Facing the New Inconvenient Truth: Climate Change is Upon Us | David Mc Cauley | TEDxOltrarno
TEDx Talks 
David Mc Cauley highlights the growing risks posed by our rapidly changing climate and the need to ramp up individual, community, national, and global protections against more frequent and intense droughts, wildfires, heatwaves, floods and other climate-induced disasters. He offers hope from observing the near-immediate returns from protecting people’s lives and property through investments, such as expanded early warning systems. He notes that modelling is improving to predict what more we can expect from our warming climate even as funding expands for developing country actions. David McCauley is a climate change and environmental policy specialist who previously led climate change programs for the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Manila and was Senior Vice President for policy, climate change and partnerships at the US World Wildlife Fund (WWF). He currently advises numerous public and private institutions on policies and investments needed to tackle the causes and consequences of climate change and in response to the accelerating degradation of ecosystems, including serving as Co-Chair of the Independent Expert Group for the Nature, People and Climate Program of the Climate Investment Funds. Before his work with ADB and WWF, Dr. McCauley lived and worked in the Asia and Pacific region, including through positions with the US Agency for International Development, the Ford Foundation and Harvard University. 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
Policy makers have known this was comming since 1987. Don't think they are about to change. They live knowing there children and grandchildren will suffer.
it is extremely difficult to solve a problem that does not exist
nonsense CO2. 999600 other molecules of 1M air are not CO2. 400 CO2 molecules compressed to a cube is 1.7micron or .000 000 04 inches per side. Yet it is supposed to be killing the planet. "the seas will boil" said Al Gore at the WEF. sure Al. Note at the WEF that is where along with Soros they plan on how to manipulate you. the WEF is not about economics as they are socialists. they call it economics to get others to believe they will use the science of economy in a socialist system. look at North Korea for the result. CO2 is not killing you. You breathe it out every breath
All of the solutions mentioned are worthy of trying to accomplish. Unfortunately the solutions become mute as long as human beings are intent on going to war with one and other.
What I get out of this speech and the comments is a wholesale win to one narrative on climate change. The sooner we become a space faring civilisation the better since it appears the majority (or at least those making the money and needing workers to be customers) can only live in a narrow band of living conditions that are best maintained in a self contained manmade environment based on the climate in specific years that benefit growth in population and economic generation. Society use to use products till they literally fell apart, now we throw it away because the labor cost to fix it is more than the automated mass production cost to make it. Those countries with the least are growing exponentially and those with the most are negating the reducing population by immigration to widen the tax base and maintain demand on production. Keep rewriting history to maintain your narrative and very soon our window on knowledge will be so narrow you may aswell close the blinds completely.
It's not climate change when you burn down Canada…
It's not climate change when you spray the shite out of the atmosphere.
This is so funny because it’s so naive.
The problem is simple: overpopulation.
the great filter in question:
Meet the new inconvenient truth…
Same as the old inconvenient truth.
1:10 Global warming has been paused at about 1°C since the early 1990s. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming because greenhouse gases are only active in earth's greenhouse effect which is the model of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor and can't have its overall effect changed. United Nation's IPCC science report acknowledges that it is NOT in-fact discussing greenhouse gases in a manor constructive to the discussion of global warming by a legal statement of data transparency in the back of its science report that it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude and only that one altitude. It is high school taught science there is no greenhouse radiant energy more than 20 meters from the radiating surface, typically the earth.
There are people without a full high school science education or a life history going back 40 years that have been taken in by the marketing of the United Nation's IPCC that human caused greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming which is impossible to well known science. It is high school taught science earth's greenhouse effect is the model of system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor that adds 10°F (5.55°C) to earth's average temperature and takes place within 20 meters of the earth's surface. After 20 meters from the radiating surface all the greenhouse radiant energy has been completely absorbed by greenhouse gases. Its further heat transfer is by convection i.e. gas molecules bumping into each other. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor.
It's suppose to seem cool and a bit of a brain conundrum to high school students causing it to be fascinating that with water vapor varying hugely across the earth's surface water vapor still always holds earth's greenhouse effect in saturation. The variation is accommodated by the qualification of "within 20 meters of the surface" a great deal of the time all the greenhouse radiant energy is entirely absorbed by greenhouse gases before that distance.
The bulk of the energy conversion going into earth's greenhouse effect goes through largely distinct and separate mechanisms.
