Climate Change - Why we are heading for extinction and what to do about it

Roger Hallam is co-founder of the Radical Think Tank. His PhD studies looked at protest movements and revolutionary campaigns and what factors make them successful.
After several practical campaigns, including wins for precarious workers, a student rent strike, and a divestment campaign at Kings College London, he is turning his hand to climate change.
In this lecture, delivered at KCL in April, he first outlines the bleak current scientific thinking on man-made climate change, then presents the results of his campaigning research, and finally invites people to join a massive civil disobedience movement to force real change and quite possibly save mankind.
Real Media will be following his campaign and bringing you more information over the coming months.

[@joyc.8115]

The strategy of distributed civil disobedience to disrupt economic society, reach critical mass and wake people up is absolute genius. Well done Roger, thank you.

[@roberteccles3896]

Name me one prediction you got right polar bears wrong coral reef wrong Maldives island wrong ice caps melt by 2010 wrong mild winters it's freezing out side snow and ice got that wrong 100 years ago half a million died through weather now it's 20 thousand and you terrorised children they are going to die watch Patrick Moore the power of truth bet you don't

[@ericherbert8253]

anyone else completely in despair watching this? i feel terrible. Angry, terrified, hopeless. I guess it's time to join the rebellion...

[@terryhudson5053]

That's exactly what he wants you to feel, a rebellion will make matters much worse.

[@Aerostealth]

I notice some commenters are more interested in who gave the talk rather than the message. It is immaterial if the presenter is liberal, a hippie, or poorly dressed, as this doesn't invalidate the message one iota. All you armchair critics try delivering a one hour talk to an audience in as a coherent manner as Roger did and you might have a leg to stand on if you had a tenth as much to say that was meaningful.

[@vancouveride]

Well, his presentation doesn't make a lot of sense. For example he says: "The productivity of corn decreases by 15% for every degree of temperature". If it were that simple a relation then the richest corn producing regions would be in the arctic. Obviously its a massive over simplification. We are at 1.2 degrees now and he has said that equates to 2.4 degrees in the middle of the continent which would be ~40% loss of productivity already. Yet if anyone bothers to look at actual harvests they will find that, paradoxically, we are harvesting more and more corn every year. This is just fear mongering. His hand wavy arguments are unconvincing. He may be right but he needs to work on his presentation if he wants to convince anyone with a shred of scepticism.

[@Patrick-jj5nh]

ironically it's usually the same people who cry about the left employing "identity politics"

[@paxwallacejazz]

@@vancouveride oh no way off expect catastrophic agricultural collapse globally within a few years due to Arctic/methane driven temperature spike globally coming soon to a planet near you.

[@golflouis52]

@ john....I agree with you John that knowledge is paramount, although i tend to give credit to people that have a degree, moreover a PhD related to the topic debated.. don't you? like i am sure you wouldn't let "anybody" questionably qualified, to perform an open heart surgery on you outside a proper setting, wouldn't you?... ok, that's what i thought

[@feedermonkey7233]

@@vancouveride it's beenwhilensince your comment and there's been a pandemic as well. I read something last month that said that the corn belt was rapidly moving north and Canada will soon be feeding the world. There was some big meeting g about this. So yes, the growing of corn has and is shifting way north! Just fyi. Though you and I are strangers, I hope this finds you well 🖖

[@domitron]

This is an excellent talk. I've listened to hundreds (perhaps thousands) of climate change talks, but this one really is tight - talking just about what matters and not getting off on the discussion about being hopeless or what have you. The problem is clearly the most important in the history of our species, so it shouldn't be kept quiet and direct talk should be the norm, not the exception.

[@wandaharding9958]

I liked the talk.... but … again... the time to act was many years ago.... One of the main problems is …. once the CHAOS begins... 450 nuke plants are at risk.... anyone, two or 20 around the world...will go with out water, employees, or get bombed... who knows... but they took our power to "survive" away when they built those death wish machines.

[@grindupBaker]

Large-scale nuclear war would (I suppose it's will) likely decrease human units more even over the long term because some radioactive elements have a long half life

[@nyoodmono4681]

Sad that you watched hundreds of talks and think this one is great. Looks like you are desperatly looking for prophets of doom. Would you be disapointed or reliefed if it turns out that nothing dramatic will hapen? Be honest.

[@Rnankn]

@@nyoodmono4681 The optimism bias or status quo bias is as much if not more of a risk. Given the degree of unknown variables, shouldn’t we assume the worst? Or at least have greater analysis and scenario development to gain considerably more clarity. This should not be something we should have to live with such uncertainty about!

