TEDx Talks 
Climate change denial has historically been defined as the overt refusal to accept the scientific understanding that climate change is happening, humans are causing it, and that it will have bad, to catastrophic, consequences for humans and the ecosystems upon which we depend. But as that viewpoint has become untenable in the face of overwhelming evidence, this talk explores the more subtle, passive forms of climate change denial that are still pervasive in the 2020s. By recognizing these passive forms of denial in our everyday lives, we enable ourselves to move past them, and begin working towards climate solutions every day. Patrick Belmont is a dad and river scientist with a rapidly shrinking carbon footprint. He thoroughly enjoys studying some things that almost nobody cares about, like how and why rivers meander, but he spends most of his time trying to solve society’s most pressing problems, like figuring out where all that mud in the Mississippi River comes from and how to reduce impacts of wildfire in the western US. And of course, he is dead serious about stopping climate change. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx
source
About The Author
I’ve heard this argument for climate change that I want to be proven wrong but I can’t find any evidence on it being wrong. If anyone can help me comment below. The argument is that we are coming out of an ice age and that’s why the Polar Ice Caps are melting. Please prove this theory wrong if you can.
Humans will deny until their last breath. Sapiens is the only lying mammal specie on earth 🌍
If we can't reduce co2 thanks to the selfish corporates we must focus on re oxygenation and co2 removal techniques like KELP FARMING !!! all around the world sea coasts together by most of people. We need to change our style of work and shift towards these techniques that can even earn us money.
Any body interested to join me , please reply here. Lets save the world !
The problem is, people have been predicting climate issues and the end of the world by a certain date (2018 NY will be underwater, etc AL Gore… The inconvenient truth plays a bit like an ironic comedy in 2021), and all sorts of alarmist stuff like that for years. Climate activists really need to read the boy who cried wolf.
Laying a huge guilt trip on almost everyone for failing to agree with a far-fetched, catastrophist theory….that was 20 minutes of my life that I will never get back.
Sir when you put 2015 was the hottest year can say from when it was the hottest year.From 1950 or 1900 or 1800 or from 1000 AD?.What relative data are you using to say this?
climate change is a hoax.
Attention all Climate Change deniers….We just went through the hottest heat wave that Canada 🇨🇦 has ever experienced. I am presently visiting Kelowna, BC and experienced 45C. A lady that I have known for 40 years and worked with for 20 years who lives down here now weathered the heat wave with me. She brought her portable AC and with 3 AC's going and 5 fans we managed with lots of lemon water. Just barely, I might add. I had to put up strips of aluminum foil up behind some of the blinds on our closed in balcony and when I accidentally touched the glass of one of the windows it burned like an oven door. Horrible experience.
Kelowna is more or less prepared for the heat but Vancouver, Canada is not….hundreds of people died sudden deaths attributed to the extreme heat. There was a small town, Lytton, BC , 🇨🇦 that experienced the hottest temperature 49.6C that was ever been experienced in Canada and then abruptly experienced wildfire and burned to the ground. The towns people barely escaped with their lives and an elderly couple died in the fire. The biggest part of the Okanagan BC cherry crop has cooked on the trees so most of it is lost. A lot of apples are now little bags of apple sauce on the trees and out on the coast at least a billion shallow water sea creatures also cooked and now smell to high heaven.
Southern Yukon and Whitehorse and Carmacks are presently under flood warnings and Canadian soldiers have been deployed to Yukon to help.
How much more of this does the world have to see before serious action is taken? I personally think that it is too late for much to be done now other than remedial action such as aggressive local Government fire smarting, flood smarting and aggressive Community Action such as Community food gardens and everyone turn what ground they have into food gardens such as the " Victory Gardens" in England during WW2. My husband and I have planted what we can get to grow at our place…potatoes that we hope to pair with Moose meat. my husband nd his 82 year old hunting partner and friend of over 40 years ( who has also planted potatoes and will share with us if need be) have planned to go moose hunting again this year and hopefully bring one back to go with our potatoes like last year. My youngest son and his daughter will most certainly go Bison hunting again this year and hopefully get a bison. My Granddaughter is also going on a school Bison hunt this winter Covid allowing and I think she is the designated shooter.
