Climate reality project presents: 24 hours of reality

I still lack a home internet connection, which is somewhat frustrating! As readers can appreciate, this has an enormous impact on publishing. However in the interim I’d like to draw readers attention to the “24 Hours of Reality” event:

A lot can change in a day. This November 14, we hope you can help us make big change happen.

Join The Climate Reality Project for 24 Hours of Reality: The Dirty Weather Report. This will be our second annual, online event showing how global climate change is connected to the extreme weather we experience in our daily lives. The entire 24-hour event will be broadcast live over the Internet.

We’ll move between our home studio in New York City and into each region of the world, bringing voices, news and multimedia content across all 24 time zones. We’ll feature videos from around the globe, man-on-the-street reports, music, and most importantly, stories from communities moving forward with solutions.

The Climate Reality Project was set up by Al Gore, and does some interesting work.

While it won’t convince the die-hard “sceptics”, for those interested in the connection between climate change and extreme weather events it is well worth watching. I’m curious to see what solutions are proposed.

22 thoughts on “Climate reality project presents: 24 hours of reality

  1. john byatt says:

    Had to laugh at Watts and his own broadcast . “broadcast to counter reality”

  2. rubber taster says:

    From Rabbet Run about the US election:

    “Denialists lost seats. In under-reported news, four out of five Congressional Representatives dubbed the “Flat Earth Five” by the League of Conservation Voters for denying climate reality lost their seats, and eleven of twelve generally anti-environment candidates also got beat. These people were specially targeted and I’ve been looking for more specifics; the League needs to update their website (a little update here). This is a nice bit of karmic payback for 2010, when most of the eight Republicans who voted to do something about climate lost their seats to primary challengers.”

    • Eric Worrall says:

      The timing of Sandy was pretty fortunate for the alarmist cause.

      But Congress is still in Republican hands – once the fuss dies down, you’ll find Americans care more about jobs than windmills.

  3. I am crediting Huff Post blogger, Ryan Grims, who uncovered romney saying on video he’d kill FEMA, just as obama was putting FEMA to work saving lives on the east coast of america after Global Warming posterchild SANDY struck.

    I monitored letters to editor and comments under articles and noticed 2 things. One – unimportant – had liberals attacking this idea.

    The second – very important – had no conservatives (usually omnipresent in the comment department ) defending romney.

    I turned to my better half and said “he’s toast.”

    One blogger, one little post – killed $6 billion in GOP ads.

    Obama’s voters didn’t turn out as much as romney’s voters stayed home – thanks to Ryan Grim.

    The blog-o-sphere rules !!!!!

    • Eric Worrall says:

      Agreed, Romney made several serious mistakes.

      I like one of the Heartland Institute’s responses to the Romney election.

      I’m not surprised. The biggest ‘achievement’ of the Obama presidency has been Obamacare, which was modeled on Romneycare in Massachusetts. So the election came down to a choice between the man who gave us Obamacare and the man who gave Obamacare to the man who gave us Obamacare. There was no compelling reason to change president.

      http://blog.heartland.org/2012/11/heartland-institute-fellows-policy-advisors-react-to-obamas-victory/

      I have consistently said Romney was no catch, was not the best candidate they could have picked.

      Ron Paul might have done better – socially liberal, fiscally ultraconservative, popular with swing voters – he could have been the medicine America needed, to rein in ballooning government debt, bring the troops home, and restore prosperity.

      Sadly we’ll never know – he’s too old to try again.

  4. john byatt says:

    The stuffing arrogance of this prick saying that he will cooperate with the commission into child abuse,

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-13/pell-welcomes-royal-commission/4369236

    You do not get a bloody choice Pell, who the fuck do you think you are?.

  5. john byatt says:

    Only a few may remember the Anglican Archbishop of Brisbane, Peter Hollingworth
    and the abuse scandal of the nineties, Clergy were using theological blackmail on single mothers and recent widows to gratify their own sexual desires, of course the general excuse was that they were possessed by the demon of lust at the time and let off, stiff shit for the women who’s lives they ruined.

    The church dealt with such claims itself only further abusing the rights of those women.
    This Hollingworth could see nothing wrong with the church trials, even if they involved child abuse,

    This would be like Boy scouts of America claiming the same right to adjudicate on sexual abuse within that organisation, These religious dinosaurs do not and will never get it.

    my rant over for now

  6. Eric Worrall says:

    Al Gore’s alarmism might be a little more plausible if he hadn’t bought an extravagant beachfront property.

    Click Here

    Obviously he is a little less worried about sea level rise than one might gather from listening to some of his dire warnings.

      • Eric Worrall says:

        Tried your link, didn’t make the smell of hypocrisy go away.

      • john byatt says:

        You are so out of touch eric, your story
        How green is Al Gore’s $9 million Montecito oceanfront villa?
        Comments 482
        By Wendy Koch, USA TODAY
        Updated 2010-05-18 2:21

        2010? How about updating yourself, Rudd also has an ocean front property, it is 10m above sea level, Tim Flannery’s property is even higher up than that and Combet’s Newcastle property is also above the 2100 SLR predictions,

        all you lot have is lies and spin,

        I have just exposed The climate Sceptics Party’s lies about the amount of man made CO2 in the atmosphere in their Blogger’s local rag., this is the reason that the sceptics like yourself have lost all credibility, Your crap is self contradictory, mentioned that also.

        Pell is to busy trying to cover his arse than putting out more of his ignorance at the moment,

        • Eric Worrall says:

          Oh I see, Al Gore buying an oceanfront villa in 2010 is “out of date”. Has the alarmist scientific position changed so radically since 2010?

          It doesn’t matter whether the villa is slightly above predicted SLR, all your predicted climate change driven superstorms would still make such a villa a very dangerous place to live, even in the next 10 or 20 years – if the people buying the villas believed their own predictions.

      • john byatt says:

        Your are a liar eric, why did you change al gore’s ocean view property to oceanfront?

        google al gore ocean view property
        go to images
        eric caught out telling prokies again

        this is why you are losing eric, too many lies

    • Eric Worrall says:

      Your graph just demonstrates warming to date is indistinguishable from natural variation John.

      There was very little rise in CO2 up until around 1940, but the rate of temperature rise before 1940 is similar to the rate after 1940. Since CO2 was not responsible for pre-1940 global warming, what is your evidence that the post 1940 global warming was driven by CO2?

      If you argue that pre-1940 CO2 *was* responsible for warming, then you have an even bigger problem. For the small shift in CO2 prior to 1940 to cause the same warming as the amount of CO2 increase post 1940, the exponential rolloff of CO2 forcing must be phenomenal – it must be at, or very near, its limit.

      Now we appear to have entered a new flat period – like I said, 16 years and counting. I’m going to enjoy watching you alarmists get increasingly frantic and defensive, as the flatline rolls on.

  7. john byatt says:

    Statistical significant warming is exactly what distinguishes it from natural variation

    It is your own ignorance eric

    of course CO2 was in part responsible for pre 1940 warming, the question that most sceptical people would ask is what caused the temperature dip post 1940?

    Of course you have never bothered to research that, easier just to parrot whatever nonsense you come across.

    you have not even come up with the right question.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: