Amy got so swept up in the eclipse mania that the poor scientist didn't have a decent shot at talking about the actual topic at hand. Shes so great and professional in every other situation so I give it a pass and the scientist did do a good job with the time he had. Keep raising the issue!
I'll give her a pass, too. After all these months reporting on Gaza and climate breakdown, one has to want to take a few minutes to just talk about something amazing but non-alarming.
+2.5 ppm CO2 per year, _a gas more rare than xenon;_ +2.5mm per year 'sea level' rise, _Miami will be ankle deep in 720 years;_ +0.05°C per year is undetectable, _everything_ is now 'The Hottest Day on Record!' _(...climate model simulation..)._ Said so right in the report that nobody reads. IPCC demanded $2,700-a-CO2-Ton tithe since al-Göre's Carbön Cäp & Träde Schëme (actual legal name). *That's $35 a gallon tax.* That's GenZ Does Gäza!
Arrested for what? Protesting or eco-terrorism? Pretty much everything he could have said has been said before. 12:18 "We should... end the fossil fuel industry" is what every environmentalist should agree on, if they don't already.
@@sandal_thong8631That is what leads to a second dark age. The level of ignorance and stupidity is astonishing. There is no alternative. Fossil fuels ended extreme poverty and allowed for free market capitalism. We are not going back even if it leads to death. Mankind cannot afford to listen to idiots.
Amy... sorry, but I would rather have heard Peter talk more about the seriousness of climate change, the CEO's with the most power on the planet energizing disinformation and the society shaping forces of marketing and who gets access to the media.
He said we need to end the fossil fuel industry. What more can he say? Unfortunately, he only mentioned solar and wind, so he may be delusional that those could take up the slack. Nuclear, geothermal and hydropower are essentially free of greenhouse gas emission in electrical generation other than concrete construction, mining for resources, and decomposing vegetation underwater.
The point is not to "take up the slack" which just leads to ecological overshoot, but to downshift the total amount of energy necessary to sustain civilization. @@sandal_thong8631
I guess you’ll have to figure out how to get 3 billion Chinese and Indians to go green. There’s absolutely nothing we can do about it. Even if we’re zero it wouldn’t make a difference whatsoever. Just wait until Africa and S. American ramp up their industrialization. We move our industry there in the name of climate change, and they have no rules.
@@toadsauce8091 the US is one of the largest consumers of fossil fuels per capita annually (eclipsed only by the gulf states, saudi arabia, and other city-states and/or petrostates). the US consumes approx. 2.5x more fossil fuels per person compared to china, and over 10x that of india. and your characterization of chinese energy generation is literally *the exact opposite* of reality. china has the single largest renewable generation capacity globally (over 3x that of the US). they have the single fastest growing renewable energy sector (with growth outpacing either fossil fuel or nuclear infrastructure) in the world. they are the single largest producer and consumer of solar panels, wind turbines, hydroelectric infrastructure, etc. china accounts for ~50% of all renewable investments made annually. the US is the one that needs to figure shit out
Amy, a climate suitable for human life and civilization overarches and underlies ALL other issues and everything else we care about. It deserved more time.
This was borderline difficult to watch. I usually appreciate Amy's interviews, but she went on with inane banalities like eclipse glasses for pets and you could tell he has a message... which she has to cut short. I'm not given to conspiratorial thinking, but it feels kind of gross to have his last desperate words about mass media distracting from and disinforming on the impending climate doom get cut off due to lack of time on an independent news outlet. It felt calculated. I'm a firm believer in never attributing to malice that which can easily be explained by ignorance, but damn man. She would know better than that. She needs to get that guy back on and give him a longer form interview that he can lead the conversation.
I think you're not too far off the mark with your thinking. Peter is forever being put on the spot, interrupted, asked to discuss something irrelevant for someone else's entertainment....
What about pets looking at the Sun during a solar eclipse? That's the stupidest question I've ever heard. A cat or a dog would never purposely look at the Sun and they have no idea what a solar eclipse is. People's attention should be on climate change, especially with such elevated ocean temperatures influencing air temperatures in 2023/2024.
Who do you think high energy prices, high food prices and high commuting costs effects the most ? The middle class eco loons don't give on jot for the poor .....
@@ossianx8752 Exactly. I am poor, and no one cares. Last week, I did errands. A Caucasian, homeless, woman asked a Caucasian guy for money to eat, and he kept on walking. When she asked me, I gave her a dollar. I had six dollars. The irony is, most homeless people are also/still brainwashed to take advantage and not care about themselves. I've gotten disrespected, even by homeless people, and most of them are/were males. Humanity is still getting worse in so many controlled/negative/fake ways.
