Skip navigation
Share via:

Pitch

You don't have to "believe in" climate change if you understand the simple physics behind it.


Description

Summary

Climate Co-Lab is sponsored by NOVA? NOVA is uniquely suited to produce a series of TV programs explaining the greenhouse effect and amplifying feedbacks; explaining the causes and effects of past thermal maximums, and showing how they relate to what we are doing to our planet; explaining the consequences of inaction; and detailing the clean non-fossil-fueled technologies that are our future--if we leave ourselves a future.

We need to NOT dumb that down too much; explain in layers, so that you bring people along as far as they are able to follow. Ignorance is not bliss--it's suicide.


What actions do you propose?

Slightly more than 1/2 of Americans now "believe in" climate change, but that is not enough to convince the (mostly) Republican congress people who stand in the way of our doing anything about it. I tell people that I don't have to "believe in" climate change because I understand the simple physics behind it (all right, it's quantum mechanics, but it's still simple). You will not teach the brain-dead and deliberately science-illiterate among our legislators anything, but the more people who truly and fully understand the causes and consequences, the more pressure they will bring to bear--and maybe some will even give more thought to who they vote for in future.

Until enough people truly understand all of this, we will not bring enough pressure to bear on recalcitrant legislators and corporations, we will not do what is needed, and we will face the collapse of civilization, the destruction of the biosphere, and our own eventual extinction--and it will hurt like fire at every step. Nice legacy for our children, eh?


Who will take these actions?

NOVA. WGBH Boston. Get James Hansen as fully involved as you can ASAP, and don't give Willie Soon and his sort any press at all, unless it is to paint them as the prostitutes they are. In pretending to be "balanced" and "present both sides" the American mainstream media has done all of humanity a huge disservice, has fostered the mistaken impression that there are two sides to climate change, that inaction is a viable choice, that "adaptation" is even possible. 

The first step in averting this hell on earth is educating people to the need.


Where will these actions be taken?


How will these actions have a high impact in addressing climate change?


What are other key benefits?

Maybe you can make people realize that ideology and religion cannot substitute for science, and that on questions of science, in the future,  they should turn to science for answers.


What are the proposal’s costs?

No idea. Don't count on the Koch brothers to sponsor it.


Time line

This needs to be done ASAP. We are out of time, and the first step is to convince people of the need and the urgency.


Related proposals


References