Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Environment

The Earth's Prognosis

By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!. Posted October 30, 2007.


One of the world's leading scientists on global warming talks about the future of the planet, its species and our energy future.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

AMY GOODMAN: A group of scientists in Britain are warning global warming could wipe out more than half the earth's species in the next few centuries. That finding appears in a new study published by researchers at the University of York. Scientists examined the relationship between climate and extinction rates over the past 500 million years. They determined that rising temperatures caused three of the earth's four biggest periods of mass extinction.

Today, we're going to spend the hour with one of the world's leading scientists studying climate change. His name: Tim Flannery. He's an Australian mammologist and palaeontologist. As a field zoologist, he has discovered and named more than sixty species. He has been described as being in league with the all-time great explorers like Dr. David Livingstone.

Here in this country, Tim Flannery might be best known as author of the bestselling book The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change. Earlier this year, he was named the 2007 Australian of the Year. He was awarded the prize by the Australian Prime Minister John Howard. He joins us today in Santa Fe, New Mexico for the hour.

Welcome to Democracy Now!

TIM FLANNERY: Thanks very much, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: It's great to have you with us, Tim Flannery. Well, we are talking today in dire times. The fires are raging in Southern California. A major drought has struck the Southeast, from Tennessee through the Carolinas, Georgia. Atlanta could run out of water. And then we've seen this drenching downpour in New Orleans. They had to close City Hall, close the schools. Is there a connection between the fire, the water and the drought?

TIM FLANNERY: Yeah. Look, the best way to think about these things, really, is to take a bigger global view. And Americans might feel they're suffering from a whole lot of severe weather at the moment, but look globally and you see exactly the same thing around the world. Anywhere with a Mediterranean climate, such as Greece or Australia or California, is suffering extreme wildfires. Now, why is that happening? The climate is slowly shifting, so that the desert regions adjacent to those Mediterranean areas, you know, are starting to expand.

The same with droughts and floods. It's not just the Southeast of the US. Europe has had its great droughts and water shortages. Australia is in the grip of a drought that's almost unbelievable in its ferocity. Again, this is a global picture. We're just getting much less usable water than we did a decade or two or three decades ago. It's a sort of thing again that the climate models are predicting. In terms of the floods, again we see the same thing. You know, a warmer atmosphere is just a more energetic atmosphere.

So if you ask me about single flood event or a single fire event, it's really hard to make the connection, but take the bigger picture and you can see very clearly what's happening.

AMY GOODMAN: We were reporting just a while ago about the fires in Greece. Is there a connection to the fires in California?

TIM FLANNERY: Absolutely. It's the same sort of environment. Greece is part of a Mediterranean climate system. And what you see there is that those very harsh conditions that characterize the Sahara to the south are now attempting to move northwards. You know, the climate is shifting, such as that those conditions are going to prevail further northwards. So, this is part of a global picture.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about a controversy in Washington, D.C. just this week. The Bush administration is being accused of severely editing the congressional testimony by a senior health official on the impact of climate change. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director, Julie Gerberding, appeared before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee just last Tuesday.

The Associated Press reports two sources familiar with both her initial draft and the White House's revisions say the administration imposed major changes. Gerberding's final testimony is said to have omitted lengthy passages she had initially included on the health risks of global warming. Her final document was whittled down to four pages from an initial fourteen.

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Dana Perino was asked about the controversy. This is what Dana Perino had to say.

DANA PERINO: As I understand it, in the draft there was broad characterizations about climate change science that didn't align with the IPCC. And we have experts and scientists across this administration that can take a look at that testimony and say, "This is an error" or "This doesn't make sense." And so, the decision on behalf of CDC was to focus that testimony on public health benefits. There are public health benefits to climate change, as well, but both benefits and concerns that somebody like a Dr. Gerberding, who is the expert in the field, could address. And so, that's the testimony that she provided yesterday.

REPORTER: Is it typical for the White House to cut that much of an administration official's prepared ...

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: global warming, democracy now, climate change, amy goodman, tim flannery

Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally syndicated radio news program, Democracy Now!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Amy Goodman has something in common with the Whitehouse
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 30, 2007 2:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amy Goodman starts off mentioning "that rising temperatures caused three of the
earth's four biggest periods of mass extinction," but her questions never touch on
those mass extinctions. Amy Goodman should have concentrated on those mass
extinctions because, if humans had been there at those times, humans would have
been included among the species that went extinct. We have the "opportunity" to
go extinct in the global warming that we are creating. Tim Flannery may not be
the right person to interview on that subject, but it seems like Alternet and the
other journalists are avoiding the subject. Amy Goodman, you have something in
common with George W. Bush. You avoid the really bad news. The bad news
is, we humans get included in the mass extinction that we are creating now. It is
far better to be impoverished than to be extinct. So, Amy Goodman, look up the
following URLs and interview the scientists named in them:
http://www.geosociety.org/meetings/2003/
prPennStateKump.htm

http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op
=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=672

http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op
=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1535

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00037A5D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000&sc=I100322


The Scientific American article is the clearest. The Existential Risk that is
virtually certain to happen is the same as the End Permian mass extinction:
Hydrogen Sulfide. It is possible to avoid it, but not easy. From the .sciam URL,
from the October 2006 issue of Scientific American
Article: "Impact from the Deep":
"Strangling heat and gases emanating from the earth and sea, not asteroids, most
likely caused several ancient mass extinctions. Could the same killer-greenhouse
conditions build once again? "
By Peter D. Ward
The last paragraph of the article says: "The so-called thermal extinction at the end
of the Paleocene began when atmospheric CO2 was just under 1,000 parts per
million (ppm). At the end of the Triassic, CO2 was just above 1,000 ppm. Today
with CO2 around 385 ppm, it seems we are still safe. But with atmospheric carbon
climbing at an annual rate of 2 ppm and expected to accelerate to 3 ppm, levels
could approach 900 ppm by the end of the next century, and conditions that bring
about the beginnings of ocean anoxia may be in place. How soon after that could
there be a new greenhouse extinction? That is something our society should never
find out." The hydrogen sulfide [H2S] will finally put an end to the mining of
coal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Impact From the Deep Posted by: Iconoclast421
Why still no mention of chemtrails from Amy.
Posted by: futurefarm on Oct 30, 2007 5:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yesterday was a big spray day here in western NY. Today we have the resultant periwinkle haze again. What is the reason behind this strange government project. Why are people not including massive atmospheric seeding programs into global warming discussions, as if they don't exist? Sorry to report; they do. They are being conducted by the same people that gave us the 911 demolitions and the Iraq war. Where is Amy here? Gatekeeping or too busy to look up?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Only at the beginning of disasters
Posted by: Jimbo33 on Oct 30, 2007 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we're seeing at the moment is quite frightening, disaster everywhere and many millions of people who suffer. But this is only the top of the iceberg. Or as George Dubbleyou would say:
Iceberg? I told you there is no Global Warming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

suicidal behavior
Posted by: Constitutionalist75 on Oct 30, 2007 7:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Relentless corporate expansion and relentless population growth are using up the surplus of fresh water the weather cycles give us, so now the worsening droughts cause worsening California wildfires, and soon there will be crop failures and starvation, like in Africa. There is not enough fresh water for an exploding population of greedy stupid people who refuse to practice family planning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: suicidal behavior Posted by: Knot_Rich
overpopulation, ignored
Posted by: stilldreaming on Oct 30, 2007 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amy Goodman dances around the main problem. Why not come right out and say it: unless we humans voluntarily choose to have only wanted, planned for, babies, catastrophies will happen, guaranteed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Lets talk about dancing! Posted by: crazy carlos
» RE: Lets talk about dancing! Posted by: stilldreaming
» RE: overpopulation, ignored Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: overpopulation, BLEH Posted by: Iconoclast421
» Overpopulation still means poverty. Posted by: utilitarianist
» RE: overpopulation, BLEH Posted by: Jeff Hoffman
» Tao Te Ching, Updated Posted by: Overburdened Planet
» RE: overpopulation and genocide Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: overpopulation and genocide Posted by: planet doomed
» RE: overpopulation and genocide Posted by: planet doomed
» Iarga is so 1960s, but you started it... Posted by: Overburdened Planet
» RE: no magic, no perpetuum mobile Posted by: stilldreaming
» low hanging fruit is gone Posted by: planet doomed
Knot-Rich
Posted by: Knot_Rich on Oct 30, 2007 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We focus on warming because that's the cycle we're in, and humans, being the self loathing creatures we are, always look to blame ourselves. Can anyone say that the ice ages didn't cause extinctions? Of course they did, change causes extinctions. Cooling, warming, cooling, warming, again and again, over time barely comprehendable to our limited timespan minds. We only came off the last little ice age back in the 19th century, less than a blink in time. What caused all that snow to melt, too much horse flatulance? Maybe it was too much mastadon flatulance that ended the last great ice age. We're in a natural warming cycle, we can maybe delay it a little by controlling our influence, but there's forces here far bigger than humans. The cycle will go on, with or without us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Knot-Rich Posted by: planet doomed
We're not going to broil we're going to freeze -- and it's already happening !
Posted by: alaskagrrl on Oct 30, 2007 10:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everybody acknowledges northern areas like Alaska are the leading indicators of climate change. We've been ringing the bell for 20 years now and hardly anybody listened. Melting permafrost, Drunken Forests, New Insects, Disappearing Glaciers....

I'm a 30 year Alaskan and I'm telling you the balance has tipped. We have been seeing the coldest winters and the biggest snows for a VERY long time. Last year a persistent high pressure system over the interior of Alaska lasted for months, trapping low pressure over the Gulf of Alaska bringing snow to the Coast Range, the location of 75% of all the worlds glaciers outside of Antarctica/Greenland.

