Recent comments

  • change the wording to CLIMATE CATASTROPHE   5 days 1 hour ago

    Not to mention, scientists have stated we need to keep the CO2 emissions under 350ppm and that any significant change results in higher WARMING of the planet and WHY is that so scary? Because of the OTHER GAS which is far worse than carbon and which neither plants or animals can breathe: Methane.

    All those dead plants and matter frozen under the Arctic ice represent trillions of tons of methane, methane displaces carbon dioxide... methane cannot be breathed by plants or animals, methane heats the planet at around 20x the rate of CO2, it is deadly and explosive and even hding in a bunker will be a death sentence.

    While it is true that during volcanic activity the CO2 emissions were very high, it was also true that very little viable life was on the planet. Nothing can be looked at in segments. Looking at CO 2 levels but failing to realize what those ppms mean , or what the temperature was and what existed is worse than an ostrich in the sand moment.

    The argument has moved WAAAAY beyond global warming, that is a given and no one is arguing that anymore. It is silly to debate who is at fault also--because whether it is humans or natural the fact is, if we do nothing, we die, all of us--even the ones getting citizenships in the Southern Hemisphere or gaining access to the Swiss bunkers for their citizens. {people can adapt to changing weather, bad weather and even climate havoc, but they ultimately cannot survive well with no water, no plants (all dead due to methane displacing CO2) and no oxygen.

  • change the wording to CLIMATE CATASTROPHE   5 days 1 hour ago

    In 2014, I was in Florida and happened to be near Cocoa beach. There, they had house after house up for sale and the price for one mansion that had an original price tag of over 1 million dollars, was 179K. The exodus has already begun and the only ones buying are the aspirants to that life and speculators. I was told that the home was being sold at true cost even though it was on an intercoastal canal because the owners could no longer afford the exorbitant property taxes which differs based on when a home is bought in Florida and who owns it.

    In a few, years, you won'tbe able to give that property away, but it won't matter, because there will be droughts and refugee mass exodus from America's southwest and an amazing food shortage to feed all those who flee into the interior, and with most countries around the world in the same boat and suffering due to weather, they will not be in any -position to help the US.

  • change the wording to CLIMATE CATASTROPHE   5 days 1 hour ago

    Global warming and climate change are the same thing.

    Global warming (which essentially ONLY applied to the increased temperature of those parts of the planet which affected permafrost and the weather, ie., the ice caps, Greenland and parts of Siberia) would essentially cause a tipping point in the release of methane clathrates frozen in the ocean (which warm the earth 20x faster than CO2 and cannot be controlled once they are released),

    The results of Global warming are climate change and the issue is not and never was where jobs were sent, it is who consumes what, to what level, for what reasons, and what happens to the planet and people and animals and plants because of that consumption.

    Scientists changed the terms to "climate change" because it is easier for people to understand bad weather than the dynamics of the jet stream changing and oxygen depletion and oceans acidifying due to increased temperatures thawing/ the releasing methane clathrates thus accelerating the entire process.

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 1 hour ago
    .

    .

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 1 hour ago

    According to many climate change experts, there is a lag time between our consumption and any negative environment impacts we can see. That lag time is about 35-40 years later . This means what we see now is the result of actions of our country around 1976 or so.

    Based on this lag time, we will be well above the upperlimits of 6.0 degrees C (life is generally believed to be unsustainable above 4.0 degrees C increase) by the time we reap the fallout from our usagein the early part of the 2000s.

    According to Bill Mckibben(in the book "eaarth") even if we had stopped ALL carbon emissions all over the world in 2009, it would take about 1000 years to get the planet back to around 350ppm which is what the planet needs in order to be a home to the plants, animals and humans that inhabit it now.

    We don't have 1000 years, we may not even have 10 years. More and more Guy McPhersons, "the sky is falling" rhetoric rings ominously true...

    In other words, it is too late and we did not stop or even slow consumption in 2009, we accelerated it.

