The Climate Question: Degrees of Change, Parts 1 and 2

Dandelion Salad

Nov 25, 2012 by

Climate Change has become one of the biggest, most complex issues of our time. And the warnings from some of the world’s leading scientists are getting louder. But skeptics remain. Despite the data, many are unconvinced the science is on target. So we ask: is climate change man-made and, if so, what can we do to stop it? From the crumbling ice caps of the Arctic to the shifting sands of the Arabian Gulf, Al Jazeera takes you around the world to see first-hand the impact mankind is having on our planet. Against the backdrop of a major UN Climate Change Conference in Qatar, join Nick Clark as he looks at the efforts that have been made to address Climate Change, the failures of previous agreements and the challenges that lay ahead.



Nov 26, 2012 by


She’s Alive… Beautiful… Finite… Hurting… Worth Dying for.

Will Superstorm Sandy Break The Silence on Climate Change?

James Balog: Capturing our Disappearing Glaciers + Time-lapse proof of extreme ice loss

The Collision Course Is Set by Chris Hedges

A New Dust Bowl? by Chris Williams

Bernie Sanders takes on Jim Inhofe: Global Warming is Real + Richard Muller: Humans are almost entirely the cause

9 thoughts on “The Climate Question: Degrees of Change, Parts 1 and 2

  1. Pingback: Out of Season by Lesley Docksey « Dandelion Salad

  2. Pingback: Sheldon Whitehouse Calls Out Climate Deniers in Senate Speech + Climate Change and Ocean Acidification « Dandelion Salad

  3. Pingback: The Quiet Revolution: Combating Climate Change by Lesley Docksey « Dandelion Salad

  4. Pingback: Africa: Climate for Change « Dandelion Salad

  5. Pingback: COP18: “We are Running Out of Time” « Dandelion Salad

  6. Pingback: World Bank should take its own advice on climate change by Simon Butler « Dandelion Salad

  7. I agree, Nick Clark’s series of reports is convincing and commendable, but the problem is the quality of the science. Science is organised scepticism. If you are not sceptical you are not a scientist. Once we make a single hypothesis the absolute truth, it assumes the unquestionable authority of unfalsifiable dogma.
    I think we need a different order of criteria to make the right moral, ecological and ethical choices. It is all a question of proportionate adjustment.
    Chris Hedges got it right when he spoke about the “sanctity of life” in his Bill Moyers interview. There is no absolute way of assessing truth. It falls to each of us to exercise our faculties and judgement as best we can, and not to accept the opinion and propaganda of others as gospel. All perspectives contribute to the cumulative evidence.
    It might be the single dissenting voice that saves us from totalitarian enslavement.

    • The real problem as I see it is not just the science and the potential abuse of the scientific method, that by definition must differ, be open to refutation, openly debated and peer-reviewed. The real issue is corporate spin and hierarchical influence. Whatever the position on climate, either way, corporate state-controls are running the game.

      The supreme agency of institutional life throughout our world is education. It is the universities that have the responsibility for providing us with the rational tools and professional expertise to make ethical judgements.

      Universities like any other corporate entity are made up of individuals. When individuals lie or dissemble in order to conserve tenure, they sow the seeds of corruption that then infect the whole of society.

      The greater the privilege, the larger one’s social responsibility. When sovereign minds can be bought and sold, they are no longer sovereign, they have become bonded slaves to the fetish of power.

  8. Pingback: Stand Still For the Apocalypse by Chris Hedges « Dandelion Salad

Comments are closed.