Frankenstorm: What kind of god?

October 30, 2012

When his monster came to life, Dr. Frankenstein said in manic derangement:  “In the name of God, now I know what it feels like to be a God!”

Now, in the wake of Frankenstorm, we know what it feels like.  Sandy is, in part, our malignant creation.

Today is about rescue.  Tomorrow is about recovery.  You can help now, here.

But with fateful political choices looming, we cannot hesitate to say this:   Extreme weather is juiced by climate disruption.  It is inflicted by the people who buy our elections so as to ensure our dependence on fossil fuels.   The specter of coal ads interspersed among the disaster footage is beyond ironic; it’s sick.

If there is some danger in appearing opportunistic by “using” Sandy to call attention to the climate crisis, it is more than offset by the danger of perpetuating climate silence.

A just god would do more than attend to its monster’s victims.  It would stop it.  And it would create something different.

Today’s victims are the priority today, and we must help them.

But what about the generations of victims we can save now, if we stand up and wage the clean energy revolution that will spare some of them?  Condemning them with denial – or silence – is no way to show our compassion for today’s victims.

The “rising of the seas,” Sandy bellowed back at Mitt Romney, is not to be mocked.  Nor will it be placated by the President’s climate silence.  I’m not being poetic.  The less we speak, the more climate will speak for itself.  If we fail to deal, it gets worse.  Actually.


The blogosphere (if not the mainstream media) is alive with useful stuff on the Sandy-climate connection.

Climate Solutions Communication Director Kimberly Larson captures it here.

Climate Progress has thorough treatment here.

Sandy herself finds a voice here.

Forecast the Facts battles silence here.

Elizabeth Kolbert weighs in here.

Romney and Obama spar for denialist-in-chief

October 17, 2012

“I had that question for all of you climate change people,” said Candy Crowley, in the post-debate coverage last night.  But she didn’t ask it because, “you know, again, we knew that the economy was still the main thing.”   (Stephen Lacey has the full scoop on the debate at Climate Progress.  Or save time and just poke yourself in the eye with a stick.)

The candidates didn’t actually contradict climate reality per se of course.  They didn’t talk about it at all.  And the moderator sat on the question.  This silence plays a vital role in the larger ecosystem of denial, at least as important as the explicit disinformation campaigns.  And competing to demonstrate who would be the most relentless fossil fuel extractor, while remaining silent on climate — well that’s a pretty potent dose of denial, even if its not overt.

OK, “climate change people” now what?  (And, WTH, is there some other kind of person?  Does everybody else gain immunity from Hell and High Water by being some other kind of people, like, what, “climate stasis people”?  Heck, let’s quit this beat!).

After watching the Presidential candidates almost come to blows over who would dig, drill, and burn more fossil fuel, I woke up with a massive headache.

I spent my first hour awake in numb silence.  That never works for me.

So, Dr. Golden’s prescription after a hard night of watching our “leaders” wage climate denial:

1)      More – and more viscous – coffee.  Peets Major Dickason’s Blend.  Grrrrrr.

2)      Sign up and spread the word to Help End the Climate Silence.

3)      Crowdfund this great short video of young activists in Florida calling on the Presidential candidates to get real about climate in the final debate.

4)      Watch Bill Moyers interview with James Balog, the Chasing Ice photographer.

5)      Sign up for Do the Math, which begins November 7 in Seattle

And as always, every day is better, the more time we spend on our own little fossil fuel divestment campaigns:   I’m going for a bike ride at lunch.