"This presentation *focuses on* the *myriad ways* in which the *powers-that-be* in the *United States have been systematically dumbing down Americans* as a society *for a very long time - all by meticulously calculated design."* - *ARTICLE* - *"The Dumbing Down of America - By Design".*
You used to much time talking about the Eclipse and didn't leave enough time for the Environment. The title of this should have been the Eclipse not about the environment
Appreciate all your efforts on the Climate Dr. Kalmus and Democracy Now. Maybe avoid mixing unrelated subject for the guest in the future. We were probably all a little frustrated by the non-sequitur. It's like folks can't stop themselves from getting overly excited about an eclipse.
Peter is one of the few people I have heard talk about global warming and the global implications that seem to share my sense of alarm and urgency over the crisis we are now in. We have chosen to disregard Nature's warnings. The global migration crisis began already a decade ago, yet we focus on the petty political power struggles reactively instead of addressing the real causes proactively. We refuse to adjust, but it's not a choice, really. Nature will ensure that we eventually comply... ultimately at the expense of billions of humans, if necessary.
I'd check out Paul Beckwith - he's a professor in Ottowa. He's pretty depressing to watch but he's been about 10 years ahead of everyone in discussing what's happening with the jet streams and ocean currents etc. He doesn't get nearly enough support.
No idea who else you listen to, of course, but Kevin Anderson is always great! Best all-round source of reliable scientific climate info is Alex Smith's Radio EcoShock. Fantastic interviews for lay people with many different scientists, mostly about their recent publications. Occasionally something else, like a chat with Paul Beckwith for more of an overview perspective, for example.
Paul Beckwith (as a friend mentioned before), Guy McPherson are IMO best info on YT Some scientist like Tim Lenton, Stefan Rahmstorf, Kevin Anderson are interesting on the subject - even if they won't tell you the worst.
Not Guy McPherson, no. He's wrong on most points. Predicted "no humans alive in ten years" several decades ago. As The Original Doomer, his take has now replaced denialist misinformation, basically. Not his doing, but this is not where you want to go. Kevin really is creme de la creme, but as I noted, the breath of scientists and specific topics on Radio EcoShock is incomparable to any other source out there that I'm aware of.
Forbes put out an article in like 08 bragging about how many more barrels we burn per soldier then compared to the Vietnam War. That's when it clicked with me that the old models are like 50 yrs off because of the Bush wars. Very depressing because we could have had Gore - who's still out here trying to raise awareness.
Life has always thrived during warm periods and dies off when earth is cold. Just go look at the paleo record. Plants thrive when co2 is above 1,000 ppm
Not going to save the planet just switching from an extractive economy based on oil to one based on minerals. We have to have an economy that doesn't deplete the planets resources.
Yeah, mineral based economy will also only become sustainable, if we ramp up recycling of almost everything we use to 100%. This is hard for things like car tires or clothes, which have wear and you can't put back all the material into a planned loop, even if all people cared about the environment. So things like this have to be made from biodegradable materials.
@halphantom2274 I remember someone saying if go back to solid as opposed to air filled tires, it would reduce waste, but mass transit is a better solution.
I am so sick of climate change deniers. I am 32 years old, and I have witnessed firsthand the change in average climate in my home country of the UK. We experienced the hottest temperatures ever recorded in London just 2 years ago, when the temperature reached 40c. Back when I was a child, a hot summer in the UK was considered to be anything above 25c, once we hit the 30s, it was considered a “heat wave”, and was a once in every few years occurrence, but this now happens every year. Christmases are now noticeably hotter too, we’ve had several Christmases in the last 5 years when the temperature has been >15c, which again, was unheard of when I was a child, when the temperatures would rarely go above 6c all of December. It is truly terrifying to think of the future that awaits us. I sincerely hope those responsible are tried at for crimes against humanity.
Sorry, I don't find your 32 years life experience very impressive. I am 77 years old and have lived in the same house and gardened, growing most of my own food, in the same location in Ohio for the last 54 years. I have seen hotter and colder spells over that time. The last two summers were the coolest I can remember.
@@jmrrpress so you’re going to ignore global trends of exponentially increasing temperatures because your particular locality isn’t as affected? This would be like me saying poverty isn’t an issue because everybody I know is rich. As I said, London experienced the hottest temperature since records began just 2 years ago. Considering these records go back to the medieval period, this eclipses both yours and my lifetime combined. Not to mention, every year we set new records for hottest average temperatures, and yet, people like you will still hand wave the issue because you are not personally impacted.
In another 10 years time you are going to be forced by reality to admit all this climate alarm is bogus. Or you have trained yourself to look at something else. Either way, trouble lies ahead. You have been lied to. You just dont know it yet but maybe one day you might accept that at least some of the alarm is unwarranted. You just need to become more skeptical. Even a little will make you feel better..
I have lived in Aberdeen Scotland for over 50 years, and it's still the most miserable wet coldest place as ever. Actually, people still tend to talk about how great the summer was in1976 was!
He is, of course, totally correct! This system has to change, or we won’t survive! And we’ll take out billions of other lives too. Just to line the greedy, selfish, pockets of a few individuals. Total madness!
Maybe if media could clue in that climate is the symptom, but it’s the economy that is the problem. So talking to weather experts, while economists pretend it’s outside their purview (because “the economy occurs indoors”) might be an example of journalistic failure.
❤️ you Amy!! I’ve been watching DN since I was in high school and it was on our local public access station before school ~2001. I credit you and your team for opening my eyes and seeing the how things really are… it’s great to see you still able to get excited and smiling even after all the terrible truths you share with us after all these years.
As more people raise out of poverty our consumprtion will increase, our pollution will crease, and our use of resources will increase. As we override the limitations of the local ecology and inport more, humans' ability to continue to grow in numbers will continue. It has always been due to limitations that has kept humans numbers down. Once we end all that plagues humanity and ends life early humans may not survive.
solar is the cheapest it has ever been, less than $500 gets you hundreds of watts of clean power. but people in the usa are so cheap and so well groomed to keep using their oil-drenched wall outlets and wait for someone in power to do the work for them. it's up to YOU not THEM to snap out of it and try small solar. having solar on your property is your public VOTE for a sustainable earth. those without solar, expect us.
PV solar panels have been around 50 cents per watt for some time. A few hundred watts of solar power is useless. I have 22,000 watts of solar and 36,000 of wind power. I do live off-grid so I don't have a choice.
If I'm not mistaken, it's going to take decades for the climate to catch up with what we've already done to the atmosphere. Even if we drop carbon / methane emissions to 0, we still have decades of warming ahead of us. That's not even counting when the permafrost in the arctic begins to thaw and decompose. That will add dramatically to greenhouse gas emissions and I don't think there's any way to stop it.
They say that the ozone depletion might have been made by CFCs put into the atmosphere a decade or more before the Montreal Protocol, so the same could be true of warming by GHGs. Maybe we could have passed the tipping point with runaway warming. Still there is a difference between 1°, 2°, 3°, etc. in terms of its affect on the environment and human civilization. I think one problem is convincing people that a sacrifice, like carbon taxes, would do anything to mitigate the problem.
DN began before the Internet. By the time I started watching it it had what is basically it's daily, hour long format. It is also available on radio stations. For RU-vid it's broken the format into several separate pieces. The first section is the daily overview of the news. Other sections, on various topics, follow adding up to an entire hour.
All it will take is for one nuke to go off , intentional or otherwise. The 5th extinction event. 👽 " we're warning you puny earthlings , we have ways if stopping you ."
Normally I really hold Amy’s interviewing prowess in the highest esteem. This was hard to take. What on earth was all the distraction and inane excitement about the eclipse about?! I’d have thought Democracy Now had done their due diligence and worked out Peter Kalmus’ calibre and credibility warranted a full, uninterrupted segment. Serious WTF?!?
i personally really dont like how short these always are and how the guests always get cut off to end when so much has still not been said. i wish these were long form that are then cut up and clipped together to form a short version.
To say that any and all technological/geoengineering solutions are irrelevant and only a distraction is something I profoundly disagree with. Do big oil companies try to lie or downplay the effects of their polluting? Sure, but that doesn't mean all technological solutions are bad or not worth trying. Carbon capture is not a terrible idea. Advances in green hydrogen and nuclear power (in particular nuclear fusion) is not a bad thing in addition to solar, wind etc. To just say, end all fossil fuel industries, without having solid alternatives in place, is not plausible or realistic. Obviously green energy has come a long way, but it's not yet enough to power the whole earth and entire industries still need to transition from reliance on fossil fuels. I would entirely support ending subsidies to fossil fuel companies and further incentivizing green advancements and adoption of new technologies and energy sources but it doesn't happen over night
Mr. Nihad Awad, The leader of CAIR, The Council on American Islamic Relations, said he was happy about the Hamas terror attacks of Oct 7th. “The people of Gaza only decided to break the siege, the walls of the concentration camp, on October 7. And yes, I WAS HAPPY to see people breaking the siege and throwing down the shackles of their own land and walk free into their land, which they were not allowed to walk in,”
Thank you for having this guest on! He’s so right that the public is asleep. After agreeing with all he’s said, we probably would just go on with our lives as usual for days, months, and years since climate change wouldn’t seem to affect us in our daily lives in the US…. Until it does, and then it’ll be too late.
Kalmus is perfectly correct in that the only way out is to end the FF industry. But the world as it is relies on the FF industry to keep running. Fossil fuels are the heartbeat and the blood of our world. So ending the FF industry is to end our way of life. And no there is no way that "alternative, sustainable" sources will be able to replace what we have (though they could have provided an alternative lifestyle that was less convenient though more fulfilling had we started to pursue this option decades ago). So ending fossil fuels means ending our world as it is. To see what this means, go for a single day without a car, plane, Starbucks, fast food, basketball, Spotify, RU-vid, your phone, the supermarket or shopping mall, the bar/restaurant, hot water, hospitals, your kitchen & stove or microwave. And all the thousands of things we take for granted everyday that fossil fuels have made possible. After doing this for one single day you will begin to realize that the FF industry will not be going anywhere until the last tree has burned down and there's nobody left to buy or use the products they produce. It will never happen, and that is why nothing is being done. It not only will not happen, it cannot happen. And for the clincher (wait for it) - this was all by the design of our consciousness: Humans would rise, populate, innovate, steal the treasures of the Earth and with those treasures destroy ourselves as a result of our inability to break through the veil of our consciousness and see clearly the correct way to utilize resources and help each other. This isn't some religious message. This is a Truth that binds together the physical realities of life on Earth with the realities of Existence that very few have come to understand. This is by design, as when throwing a ball to a group of children it can be expected that they will play games with that ball. This wouldn't surprise you. Therefore don't be troubled as these things must come to pass. This will not be the end but a painful stage in the evolution of our planet and life on it. Instead of worrying about fossil fuels and blaming one another,, try to understand each other and learn to be accepting in the short time we have left. Ultimately it is Creation that will determine who, if anyone, will be at fault for anything that is truly beyond our power to change.
This is so wrong, I don't even know where to start. Fossil fuels were necessary up until about 50 years ago when we developed cleaner technology to harness renewable energy forms. The failure to do that wholesale, to scrap fossil fuel use is why we're here but you're placing a level of importance to it that just doesn't exist. We'll be fine without fossil fuels, just like we're fine without burning wood for heat, just like we can hunt without a flint spear, we can build homes without adobe, and we can add spandex to our socks so they don't fall down.
@@jaybee9269 Our African, atheist, non political, ancestors were actually free in so many ways. They, obviously, didn't have so many ("modern") technologies to keep them docile/lazy, either.
@@tanyalake9152 >> I take your point but I don’t think our ancestors counted too many atheists amongst them. They would not have understood things when there was little science. Stoics count, I suppose.
@@jaybee9269 I was born in the Caribbean, and my Caribbean birthplace also got invaded, colonized, renamed by pale-skinned, European, "christian/political", males. Especially by Christopher Columbus. So did so-called america. Heck. Even when I was a child, in the Caribbeans, certain Caribbean people helped/supported each other in certain/many ways. Humanity, even then, weren't physically lazy. Why? Because humanity also didn't have so much technologies.
I go one step further: the whole greenhouse gas theory is not a theory but a hypothesis whose underlying assumptions can't be proven. Not very scientific at all. But you wouldnt know that.
Look at a pie chart of atmospheric gases. Note the percentage of the CO2. Look up percentages of CO2 going back 100 million years. We’re at a low point. It has been lower but we’re still really low. CO2 was tin times higher in the past
@@MrBallynally2 Thousands of research studies and models that have been quite accurate for over 40 years proved the theory of man-made global warming is correct.
I would have to assume all of you in the series of comments are climate scientists and have reviewed the thousands of studies the 200 + internation IPCC team did to achieve a global consensus. If so can you please submit your research material to correct the overwhelming scientific consensus. Or you could folk with an uninformed opinions that helps justify your poor life choices that your children and grandchildren will inherit the consequences of.
The main point that no one seems to want to talk about is that green energy is more expensive and requires less people working. Those are two very real problems we have to figure out or no one is going to move forward on it. No one wants to pay more or repurchase a whole bunch of their current assets including governments and companies. the second major point is that even if we stopped all fossil fuel use right now it will be a substantial amount of time to remove said carbon therefore we definitely need to have plans in place to deal with flooding fires ect and that requires labor and money. That requires a strong economy. No country is going to want to lose its spot in the pecking order while they shuffle their entire system and you can see that playing out in all the superpower nations right now.
"The main point that no one seems to want to talk about is that green energy is more expensive and requires less people working." Actually, green energy is already cheaper and employs far more people than the fossil fuel industry.
@@karlwheatley1244 Oh well I love learning what sector is that? What is it that is produced? Are any of those companies listed in the sp500 then we can see their books and number of employees. Can you name one company to me here so that I can learn and maybe change my perspective.
@@Clamps-nn2pz Google "More people work in the energy sector today than in 2019, almost exclusively due to growth in clean energy, which now employs more workers than fossil fuels." And try "Green energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, a new study finds Making a fast switch to cleaner renewable power could save trillions of dollars by 2050" But next time, maybe search for yourself?
I don't think the Earth should be blamed for the emissions, the true credit goes to each of us and our collective fossil fuel addiction. Addicts always seem to blame others for the problems and deny that they have personal responsibility. So it is with the human race. 😢
We could go to $6/gallon gasoline, which is similar to Europe. But both the companies and consumers resist. We saw examples of what happens to emissions and the atmosphere when transportation is disrupted: no commercial jets flew for a few days after 9/11, and people stayed home during a month or two of the pandemic in 2020. If we do increase gas/carbon taxes, the public has to feel that it's really doing something to delay global warming. It is slightly unfair for the developed world to say they won't do anything unless the undeveloped world agrees, but you can't tax pollution in one place and not in another without people making a decision to relocate their businesses to the low-tax country.
Love ya Amy but this scientist desperately wants to talk about Climate chaos, not solar eclipses. Please Democracy Now, don’t ever so this to this man again.
What do you mean, "not reporting"? We all have been hearing this alarm for many decades. Also, what's the use of plentiful crops if farmers can't use equipment to harvest it? Farm equipment need fossil fuel to be able to work you know! So, what's the plan?
This would have been a problem only if Air Conditioing was never invented. Since rich people can have ACs /AirCons running all time without the care for electricity bills, there is no climate crisis according to them.
By volume, the dry air in Earth's atmosphere is about 78.08 percent nitrogen, 20.95 percent oxygen, and 0.93 percent argon, adding up to 99.96 percent. A brew of trace gases accounts for the other approximately 0.04 percent, including the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone. To think that a small increase (200 parts per million in the last hundred years) of carbon dioxide would affect the weather is absurd.
So did you notice that those 99.96% of gases are DIATOMIC gases? N2, O2, Ar all less than 3, BUT CO2=3, CH4=5, N2O=3 .. keep digging, maybe you'll find out.. How do you explain 0.04% of caffeine in your blood effect, or alcohol, or some very small medicine concentration huge effects?
Whaaaat???, but Treudoe said if we give him all our money, the climate would be saved. What happened? We're paying, why isn't the climate getting better??
Some day people will realize that they can harvest the earth’s own geothermal dynamic energy and not have to rely on the sun shining or the wind blowing or the burning of fossil fuels to generate electricity.
Racism Africa Black Children Death Famine NO UNRWA World Center Kitchen Ship Food Truck Air Drops Hospitals Ambulance In 2023 an estimated 6.3 million children under five died, 2.9 million of them in the WHO African Region. This is equivalent to five children under 5 years of age dying every minute. Two thirds of these deaths can be attributed to preventable causes. A third of all these deaths are in the neonatal period. 0:52
I agree that it's sad to see such a science denying president. Lets be fair though, he HAS to "drill, baby, drill", or fuel prices will be so high, he might not get re-elected. Oh, he meant the Orange one? Yeah, him too.
A good start could be stopping all new Wells in any country but for this countries have to agree or other way out move to minimum oil consumption as fast as possible in developed countries
I couldn't agree more. People with hybrid electric vehicles often drive more, not less. Work from home. Stop commuting 2-4 hours a day! Traffic jams suck!!
You don't, it's valuable, you re-use it. Look up Redwood recycling or LiCycle. As a note they get very few EV packs as they don't die easily so are recycle things like phone batteries until EV batteries start dying. This is the notion of stock vs flow, with fossil fuels it's a constant flow we dump into the atmosphere or landfills, around 20 billion tons per year.