It has finally cooled down in Kelowna…for a day at least…then back to the usual 30's of an Okanagan Summer today according to Environment lCanada. However, 31 is a lot better than 45 let me tell you.
All that said, get on it you slackers!!!
An event of global scale will happen July 24, 2021 at 15:00GMT – the international online conference "Global Crisis. This Already Affects Everyone". We have the right to know the truth! We have a chance, uniting our efforts, to overcome the collapse of humankind together and enter the era of prosperity by building the Creative Society! On Allatra TV International Youtube Channel.
Environmental Racism….
Bahahahahahahaha
Why can the satellite data and balloon data not find the rise in temperature?
There are in my opinion for example 13 types of beliefs of climate change humans tend to vaguely formulate:
1. Climate change is solely caused by humans and industry thus only global warming exists in the entire planet history. They reject the swing effect of the planet and deny the big ice age as fake science to argue.
2. Same as 1, but who believe in Ice age, but believe it's irrelevant to climate change thus seeing humans and industry solely causing global warming to this planet.
3. Climate change is caused both by humans industry AND the swing effect. However Ice age is NOT related to the swing effect . And humans and industry add the biggest impact through global warming.
4. Same as 3, except to believe ice age IS related to the swing effect.
5. Same as 4, except that humans industry and global warming are EVENLY causing it. Not MAJORILY. They think it's 50/50
6. Same as 3, except that humans industry and global warming are EVENLY causing it. Not MAJORILY
They think it's 50/50
7. Same as 5, except that humans industry and global warming are MINORILY causing it. Not MAJORILY
Thus humans global warming are barely relevant.
8. Same as 6, except that humans industry and global warming are MINORILY causing it. Not MAJORILY
Thus humans global warming are barely relevant.
9. Humans and industry do essentially NOT cause climate change . Global warming is a myth . But they STILL do not deny the existence of climate change. They believe still there is going to be consequences for humans. The ice age theory is NOT relevant. even if climate change its not our fault, we need to prepare to survive as humans .
10. Same as 9, but believe the ice age IS relevant
11. Both climate change and global warming are myths. Believes in the ice age , but think it's irrelevant anyway. Humans have nothing to worry in the future about the planet warming up. They also believe in the mini ice age theory .
12. All theories above are myths .
13. Same as 12, only believes in the mini ice age.
So, who are you?
Most climate deniers tend to be American, this is because the US constitution is the sole provider of the breeding ground for false ideas to take place. The country was a failed state the moment it gained independence from the British. If you look at the UK, there is still free speech but with limits to prevent idiots like Trump from having a voice.
"Environmental racism" well I could've predicted he would say something like that
Why didn't he say anything about animal agriculture? Being non vegan is a form of climate change denial.
At about 3:10, he says they measured co2 coming out of a single tree's leaf.
Don't trees convert c02 into oxygen?
We shouldn't worry about climate refugees in 2050 because almost all humans be gone from earth by then. Neoliberalism will persist until the last drop of potable water, breathable air and tolerable climate is gone.
How much CO2 in atmosphere is the result of unnecessary manufacturing due to planned obsolescence? Where do economists compute and report the annual depreciation of consumer junk? There were 200,000,000 cars in the US in 1994. Where is the data on the depreciation of those cars?
US Republicans are beyond redemption – they'd rather see the whole world burn.
Climate change denial is right there is no climate crisis we do not have a climate emergency caused by CO2 emissions that is fundamentally ridiculous
What a load of shite. Don't worry you silly people, your climate change will be back next summer 😂😂😂
A few interesting observations are included, but Belmont's talk is burdened by too many problems and errors overall. Presenting it in English is probably his first problematic choice, assuming he really is concerned about the environment of the planet.
CO2 at 0.04% is a 2,500th part of the atmosphere. That means to warm the climate by just 1"C carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2,500"C of heat energy. That is of course impossible and it breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics.
Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible. To cause 1° of heating methane would have to capture 600,000°C of heat energy. Problematic as this is over a hundred times hotter than the surface of the sun.
