People power part 2: climate council raises $1 million in a week

cc.infographic.final_.1250

Amazing response from the public:

A social media campaign to fund a replacement for the abolished Climate  Commission through private donations has proved a huge success with $900,000  raised in less than a week.

Amanda McKenzie, from the rebadged Climate Council, said the money was raised  largely from small donors, with an average donation of about $50.

The funds were raised from about 20,000 individuals and far exceeded the  original targets.

“Initially the councillors aimed to raise $500,000 in a week. That target was  met after two days,” she said. “Once we got to $800,000 we upped the aim to $1  million on Facebook”.

There is a much greater level of support for action on climate change than our conservative politicians would have us believe.

See also their report on the IPCCs recently released Assessment Report (5th edition).

 

 

 

About these ads

29 thoughts on “People power part 2: climate council raises $1 million in a week

  1. […] 2013/09/30: WtD: People power part 2: climate council raises $1 million in a week […]

  2. Rodger the Dodger says:

    My question is to Bill Jamison,

    Why do you continue to haunt the comments section of this site? The science of global warming is over 150 years old, and was settled over 30 years ago. Your continual and monotonous protestation will never change the facts. Most intelligent people have moved on, accepted the fact and are now rolling up their sleeves to do something about it. You on the other hand act like a nasty dumpy troll with a vendetta. No capacity for rational thought or insight. Start acting like an adult, move on and direct your juvenile frustration somewhere else. I hear that burning ants with a magnifying glass in pretty good. We’ve all seen your type many times before. Hanging around forums like a bad smell with evangelical determination, posting pointless, inane and bigoted ramblings. You enjoyment is to taunt and provoke, and never giving any respect. Is there something mentally wrong with you? Where you abused as a child? Why do you persist? Why not just cut your losses and do something constructive with your life.

    • Nick says:

      The GOP is exercising the madness that the conservative brain imposes. Whatever it takes, the procedural codification of the tantrum. No conservative belief is wrong, regardless the evidence….and they are normalising bad faith action throughout economies, leading to the destruction of trust, the spreading of despair and the hamstringing of their own ideal economic dreams.

  3. J Giddeon says:

    I’m looking forward to them posting a list of their larger donners. They will do that, won’t they? After all they always demand it from skeptic think tanks.

    • john byatt says:

      no donors over $1000 at the current time average donation $50

      was that larger donners or dongers?

    • john byatt says:

      “skeptic think tanks”

      big admission that one, interchangeable with climate denial think tanks …

  4. Bill Jamison says:

    “1982: Strong global warming since the mid-1970’s is reported with 1981 the warmest year on record”.

    So 6 or 7 years of change is significant? In that case if we look at global temperature since 2005 we see a cooling trend.

    Oh no, we’re doomed! The Ice Age Cometh!

    • zoot says:

      Bill, you’re sounding more and more desperate.
      It’s quite heart warming.

      • Bill Jamison says:

        If I made comments about any kind of 6 year trend you’d laugh at me yet that’s exactly what is touted in the graphic. I think we all know that annual variability prevents any meaningful conclusions from being made from short term trends of any kind.

        • john byatt says:

          The comments were made in 1982,

          it comes from a timeline of reports on global warming

          http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm

          No meaningful conclusions came from it at the time

        • Bill Jamison says:

          That was my point john – in 1982 they were touting the fact that there had been *gasp* 6 years of warming! From the “mid-1970’s” to 1982. Not a very long period to get all excited and make claims of a trend.

          If nothing else it shows the alarmist message started long ago.

        • john byatt says:

          i think that it shows that you did not have a clue where it came from and now instead of accepting you total lack of understanding you go off in a rant how they should have known in 1982 exactly what we know now

          talk about making an even bigger fool of yourself

    • Nick says:

      What’s your point, Bill? You think you can excerpt a quick observational history, and make a cheap point while ignoring the state of knowledge at the time, and the gains in knowledge of the last thirty years? 6 or 7 years of change in the direction of predictions of the time was interesting. It_just_was_notable. Now after another thirty years, the interest is more than justified. We know a lot more.

      Put the observation in context: the climate field was small, the consensus of study [as documented in Peterson, Fleck and Connolley] was that warming was going to occur,and observers crunching numbers saw a global increase,while Ralph Keelings definitive measurement system noted CO2 increase.. Are they supposed to not make a note? There was no IPCC,just some interest at academy level, and some advice flowing through to government like Charney, all of it qualified and couched in cautious language. Concepts of climatic significance have been given a term since those times

      • john byatt says:

        bill is just a denier doing what deniers do

      • john byatt says:

        he still thinks that reporting facts is alarmist.

        we have had six years of warming ,,,,do not tell anyone they will think we are alarmist

        last year was the warmest year….. do not tell anyone they will think we are alarmist

        bill has the IQ of a retarded gnat

  5. Alan Jones ranting as usual – spreading the myths of denial and putting the opinion of fossil-fuel funded Bob Carter ahead of climate scientists. It’s time ACMA got serious about enforcing 2GB’s broadcaster licence conditions.

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      Oh dear… may have to listen to see if they’ve made a Press Council worthy complaint ;)

  6. john byatt says:

    Was that Abbott inspecting the indonesian military personal or was it paul hogan doing an impersonation ?

  7. john byatt says:

    WTF

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/carbon-emission-target-easier-than-thought-hunt-20130921-2u6w8.html

    Hunt “Under direct action, a $2.55 billion fund will be set up to buy emissions reductions from companies and farmers. Companies will also be given an emissions intensity baseline and will face penalties if they breach it”
    .

    This is a direct contradiction of the policy not to impose penalties but only to provide incentives

    someone ask hunt on twitter?

  8. antipodeanspecies1 says:

    I think more people are reaching the conclusion that waiting for governments to do something is roughly equivalent to doing nothing and that it’s best to take the initiative. Rarely do politicians lead, mostly they play catch up and pretend they are in touch with the community. I hope this example of people being prepared to put their money where their mouth is makes a few politicians lie awake at night.

  9. This is a massive kick in the teeth for Abbott and Hunt. They tried to shoot the messenger and failed miserably.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 771 other followers

%d bloggers like this: