Author: drmarchudson

Categories
Scientists

December 4, 1893 – John Tyndall dies

One hundred and thirty two years ago, on this day, December 4th, 1893,

In his last years Tyndall often took chloral hydrate to treat his insomnia. When bedridden and ailing, he died from an accidental overdose[79] of this drug in 1893 at the age of 73, and was buried at Haslemere.[80] The overdose was administered by his wife Louisa. “My darling,” said Tyndall when he realized what had happened, “you have killed your John.”[81]

: 1893 John Tyndall dies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 294ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Tyndall had, in the 1860s, proved that carbon dioxide was a greenhouse gas (did he rip off Eunice Foote? Possibly. Probably say some. I am less convinced, fwiw).

What I think we can learn from this – be super careful with potentially lethal cures for insomnia? Er, that’s all I got…

Also, I listened to a podcast where they interviewed the climate scientist Kate Marvel – in her new book she speculates (and she admits this is speculation) that it may not have been an accident…

What happened next? They named a climate centre after him.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

December 4, 1969 – Black Panther Fred Hampton assassinated by FBI, Chicago cops – All Our Yesterdays

December 4, 1989 – first anti-climate action economic “modelling” released in Australia

December 4, 1989 – Greenhouse tax urged…

Categories
Poland UNFCCC United Kingdom

December 3, 2018- David Attenborough on the end of civilisation

Seven years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 2018,

“The collapse of civilisation and the natural world is on the horizon, Sir David Attenborough has told the UN climate change summit in Poland.

“The naturalist was chosen to represent the world’s people in addressing delegates of almost 200 nations who are in Katowice to negotiate how to turn pledges made in the 2015 Paris climate deal into reality.

“As part of the UN’s people’s seat initiative, messages were gathered from all over the world to inform Attenborough’s address on Monday. “Right now we are facing a manmade disaster of global scale, our greatest threat in thousands of years: climate change,” he said. “If we don’t take action, the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon.”

3 Dec 2018 Guardian

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 409ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Attenborough had been slow to acknowledge the carbon dioxide problem (see 2006 piece by George Monbiot).

The specific context was that with the IPCC’s 1.5 degree report, and the Thunberg school strikes, and XR’s “declaration of rebellion”, it was all systems go for climate doom.

What I think we can learn from this – “words words words” as Hamlet would have it.

What happened next – Attenborough kept making documentaries. The emissions, at a global level, kept climbing. So did atmospheric concentrations and temperature. We are fubarred.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

Categories
United Kingdom Weather modification

December 3, 1974 – Commons debates “The Weather Machine”

Fifty one years ago, on this day, December 3rd, 1974,

The CO2 question (that is, long-term temperature and precipitation changes caused by rising carbon dioxide levels) was absent from the Dynamical Climatology Branch and rarely touched on by Mason. This changed with the airing of Nigel Calder’s BBC television programme, The Weather Machine, in 1974. Calder, a well-known British science writer and former New Scientist journalist, painted the imminent coming of a new Ice Age in such dramatic terms that the House of Commons ordered the Meteorological Office to report on Calder’s pronouncements 

‘Meteorological Office: Ice Age Predictions, House of Commons Debate,’’ 3 Dec 1974, Hansard, Vol. 882, cc. 440-2W 

via Martin-Nielsen, 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 330ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that all sorts of predictions – about getting hotter and getting colder, for various reasons, were being thrown about in the 1960s and 1970s. Carbon dioxide build-up was acknowledged by all, but some (including Nigel Calder) were not interested.

One does wonder what Nigel’s dad, Lord Ritchie-Calder, thought…

The specific context was – 1974 was busy year, politically, and there was still ambiguity about what the future would hold for the climate (it wasn’t really for another 10 years that all doubt could be removed, though certainly by the second half of the 1970s more and more people were saying “it’s gonna get hotter, and carbon dioxide is the reason why”).

What I think we can learn from this – the BBC used to have the power to upset the applecart.

What happened next – a fierce prolonged two year spat between the BBC and John Mason, who was, by all accounts, an, ah “forceful personality.”

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

December 3, 1968 – UN General Assembly says yes to a conference about environment. CO2 mentioned.

December 3, 1970 – Olof Palme looks to the future… 

December 3, 1972 – #climate scientists write “gizza grant” letter to President Nixon

Categories
Activism Australia

December 2, 2015 – Parliament sit-in

Ten years ago, on this day, December 2nd, 2015, Australian climate protesters held a Parliament House sit-in. 

Climate Change: Sit-In Protesters Dragged Out Of The Australian Parliament

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 401ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that parliament has proved itself to be largely stuffed with mental or moral defectives (the two are not mutually exclusive, obvs) with the smartest being venal corporate meat-puppets. This is part of the overall assault on civil society by both corporate and state interests, a phenomenon that is going on around the world, with dire consequences. Oh well.

The specific context was – oh, I don’t know. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull being useless.

What I think we can learn from this – we are fubarred. 

What happened next – protests continued. Emissions continued to climb. But then, thank goodness, a Labor government came to power in 2022 and there began a stark improvement in climate policy. Oh yes.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day

December 2, 1964 – Mario Savio’s “bodies on the gears” speech at Berkeley..