    The IPCC stated in their last analysis of climate change (after the NASA discovery of a 150km wide methane vent in 2013) that as early as 2020 up to 90% of all species of plants and animals would be extinct and up to 60% of all humans now on the planet may very well be dead. The game changers? The usual, drought, famine, disease and pestilence and wars as countries and people fight over resources and these 4 horsemen would not be limiting their rides to Africa and Asia. America will be hit, as will parts of Europe and Micronesia and elsewhere.

    Now what were you saying about your carbon foot print and having no kids? Toothpaste goes poorly back into the tube.

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 1 hour ago

    Well Thom... glad to see you finally are considering that we have already passed the point of no return. But why the fingerpointing?

    Surely it is not the industry who is trying to sway the government that is responsible, it is that government and all the citizenry too lazy and self centered to ever find out what was really going on.

    We have met the enemy and it is US.. but that aside, IF the world is trending toward extinction.. at THIS point, does it really matter who is at fault? It won't change anything and jailing or fines is paltry and moot at this time.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 2 hours ago

    This has been a good discussion; a bit off the OP, but a good discussion.

    After some thought, I still consider myself an "economic issues" guy, though. Sorry. I will drill down a bit though, and identify these issues as labor, taxation, and trade as my primary areas of interest...I believe our primary problem is big business and finance needs to be neutered. It is not that I am disinterested in social issues, or want them to go away, what I don't like is how they are used by Washington , Wall Street and the media to divide society in a particular way, the express purpose of which is to prevent the division being between the people and, well, Washington and Wall Street. It works perfectly, preventing any popular critical mass challenging the hegemony of business. Just about time the people are coming to the dawn of realization that we're all getting ripped off by big business, someone yells "Gay Marriage!" That simmers down, then "Abortion!" "Transgender bathroom rights!" "Hobby Lobby!" And on and on and on. It's like swatting a hornet's nest, over and over, and in the meantime, another company's offshored jobs, or received a loophole to launder yet more tax money through the Caymans. In other words, social issues are used like a bludgeon to prevent populist economic progress in the areas I am interested in...labor, trade, taxation. I don't think any pro-social issues person can say that isn't the case.

  • Banksters getting a taste of their own medicine   5 days 2 hours ago

    Thom said on the radio show today that keynes was demand-side, give ppl meaningless jobs; friedman was supply-side. I think we should give ppl created money not to work. Indexation fixes inflation forever. Challenges inspire individual creativity that raises standards of living at an unprecedented pace.

    The more you know, the less you need. The more efficient your machines become; you don't need the bulk, the labor inputs, you needed when you knew less. Let's focus on knowledge advancement, not jobs and taxes. I mean if that's your chosen way of improving knowledge about jobs and taxes, fine I guess, not that there's anything wrong with that. But if I want to pursue my happiness in a different way than working, selling, then we have the production capacity to support that. What stops us from creating money for a world-wide basic income is ancient, outdated, sentimental old economics based on faulty assumptions of scarcity and the Quantity Theory of Money.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 2 hours ago
    Quote Garrett78:Here's an article that should make clear how interrelated social and economic issues are, and how sociocultural realities can actually be a driver of economic policy: https://medium.com/@YawoBrown/the-subtle-linguistics-of-polite-white-sup...

    Yup, I'm aware of all that, Garrett78. Regarding redlining, desegregation and white flight, I had direct experience growing up in the deep south during that period.

    Now, of course, I was too young to even consider the planned structural aspects behind that white flight...Being a kid, I just naively thought nobody wanted to live near black people. I wasn't til I was older that I became aware of the insidious drivers...the redlining, real estate agents steering black people away from neighborhoods, etc. etc. But let me tell you, those neighborhoods went from white to black in the period of about 2 years. Unfortunately, we flew too. We lived in a nice middle class neighborhood, lot of airline employees (near a major airport), and some nice middle class black families moved in, and, well, you know, there was a giant sucking sound out to the exhurbs and countryside. The kids got along fine though...I remember playing hoops and football with some of the black kids in the street and their moms serving us Kool Aid and snacks...just like in white suburbs. Nevertheless, all the whites left and the pace accelerated after there was a stabbing at the local high school, reportedly in a fight among black students. "Reportedly." Who knows, maybe a rumor spread by local power brokers to scare the remaining whites out so RE Agents could sell more homes. I've read things like that happened in the era of desegregation. Well, I remember my Mom - who despite being a lifelong southerner, never uttered a racist word that I could ever recall - freaking out, running around the house, "That's where you will go to school soon!" Racism is one thing; perceived fear for one's safety is quite another.

