Greenland is in a major meltdown...
Greenland’s Ice Sheet Is In A Red Alert Meltdown. According to data released by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) Greenland's ice sheet has melted 12% over last year - an alarming rate.
This is not only unusual but is happening a month before usual.
According to the DMI report, warm air that came in off the Atlantic, was driving the ice melt. DMI climate scientist, Martin Stendel, said, "It is a very unusual situation, especially so early in the year, with very cold air and a deep low pressures system to the west and east of Greenland, and very warm air forming a 'cap' over the island.
This helped to force a frontal system with very warm air up the west coast bringing rain over the ice sheet.” Even a small $10-per-ton US carbon tax would help cut greenhouse gas emissions by around 28 percent of 2005 levels.
We need representatives and leaders who will promote a national carbon tax now.
The carbon tax is a scam of the one world government addenda. We should reduce emission but the government can mandate industry not citizens. Most Americans have their head deep in the sand and cannot stand the truth as to why the jet streams have changed. It has nothing to do with man made global warming. But ask your selves why are the stars in the wrong place, why are there 2 suns in the sky sometimes, why has the Earths tilt changed? Google these questions and take a fresh deep breath, you'll need it.
Have a nice day
Toms effort to sway public opinion on the carbon tax is laudable.
If enacted in spite of a divided congress, it would slow down warming events at least in the US.
But the planetwide cure is tied to moving the planet onto fusion power plants.
Suggest that a dollar donated to a fusion research project will be far more effective than a dollar donated to Hillary.
Actually, having rapid rise in sea level casued by a large chunk of Greenland's ice sliding into the ocean is something we should hope happens SOON!
A fellow named JRM said the following:
What is clearly needed now is a mass rebellion -- much bigger than what happened in the 60s, which resulted in a "counterculture" which was quickly co-opted by the consumer-capitalist-entertainment world. It was this which the "counterculture" was ultimately rebelling against, and we're well overdue for a recurrence of that event, only differently. Because it can't be the same as last time. They never are.
Sadly, such a mass rebellion is very unlikely now, because too few people are educated or literate in the true senses of these terms. Too many Americans (which is where it needs to happen most) know no history, no social or political philosophy, are basically ignorant and hypnotized by consumerism ... or drunk or drugged.... Too few are part of any of the transformative movement/s..., and have never even heard of them. The last time I felt any hope for transformation was during the Occupy "movement," and today I can't even find folks who want to commemorate the five year anniversary of Occupy! as if it never happened, or mattered. How quickly we forget!
THis was my answer:
That is why the ONLY HOPE we have is for ACCELERATED SEA LEVEL RISE from a large chunk of Greenland's ice sliding into the ocean. Trillions of dollars of lost ocean front property is, ironically enough, the "IT" that will get us off of fossil fuels and moving towards a viable biosphere in Wartime economy velocity (less than a decade).
The really serious stuff like ocean acidification and reduced photosynthetic efficiency that ACTUALLY endangers our species goes right over the elite greed ball heads.
Oh but let shipping and coastal property go belly up and the attention of the Predators' R' US crowd will be very focused very quickly.
OVERNIGHT, every Republican and his Saudi brother will claim that they "always supported action on climate change". LOL!
They will holler and scream that they are "conservatives" and we all have to "conserve" the environment! SUBSIDIES for Renewable Energy will become gargantuan and, OF COURSE, the fossil fuel industry will immediately be transformed (WITHOUT ANY PENALTY FOR A CENTURY OF PROFIT OVER PLANET) to a Renewable Energy Industry.
I probably won't be here to see it but it might be fun to watch all the deniers trying to rewrite history.
The warming in the Arctic has been increasing at an increasing rate. As Dr. Jim Hansen has said, we need to stop emitting CO2 into the atmosphere right now. That means stopping the burning of fossil fuels but our society is not ready to live without the electricity that our fossil fuel-burning power plants now supply.
Scientists have said that we need new forms of energy to replace fossil fuels as wind, solar, etc are not enough. However there are no new sources of energy on the horizon so options are slim to nil.
Fortunately, that is really not the case but information about this has not been available. My company will be introducing later this year a device that goes onto large smokestacks and causes the CO2 to break down into carbon (precipitate) and oxygen. This is a leapfrog technology that will dramatically reduce the amount of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere. Of course it will take time to manufacture enough of these to make a difference but we are well financed and we have a large manufacturing capability, at least to get off to a good start. We've been keeping under the radar as there are players in the energy community who will not be happy with the outcome and may get in our way.
The solution to all these Bernie-or-Bust arguments on your show is very simple, obvious, has been right in front of our faces, is consistent with everything that you and very caller has said, and will unite all of together:
We should vote for her, but it's perfectly fine to THREATEN to not vote for her.
Think of all the energy and passion of the people who support Bernie.
Now imagine all of that energy being channeled into a letter writing campaign to Hillary saying "I won't vote for you in the general election beause of [Insert your favorite reason(s) here]". That would scare the begeezus out of her, no?
Now she's no dummy... she knows what you have been saying all along: Better her than a republican, and Obama triumphed despite similar sentiments. But of course you have been saying that till you're blue in the face but the callers keep calling in. So that means she won't have any better luck. So from her perspective, the threat will look very real and should push her harder in a more progressive direction.
So instead of telling the callers that they should vote for her anyway (which doesn't seem to be working), I recommend you tell the Bernie-or-Bust callers to write to her. Turn all that negative energy into something productive.
Keep up the great work.
I recently ran into a group somewhere, maybe it was featured on the Thom Hartmann Show, called the Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL). They seemed to have a good strategy for getting a carbon tax passed through even this Congress. They are writting letters and meeting with their Congress representatives in person. They want the tax to be revenue neutral. They call it "Carbon Fee and Dividend". I read the details and liked the plan. I am perfectly okay with a straight carbon tax in which the government uses the funds to promote clean energy, but I think the CCL plan might be more effective because it makes it so everyone has skin in the game. If every individual can figure out how to use less carbon, then they can get more money back than they put in. The more people figure out how to use less (cheat the system) the less carbon we all use. The money is a small incentive, but I think it works to motivate individuals.
Has anyone else seen this? What do you think?
Hi Thom, Long time listener and reader of your books...I value your wisdom and explanations. I applaud Bernie's efforts to move the country towards progessive thinking and plans for change, but, as a pragmatic older person, I worry that his followers may not realize that sticking to their ideology totally, if Hillary wins the nomination, and not voting for her as President means a generation or more of a conservative SCOTUS, which would be far worse than having Hillary, warts and all, in the White House. Is this something that you should bring up in earnest?