And I mean snow folks ! So much in places it didn't have time to melt during the summer. In the history of human memory nobody has seen the like. I'm writing this in Southeast where it's rained every single day for the last 40 which means big snow in the mountains.

I'm not a scientist but I am a very experienced electrician. I'll tell you for certain no system of any sort can remain stable without controls. Our climate has been stable through many climatic assaults far greater than that posed by humanity, so its obvious to anyone looking that Earth has a Thermostat, probably Thermo-Haline based.

I'm betting the thermostat has been tripped. Not soon, not someday but right NOW !!! Alaskans are once again ringing the bell, and we were right the first time. You can say you heard it here first.

Apparently God has a sense of humor !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not just yet, but very soon - Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» freezing is less painful. Posted by: veggiegrrrl
More micro-turbines
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 30, 2007 11:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At least one entrepreneur thinks he can drive down the price of wind power (which is already pretty low). I recommend MassMegawatts.com Hopefully he already has some satisfied customers.

P.S. currently, the best way to store vast amounts of electric power (to tide us over when the wind stops blowing for days or weeks, and when the sun isn't shining) is with a pumped storage hydro plant. They built one several decades ago on the Hudson River, on Storm King Mountain. Wikipedia says there are 100 such plants, so the technology is pretty well tested. Don't let anyone tell you wind power is no good when it stops blowing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More micro-turbines Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: More micro-turbines Posted by: Constitutionalist75
» RE: More micro-turbines Posted by: Knot_Rich
» RE: More micro-turbines Posted by: Jefferson's Guardian
Enjoyed the Article!
Posted by: Urgelt on Nov 7, 2007 11:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A heartfelt thanks, Amy. This was a very enjoyable read.

I'm not going to throw stones, as some readers have, for the things that could have been addressed and weren't (such as more information about previous global extinctions). Global warming is a very large subject. I'm pleased that you and Tim were able to cover as much ground as you did, and so well.

Great job!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE Crack open and grow rapidly
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 7, 2007 11:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, Iconoclast421, the earth did not crack open and grow rapidly
200 million years ago. That is science fiction. There have been
oceans for 3800 million years. Go back to school. Read some
real science textbooks an lay off the scifi for a while.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another scientist finds H2S at the End Permian
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Nov 7, 2007 11:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Downloaded from: http://www.astrobio.net/news/article2509.html
The greatest mass extinction in Earth’s history also may have been one of the
slowest, according to a study that casts further doubt on the extinction-by-meteor
theory. Creeping environmental stress fueled by volcanic eruptions and global
warming was the likely cause of the Great Dying, or Permian-Triassic Extinction,
250 million years ago, said University of Southern California doctoral student
Catherine Powers. The research sheds light on how past life interacted with our
planet's changing environment during one of the most important events in the
evolution of life on Earth.
Writing in the November issue of the journal Geology, Powers and her adviser
David Bottjer, professor of earth sciences at USC College, describe a slow decline
in the diversity of some common marine organisms.
The decline began millions of years before the disappearance of 90 percent of
Earth’s species at the end of the Permian era, Powers shows in her study.
More damaging to the meteor theory, the study finds that organisms in the deep
ocean started dying first, followed by those on ocean shelves and reefs, and finally
those living near shore.
“Something has to be coming from the deep ocean,” Powers said. “Something has
to be coming up the water column and killing these organisms.”
That something probably was hydrogen sulfide, according to Powers, who cited
studies from the University of Washington, Pennsylvania State University, the
University of Arizona and the Bottjer laboratory at USC.
Those studies, combined with the new data from Powers and Bottjer, support a
model that attributes the extinction to enormous volcanic eruptions that released
carbon dioxide and methane, triggering rapid global warming.
The warmer ocean water would have lost some of its ability to retain oxygen,
allowing water rich in hydrogen sulfide to well up from the deep (the gas comes
from anaerobic bacteria at the bottom of the ocean).
If large amounts of hydrogen sulfide escaped into the atmosphere, the gas would
have killed most forms of life and also damaged the ozone shield, increasing the
level of harmful ultraviolet radiation reaching the planet’s surface.
Powers and others believe that the same deadly sequence repeated itself for
another major extinction 200 million years ago, at the end of the Triassic era.
“There are very few people that hang on to the idea that it was a meteorite
impact,” she said. Even if an impact did occur, she added, it could not have been
the primary cause of an extinction already in progress.
In her study, Powers analyzed the distribution and diversity of bryozoans, a
family of marine invertebrates.
Based on the types of rocks in which the fossils were found, Powers was able to
classify the organisms according to age and approximate depth of their habitat.
She found that bryozoan diversity in the deep ocean started to decrease about 270
million years ago and fell sharply in the 10 million years before the mass
extinction that marked the end of the Permian era.
But diversity at middle depths and near shore fell off later and gradually, with
shoreline bryozoans being affected last, Powers said.
She observed the same pattern before the end-Triassic extinction, 50 million years
after the end-Permian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]