    At any rate, I drove through the neighborhood decades later, and was pleased to see that particular neighborhood was still neat and well kept. The general region, however, hasn't fared as well. It suffered a double whammy with the exodus of relatively wealthier whites and the decline of good paying non-pilot airline jobs. There's a lot of crime, lot of closed storefronts, a dilapidated mall, etc. etc. I kind of follow the area...it's a part of my life...just last year, I was dismayed to see a 48 Hours episode about a multiple murder in a closeby neighborhood...and there was a headline last year I read off Yahoo that linked to a report that named a nearby suburb - where I would have gone to high school.- as the most dangerous suburb in the U.S., not one of, but the. Kinda sad, having remembered it as bustling, safe, prosperous and clean...and integrated, at least for awhile.

    It's an unfortunate part of our history. Most of structural practices behind the scenes driving this are illegal now, though, and RE Agents and banksters take it very seriously. Actually, as the Bush crash showed, banks probably went too far the other way, as the free marketers abused the law and took advantage of minorities.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 3 hours ago

    Zenzoe - really? Then why do you take no specific issue with thr context questions I raisedf?

    Also, if you look at whom I was replying to in my post.... you will note tht the last part of my comment was not made to you or even about something you said. Your reference was my response to Ante-bellum's trolling on post #184.....

    Tell me again.... How was Einstein's quote about what you were trying to make of these issues? Was thre some contextual kinship that I missed?

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 4 hours ago

    Quote Mr.Wayne:

    Quote Zenzoe:
    Albert Einstein's observation that "great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds" could be paraphrased to respond to working class opposition to Hillary Clinton, if and where it exists: Strong women have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.

    Go and read the entire quote (do your own work here) and listen to the context.... HRC is the status quo (accepted thinking) Einstein is speaking against, not for.

    I’m quite familiar with the original quote, and I am certainly not edified by your reading of it, a reading which is a distortion of Einstein's original meaning to fit your bias.

    My paraphrase of the quote stands: Hillary Clinton is a strong woman. And she does encounter violent opposition from mediocre minds, mediocre mind being defined as unable to transcend vulgar excesses of depersonalization. Such a mind reverts immediately to mean-spiritedness, avoiding fairness and care at all costs.

    Quote Mr.Wayne:

    Obviously, you should get out more often.

    There you go— proving my point. Nice.

  • Advice to Thom on trolls   5 days 4 hours ago

    "It is in fact perfectly reasonable to have a referee police our web sites and make such decisions when the paid bullying and right wing propagandy [sic] becomes especially distasteful and obvious."

    I couldn't disagree more. You create more of what you are trying to censor. Enjoy President Trump!

    The better response is to remain unemotional. Then you can use emotional words in response, if you wish, and laugh if you get bites from the right-wing trolls. Troll the trolls!

    Or, respond unemotionally with reason.

    Censorship is the worst possible choice. I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 4 hours ago
    Quote marriott79:
    Quote Mr.Wayne:
    Quote Zenzoe:
    Quote Noam Chomsky, 5/16/16 on Democracy Now:

    ...going back to who should you push the button for, well, my own—in the primaries, I would prefer Bernie Sanders. If Clinton is nominated and it comes to a choice between Clinton and Trump, in a swing state, a state where it’s going to matter which way you vote, I would vote against Trump, and by elementary arithmetic, that means you hold your nose and you vote Democrat. I don’t think there’s any other rational choice. Abstaining from voting or, say, voting for, say, a candidate you prefer, a minority candidate, just amounts to a vote for Donald Trump, which I think is a devastating prospect, for reasons I’ve already mentioned. So—but meanwhile, do the important things. http://www.democracynow.org/2016/5/16/chomsky_on_supporting_sanders_why_he

    As much as I love Chomsky and am humbled by his wisdom - I must differ with a fair part of his conclusions here. While I completely agree with both yourself and Chomsky as regards the utter and complete unacceptability of a Trump POTUS, it is the 'math' I find I must take issue with here.