[@nyoodmono4681]

@@Rnankn I agree with the "at lest have greater analysisis". The problem is that this issue is presented as if it *was* likely that we are doomed. Reality is it is not proven whatsoever and with the 1,5°C we are moving to, we actualy arrive at the lowest threshold of all aprehensions (Charney 1,5°C to 4,5°C with a doubling of CO2 since ~1850). The solution can not be to teach the peolpe in a paternalistic way. Like we teach a child that there is a bad santa that will punish you if not being good. Hysterical fear is not the sollution. The optimism is no bias to me, it is what makes sense if we look at CO2 historicaly. And we dont have to look too far back: 1910 to 1940 was warming at a same rate as current, more recent triple decades did, *without* the CO2 emissions that exploded later on after WW2. So yes: We should stay humble in the face of obvious record breaking CO2 due to mankind, but at the same time we should *not* always except the worst and we should also stay humble and not overestimate our influence, in an anthropcentric fashion.

[@grindupBaker]

At 25:40 "water vapour Roger makes one of his huge mistakes. The water vapour +ve feedback and loss of Arctic Ocean sea ice loss +ve feedback are definitely already included in each of the 2 "+0.5" on the blackboard (as they are included in the +1.2 degrees that's already happened). If they weren't included then each of the "+0.5" on the blackboard should have been "+0.25" instead and then you add a single "+0.5" for the water vapour +ve feedback and loss of Arctic Ocean sea ice loss +ve feedback (it gets a little complicated because you actually add another 0.25 but then that plays out over a couple of hundred years so we don't actually care). So, in summary, Roger made an absolutely massive ignorant mistake there by adding the 1.0 for feedbacks on when it was already included. This is what happens when you have nice social work, literature, poetry & author persons attempting to do solid physical science. They invariably screw it up like this. I like the Roger fellow though he seems pleasant.

[@gedofgont1006]

Pleasant, but dangerously deluded...…..

[@Rnankn]

The major problem is the authoritative sources have been communicating to governments and society about warming as though it is an exclusively climate centred problem of hard science. A human problem caused by societal organization and economic output that requires mitigation through social change failure of which is social collapse. This has always been a social problem but we have no international panel of sociologists. It is a governance problem, but we have no political scientists. So Roger is doing important forecasting and scenario planning, without direct input or review from colleagues. In other words, there are a few lone voices to counterbalance the ridiculous bias towards physical science and empirical methodology. Unsurprisingly, the hard scientists haven’t been to effective precisely because of their ignorance to social change, and bias against social theory, poor public communication and blind commitment to neutrality.

[@grindupBaker]

I can answer Roger's confusion at 20:22. It's because the person's he's speaking with are referring to best estimate of >90% open water for the entire summer June 22 to September 22 and Roger is referring to >90% open water for a day or so in September. Completely different things. When you discuss anything with somebody I've always found that it's always best to first make sure that you are both discussing the same thing.

[@Pasandeeros]

29:30 - the gas that is released in an ocean anoxid event is hydrogen sulfide (not "nitrate sulfate")

[@mydogskips2]

I'm guess you're probably correct, but I do think he said "nitrate sulfide".

[@carolisaac5459]

But he is a "numbers" man.

[@EastWindCommunity1973]

Dihydrogen sulfide, in fact!

[@aum82]

Gandalf dropping the “you shall not pass” climate bomb. Strictly for the real ones skrrrahh, skidiki-pap-pap Boom

[@samshep70]

School strike 4 climate every Friday

[@thisisnumber0]

Child abuser.

[@jimtaggert42]

sam was framed

[@tullygeevagh]

The only way of achieving any kind of mobilization is if there is hope, the possibility of making a positive change. With no hope there can be no objective, no positive end point. All we can achieve now is an acceptance of the inevitable and to end our existence with 'grace', that is with mutual compassion and a shared understanding.

[@pinkpeonyy]

The ending was great, I think you are right about everything you discussed

[@maggieadams8600]

Stirring stuff! If you can't feel passionate about life on earth what can you feel passsionate about? Thank you!

[@andrefjbernardo]

That's a great question. People really should think about it.

[@andrefjbernardo]

+Donald McCarthy brilliance?

[@andrefjbernardo]

That's brilliant.

[@JeffHiemstra]

So if we’ve lost 75% of natural arctic sea ice so far, why do we still have winter season on queue in North America. Wouldn’t the albedo / dark water effect already have eliminated 75% of the Winter cold? What is the tipping point to complete climate change with regards to winter season. 90% loss of sea ice and then it just ‘happens’ ?

[@nyoodmono4681]

Does not even matter. The arctic as a sea melted and grew back many times. Climate will change and man will adept, thats all. And man made C02 plays a very minor role.

[@jamesdarling2468]

The sea ice grows in the winter and shrinks in the summer. The annual minimum has shrunk by 75% to what the annual minimum average was in the 20th century. When there is a blue ocean event for the first time, it will probably only last for a few days before ice starts to form again. Once it happens though, the blue ocean state will last for a longer period of time with each consecutive season, finally reaching an equilibrium of no ice year round about 10 years after the initial no ice for a few days in September. Look at the image at the top of the report. Multi-year ice is ice that survives the summer. Pretty soon, (any season now) there will be no ice that survives the summer. scripps.ucsd.edu/news/research-highlight-loss-arctics-reflective-sea-ice-will-advance-global-warming-25-years

[@robertpoen5383]

Spot on. I've watched dozens of videos on climate change and they all end with someone in the audience asking "What can we do?" Well, watch this video and you find out.

[@andrewtrip8617]

The “what can we do” person is edited into the video as positive reinforcement.take notice of Rogers “longest line “ explanation at the start of the talk .I don’t think you have any idea about how or why these videos are produced .

[@CoolBreezeAnthony]

Giving up is not human nature. Knowing what is wrong is the first step towards fixing it. Or at least give your best efforts.

[@carolisaac5459]

This is partially the way I see it. There are two classes in the near future. The collateral is optimism.

[@owlnationlegal4228]

Great sequence. I've watched 1000+ climate.vids, and your presentaion, basic analog chalk and yes, the most important graph, was spot on save your 2024 optimism. No such luck. Its 2018 or 2019 at most. Btw the gas you mentioned is hydrogen sulfide

[@Roger_Hallam]

thanks - yes I always get my chemical names mixed up - sorry about that. I am interested getting more info on CC for mobilising people so get in touch if you could help - I'm on facebook

[@kali1hunna1993]

@@Roger_Hallam Hi Roger, I understand you probably very busy these days but I wondered if you had a document to provide the references for some of the scientific info in this talk. I am doing a XR heading for extinction talk in Taunton and wanted to be able to provide references to the scientific journals... No worries if not. And thank you for giving this talk. Watching it 9 months ago has changed the course of my life dramatically for the better!

[@stevet7506]

Bravo. Great talk.

[@J.M.-nb4gw]

The only thing to do is learn to live in the present moment cuz there is NO future for humans (or other vertebrates.) The many feedback loops are in motion and it's much too late to "fix" the Earth's climate now... we might have had a chance 15 or even 10 years ago but we are totally screwed now

[@grindupBaker]

The graph being shown is that there'll be no Arctic sea ice for 1 day only in ~2024 AD or whatever. It's 1 day without ice. Then the days increase backwards towards March over the decades. As you know, northern hemisphere equinox dates are ~March 22 to ~September 22 so ocean warming accelerates mostly as ice is near zero such as May 22 - July 22 or such like (there is no actual date, it's inane to think there's some cutoff or start off date). There's paleoclimate analysis of 5,000 years ago when this might have happened that indicates that "the transition is fast" between year-round Arctic sea ice and seasonal Arctic sea ice (covered in autumn/winter/spring, no ice in spring/summer/autumn) but the synopsis I read didn't say how many decades is "the transition is fast".

[@christinearmington]

grindupBaker The difference between geologic time and hockey 🏒 stick time.

[@richdiana3663]

A predicament has no solutions, only consequences. Nothing we do will change our fate. Doom is no longer a philosophical position but the fate of most living creatures on this planet. Humans find themselves in a perilous state from their ability to deny their culpability, a talent that insures their destruction. It is why things continue to worsen.

[@ruthanthonygardner]

Fossil fuel civilization is doomed, it's self-limiting. But we could reinvent our society to face truth and work together cooperatively along Partnership Culture lines.

[@freedomfightertwo]

When people hear this wake up call, most are quietly turning around and going back into the Matrix. They choose fantasy over reality.

[@bkbland1626]

Then we're doomed.

[@ericgenestvideoclips]

I agree. No more grey, the end of The Matrix, nothing but the truth. That is worth dying for. @TheEsotericZebra

[@MICKEYISLOWD]

@TheEsotericZebra You mean like hiding out in woods and forests because there are gangs and groups of people everywhere looking to kill anyone just for their clothes of any food they may have. Children being attacked for the same reasons and then there is cannibalism happening because when you are starving the frontal cortex of the brain takes a back seat as the primal survival areas kick in with a bang!! It would be horrible beyond what you can imagine and there will be no more happy days only boding fear and apprehension. Hollywood makes us scared because we like to be scared when we know we are really safe also we like it because it forces us to rehearse for terrible things just like some dreams do but in reality it will be terrifying 24/7 with absolutely no time out just to kick back and relax!! You can't ever imagine what the reality of this would be like!!

[@JamesHenderson-ue5db]

BK Bland COVER THE SAHARA DESERT WITH A GIANT WHITE INTENSELY LIGHT-REFLECTIVE LAYER! SUNLIGHT ESCAPING INTO SPACE BY PASSING THROUGH HEAT- INSULATING GREENHOUSE GASES IN A WAY HEAT ENERGY FROM LIGHT ABSORBED INTO THE GROUND COULDN'T WOULD PREVENT EXTREME GLOBAL WARMING BY REDUCING THE SO-CALLED 'GREENHOUSE EFFECT'.

[@patricklincoln5942]

I had 1 day ago posted a criticism where I posted criticism of the speakers assesment of humanity's situation with respect to the global Warming. I felt that it was necessary to state that I agree with the speaker that humanity is at risk of extinction. I just don't agree with his analysis and I think our situation is bit better than what he describes. However, I do believe that the situation is so dire that I think his call for action (and his method in particular) our warranted. We all need to be taking the climate change crisis much more seriously. I hadn't considered his suggestion before I saw this his video and it might work. I WISH TO PRAISE THE SPEAKER FOR HIS SUGGESTION. I think it is very good one.

[@Jane_under_a_tree_with_a_book]

I totally agree with Mr Hallam's climate conclusions. I just don't see the point of being jailed - for some it might be right action, for others it is not accepting what is. Either way, it will not alter the volume of greenhouse gases, the melting ice, the growing global population, the destruction of the environment, nor the inevitable meltdown of 450+ nuclear facilities.

[@ikoiko1day531]

A good reason to fight the system that is killing the planet is to prove to God, man and yourself that you are a good person.

[@Jane_under_a_tree_with_a_book]

@JayBird We are all wired differently. However, your 'good reason' does not work for me. That is because: I don't feel the need to prove anything; I do not believe in 'God'; to me, the term 'man' does not include women, girls or boys; and I think that humans are more complex than the label 'good'. Nevertheless, if it works for you, then it is a valid way of looking at the world - and I mean that. We are doing the best we can to make sense of what is. Peace.

[@valhala56]

I have to agree with Jane, even if you were successful in overthrowing the system,it's too late and you will not be successful. Julian Assange is soon to be handed over to the system for torture and imprisonment and very little is being done to stop it. The group of military officers attempting to assassinate Hitler and take over the government, the lucky ones were shot, the unlucky ones were hung by piano wire. It's too late.

[@spinkyl9559]

So is Roger taking private for profit prisons in the US into account, and how they need more inmates to be more profitable? If govt invests in private, for profit prisons, it might be self defeating to go to prison. just saying.

[@JohnnyMotel99]

I would have preferred a lot less waffle. Get to the points and edit this down to 15minutes.

[@stevefitt9538]

I have 3 ideas for a US Green New Deal. 1] Sell off half the US gold holdings for as much as possible. Not that this is in any sense necessary, I have agreed with Stephanie Kelton view on what a fiat dollar means for over 6 years now. But, it does help send the message that who will need gold when we are all dead? So, let us get serious about this. 2] Start building a few factories to build solar panels using the best tech we have now, just like we built factories to build B-24 bombers. What the world needs is a glut of solar panels. 3] Double all the unemployment benefit payments for all workers who's job is eliminated by this fight. For just as long or longer then the current system would allow. Then they will not feel so damaged and it will stimulate the communities where the money is spent.

[@christinearmington]

What’s happening Nov. 6th? I’m guessing since you are up based it’s not us mid-terms?

[@erwin643]

Wow. My wife and I paid $5.00 each for a lecture at Portland Oregon's OMSI, recently. The Director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center who spoke gets all his funding from U.S. Federal sources (NASA, etc), so of course "the Summer ice isn't going to melt until about 2040," so go home and continue your lives of NFL/NASCAR. I wish I had this professor's chart with me during the Q&A session that evening. Many of us were pissed with that speaker's conclusions.

[@erwin643]

In other words, the U.S. Gov't doesn't want the populace to go into a blind panic, while they spend billions upgrading gov't underground cities like Raven Rock, Mt. Weather and other COG/COOP, not to mention a massive tunneling project that is now connecting all these locations. How do I know? It's now all been declassified under Obama, and his "transparent Gov't." DOD also knows that everything they do from this point-on will be driven by abrupt climate change.

[@forestdweller5581]

He is exactly right pointing out the PIOMAS volume graph is the one that says most. And PIOMAS does not even account for increasing feedbacks. PIOMAS has also been found to over estimate ice that is 1 meter or less thick from around 11-25%. Nearly all the ice in summer is in that category...you do the math. And i have to agree with a lot of the comments here, don't get your ass thrown in jail being a brave activist however noble. It's the last place you wanna be when collapse is imminent....

[@grindupBaker]

It's my understanding that DMI analysis shows larger volume than PIOMAS analysis. Check it out yourself though if it interests because I haven't studied it, just heard that somewhere.

[@arronjerden915]

I have a question for climate change advocates. If the global temp is indeed warmer now than it was during the ice age then how are the ice age animals frozen in permafrost? Obviously if the ground was frozen when the animals died then they could not be forced into the ground without causing massive damage to the remains but if they were exposed on the surface for even a short period of time then the remains would have started to putrefy, the bodies own internal temperature at the time of death would be enough to start the process in hours and is noticeable within days. I know the answer, I just want to see who else does. No I do not think the earth was warmer during the ice age than it is now, so don't even try to come at me from that angle.

[@stevengill1736]

OK. it's almost 2023.....where are we now, one pandemic, three worldwide droughts and some serious flash floods all over the world later, and now what?

[@mathieucaron4957]

And now what you asked 8 months ago? 😅 Open your tv, is it clear enough now?

[@Wookey.]

Roger, Why are you using the 2014 PIOMASS septmeber minimum graph in 2018? Add the missing 4 years data so people can't accuse you of being misleading. The current trend is 3.2+/-1 per decade, (psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAprSepCurrent.png) suggesting ice-free (in September) sometime between 2026 and 2034, which is still very worrying, but not quite the 2020 or 2017 your graph suggests. Similarly you tell us the 100% guaranteed temp is 1.2C+ 0.5C + 0.5C, without backing it up. I've watched an awful lot of climate change videos too, and I'll give you 1.7C, but not 2.2C _guaranteed_ at this stage (unless you are talking about the long-term equilibrium (i.e. another thousand years), but that's not really very relevant right now - it's the next 50-odd year that really counts). Perhaps you can justify that, but just stating it looks extremely dubious. I think we are well off the path of 'simple arithmetic' at this point. Your basic premise about positive feedbacks is sound, and I agree that the uncertainties is not a good thing - it works both ways. I also think your Extinction rebellion plan is brilliant - I'm signed up. We need things to happen, fast, and I agree with your analysis that this method could well be effective. However it's really important that you get the science right, and are not partaking of McPherson-style catastrophism. It makes us look bad, and helps make us dismissable. Kevin Anderson invariably gets it right, and still makes his points very clearly, and plenty scarily enough - there is no need to exaggerate at this stage. And 'Nitrate sulphide' is not a thing. Perhaps you mean Hydrogen Sulphide. Anyway, thanks you for your efforts. I really hope it works, but please adjust this talk if you give it again.

[@nespith]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/fqmTdGmMi5umsKs

[@greggsenne1268]

I don't think integration in the south of the US is quite the same as bringing the fossil fuel industry a halt. Integration was at worst an inconvenience. To stop burning fossil carbon would destroy civilization in a heartbeat. We're in a situation of overshoot. To remove the support would cause a collapse in the near term. The effects of global warming won't be serious enough to provoke a response for a couple of decades. Given the choice, people will delay action until the consequences can't be ignore. Whether or not there is any chance of recovery at that point really isn't the issue.

[@greggsenne1268]

First, why do you believe is it relevant?

[@harper277]

Sedition 101

[@matthewhenry9655]

I aimed to clarify the role of positive (or destabilizing) climate feedbacks and show how they don't (necessarily) lead to runaway climate change in this video --> kzbin.info/www/bejne/mXWvpX5_pMqqZ6M

[@MrSammer1972]

Lots of ice left in 2023

[@grindupBaker]

Freddy van Manen grindupBaker + Freddy van Manen "If warming to + 2 degrees celcious could be catastrophic for the world why it didn't happen before as showed in this Greenland ice core graph". Because the surface temperature of Greenland and the North Atlantic region isn't the same as the Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) and it doesn't change the same, not even close. 126,000 to 122,000 years ago when Earth's Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) was 0.5 degrees higher than now the surface of the Greenland ice sheet (GIS) was 5-8 degrees higher than now (from a Greenland ice core proxy like you reference) so it's 10-16x as much for Greenland so when Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) becomes 1.0 degrees higher than now the surface of the Greenland ice sheet (GIS) will be 10-16 degrees higher than now. It's massive. I'm sure it'll actually be a bit less like 7-12 degrees higher than now for the first few hundred years but it's still massive. That's why half the ice is now already guaranteed to be gone off Greenland in the next 300-700 years with no more warming at all. It happened before in the same situation and it'll happen again. That's why. Boy was that ever an easy one.

[@randomvariable4597]

Jesus

[@aum82]

..is coming to solve climate change thank god

[@grindupBaker]

Just to be clear on the mumbled aside at 25:20 "there's a 20% chance that it's going to be 8 degrees higher in the next 5 years" that's huge false information simply because that happens to be physically impossible for this particular planet (there are other planets that it's possible for). So I can answer Roger's talk with himself at 25:30 "if I understand basic physics", the answer is obviously Roger doesn't understand basic physics. but that's OK because I can confirm his +2.2 degrees from 1750 AD if no carbon is burned from this year on, and the ocean stops taking up CO2, and the Arctic Ocean becomes typically ice free (

[@Dr.AnonymousPro]

June 2018 Arctic sea ice volume was 26% below the 1979-2017 average and 42% below 1979.

[@nicolew231]

Anonymous Pro please! The 1979 to 1990 average on the last day of June was 11.544 million square kilometers. The last day of June 2018 was 10.074 million square kilometers. How about you look at facts instead of news articles. And that is the area of ocean with at least 15% sea ice.

[@seslews]

Anonymous pro- Interested to see data supporting your statement. NOAA, NASA and the Danish Meteorological Institue all say that the artic ice is less than 10 per cent less than average and 40 per cent more than 2012 which was the lowest on record. It has been colder than average during the melt season so far. Greenland had a small percentage of net ice gain last year and is projected to have a substantial gain this year.

[@Dr.AnonymousPro]

Just a regional example: polarview.met.no/Statistics/graphs/osisaf_season_plot_latest.png

[@Dr.AnonymousPro]

Sorry to burst your bubble Nicole, but you're wrong. The facts I mentioned are from cold hard (mostly soft, pun intended) observational data. psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/ We're talking VOLUME here, in case you misread. I often freelance for the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility, so good luck trying to convince me of what I have personally seen and observed to be correct.

[@ericpowell7547]

Nicole W area is not an accurate measurement for sea ice, you also have to take the thickness into account. It's the older, thicker ice that is disappearing, but it was cooler in the arctic this spring, which is a better trend than last year.

[@willrobinson1229]

Garnering the sympathy of those not yet mobilized by "getting stepped on". Bingo. Who is brave enough to get stepped on for a cause? Perhaps it's a matter of feeling the desperation of the situation keenly enough to be willing to suffer for it all.

[@gedofgont1006]

Go on then: we're all watching...…..

[@motsmada4758]

We have more to worry about fracking than man-made gases!

[@grindupBaker]

+Tom Adams "We have more to worry about fracking than man-made gases!" You've obviously never been in my road bicycling group

[@motsmada4758]

I concur with the level of pollution. I cycled one mile on Jul 3. My throat burned like never before. They must be making catalytic converters with less platinum. Also, many lawn-owners have not asked their landscapers to suspend service. They cut only micrometers of grass every week in this dry weather. Even in normal rainfall they need only appear once every two weeks. Lots of people lacking environmental / health conscientiousness.

[@nyoodmono4681]

Nah fracking is alright, nothing bad happens, the ground water is way above the drilling and there is not much civilization close anyway like in Arizona.

[@sichere]

And what does the time lord suggest we do about Volcano's ? Researchers say new evidence has found there was a worse time to be alive - the year 536 AD. The Earth was plunged into darkness for 18 months when a thick cloud blocked the sun - causing temperatures to drop, crops to fail and people to starve. Temperatures that summer plunged to between 1.5C and 2.5C (36.5F). The decade that followed would be the coldest in the previous 2,300 years. "It was the beginning of one of the worst periods to be alive, if not the worst year," Michael McCormick, historian and archaeologist, told Science Magazine. The source of the cloud so thick it obscured the sun in the sixth century has long puzzled historians, but ultra precise analysis of ice from a Swiss glacier has unlocked the mystery. A team led by Mr McCormick, chair of the Harvard University initiative for the science of the human past, and glaciologist Paul Mayewski, of the climate change institute of the University of Maine (UM) in Orono, found an enormous volcanic eruption in Iceland was likely to blame.

[@wailinburnin]

Love the disposable cup and the small plastic bottle of water from which it is being filled while speaking about the lack of government action, not that I’m a libertarian idiot who thinks “we can all do our part” individually and it will all be alright. When selective genocide becomes a political debate it becomes interesting because then you start to debate: “Who is the sociopath?” The advocate who seeks to avoid extinction, or those of us who recoil in horror at the argument. Makes you wonder what kinds of classified PowerPoints junior military officers all over the world of nuclear powers are preparing for consideration by their superiors. Imagine you’ve got stars on your shoulders and lines on your face and you get called into a closed room and that’s the presentation from a brilliant young crew cut sporting male captain or “pleasing” (as Orin Hatch would say), uniformed young woman.

[@nyoodmono4681]

How is this brilliant? This is just modelling with overexaturating of greenhouse gases and effects of arctic melting.

[@valhala56]

I already knew all this, studied Guy McPheson's work but this bloke seems like me, a generalist, it is the specialists ie Glacieriologist or rising tide scientists who fail to see the big total picture and realize we are done. Game over.

[@MrTageamu]

Al Gore said that it would be ice free by 2007!

[@gedofgont1006]

LOL! I think he was talking about his wine cellar!

[@Leitwolf22]

Amazing how this guy has no knowledge on climate science at all (and probably does not even care), but is all in on fixing the problems he does not understand..

[@stevet7506]

Do say more... what does he not know?

[@bitchinbob2045]

You are 15 seconds into this video , you look , and that's your son . What do you do ? You say oh shit. What have I done . Nuff said .

[@EmeraldView]

The universe did me a big favor recently by making sure I don't care anymore. Bye bye humanity. And good riddance.

[@biodynamic2700]

`NICE INTRO BY THE CANCER PATIENT

[@poiter3780]

It was 54 deg celius in Australia two years ago where i live. My theory is we are slowly burning out like mercury for the near future b ut i also think its the opposite of an ice age a heat age maybe.

[@poiter3780]

Redzone 2118 Nsw on the coast nearby was 49 c

[@poiter3780]

Redzone 2118 No sorry but it's 100 m above sea level here and the heat was 100 km radius our eyes felt as if they were burning

[@traditionalfood367]

Was that in summer or winter? What month of the year? Yes, I know the seasons are reversed so was it between late December and early April, when such temperatures are normal for parts of Australia?

[@nyoodmono4681]

Wow i love heat, i have to visit Australia, you are blessed.

[@patricklincoln5942]

Who is this guy? He does not seem very professional. When he adds those increases of temperature how does he know there is not an overlap (I will explain what I mean by overlap more carefully in my next sentences)? He says from the literature you get 1.2C and 0.5C and 0.5C from different sources...but how does he know that some of the 1.2C in the first event does not account for some of the 0.5C increase stemming from another cause? These events are all connected. It seems to naive to just add them as he does. If you do this you clearly get a biased result towards a higher end temperature. I think we are at risk of extinction...but it is not game over yet and he should not say that it is when he is clearly not an expert in the field. I beg all of you to think clearly about what I am saying here. We all need to act to prevent disaster...we still have time...just not as much as before.

[@patricklincoln5942]

I am not a bot, I was only being critical of how he came to his conclusion. You can't just add temperatures in that way he did. I regrettet that I could see that my comment would be viewed as saying that there is nothing to worry about. He is right to worry about the potential of human extinction....but I don't agree with it being unavoidable at this point. We have a chance to fix this still and that is why I posted the comment which is just below this one (have a look). I support the suggestions actions of the man who gave his lecture. I just want his sharing of his knowledge of climate science to be factual.

[@patricklincoln5942]

Oh...I did not notice that it says under the publishing date that his name is Roger Hallam. Now I know who he is.

[@greenfellow1966]

I agree actually. I am suspicious, and I've asked Mr Hallam for references so I can check his claims. If anyone else though has those references, please supply them. Thanks.

[@nyoodmono4681]

He is a prophet of doom, he wants an endtime like many in these comments secretly do. He is doing what the ipcc does on a whole new level: Overexhaturating the greenhouse effect beyond sanity. Sad how many people just buy his "math" and then keep going with him for an hour. redicilous unmasking bs and i say that as a far left.

[@dickhamilton3517]

thr intro nearly stopped me watching - I cannot stand 'uptalk'

[@MegaUluwatu]

26:38 says it all. weird stuff going on

[@LukeFlegg]

"please prove me wrong" Sounds like humble to me. What's your stance Rob?

[@MegaUluwatu]

@@LukeFlegg Yes Luke you could be right

[@jimtaggert42]

do not dis Trump here or you will be smashed!!!

[@charachoppel3116]

Come to the point, man!!! He has no point but babbling away. Showing an ice decrease graph saying ice will have metlted by 2024. There are graphs telling the opposite. So why does he not compare?

[@conaman551]

lol yes show me the graphs from nasa showin contradictory observations otherwise They MuST bE BrOKen INstRuMenTS

[@grindupBaker]

Roger's "This is absolutely certain" at 25:30 is incorrect and it's because Roger has no grasp of the subject whatsoever. The loss of all Arctic Ocean sea ice from late March each year isn't already set up at all, Roger is just babbling rubbish about that. Only the 30% that has already happened sinec 1979, which Roger mentions, is certain (because it's already done). The final 70% from now until no ice depends entirely on how much carbon humans burn from now on. There's even a 2020 AD scientific paper about it that details what increase in global temperature from know will make each month ice free (it's free, Roger could download it for free and read it if he had any actual interest in the science). There actually is 1.01 degrees held back and unstoppable (eventually ) right now in 2020 AD but it isn't what Roger says about Arctic Ocean sea ice, he's got it all screwed up. It's: +0.54 degrees lag right now because the ocean keeps warming until it's back in balance, plus +0.47 degrees if all human air pollution is cleaned up.

[@reinoldhartberg7835]

Still 1,2 + 1,0 degree means passing the threshhold presented in the 2018 "hothouse earth" paper and means we are coming towards the runaway climate change that will bring us to ever higher temperatures killing billions of people in little time. Not sure why even if hes incurrect (could well be, I certainly dought some of it but would like to see your references) that actually matters too much...

[@jonfairway8235]

only one fix for this... extreme as it sounds ... we need to create a new ice age.. we have a chance at surviving that !!

[@casheewassuch]

Reference: www.corbettreport.com/interview-288-dr-tim-ball/

[@timhallas4275]

Now I understand why college students are so gullible and ignorant. They are getting a lecture on climate, from a guy who has PhD in protesting. I'm willing to bet this guy never took a single science class since high-school, and he thinks he has a handle on the Earth's climate. There is a very good reason that we should fear our future, and these students are it.

