Categories
Science United States of America

December 22, 2010 – James Hansen and Bill McKibben and the loaded dice…

Fifteen years ago, on this day, December 22nd, 2010,

“What we see happening with new record temperatures, both warm and cold, is in good agreement with what we predicted in the 1980s when I testified to Congress about the expected effect of global warming. I used coloured dice then to emphasize that global warming would cause the climate dice to be ‘loaded’—for risk of more extreme weather.”

James Hansen, Director, Goddard Institute for Space Studies, interview with Bill McKibben, 22 December 2010

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 390ppm. 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 Hansen has been banging on about carbon dioxide build-up for 50 years. His first foray into the world beyond science on this was in 1981. McKibben wrote a series of essays for the New Yorker that was then published as a book “The End of Nature”

The specific context was – that the UNFCCC conference in Copenhagen had been a farce, and it was clear things were gonna get out of hand.

What I think we can learn from this – being smart and right isn’t enough.

What happened next – Hansen and McKibben have gone on being smart and right.

The emissions have kept climbing. Who knows, maybe solar will reduce our energy emissions markedly. Who knows…

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 22, 1759 – “What have ye done?”

December 22, 1975 – “Scientist Warns of Great Floods if Earth’s Heat Rises” (surely “when”?)

December 22, 1978 – UK Energy Department chief scientist worries about CO2 levels and pressure to reduce them…

December 22, 1988 – Chico Mendes murdered

December 22, 1999 – Australian population growth and carbon reductions – not so easy… 

Categories
United States of America

December 20, 1971 – Nixon’s climate plans

Fifty four years ago, on this day, December 20th, 1971,

But the newly revealed Dec. 20, 1971, research proposal by the White House Office of Science and Technology shows for the first time that Nixon’s science advisors embarked on an extensive analysis of the potential risks of climate change and an assessment of the data needs. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/26042024/nixon-administration-climate-research-plan/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 326ppm. 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 the first global ecological awakening (aka “The Malthusian Moment”) had begun in late 1968/early 1969, with Earthrise and then the Santa Barbara Oil Spill. April 1970 had seen “Earth Day”…. That same year had seen the passage of NEPA and the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

The specific context was that Nixon’s people (e.g. Daniel Moynihan) had been talking about carbon dioxide build-up since 1969.

What I think we can learn from this – there were people doing the research and thinking all the way back then.

What happened next – extensive federal support for climate research only got going late in the 1970s, with the 1978 National Climate Programme Act. 

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 20, 1961 – UNGA resolution on outer space and weather modification 

December 20, 1969 – AGU on climate change… –

December 20, 1983 – Documentary on “the Climate Crisis” shown

December 20, 2007 – UK opposition leader David Cameron gives clean coal speech in Beijing…

Categories
Coal United States of America

December 19, 1985 – “Clean Coal” in Washington DC

Forty years ago, on this day, December 19th, 1985,

“On December 19, 1985, Congress set aside nearly $400 million for the government’s share of funds for “constructing and operating facilities to demonstrate the feasibility of their future clean coal commercial application” (Public Law No. 99-190).” 

(DoE 1992) Department of Energy. 1992. Clean Coal Technology: A New Era. Washington DC: Department of Energy. http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015041771992;view=1up;seq=5

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 346ppm. 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 cleanliness/dirtyness of coal had been a “local” problem for, well, since it started to be burned. The Donora fog was one clear (see what I did there?) example. But other pressures were building, including acid rain (the Canadians were pissed off) and our friend anthropogenic global warming. In the late 1970s interest in carbon capture and storage had begun…. By the early 1980s the International Energy Agency was doing “clean coal” seminars and workshops.

The specific context was people didn’t let Reagan’s alleged enthusiasm for small states and free-markets get in the way of taxpayer funding of research and development moolah…

What I think we can learn from this – the clean coal rhetoric has been around for yonks.

What happened next – all the technology was delivered under-budget and ahead of schedule, worked perfectly and coal is now super-dooper clean.

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 19, 1988 – the launch of “Ark”

December 19, 1991- Will UN negotiations go as usual and “commit us to global catastrophe”?

December 19, 2010 – CCS dies in Queensland

December 19, 2017 – BHP exits World Coal Association.

Categories
Science United States of America

December 18, 1953 – “Pathological Science” lecture by Irving Langmuir

Seventy-two years ago, on this day, December 18th, 1953, Irving Langmuir gave a seminar at General Electric,

In 1953, at the time he was making highly dubious claims for the efficacy of weather modification and even climate modification, Langmuir presented a seminar at GE on “Pathological science” or “the science of things that arenʼt so.”(27) Utilizing his own criteria for pathology, Langmuirʼs claims for cloud seeding qualified on several counts: they rested on observations close to the threshold of detectability, on apparently meaningful patterns generated in field trials; on the inability of critics to reproduce the experiments; on the intervention of the courts, legislature, and the press; and on overreliance on the credentials of a Nobel laureate rather than proof.

Pathological science – Wikipedia

Langmuir’s talk on Pathological Science

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 312ppm. 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 in the aftermath of World War 2, anything seemed possible, if you threw enough money and brains at it.

The specific context was – hydrogen bombs had been tested, and weather modification was “in the air” – but maybe it couldn’t be done…

What I think we can learn from this – even those taking the grants for the experiments were not sure it could be done…

What happened next – Langmuir died in 1957. The Weather Modification bandwagon rolled on for decades. 

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.

References

Fleming, J. 2006. The pathological history of weather and climate modification: Three cycles of promise and hype . Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences (2006) 37 (1): 3–25.

https://doi.org/10.1525/hsps.2006.37.1.3

Also on this day: 

December 18, 1970 – Science article about “Man-Made Climatic Changes”

December 18, 1996 – Australian greenhouse emissions sharply UP.

December 18, 2008 – Tim DeChristopher does his auction action

December 18, 2009 – the worthless “Copenhagen Accord”

Categories
Australia United States of America

December 14, 1973 – Canberra Times on melting ice caps

Fifty two years ago, on this day, December 14th, 1973, an article in the Canberra Times about the American writer Howard Wilcox warning of ice caps melting etc

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 warnings about polar melting had a long history. Various causes for the melting (natural and man-made) were being put forward.

The specific context was that Wilcox thought it was going to be the problem of “waste heat” rather than carbon dioxide build-up that caused the problem (he was not alone in thinking this, btw).

What I think we can learn from this – the phenomena can be disputed, the cause disputed. Lotsa disputes (because reality is confusing. “Science” remains though, a pretty good way of figuring out what is going on… Beats chicken entrails and wild guesses, anyway).

What happened next Wilcox wrote a book. It’s not very good.

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 14, 1988 – Greenhouse Glasnost gets going…

December 14, 1992 – UK “releases “National programme on carbon dioxide emissions”

December 14, 1995 – Monbiot nails it with “it’s happening” article – All Our Yesterdays

Categories
Australia United States of America

December 13, 1988 – Environment Minister Graham Richardson dishing it out in Washington

Thirty seven years ago, on this day, December 13th, 1988, a speech by the then Australian Environment Minister, the late Graham Richardson, in Washington at International Environment Forum, attacked James Balderstone, AMIC etc. 

“Resource development and industrialisation, often unfettered, have been seen in the past as economic imperatives. But a lack of control and foresight has laid waste so much of the world that environment protection is now the economic imperative. Countries that are fouling their own nest, or allowing others to foul them, will struggle to survive.”

“Countries who protect their nests will be far better off. But with global problems like the greenhouse effect, that is only part of the picture. We now live in one big fairly dirty nest, and protecting other countries as well as our own, is the big economic imperative.”

See H Morgan Speech 4 May 1989 to ANU. “Exploration Access and political power

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 352ppm. 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 – we had been through this rhetorical game back in the late 1960s – lots of fine words from politicians.

The specific context was that in 1988 we were at the beginning of another rhetorical game, which would stagger on to 1992. Also, Richardson was still on a sugar-rush after the November 1988 “Greenhouse 88” satellite link up.

What I think we can learn from this – that there was knowledge of what was at stake, all those decades ago.

What happened next

Morgan gave a speech six months later, May 4 1989, to ANU. “Exploration Access and political power.

Richardson tried to get ambitious carbon dioxide reduction targets through Hawke’s cabinet that same month, and got squished by then-Treasurer Paul Keating.

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 13, 1967 – Sweden begins to save the world…

December 13, 1973 – Edward Heath announces Three Day Week

December 13, 1978 – BBC Radio talks about climate change “One Degree Over” – All Our Yesterdays

December 13, 1984 – Christian Science Monitor monitors the #climate science – ooops.

Categories
Australia Denial United States of America

December 12, 2016 – Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts shares his wisdom

Nine years ago, on this day, December 12th, 2016, the Guardian Australia reports –

 Australian senator Malcolm Roberts, of the far-right One Nation party, who is in the US, revealed he had given a speech at a CEI meeting with Ebell.

Roberts wrote the meeting was a gathering of the Cooler Heads Coalition and then listed some of the participants.

Screengrab of a post on Malcolm Robert’s Facebook page. Photograph: Facebook

They included Marc Morano, Randy Randol, Steve Milloy, Chris Horner, Craig Rucker, Patrick Michaels, Ken Haapala and James Taylor.

The views of most of the attendees are in direct contradiction to the overwhelming majority of scientific research published over decades, as well as the positions of the world’s major scientific academies.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2016/dec/15/one-nation-senator-joins-new-world-order-of-climate-change-denial

2016 Malcolm Roberts at CEI event http://reneweconomy.com.au/malcolm-roberts-joins-trumps-climate-deniers-fight-freedom-85911/

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 404ppm. 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 … I can’t even. What a species. Anti-reflexivity etc etc.

The specific context was – the moronic Tony Abbott had recently been toppled by Malcolm Turnbull, who said climate change was a thing.

What I think we can learn from this – nothing. Or rather, that there is no science so proven that there won’t be chuckleheads out there displaying their wilful ignorance.

What happened next

Ah, I will let Wikipedia deal with this

On 27 October 2017, the full High Court, as the Court of Disputed Returns, ruled that Roberts had been ineligible to be elected to the Parliament. Roberts and One Nation leader Pauline Hanson subsequently announced that Roberts would nominate as a candidate for the electoral district of Ipswich at the 2017 Queensland state election.[18] He was not elected.[19] In February 2018, it was announced that Roberts would lead the One Nation Senate ticket in Queensland at the 2019 Australian federal election. Pauline Hanson said: “Malcolm Roberts has got the reputation as a powerhouse, the empirical science man, and he’s really taken it up to members of parliament”.[20]

In September 2017, before the High Court ruling on Roberts’s eligibility, blogger Tony Magrathea initiated a High Court action alleging that Roberts had sat in the Senate while disqualified, contrary to the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act 1975. On 24 June 2019, the High Court found the allegation proved and ordered Roberts to pay a penalty of $6,000 to Magrathea.[21]

Re-election

With his citizenship clear, Roberts was elected to the Senate again in 2019.

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 12, 1977 – UK Government launches energy efficiency scheme, because Jimmy Carter had visited…

December 12, 1990 – Paul Keating refers greenhouse issue to Industry Commission

December 12, 2007 – Canada leaves Kyoto Protocol as Australia joins

December 12, 2007 – RIP William Kellogg

Categories
Australia International processes Kyoto Protocol United States of America

December 8, 1997 – Gore and Hill at Kyoto

Twenty eight years ago, on this day, December 8th, 1997,

Al Gore, then Vice-President of the United States, there at Kyoto. And on the same day

“Senator Hill’s entrance was a bit rockier, with a smaller Australian demonstration led by Greens’ Senator Dee Margetts jostling him on his entrance to the main summit hall. Two hours after Mr Gore, Senator Hill rushed through his speech – the 16th out of 67 – in front of a half-empty hall.”

Lunn, S. 1997. US juggernaut swamps small beer at Kyoto. The Australian, December 9, p.8

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. 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 UNFCCC had been kneecapped at birth by the US refusing to allow targets and timetables for emissions reductions by rich countries into the treaty’s text. George HW Bush said he’d boycott the Earth Summit if they weren’t removed from the draft text – and the French blinked. Everything since then has been an attempt to get some targets in. The Paris farce is the latest and the last (presumably).

The specific context was in the run up to Kyoto there were fierce public campaigns, funded by the oil companies etc, against Kyoto. Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister John Howard had been trying to get people to accept the ridiculous position that Australia deserved special treatment (he succeeded).

What I think we can learn from this – we were doomed a long time ago.

What happened next – The US pulled out of Kyoto negotiations at the beginning of 2001. Australia followed the next year, despite having extorted an insanely generous deal. 

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 8, 1976 – IIASA holds a workshop on climate and solar energy conversion 

December 8, 1981 – Thames TV shows “Warming Warning” documentary

December 8, 2003 – Chief Scientific Advisor under microscope for Rio Tinto role

Categories
Science Scientists United States of America

December 6, 2005 – James Hansen speech about imminent tipping points, at AGU

Twenty years ago, on this day,

“On 6 December 2005, in a presentation to the American Geophysical Union (AGU), James Hansen stated that, “we are on the precipice of climate system tipping points beyond which there is no redemption” (Hansen, 2005, p. 8). Hansen’s warning helped initiate a tipping point trend in climate change communication that was quickly reflected in public debate. These warnings were front page news by January 2006, with The Washington Post reporting that, “[t]his ‘tipping point’ scenario has begun to consume many prominent researchers in the United States and abroad…” (Eilperin, 2006, p. A01).”

The tipping point trend in climate change communication – ScienceDirect

See also Bowen Censoring Science 1 to 6

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 James Hansen had been getting in trouble with asshole Republican administrations since 1981, when a front page story on the New York Times had led to a research grant already given being withdrawn and people losing their jobs. The George HW Bush administration had also tried to sideline/silence Hansen in the key period 1989-1992. And on and on it went.

The specific context was HW’s dumb son, “Dubya” was nominally President, but you gotta assume a lot of the direction was coming from Dick Cheney. By this time the US was having to contend with the fact that the UN process, which it thought it had rendered pointless by withdrawing from Kyoto negotiations, was “back on track” (it’s all relative) and there would be more fights to come about this.

What I think we can learn from this – Hansen is worth listening to. It’s scary af.

What happened next – Hansen took (enforced) retirement. GISS got slaughtered in 2025. The emissions kept climbing, and the Republicans stopped pretending to be anything other than devastation-bots.

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 6, 2005 – CCS is our only hope, says Chief Scientist….

December 6, 2006- Turns out 0.1% of a Very BIG NUMBER is … quite a lot…

December 6, 2018 – Macron scraps a fuel tax because of protests – 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