Methane also breaks down in sunlight.
To get round the obvious flaw, NASA and even Nobel Prize winning physicists have expounded 'accumulated heat' as the explanation how CO2 is able to warm the atmosphere. They claim that over hundreds of years CO2 has captured heat energy and this heat has 'accumulated' to produce a serious warming effect.
Accumulated heat whilst sounding a reasonable explanation of how heat can build up is rather nothing more than gobbledygook. In fact it shows those using such arguments do not even understand what heat is.
When we measure temperature we are measuring the heat energy a thing is losing. In short heat is a measurement of flow, the transfer of heat energy and this will always be in the direction towards the colder. For this reason a thing can never 'accumulate heat' in the way those advocating CO2 climate change describe. The temperature of a body is the measure of heat output, it can never be greater than the measure of heat input. Output = input. When a thing is warmed it is heated to an equivalent of the heat input. If this input is not maintained it will cool. Those that propose that heat can build up to be hotter than the total measure of heat input at a given time either do not understand what heat is or are being deliberately misleading. To illustrate, an object being heated by a flame can never become hotter than that flame, it's temperature cannot rise inexorably to the temperature of the sun for instance. Heat cannot be accumulated. When we think about it common sense tells us this must be the case.
Imagine a river. It's flow is not water but heat. The river is being fed from a point a 2,500th the size of the river's overall diameter. The flow at the point the river is being fed from must be 2,500 times faster. So if the flow of the river is 1 the flow at the point source must be 2,500. Heat cannot be accumulated because heat, like a river, must continually flow. The measure of heat is the measure of its loss.
There is no getting round this. Accumulated heat is nonsense.
Fraction elements have fractional effects. We understand this everyday as scale and proportion.
When confronted with these contradictions 'the butterfly effect' is sited allowing fractional elements to be attributed major effects. This too is nonsense and deeply unscientific. The flap of a butterfly wing in Brazil cannot cause a hurricane in Texas just as the stamping of a foot will not cause the moon to crash into the earth. All processes must be measurable and proportionate. The butterfly effect is magical thinking.
Similarly, over complexity has been introduced to support man made climate change. This gives the impression of evidence whilst burying obvious contradictions of logic under a mountain of incomprehensible information. Opaque terms such as 'solar forcing' are used to add further unnecessary muddle, in this case the word 'comparison' works much better.
Man made climate change is a cover story. It has been constructed to hide real changes taking place to the Sun, Earth and all the planets in the solar system as the electromagnetic polarity resets.
Like all the planets, Earth's electromagnetic field is weakening. This weakening is accelerating. As the field weakens more damaging solar particle radiation is able to reach the atmosphere, ozone is destroyed.
Ozone thinning is directly observable, in clear skies you will see an unnaturally bright 'white' sun. It's why the moon seems so much brighter. Under these conditions the pain felt when looking at the sun is not only from the increase in visible light but the much larger increase in infrared.
Look up at the sky and you will see a range of geoengineering operations in progress to mitigate this damage, these include chemtrail induced cloud or hazing, geometric ripple patterns (HAARP), bizarre and unnatural cloud formations.
The collapse of the electromagnetic fields mean climate change will increase and get much much worse. Harmful radiation will scorch plants, destroy crops. Electromagnetic deterioration will cause earthquakes, seismic activity, rivers to run dry, finally electronic devices will burn out, blackouts, no electricity. Nuclear war will be used to conceal the levels of increased radiation. Three years before the reversal is complete the inner planets Venus and Mercury will develop tails that will spiral back towards the Sun. Of course by then geoengineering will be used to create permanent cloud cover, in part to conceal such an alarming spectacle but also to reduce the damaging effects of increased solar radiation.
Throughout this period of collapse man made climate change will be used as the popular explanation. Descent will not be tolerated. A variety of strategies are already being deployed to impose authoritarian government in what will be a rather orgiastic cull of population. Collapse of the economic system likely September this year and the prelude to the introduction of digital currencies.