[@stauffap]

That's a pretty ignorant comment. This certainly isn't an obligatory lecture. Of course a physics student wouldn't have to listen to Roger Hallam to get his bachelor or masters degree. And of course a student of atmospheric science wouldn't learn it from Roger Hallam. The problem at the universities are the social sciences. There you'll find the occasional people, who have just joined the university to push their views into the scientific literature. But those people are a minority. They are just a minority that people unfortunately pay a lot of attention to, because apparently that's what our media has become. It's not about substance any more. It's not about what's really important, but just about grabbing people's attention and of course nothing grabs attention as much as a person at a university expressing a moronic view. You should blame the media not the universities. That being said, the climate science is very clear. We are causing global warming by burning fossil fuels and by our methan emissions. It's also very clear that if we stay on the path that we are on (Emissionscenario RCP8.5 from the IPCC) then the consequences can be catastrophic. And by catastrophic i mean it can cause the destabilisation of our systems and it will cause a lot of deaths. We can get into details in case you're not familiar with the peer-reviewed literature regarding high emission scenarios. So it's clear that a warming over 1.5 or 1°C is too big of a risk to take. A lot of the damages would be irreversible and it would cost a lot. That's one reason why it's so irrational when people talk about the costs of switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. They are completely ignoring the future costs of global warming.

[@stauffap]

Look at some MIT lectures about quantum physics, organic chemistry or mathematics (you can find them on youtube) and then you see what normal lectures look like. This is not a lecture. I wish lectures at universities were that easy....(well not really, then we woulnd't be learning much).

[@timhallas4275]

@@stauffap Warming is a natural state of this planet right now. We have reached the halfway point between glaciation events. It's supposed to be getting warmer. As for our contribution to that. it looks like maybe 2% more than would normally occur. It's been much higher in distant history and the Earth survived. In fact it thrived. Global warming went from a science investigation to a political debate and now it has become a religion. I'm following the real science. Fuck all of you liberal puppets.

[@stevet7506]

How do you deny an observation in climate so apparent?

[@timhallas4275]

@@stevet7506 We don't deny anything. We simply do not believe the bullshit that is not science. The Earth is warming. It is not alarming. The hockey stick was a deliberate misrepresentation of the data. Once you look at the big picture, the small one is not frightening. CO2 is not our enemy. Politicians are.

[@sichere]

The one thing that's certain is Roger will be extinct in less than 50 years

[@MrSvenovitch]

They really have no one who is less annoying both by voice and clothing to present this message? OMG, I've done the math so know it's true and I'm almost hoping some vikings come in and take care of this guy.

[@grindupBaker]

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM. SPAM SPaaaaaaaAM wonderful SPaaaaaaaAM.

[@mattg6136]

Grand solar minimum/Modern Eddie Minimum is upon us now. Last solar minimum was the Dalton Minimum and before that the Maunder, 206 year solar cycles. Glaciation is not far off. 13,000 year cycle. We have just ended the warm cycle definitely mini ice age but could be a major one. Life is going to change.

[@Tonyisnotonfire]

Yet temperature are still increasing

[@mattg6136]

Space Wizard . No it ain't

[@Tonyisnotonfire]

climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/monitoring/climate/surface-temperature www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-surface-temperature climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

[@Tonyisnotonfire]

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Temp-sunspot-co2.svg

[@mattg6136]

Space Wizard hi, thanks for the reply looked at the links. They don't go back in time far enough to get a clear picture. Nasa, IPCC, EPA supprt the Global warming thery as they get /used to get funding from their government re CO2 levels. CO2 taxes. They homogenized figures, data sets, increase temps 0.5 deg c. Twice because it doesn't fit their 100s of models/narrative . Global warming and cooling are natural 206, 13,000year cycles. Gran Solar Maximum has hust ended were going in to the Modern Eddie Minimum, Grand Solar Minimum. Mini Ice age longer colder winters, messed up jet stresm, hotter sumers, kate frists record hale floiding increased volcanic activitu due to less sunspot = weaker earths magnetosphere = more cosmic ray influx = more cloud nucleation albedo affect, cooling. Below 120ppm plants suffer to live. About 1,000ppm would be better. CO2 goes up with temps. Most comes from the sea. CO2 is a trace gas will vertually no affect to climate change. During the roman era CO2 was about a 1000ppm. Check out past co2 levels and how they correlate with solar cycles. Ice core data and carbon data from cosmic rays. Global warming is real but a natural cycle. I agree more humans snd more pollutants aren't good for the enviroment. Look up for more info. Rolf Witzsche, John L Casey Thanks. Discussion is goid Don't nean to offend.

[@anthonyferguson4218]

Antartica is doing fine currently more ice than 1979 and 1980 despite 40 years co2 Dont forget arctic ice comes back every winter it only melts in summer This talk is as daft as it gets, I suggest he looks into earths history the poles have been ice free more than it has ice We have had ice ages with nore co2 we are currently still in an ice age, co2 rise follows temperature it is not the driver of climate

[@grindupBaker]

The Arctic ice isn't coming back every winter and that's, duh!, the whole point you banana. In 1979 it was 33 and now it's 22, and it's definitely on a continuing downward trajectory, duh ! When it reaches 0 then it's (guess what , guess what anybody ?) all gone. Duh duh duh.

[@mathieucaron4957]

​@@grindupBaker2 years later, we can confirm you were right lol We now know it will melt for the first time during summer in ~2030.