    To illustrate, let's pretend that I am that voter who intends to 'abstain from voting' for the general reasons (can't stand either one, or whatever) found in several forum topix already discussed here. Okay, so - I'm at a cookout with a mixed croud of other voters and I end up in a conversation with a Democrat who tells me that my abstention constitutes a vote for Trump and so by not voting at all I've actuallly cast a vote for one of the very people I am opposed to....

    Do you see where I'm going with this? The next person I run into happens to be a Republican. He then uses the same math to argue the opposite result. They can't both be right - they're mutually exclusive, after all.

    No: before my vote is actually cast it is only a 'potential vote'. Choosing not to cast that vote at all, simply deprives both sides equally of one potential vote. It is essentially a vote of 'no confidence' and any advantage or disadvantage (if any) is equal to both parties.

    Now, I take no pleasure in being on the 'other' side of anything Chomsky said, but a plea for votes based on math needs to be correct.... and I'm seeing an equation here that does not actually balance - so I'll be needing a better reason (or one actually supported by the math offered as its' proof) before I agree to any vote.

    Thank you, Mr. Wayne. I've been trying to explain this concept to people, and your example is the most cogent and to the point that I've read.

    You are welcome and I am flattered. Unfortunately Zenzoe has claimed - on the one hand - to understand what I am trying to say... but still continues to put forth the fraud that, "voting for neither person is really a Trump vote. Oh yes, she lastly called it an "accidental Trump Vote".... ROFL!

    Wow! That little trick fooled me for nearly 2 or 3 seconds!!! That's actually a 'record' for Zenzoe..........

    Well - according to Zenzoe- we are all a bunch of Hillary Haters who have fallen prey to the Republican Party's portrayal of her as a "corporate stooge" who's vote can be bought by the highest bidder. Okay, then - by definition - everything they say is a lie. Right?

    After all, Hillary makes all these 'talking points' that seen to indicate she has abandoned several of what seemed to be her previously held positions and now apparently reversed her stance on several issues. Really? Is there some independant reason we should give some real credibility to this about face? All I see is words. Words are cheap.

    All I see so far is Zenzoe re-iterating HRC's talking points as if they were facts.... over and over.... as if that will give them substance. Run that crap somewhere else.

    A plan by anyone here - regardless of their intent - to NOT vote - cannot be honestly construed to equal a vote for the party or person you oppose. That is simply bull-shit and anyone telling you otherwise is attempting to trick you into placing your vote where they want it..... without regard to your honest wishes or desires..... as if a vote for anyone they don't favor is the same as a vote for their least favorite person. You should know better.

    On the other hand - a vote for Trump IS a vote for failure. This is true regardless if is true for HRC as well. Voting for Trump (or someone else , for the same reasons) is as stupid as Zenzoe alludes to in many posts. Zenzoe - in my opinion - properly sees a Trump presidency for what it may truly be. For me, the real question is whether Zenzoe has accurately predicted the outcome of a HRC presidencvy.... I do not share her optimistic view in this regard. I think it will likely be even worse (even though Trump is so bad it's hard to calculate) than Trump simply because she is so duplicitous and concealatory in her methodology....... I mean - they're both horribly bad in this regard, and it's really a matter of how hard they are to catch at what we all know they'll attempt to do.

    Trump wins this debate (in my view) only because a creep we can catch is better than a creeep that's not as easy to catch.

    ...

