Some of the best signs so far

Ashitha Nagesh

BBC News, London

Protests are a time for drawing attention to serious issues, but they're also an opportunity to show off your incredible placard-making skills.

Some are funny, others make you think - and the really good ones make you do both. 

Here are some of the most striking ones from today's protests so far.

See more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-49753710

Our PM, Scottus, is on the same page as Potus and "Borice-brexit". All of these bottom of the barrel deadfish are ignorant of the issue of global warming — ignorant by choice. Scottus scummo's cabinet is full of self-serving global warming denialists, while the scientists in the USA are panicking about the damage Trump has been doing to the sciences in general. Air and water quality improvements of the past have now gone through the window of refusal to know. In the USA, National Parks, reduced in size at the will of the imbecile in charge, are now earmarked for drilling for oil. In Australia, the Great Barrier Reef has become a football between serious study and exposure of damage versus a frivolous abandon of all regulations on pesticides and fertiliser runoffs from farms plus coal tailings from mines and alluvial mud from digging ports. And the destructionist idiots are winning...

The question is "should we let them win, to precipitate the catastrophe earlier, or should we fight them in the courts and more inquiries to show the damage done (and impending) to try and save what's left of this beautiful planet?" The answer of course is obvious... Kick their arse, but the farming lobby is like a ruthless Roman army versus a battalion of scholars. Brawn versus brains? Brawn always wins... Idiocy prevail because it's easier to be an idiot than to understand sciences.

Read from top.

Liberal senator Eric Abetz has linked a website banning climate change deniers to Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

Academic news and analysis website The Conversation has announced a zero-tolerance approach to climate change deniers and sceptics, vowing to remove comments and lock accounts.

The decision has outraged conservative Tasmanian Senator Eric Abetz.

“Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong couldn’t have put it better themselves. They’d be so proud,” he told Parliament.

“To so superciliously and arrogantly deny a voice to an alternative point of view is reminiscent of totalitarian regimes.”

In a blog post, The Conversation’s editor Misha Ketchell said people shamelessly peddling pseudoscience were perpetuating ideas that would ultimately destroy the planet.

Senator Abetz, who describes himself as a climate change agnostic, said environmental prophets of doom had been getting it wrong for half a century.

“This ugly, unscientific, totalitarian, arrogant approach taken by The Conversation is the exact opposite to the principles of scientific endeavour.”

He said the lesson of history was truth would ultimately prevail.

“The Conversation can stop the conversation, but it cannot stop the march of inquiring minds that will ultimately determine this issue,” Senator Abetz said.

Read more:

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2019/09/19/liberal-links-climat...

Gus heard:

Eric then muttered to himself that the earth being flat, heaven had to be in the cloud above his head... 

Now what is a climate agnostic? Someone who believes both side of the climate argument or someone who does not believe any of them, by not studying the scientific evidence and letting mongrel gremlins like the Lord Monckton gets to his brains? Agnos is a painfully sharp fence. Sitting on top of Agnos for yonks like Abetz is even more imbecilic and idiotic than being on the denialist side. It shows the guy has no analytical ability and resemble at best, the queen of fence sitting, Annabel Crabb.

Global warming isn't a fallacy. the problem is real. Global warming is real and anthropogenic. The more we ignore it the more our response will be challenging. This editorial from Der Spiegel:

There is no end point to climate policy. No matter what it looks like, any program will only be an attempt to slow down climate change. Its passage will be followed by a period of observation to see whether the policy is effective and how society reacts. Then come the adjustments. And, likely, an additional program -- and another one after that.

The issue isn't going away, that much is certain. Humanity has perhaps never before faced such a huge task. Everyone is affected, as are almost all areas of life: work, free time, diet, transportation, vacation and, more broadly, our patterns of consumption. To ensure that the earth doesn't get dangerously warm, with potentially catastrophic consequences, a lot must change, particularly in areas crucial to our enjoyment of life. Higher costs and modified behavior cannot be avoided, even if new technologies might one day help solve the problem.

As such, an effective climate policy is unavoidable. And that presents real problems for democracies. It is the only form of government that is based on the idea of freedom and it requires the approval of a large majority if it is to survive. As urgent as the climate problem is, democracies can't just be guided by the effectiveness of measures at hand. The preservation of democratic principles must likewise be a key consideration no matter what actions are ultimately taken.