December 2, 1981 – “Is the world getting warmer?” (YES)

December 2, 1991 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” bites the dust…

December 2, 2023 – Exxon’s boss vs IEA, planet – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia

December 2, 1994 – “Canberra fiddles as environment burns”

Thirty years ago, on this day, December 2nd, 1994,

When it comes to protecting the environment and meeting Australia’s international greenhouse commitments, the Prime Minister and his Government” lack vision and direction”, claims a leading solar scientist.

Dr David Mills, a physicist at the University of Sydney, said Mr Keating’s Government offered $150 million “to take down an expressway in Sydney as an aesthetic eyesore, but puts a pittance into development of new technologies to alleviate future environmental and balance of payments disasters. Canberra fiddles while the environment burns.”

Dr Mills will present his critique of Federal renewable energy policy in Sydney today at Solar ’94, the Australian and New Zealand Solar Energy Society annual conference.

Dayton, L. 1994. ‘Canberra fiddles as environment burns’. Sydney Morning Herald, 2 December, p.5. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 359ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Australia’s policy elites had been shitting on all things climate since about 1990, upping the speed of this from 1991.

The specific context was that a modest carbon tax was on the table. It would have provided reliable and significant funding for renewables. It was defeated.

What I think we can learn from this – Australia is a lucky country led by tenth-rate assholes.

What happened next – the carbon tax was, of course, defeated. Emissions climbed. People got rich and will in all likelihood escape any punishment for their grievous crimes not just against humanity, but against life itself. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day

December 2, 1964 – Mario Savio’s “bodies on the gears” speech at Berkeley..

December 2, 1981 – “Is the world getting warmer?” (YES)

December 2, 1991 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” bites the dust…

December 2, 2023 – Exxon’s boss vs IEA, planet – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
1980 El Salvador United States of America

December 2, 1980 – Four US nuns killed in El Salvador

Forty five years ago, on this day, December 2nd, 1980,

1980 Salvadoran Civil War: Four U.S. nuns and churchwomen, Ita Ford, Maura Clarke, Jean Donovan, and Dorothy Kazel, are murdered by a military death squad.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 339ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that the US has been killing people for fun and profit for centuries. It started with the local populations foolish enough to be there when whitey wanted their land. It went on and on.

Here’s Smedley Butler –

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

The specific context was that the US government was supporting the 14 families with their death (squad) grip on El Salvador.

What I think we can learn from this – as per Chomsky, you can have a society that has a high degree of freedom that is also a bloodthirsty empire. The two are not mutually contradictory.

What happened next

As per Wikipedia – 

As news of the murders was made public in the United States, public outrage forced the U.S. government to pressure the Salvadoran regime to investigate. U.S. President Jimmy Carter suspended aid to El Salvador. The earliest investigations were condemned as whitewash attempts by the later ones, and in time, a Commission on the Truth for El Salvador was appointed by the United Nations to investigate who gave the orders, who knew about it, and who covered it up. Several low-level guardsman were convicted, and two generals were sued by the women’s families in the U.S. federal courts for their command responsibility for the incident.

Unlike President Carter, succeeding U.S. President Ronald Reagan favored the Salvadoran military regime; he authorized increased military aid and sent more U.S. military advisers to the country to aid the government in quelling the civil/guerrilla war. 

See also the 1989 murder of six Jesuit intellectuals, their housekeeper and her daughter.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day

December 2, 1964 – Mario Savio’s “bodies on the gears” speech at Berkeley..

December 2, 1981 – “Is the world getting warmer?” (YES)

December 2, 1991 – “Ecologically Sustainable Development” bites the dust…

December 2, 2023 – Exxon’s boss vs IEA, planet – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia

December 1, 1995 – Air Pollution causing climate chaos, front page story in Sydney Morning Herald

Thirty years ago, on this day, December 1st, 1995,

There is now proof that global warming caused by the greenhouse effect has begun to change the weather, the world’s leading climate scientists have concluded.

The findings of the United Nations-sponsored panel of scientists mean that the world’s present freakish weather patterns can no longer be put down to random natural forces only.

Air pollution, the scientists believe, has begun to transform weather patterns.

After a three-day conference in Madrid, the 200 scientists from more than 100 countries concluded yesterday: “The balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernable human influence on global climate.”

1995 Gilchrist, G. 1995. Official: Air Pollution Causing Climate Chaos. Sydney Morning Herald, December. 1 p1. 

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 361ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Australia is a quarry with a state attached, an extractivist settler-colony with some nice flora and fauna.

The specific context was that Australia’s policy elites had the opportunity to introduce a modest, sensible carbon tax in 1994-5, one that would have funded research and development of wind and solar. Meanwhile, with the international negotiations heating up, lobbyists, fresh from defeating the carbon tax, were upping their support for a state-owned outfit- “ABARE” – and funding its exceptionally dodgy economic modelling.

