TUHO: Jeste k tomu Schneiderovi, tady kratky overview jeho knizky Science as Contact Sport

We know there’s a problem, but spurring the world to action has been a decades-long struggle, and Stephen H. Schneider has been in the front lines of the charge to understand the science, explain the warnings, and mitigate the damage we’ve inflicted upon the environment and ourselves for four decades. One of the world’s leading climatologists, founder of the journal Climatic Change, and senior participant in the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), his work has been instrumental in framing both the internal debates within the scientific community and the very public debate on understanding and dealing with climate change.

Science as a Contact Sport is Stephen Schneider’s first-hand account of a scientific odyssey, navigating in both the turbulent waters of the world’s power structures and the arcane theatre of academic debaters. From the initial stages of understanding the science of human-induced climate change to predicting the consequences of our actions 10, 50 and even 250 years out, Dr. Schneider has been there to experience it all. Few people know more about the struggles and knockdown, drag-out fights that have taken place behind the scenes and the people who try to repair the damage as well as those who will stop at nothing to deny that climate change is happening. In this riveting memoir Schneider shares his unique eye witness perspective on an era of scientific discovery and debate that may well be one of the most important periods of time in our planet’s history.

Schneider’s efforts have helped bring about important measures to safeguard our planet, but there’s still more to be done to get them implemented.

This is a battle, and no one knows that better than Dr. Schneider—he’s fought with and against presidents, prime ministers, legislators, mayors, CEOs, movie and media stars, lobbyists, journalists, and even his fellow scientists to share good science and workable solutions with the world.

Science as a Contact Sport Book Overview
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Books/SAACS/saacs_book.htm

TUHO: So the message, dear reader, is look underneath the hype and spin out there and try to separate out what aspects of the debate are legitimate remaining scientific uncertainties—still plenty of those left to go around—and what fraction is simply an ideological protection of world views in drag as “sound science.” That separating job is a real tax on public understanding of how to first understand, and then deal with, very complex topics that have a high bar of information needed to even enter the debate intelligently. In the last chapter of Contact Sport, I ask a scary question: “Can democracy survive complexity?” My National Geographic Society editors thought that too much of a downer as my final chapter title and substituted “What Keeps Me Awake at Night.” Either way, for a representative democracy to function well, both the public and its representatives have to understand what is at stake: Risk equals what can happen multiplied by the odds it will happen.

trochu kontextu od stephene schneidera, ktery je u klimaticke debaty od jejiho zacatku

What underlay this loss of cordiality and honest information exchange from the earlier decade? The most environmentally oriented presidents of the past century, in my view, were Republicans: Richard Nixon—who created the EPA—and Teddy Roosevelt. After all, what is a more conservative word than “conservation”? But to the Reaganites, the very admission of global warming was an ideological no-no. It represented the collective planetary-scale footprint of personal, corporate, and national decisions to use the atmosphere as a convenient, free sewer to dump our smokestack wastes, tailpipe emissions, and side effects of land-use changes like deforestation. To admit that we were harming the planetary commons was to admit that we needed regulatory solutions, some internationalist—the ultimate no-no to ideologists of American hegemony and economic power. So denial of global warming became de facto government policy, since the ideology of protecting entrepreneurial rights over public amenities was Reaganite doctrine. The Gore hearing was the first public gun battle in the Congress.

The Climate War: True Believers, Power Brokers, and the Fight to Save the Earth by Eric Pooley | Climate Soldiers
https://ssir.org/books/reviews/entry/climate_war_eric_pooley#

TUHO:
TUHO: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/07/us/politics/oklahoma-attorney-general-letter-written-almost-entirely-by-energy-company.html

TUHO:

TUHO: Several years ago, before I started researching electric utilities’ role in promoting climate denial, I came across a memorable advertisement from 1991. It showed a cartoon chicken running around with the caption: “Who told you the earth was warming… Chicken Little?” The ad was funded by a climate denial campaign called “Informed Citizens for the Environment.” Utilities spearheaded this work, including the private utilities such as Southern Company and Arizona Public Service, as well as the utility association, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). Even though climate science was well established by the early 1990s, the ad argued there was “no hard evidence” for global warming.

Německý ekologistický průmysl tak přijal za svou myšlenku Vladimíra Putina, že než celý německý průmysl pojede na baterky dobíjené z alternativních zdrojů, je pro životní prostředí v Německu ideální ruský plyn. Tato ekologistická lobby tedy v zásadě vyhecovala Německo, aby zavřela uhelné a jaderné elektrárny a celou svou desetiletí budovanou ekonomickou prosperitu vsadila vabank na dobrotu Putinova režimu.
Zatímco se východoněmecká pionýrka Merkelová cumlala s muslimčaty, Putin korumpoval německé vědce, kteří se mu odvděčili tvrdou propagandou o škodlivosti spalování uhlí a nebezpečnosti jaderných elektráren. Potřebovali toho k přesvědčení německé veřejnosti jen pár desítek milionů eur (havárie jaderné elektrárny Fukušima byla jen bonusem zadarmo).
Po letech, když už byla uzavřena většina pro Putina škodlivých německých elektráren a 60 % německého průmyslu bylo závislých na ruském plynu, přišel Vladimír Putin v časech dokončování druhé etapy Nord Stream, s dalším nápadem a Meklenbersko-Přední Pomořansko mu skočilo na špek podruhé. V lednu 2021 se zakládá nová nadace a tentokrát do ní ruská vláda zastoupená Gazpromem vkládá 192 miliónů eur (asi 4,7 miliardy korun).
Předsedkyně zemské vlády Manuela Schwesigová z SPD pak Němcům oznámila, že lidé z Nord Stream to myslí s ekologií vážně, protože v listopadu 2021 převedli na účet nové nadace dohodnuté peníze (odměnu).
Kam šly tyto ruské peníze? Myslíte, že na ekologistické projekty? Dá se to tak říci… O peníze se šábly německé neziskové organizace, které celá ta léta bojovaly proti uhelným a jaderným elektrárnám. Odměna to byla zasloužená. Byla to totiž mravenčí práce zlikvidovat celou klimatickou opozici a prosadit zcela novou environmentální eugeniku.

Jak Putin platil užitečné idioty německé ekologie – Konzervativní noviny
https://www.konzervativninoviny.cz/jak-putin-platil-uzitecne-idioty-nemecke-ekologie/

P Maidowski
https://t.co/RimUcgjUB6

@willmacaskill shows how deep in climate denial effective altruism and longtermism are. I once even wrote Bostrom to warn about their errors - nothing changed 🤡 The claim 15°C (fn 98) is funny, given lethal Chinese and UK 40°C heatwaves at barely 1.2°C.



posledni macaskill:

What We Owe The Future — William MacAskill
https://www.williammacaskill.com/what-we-owe-the-future