The climate change documentary, “Years of Living Dangerously” was nominated for two Emmy Awards. That was well deserved and fantastic news. But, frankly, with Cosmos also nominated for the same categories, no one really expected more than the nomination.
But, while Cosmos dis win in the “Outstanding Writing For Nonfiction Programming” category, and good on them for doing that, “Years of Living Dangerously” took the award for “Outstanding Documentary or NonFiction Series.
This is of course because it is a great, well done documentary. But I like to think part of this outcome has to do with people realizing the importance of climate change as an existential issue.
You can watch the first episode here:
You have to have Showtime to watch the rest of it, but it will be available on iTunes and as a DVD next month.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
In various polls, global warming invariably ends up at or near the bottom of the worry list. Maybe now, after one of the coldest winters and chilliest summers ever, GW will move farther from the bottom of the pile. Except the folks will be rooting for MORE global warming. So we can have normal summers again.
Driving on the N.E. extension of the PA turnpike this week, I noticed some leaves already changing.
Global warming has been moving up on people’s list of things they are concerned about, so no, you’ve got that wrong.
The very cold winter was a result of global warming, ironically, see this post for a more detailed explanation of that:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/08/14/more-research-linking-global-warming-to-bad-weather-events/
So no, you’ve got that wrong too.
This time of year in Pennsylvania and lots of other places some trees turn. It may be disease, lack of water, damage, or just rude trees. Personally I think someone should cut those trees down. But in any event, this has not hing to do with global warming, so no, you’ve got that wrong too.
You pretty much got everything wrong. HOW DID YOU DO THAT? I suspect you have an anti-climate science agenda.
GW doesn’t even register here:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
Also,
“Public concern about environmental issues including climate change has slumped to a 20-year low since the financial crisis, a global study reveals… Despite years of studies showing the impact of global warming on the planet, only 49 per cent of people now consider climate change a very serious issue – far fewer than at the beginning of the worldwide financial crisis in 2009.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/green-fatigue-sets-in-the-world-cools-on-global-warming-8513826.html
Most feel GW claims are exaggerated:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/167960/americans-likely-say-global-warming-exaggerated.aspx
That is significantly different from your earlier simplistic statement. Now you are doing some complex cherry picking. Also please be careful with terms like “most claim” when fewer than half claim.
Oh yes indeed, the problem is not recognized to be as important as it truly is by the general public, and it goes up and down. I wonder why, any ideas?
As it happens, this August has been cool at my location (southern New Hampshire). We haven’t seen any 90 degree days yet this month, and the long range forecast doesn’t get us above 80 degrees. But other places have seen summers much hotter than normal. Like my mother, who is two blocks from Puget Sound and has seen some 90 degree days. Ninety degrees in summer is common for inland parts of metro Seattle, but it’s usually much cooler near the waterfront–her building does not have air conditioning because at the time it was built, it was rare for temperatures to get warm enough to need it. If you look throughout the world, you see more places where it’s warmer than the average of the last 30 years than places where it’s cooler–and that’s how it’s been, every month, since the 1980s.
So I’m not surprised that leaves are staring to turn at the higher elevations of the Northeast, especially for trees that are under stress. That used to be normal, rather than unusual, for this time of year. Just like the past winter would have been considered a normal winter 30 years ago.
You’re right – I should have said over 40% (not “most”) feel GW claims are exaggerated.
But you appear to be dodging the main point: GW is near the bottom of the problem priority list, if it shows up at all.
An analogy would be saying that polls show 1) over 40% think baseball player X’s talent is over-estimated, but 2) player X doesn’t even make the list of the top 50 baseball players.
England’s chilly too.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2727734/Wet-cold-bank-holiday-way-forecasters-warn-two-weeks-bad-weather-ahead.html
Yes, indeed, that latest Gallup poll is bad news; people’s listing of climate change is very low as a priority. But the poll also listed far more topics than most such polls, so there is more competition. And lack of concern over climate change is a problem. However, you seem to be implying that scientific concern of climate change actually IS overstated. Is that your point?
But, on the other hand, we are seeing climate change actually appearing in certain areas as a factor in elections. People who vote don’t represent the public in general, but in some ways people who vote are the only people who matter (they are the only ones who show up!). I suspect that will increase over time.
Regarding it being cold some places, that’s weather, not climate. See this for July’s anomaly in temperature to get an idea:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/global-maps.php?imgs%5B%5D=map-land-sfc-mntp&year=2014&month=7
It is important to keep clear the distinction between weather and climate.
“And lack of concern over climate change is a problem.”
Many scientists, and many other people, including many people who actually vote, would disagree.
“It is important to keep clear the distinction between weather and climate.”
Oh, I think I understand the distinction. However, they’re of course much related. One could say climate is the sum of the “weathers”. Merriam Webster defines “climate” as
1) a region with particular weather patterns or conditions.
2) the usual weather conditions in a particular place or region.
Am I saying the climate in the North Eastern U.S. or in England or elsewhere is changing? Not necessarily. But if it IS, a case could be made for it not getting warmer.
What about global temps staying steady for the last 17 years?
Of course, all the above is minor league stuff. How about the majors? How about significant and indisputable climate change – BEFORE SUVs and factory smokestacks?
“At the end of the last Ice Age, the Sahara Desert was just as dry and uninviting as it is today. But sandwiched between two periods of extreme dryness were a few millennia of plentiful rainfall and lush vegetation.”
http://www.livescience.com/4180-sahara-desert-lush-populated.html
No, sorry, you can not make a case for it not getting warmer. Rearding the so called pause in global temperatures, see the following.
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?s=pause
And then, go away.
See Noevo refers to some cold weeks in August, but one wonders why he ignores the warmer than usual July:
http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2014/07/30/july-2014-in-top-ten-warmest-and-sunniest/
(oh, we know, weather and climate are the same)