One of those principles is tolerance. The climate question has a similar potential to drive a wedge in society as refugee policy does. Here, too, it isn't difficult to establish a superficial division between good and evil. On the one hand, you have those who don't own a car, don't fly and don't eat meat. On the other are those who continue living as before, thus falling under suspicion of harming their neighbors and the world as a whole.

Moralizing doesn't get us anywhere. Even those who drive the biggest SUVs don't deserve to be ostracized or stigmatized. By the same token, it must be understood that criticism is not the same as censorship. All citizens are called upon to tolerate inconsistencies and discrepancies, including their own, and to continue engaging in dialogue with each other.

Doing anything else plays into the hands of the populists. Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) is more than happy to welcome all those who don't see climate change as a problem and who feel stigmatized for their views. On the strength of such voters, the right-wing populists could dramatically increase their share of the electorate.

The Ultimate Consequence

According to a survey conducted by the pollsters at IfD Allensbach, a majority of Germans have a positive view of the climate movement Fridays for Future. But there is also a majority that doesn't want to be forced to bear the costs of climate policy. Do something, but leave me alone: That is a rather challenging assignment for policymakers to fulfill, particularly on an issue in which everyone plays a role because everyone is responsible for CO2 emissions. There is no such thing as an effective climate policy that does not intrude on our everyday lives. An authoritarian state can simply issue a decree, but such a thing is more challenging for democracies because of their foundational values.

The rule of law is among the principles that democracies must defend. Given the magnitude of the climate problem, some might feel that strikes are an appropriate strategy. But it is a strategy that stands in contrast with our legal order and is thus ill-advised. Once this door is cracked, it will be pushed open wider and wider as the urgency of the problem grows. The ultimate consequence could be a climate dictatorship.

Furthermore, democracies cannot impose significant limitations on the freedoms of its citizens. Otherwise, it will lose one of its most important pillars. Politicians must reconcile the effectiveness of climate protection measures with freedom and fairness. But they cannot shy away from asking citizens to make sacrifices and to push through policies against opposition. That has always been a requirement in democracies, no matter what the issue. The key is to consistently communicate to voters why the policy is necessary.

When it comes to climate policy, success will only become apparent quite a long way down the road. Global warming won't come to a sudden stop just because Germany passes a package of climate protection measures. In the future, we will have to cope with frustration, bad news and the indecisiveness or unwillingness of other countries. But being a role model matters -- or at least not hiding behind the inactivity of others.

For all of these reasons, the next years and decades will be immensely challenging. But other existential issues have long since taught democracies how to deal with perpetual contradiction -- such as the one between freedom and security. Now, that has been joined by the contradiction between freedom and the efficacy of climate policy. And once again, we have to find the correct balance.

Read more:

https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/the-challenge-of-climate-cha...

Gus:

This Der Spiegel editorial is a bit weak, but well intentioned.

Yet, the more inaction, the more disasters we invite on this limited planet. When the ozone layer was in danger of being destroyed, countries of the world presented a united front: CFC gases were eliminated BY LAWS. Better management of old fridges and systems prevented further leaks into the atmosphere. The ozone layer is still a bit wonky, but has improved.

With global warming, the correct balance is to find ways to stop releasing CO2, methane and NOx gases into the atmosphere NOW (since the 1996 turning point according to Gus). This is a HUGE task and one major problem is to fight the well-organised denialists who advise and control most the powerful powerful governments (US, UK, Australia, some of Europe, Russia, China). Thus we have an IMBALANCE. The kids are trying hard to expose this IMBALANCE in our present responses.

What is at stake? There are many feedback mechanisms that hide the full extend of the problem. The melting of the polar ice caps is presently hiding the furious future impact of global warming.

Note: we are not talking about "climate change" — as natural climate climate varies between ice ages and warm periods on a 100,000 + year basis. We are not talking about weather patterns which we know are not constant on a day to day basis. We are talking about a WARMING phenomenon that is adding EXTRA heat potential (up to 9 degrees Celsius average on present temperatures) into the atmosphere of a natural warm period (which we are presently in) — through adding warming gases (CO2, methane, NOx) by our industrialisation which has relied so far, more than 90 per cent on burning fossil fuels that create these warming gases. Can we carry on? NO. Do we need to do something? YES.

