This post is the second of a two part series. Read the first installment, Unreported Emissions From Natural Gas Blow Up BC's Climate Action Plan.
Methane leaks from British Columbia's natural gas industry are likely at least 7 times greater than official numbers increasing the entire provinces' carbon footprint by nearly 25%. That's like putting 3 million more vehicles on BC's roads.
As...
read more






















Comments
The climate zombie caucus of the 112th Congress
One year ago, the right-wing media machine smeared climate scientists with the Climate gate conspiracy theory, even as the climate itself continued to get hotter and more destructive.
Although the National Academies of Science says “the U.S. should act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and develop a national strategy to adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change,” the Republican Party is now dominated by fossil-funded ideologues who repeat zombie myths about global warming. An exclusive survey by Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson, with research support by Daily Kos blogger RL Miller, has identified the members of Congress that are on record challenging the scientific consensus:
Who is the arrogant one?
Straw man 1:
'I think the science is far from settled and for anyone including Al Gore to say otherwise is arrogance.'
Nobody is saying the science is settled you are either very ignorant or a liar Phillips.
Our appreciation of climate change is rather like a jig-saw puzzle with some pieces yet to be found, some rather obscure in how they fit – as yet, but enough of the picture is clear to understand the underlying trends and what is driving them. We should be concerned, very concerned about the picture that is emerging.
Straw man 2:
'There are enough scientists out there and doctors out there saying hey wait a minute lets look at this thing more closely.'
There are very few scientists who are skeptical of the impact of humans on the climate but most of those who raise doubts are supported financially, either directly or indirectly by the fossil fuel and allied industries through the various 'tax perked' think tanks. But of course you know that Mr Phillips because you are a part of that misinformation campaign.
As for doctors! Really Mr Phillips would you consult a climatologist about your gall stones?
Straw man 3:
'...but when I look and read for the left to say...'
Left, Mr Phillips, left! The Arctic sea ice has no political affiliation nor have any of the glaciers that have lost mass over the last thirty years in particular, some even disappearing and taking the water supply of the native population with them. The late Chacalataya glacier of Bolivia knew nothing about left or right and neither did the population that lost their irrigation. That glacier BTW was assessed as surviving until 2015 but triple the rate of thaw ensured that it had gone by March 2009.
So, if you look and read that warming has stopped over the last ten years then those who are telling you that are lying. YES lying Mr Phillips.
Your reading material clearly leaves much to be desired and I would suggest a good starter would be 'Science as a Contact Sport' by the late lamented, and courageous, Stephen H. Schneider who has been so cowardly maligned recently by one of those scientists to whom you obviously like to pay attention. You, as a non scientist should be able to cope with that book. For the science I would suggest David Archer's excellent offerings 'Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast', 'The Long Thaw' and 'The Climate Crisis: An Introductory Guide to Climate Change' with Stefan Rahmstorf.
Mr Phillips you need to be sent on a reality tour around all the various places on the globe that are already seeing the effects of climate change. You should be sent to exist as they do and not with the aid of imported sustenance. Maybe then you will not be an entrant in any future edition of
Climate Cover-Up
or
Merchants of Doubt
or
Straight Up
Oh! And Tim, 'We are watching you!'
Green Economy
Sir,
Your comment about creating "millions of jobs" with a green or clean energy economy confuses me. All the big employers seem to be in the dirty energy dependent industries. Which of the companies/employers or industry/business types are those that will create the huge numbers of jobs that you and others predict? It seems to me that going back to smaller, cottage-style industries with their dispersed, slower-pace of activity models will do this, but at a price of lowered efficiencies and higher worker:product rations. What is it that you see coming up? The information age and robotics appears to have fizzled on the more-employment scene (and competing with cheap foreign labour!). I'd love to see that going green was for more than philosophical reasons (which I support hugely), as only economics is going to convince any corporation or non-authoritatian/socialist government on the planet.
Treason and sabotage
Lets be very clear about this. This not just snake oil marketing, this directly endangers our future.