What I think we can learn from this – we had our chance to do something (we probably never would have done enough, because, well, humans) and we blew it. Now we are at the very beginning of the Fafocene

Also on this day

December 1, 1984 – they’re talking about CCS already… – All Our Yesterdays

December 1, 1995 – bullshit modelling put out by Keating Government – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Norway United Kingdom

November 30, 2005 – a “North Sea Basin Task Force” is formed

Twenty years ago, on this day, November 31st, 2005,

On 30 November 2005, Minister Enoksen of Norway and Minister Wicks of the UK agreed to establish a North Sea Basin Task Force, composed of public and private bodies from countries on the rim of the North Sea. Its purpose: to develop common principles for managing and regulating the transport, injection and permanent storage of CO2 in the North Sea sub-seabed. https://www.regjeringen.no/globalassets/upload/oed/pdf_filer/rapporter/north-sea-basin-report-final.pdf

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 380ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that the North Sea had been an economic bonanza for both countries (only one of which had bothered to set up a sovereign wealth fund).

The specific context was – there was increased interest in CCS, and depleted North Sea oil fields seemed like a good idea…

What I think we can learn from this – we have been hoping for technofixes for a long time.

What happened next – the CCS bubble burst in 2011, and again in 2015, but thanks to astonishing lobbying, it’s back on the agenda, and is getting LOADS of money.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 30, 1978 – House of Lords debate on Atmospheric Changes…

November 30, 1994 – Another denialist dolt – “Global warming a clouded issue” 

November 30, 1998 – Exxon and Mobil merge

November 30, 2014 – US TV show The Newsroom tackles climate change

Categories
Australia

November 29, 1995 – Australian power company boss is silent on climate, obvs

Thirty years ago, on this day, November 30th, 1995,

Two days ago, Fred Hilmer, the chairman of Australia’s worst atmospheric polluter, Pacific Power, gave a talk at the University of NSW on the rationale behind the Carr Government’s changes to the electricity industry.

Professor Hilmer gave an impressive, enthusiastic sales job. The crowded room was hot as hell that afternoon and at the end of his 45-minute talk he was sweating profusely.

Even though Pacific Power is our biggest producer of greenhouse gases, the greenhouse effect and global warming were not mentioned. It was an extraordinary omission.

1995 Gilchrist, G. 1995. Just The Shock Power Industry Needs. Sydney Morning Herald.  December 1, p.4.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 361ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that Australia’s leaders had by this time had 7 years of having to pretend they gave a damn about “the greenhouse effect”.  But the public pressure was off a bit by now…

The specific context was – a carbon tax proposal had been defeated earlier in the year, and maybe Hilmer couldn’t be bothered to pretend to give a shit?

What I think we can learn from this – they will ignore an issue if they think they can get away with it.

What happened next – John Howard became Prime Minister of Australia in March 1996 and climate policy went from incredibly bad to even worse.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 29, 1973 – Australian politician warns of climate change

NOVEMBER 29, 1974 – SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER SAYS “RISK OF A CHANGED CLIMATE DUE TO HUMAN ACTIVITIES … [IS] OF UTTER IMPORTANCE”

November 29, 1988 – Australian parliamentarians taught climate

November 29, 1990 and 1994 – Australian denial fools (Fred Singer and Brian Tucker) – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
United Kingdom

November 29, 1968 – Arnold Marsh of the National Clean Air Society on carbon dioxide

Fifty six years ago, on this day, November 29th, 1968,

Arnold Marsh, secretary of the UK National Clean Air Society,  namechecks the problem at a speech at the House of Lords.

“A long-term outstanding problem, in the view of serious American scientific opinion, is the effect of the gradual but steady increase in the carbon dioxide content of the air as a result of the prodigious consumption, which is still going up, of the fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide, the product of all combustion processes – including our own internal processes – is not usually regarded as an air pollutant, and most of it is absorbed by growing plants. But the amount remaining in the atmosphere is creeping up, and in due course, it is suggested, the fact that it absorbs and retains more solar heat than the air itself, will mean a rise in the mean temperature of the atmosphere. This would lead to a melting of the polar ice-caps so that the level of the sea would rise and cover all low-lying land. It is not something that could happen in our lifetimes, but, if the arguments are correct, it could become catastrophic at some future date.”

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 323ppm. As of 2025, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context was that from about 1967, more and more British people were realising that carbon dioxide might be a serious problem. 

The specific context was that the impetus for this from Marsh MIGHT have been Ritchie-Calder’s speech to the Conservation Society a few days earlier (i.e. Marsh may have been in touch with Ritchie-Calder about this earlier.).

What I think we can learn from this – we knew plenty.

What happened next – the general “eco” wave began properly the next year, and lasted through until 1972 or 3 or so…

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Also on this day: 

November 29, 1973 – Australian politician warns of climate change

NOVEMBER 29, 1974 – SWEDISH PRIME MINISTER SAYS “RISK OF A CHANGED CLIMATE DUE TO HUMAN ACTIVITIES … [IS] OF UTTER IMPORTANCE”

November 29, 1988 – Australian parliamentarians taught climate

November 29, 1990 and 1994 – Australian denial fools (Fred Singer and Brian Tucker) – All Our Yesterdays

CATEGORIES-