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 5 hours ago
    Quote Zenzoe: The message I got from it was that the guy wants to blame the DNC and Clinton's candidacy for Trump's victory, should that happen. Maybe I missed something, but that seemed to be the essence of it.

    Zenzoe, Matthew Filipowicz blames or points the finger at those who, knowing about Hillary’s email indiscretion, nevertheless voted for her in the primaries. Sanders, too, bears much of the responsibility for his own defeat. He, in the first debate, dismissed the emails as of no consequence and urged people to stop talking about them. So both the people who voted for Hillary in spite of her email blunder and Sanders himself must accept responsibility for Sanders apparent defeat.

    Mr. Wayne, I second your two comments just above.

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 5 hours ago

    This is the reason Thom ought to embrace Bernie or bust. Hillary, like Trump, wants to fracking accelerate climate change; and she will!

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 5 hours ago

    Mind you, it is not the fossil fuel industry that is culpable, but ourselves for using that energy, and above all our unwillingness to curb our consumption to a sutainable level.

    The U.S. could cut its energy consumption in half overnight without too much of a hardship, my carbon foot print is under half of the average and life perfectly confortable. But, no kids, no flying or uneeded driving and keeping A/C high and heat low etc...

    Two most inflential books I read in my youth were Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (1962) and Limits to Growth (1972) which both described and predicted our present dilemma.

    Again "man's destiny is to drown in his own feces"

  • Are we in an extinction event right this moment - due to climate change?   5 days 5 hours ago

    As a retired earth scientist specialized in past climates I hear too much optimism for a correction of our present course, as we sail through the point of no return. We are curently witnessing the end of capatism and demise of civilisation as we've known, all this in the name of greed.

    Man's destiny is to drown in his own feces.

    MissQuote from Chief Seattle

  • Ft. McMurray Fire Carbon-Monoxide Plume @ 6100-ppb & 50-times the Size of NYC's   5 days 5 hours ago

    Including to what i have just reposted from the heads up of The Hartmann Report, you can add the tar sands project uses as much energy in the tar sands extraction as the city of Toronto consumes and on top of that the extraction process requires high pressure steam , which each year consumes the approx same amount of fresh water that the 6 million people in the Greater Toronto area , but unlike Toronto's effluent, the tar sands effluent cannot be recycled, therefore it is allowed to be dumped on the ground and stored in large lakes that are poisoned with over 100 toxic chemicals , including heavy metals. This tar sands effluent is now leaking into the ground water and aquifers and poisoning everything in its path from Fort McMurray to the Arctic Ocean.

    Ten years of right wing conservative governments both at the provincial(state) level and federal level under the now topple Stephen Harper conservative federal government have allowed this to happen. But now we are catching wind that it may be more of the same under the new federal Liberal majority government of Justin Trudeau. A majority government given to our parliamentary system , means a virtual unchallengable dictatorship for 4 years.

  • Ft. McMurray Fire Carbon-Monoxide Plume @ 6100-ppb & 50-times the Size of NYC's   5 days 5 hours ago

    You can add to your post, The Hartmann Report information.

    "A cloud of noxious particles brewing in the air above the Alberta oil sands is one of the most prolific sources of air pollution in North America, often exceeding the total emissions from Canada’s largest city, federal scientists have discovered.

    The finding marks the first time researchers have quantified the role of oil sands operations in generating secondary organic aerosols, a poorly understood class of pollutants that have been linked to a range of adverse health effects.

    The result adds to the known impact of the oil sands, including as a source of carbon emissions that contribute to climate change."

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/oil-sands-found-to-be-a-lea...

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 5 hours ago

    Go and read the entire quote (do your own work here) and listen to the context.... HRC is the status quo (accepted thinking) Einstein is speaking against, not for.

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 6 hours ago

    Obviously, you should get out more often.

  • Did the Fossil Fuel Industry Bring Us to the Point of No Return?   5 days 6 hours ago

    A geophysical solution not dependent on emissions control to succeed restoring sea-ice for a longer season to delay melt-out north into the Chukchi & Beaufort Seas.