We have to find ways to create our energy supplies without burning more fossil fuels.

We have to find ways to feed the world population without creating more of the warming gases, especially methane, and without poisoning the planet with insecticides, while controlling the usage of fertilisers. We have to find ways to limit the world population at under 7 billion.

We have to find ways to limit the damage done to the natural planet Earth with rubbish, poisons and plastics. We need more protected areas for other species to survive.

We need to reduce greed, which is an inductor of many of the said sources of the problem.

These are the challenge that we must face, without blame, nor wars. The BALANCE is not in the understanding of these challenges, but for governments ACCEPTING the elimination of warming gases ASAP, while maintaining our comforts. IT CAN BE DONE. 

Our next tipping point is around 2032. That is to say WHEN weather patterns will become so erratic, crossing the boundaries of climate zoning — a bit like what happened in Europe earlier this year, and seems to happen now on a yearly basis with a polar vortex over the USA — BUT on a much greater scale, that we will all (we all should) say: OH SHIT! We are in trouble!

By this time, time for balance will have gone out of the window. Individual liberties will have to be curbed and there will be nothing dystopian about it, but a general NEED to survive in a new political imposed reality.

The kids are right to shake our apple tree of general apathy. It's their future. It's already mucked up, but we do not need to muck it up further.

The signs and impacts of global heating are speeding up, the latest science on climate change, published ahead of key UN talks in New York, says.

The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says the five-year period from 2014 to 2019 is the warmest on record. 

Sea-level rise has accelerated significantly over the same period, as CO2 emissions have hit new highs.

The WMO says carbon-cutting efforts have to be intensified immediately.

• BBC Briefing: Your energy and climate facts guide
• Offshore wind expands at record low price
• Thousands join UK climate change protests

The climate statement is a pull-together of the latest science on the causes and growing impacts of unprecedented levels of warming seen in recent years. 

Recognising that global temperatures have risen by 1.1 degrees C since 1850, the paper notes they have gone up by 0.2C between 2011 and 2015.

This is as a result of burgeoning emissions of carbon, with the amount of the gas going into the atmosphere between 2015 and 2019 growing by 20% compared with the previous five years. 

Perhaps most worrying of all is the data on sea-level rise. 

The average rate of rise since 1993 until now is 3.2mm per year. However, from May 2014 to 2019 the rise has increased to 5mm per year. The 10-year period from 2007-2016 saw an average of about 4mm per year. 

"Sea-level rise has accelerated and we are concerned that an abrupt decline in the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, which will exacerbate future rise," said WMO secretary general Petteri Taalas.

"As we have seen this year with tragic effect in the Bahamas and Mozambique, sea-level rise and intense tropical storms led to humanitarian and economic catastrophes." 

The report also highlights the threats to the oceans, with more than 90% of the excess heat caused by climate change ending up in the waters. The WMO analysis says 2018 had the highest ocean heat content values on record.

The study underlines the fact that wherever you look on the planet right now, the story is the same: human-induced warming is impacting the scale and intensity of extreme weather events such as heatwaves and wildfires. 

"Climate change due to us is accelerating and on a very dangerous course," said Prof Brian Hoskins, chair of the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, and professor of meteorology, University of Reading.

"We should listen to the loud cry coming from the schoolchildren. There is an emergency - one for action in both rapidly reducing our greenhouse gas emissions towards zero and adapting to the inevitable changes in climate."

The WMO report is meant to inform the special UN summit on climate change taking place in New York on Monday.

A range of political leaders will attend the one-day event, which is designed to be about action and not words, according to UN secretary general António Guterres. 

"I told leaders not to come with fancy speeches, but with concrete commitments," he said ahead of the meeting. 

"People want solutions, commitments and action. I expect there will be an announcement and unveiling of a number of meaningful plans on dramatically reducing emissions during the next decade, and on reaching carbon neutrality by 2050."

Greta Thunberg and other youth activists, fresh from marching on the streets of New York on Friday, will speak at the opening of the meeting.

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869

Read from top.