics out there aren’t going to let an ecological imperative get in the way of blasting a far-sighted initiative designed to help save Planet Earth.

local news

El Nino gets a new name

Some weather experts are calling the current version of El Nino “Godzilla.”

It’s meant to suggest that the severity of the weather that could be coming to the Pacific Coast is monumental, historic, unprecedented. El Nino is the name the National Weather Service gives to the ocean currents that deliver stormier-than-normal weather patterns. The opposite of El Nino is La Nina, which has been blamed in large part for the drought that has ravaged the West Coast.

http://sfist.com/2015/07/23/godzilla_el_nino_now_being_called_s.php

Many millions of Californians are hoping El Nino takes on Godzilla-like traits, if they don’t live on or within spitting distance of the beach. They need the moisture out there.

I won’t get into the climate change debate with this post, but there does seem to be some significant change in the weather occurring in the Pacific Ocean. And, oh by the way, it’s having an impact on us way inland, many miles away.

We’ve had a very wet spring and first half of the summer on the Texas Tundra. But those of you who live there know that already.

If we’re going to have a Godzilla-like El Nino current for the rest of this year and perhaps well into the next one, then we’re going to see some tremendous benefit from this change in our climate.

The weather that moves in off the mountains to our west has been bringing a lot of rain over the course of the past few months.

We’ll take it. Anytime.

Welcome to the High Plains, Godzilla.