    Restoring Arctic sea-ice in the Beaufort Sea, it was 4-9 year-old ice now mainly fast-ice, first year so weak and salty and easy to break up, there were no big storms and it melted out last month a new early record: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=88065

    The albedo heat is now equal to 20-years of heating from emissions of CO2 because it's so efficient, that's implies Paris commitments need to be halved or 1/3rd the timelines proposed to accommodate how much heat this is and how fast it's growing.

    So with global scale in mind a forum thread on creating a dam with a large weir section to allow a much reduced volume in from the Pacific south of Bering Strait at St. Lawrence Island, the proposal: http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php?topic=1545.0

    Image of the proposed route: http://www.mallard-design.com/mdc2010/media/aleutian-currents3.jpg

  • I will not support the LESSORS of either of the two evils -not again   5 days 7 hours ago
    Quote Alberto Ceras 2:

    Now, it seems that you didn't bother to click on the the link I provided. How about clicking on it in order to view/listen from the 9 minute point to the end. That might tempt you to view it from the beginning.

    I did watch it, Alberto, before I commented on your post. The message I got from it was that the guy wants to blame the DNC and Clinton's candidacy for Trump's victory, should that happen. Maybe I missed something, but that seemed to be the essence of it.

    If Trump is victorious, that'll be on those Clinton haters and independents who admire Trump's celebrity, his supposed "outsider" status, and his experience as a businessman, that is, no relevant experience whatsoever in leading a democratic republic. In fact, his experience and mind set are the exact opposite of how to make America great, at least if you value democracy, justice, equality, the environment, human rights and all the other values we progressives cherish and wish to improve and grow from here on out.

  • Thom Hartmann Program -- 3 hour shows missing from You Tube !   5 days 8 hours ago
    Quote webmaster:

    We have for many years used clips from the program in YouTube and will continue to do that.

    The three hour versions will not be provided again.

    -Nigel-
    Webmaster.

    I undersdtand , Nigel. Thom has a business and he needs to sell the audio podcast versions. I was downloading Livestream video originally until that was disabled in March. Then from You Tube. In both cases I converted the complete shows to Mp3 to listen to on my iPod while on the road. So now I guess I'll just have to watch on Livestream....or subscribe to the podcast, because Livestream videos aren't always posted of the show.

  • Concerns I have about the response to Climate Change...   5 days 8 hours ago
    Quote SueN:

    jrodefeld, as someone with an environmental studies degree, I suggest you study scientific sources, not the kind of material put our by climate deniers representing the fossil fuel billionaires. They can afford to create some complex, lengthy pseudoscientific arguments, but there is very little truth in it.

    Hey, you've got an environmental studies degree right? Surely you'll be able to answer a few of my questions? I'm surprised that on Thom Hartmann's website, I can't seem to find progressives who are willing to discuss this issue with me. Hartmann is one of America's top Progressive radio hosts, so surely he's got some acolytes who can defend the Progessive position on climate change?

    I am not a "denier". I'm with the 97% of scientists who recognize that industrial human activity has caused CO2 emissions to rise and a small increase in global temperatures occurred as a result. Beyond that though, scientific views diverge among serious scientists. And policy prescriptions are tainted by short-term thinking political demagogues. I'm just trying to dig deeper.

Latest Headlines

Who rejected United States-North Korea peace talks?

There were conflicting reports on Sunday regarding a recent proposal for United States-North Korea peace talks which was allegedly made before North Korea"s recent nuclear test

U.K. Pound Falls As Markets Get Brexit Jitters

Bloomberg said on Monday the pound had sustained its biggest fall against the dollar in 11 months

Clinton: I'll defend Israel but push for 'two-state solution

Hillary Clinton believes both Republican candidates Donald Trump and Ted Cruz "missed the mark" with their approach to the Israel-Palestinian Arab conflict

Community Archive

Libertarians Want to Make a Fool Out of You Again…

On Sunday, the Libertarian Party selected former New Mexico Republican Governor Gary Johnson to run for president with former Republican Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld as his running mate.