The inevitable culmination of pole reversal is micronova, something that our Sun does at regular intervals of thousands of years. As the Sun's electromagnetic field reaches total collapse the Sun will micronova. Actually micronova represents solar reset as the electromagnetic fields of the Sun and planets restore. There will be survivors but in all likelihood most will perish either before or during the micronova itself.
Of course you may consider this far too incredible and horrific a prospect. Compared to the CO2 narrative it seems exceptionally bleak.
I am putting this information out as it is important not because I am interested in endless debate. I am extremely familiar with the mainstream narrative.
Micronova likely 2033.
All these observations are my own and have not been lifted from third parties. Furthermore, the figures quoted are all checkable so please do check.
__________
Please be aware of organized attempts to dismiss this comment including:
– Irrelevant questions and attempts to confuse. This will include misdirection to mainstream narratives.
– Closing-down questions and thought by deferring to 'experts'.
– Counter accusation.
– Contradictory statements that are not supported.
– Condescension, abuse and accusation.
This might be the dumbest TED talk to date. CO2 emissions disproportionately caused by white people? Just going to ignore China and India like that? "Denier" isn't even a scientific term, unless you think the converse — a "climate change believer" — really embodies the spirit of science. This is just unskeptical, uncurious sophistry designed to delegitimize the other side. I have no doubt that Big Oil has money in the other side, but don't pretend that the billion of dollars in the Green Energy has no impact on research and advocacy, or that corruption of scientific consensus can only work in one direction. People like this are the reason that trust in the credibility of science has been on the decline, and will continue to decline in the coming years. This kind of certainty, hubris, and condescension has an epistemological cost, as well as a social one, and all climate activists are not only making themselves a joke, but taking down scientific institutions in general with them.
There has been no increase in floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, or heatwaves. The oceans have risen at a steady 1.5mm per year since 1865,since the end of the "Little Ice Age". 89% of all islands are stable or growing in mass, all islands over 10ha are growing. There has not been a huge spike in the Earth's temperature, many locations show no warming at all. They are lying to us…….. why? The rich want you to believe a fake crisis….. why?
We are going to do nothing. The doubt cast lobby paid by oil companies have done their work.
The problem with Emissions scenarios out to the year 2100 of course, is their assumptions cannot be verified until the year 2100. The second problem is at most only one scenario can be verified when the year 2100 is reached. The remaining scenarios conditions are never reached by actual temperatures, so their assumptions cannot be verified. This somehow does not seem to concern climate scientists – whom expect us to believe untestable models are fact checked, reliable, and not open to question. So no, I'm not going to assume global warming is wrong because James Inhofe throws a snowball in congress. But lack of suitable responses by scientists to pertinent scientific claims like emissions scenarios means I'm not willing to assume it's right just because authoritative statements by scientists try to cut off debate. Now address the emissions scenario problem with facts and logic. Where am I going wrong.
Regarding technology, Green energy is also dependent on oil and gas. Or did the thought never occur to him. It's easy for him to spout off what we should do from the sidelines, how to do it is another matter, a lot harder when the rubber meets the road in policy.
Yep. 1856. And it still hasn't happened. Doesn't that tell you something?
Notice how this guy is dispensing lots of policy advice. Notice how this guy is telling us how we're supposed to vote. (he even said the word "vote.") At what point when people like him tell us how to act politically to buy green houses, green cars, eat less meat, fly less, and all but tell me who I'm supposed to elect in the next election cycle does that advice he's giving stop becoming motivated by "science" and start becoming his own political prejudices? At what point do we tell people like him, that the government doesn't belong to his scientists, and that people have free will to vote the way they want because there's this little thing called democracy, the constitution, and the bill of rights?
Dude is woke on steroids.
bonehead deniers??? ….. whoa?
i have a capture system in my backyard. Trees
He should follow his own advice and put forth a substantive argument. Enviromental racism? Seriously? How could he live out blaming Trump? Lol!
Hey, he's a Bonehead climate alarmist! Yeah thats how u persuade ppl. He's an arrogant f.
This just proves how diahonest the left is, and that this has never beem about the science. We live in a democracy, and people have a right to advocate different policies. Advocating different policies is not denial, you don't get to redefine words to suit your political agenda.