1) In the stratosphere high energy ultra violet radiation photons from the sun are absorbed by CO2 and other gas molecules and then radiated at lower frequencies better to warm the earth. The energy conversation by CO2 is thought to allow 50°C of heating to the earth's surface which takes place to saturation at 10 ppm – 40 ppm CO2 in the very thin stratosphere. Current CO2 levels in the atmosphere are about 400 ppm. Without this CO2 energy conversion earth would be a snowball. This is not not greenhouse gas behavior.
2) Photons of energy hit the earth or other objects warming them up.
3) These objects (the earth) radiate far inferred electromagnetic radiation, the greenhouse radiant energy, along with wider spectrums radiant energy.
4) The greenhouse radiant electromagnetic energy is completely absorbed by its loose interaction with the lumpy electrostatic fields of greenhouse gas molecules, typified by gas molecules with widely differing sized atoms such as H20 and CH4 (note: the use of the smallest atom hydrogen), within 20 meters of the radiating surface. CO2 is almost inert as a greenhouse gas.
5) The warmed greenhouse gas molecules further transfer the greenhouse energy by convection i.e. gas molecules bumping into each other. A large part of earth's weather comes from this convection process.
For people that were interested in popular science and specifically planetary science in the late 1980s and were following global warming it was major news when global warming was reported at 1.1°C in 1991. There were lots of news discussion shows on it and some documentaries. During a prolonged period global warming had been rising at about 2/10°C per decade expected to hit 1.3°C by about 1998 when stronger measurable hurricanes were expected to be the result in the Gulf of Mexico. To witness not-just-your-grandparent's hurricane was something the future seemed to hold. Then in late 1994 with no reporting on global warming for a few years it was announced global warming for unknown reasons had suddenly paused in the early 1990s. Global warming was reported at 1.06°C in 2022. The Arctic region is warming in 2023 with the most prominent theory being from more frequent and deeper migrations of warm Atlantic Ocean waters into the Arctic Ocean warming the Arctic region.
Climate change.. Marxism by proxy..
Do these people really understand that climate change is not a linear process? It involves several interconnected factors and we need to connect all dots together in order to find a solution in order to defend nature and humankind.
The inconvient truth is until. The effects of climate change start killing millions of people a year. We wont do anything and by the time. That happens it will be too late to do anything. What we are doing right now is Climate theatre. Carbon capture is not a solution, so long as we dont massively cut back on fossil fuel use. It's a pr stunt by the fossil fuel industry.
Aww
Climate change is FAKE, just like most of everything else we're told!!! It's just a big business and being used and manipulated to make profits and to implement new laws etc.. into society!! The earth goes through natural cycles just like the seasons and nothing we can do about it!! Humans are pathetic in this time! What's wrong with you people!
There is no "climate crisis" to worry about. You are disseminating false propaganda by using the imaginary temperature data and imaginary Carbon dioxide data fabricated by the Alarmist Climate Change organizations as imaginary substitutes for the historical temperature observations, the true temperatures, and the actual atmospheric concentrations of Carbon dioxide. The present Carbon dioxide levels are LOWER or about EQUAL to the 415 ppm average and 574 maximum levels observed in 1827-1829 and the below and above 400 ppm averages and the 550 ppm maximum observed in 1939-1941. The observational evidence demonstrates how the imaginary numbers fabricated by the Climate Change Alarmists and presented in this video have zero scientific validity.
Yeah, but none of the claims made 15 years ago have come true…… Are the scientists and organizations that made all these claims being held accountable?….. In 2000 three, Al Gore said that the Florida keys would be underwater by 2016…… Is Al Gore in the Florida keys right now? Apologizing for scaring the citizens……
All this mind farting is very frustrating. Why are people afraid to address the core cause of man-made climate change. Our collective behavior towards our environment is the cause
of man-made climate change and the core cause of our bad behavior is our erroneous behavior model, namely, "profit = income – expenses".
You should be shocked that our profit model doesn't include the word 'environment' when, in fact, all of our actual gains come to us from the environment; furthermore, you should all be appalled that this definition of profit defines all of us and the entire environment as nothing more than expenses. This explains why there is so much homelessness and why the planet is on fire. Solution:
"Profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides to all of us". This new profit model would virtually end homelessness and it would literally
reverse man-made climate change by making it economically mandatory for us to create millions of new jobs that will come under the heading "Caretakers of the Environment". Caretakers will
earn higher wages than most other workers. Caretakers will be divided into many thousands of subcategories. Just to name some:
(1) removing pollution that is already contaminating the environment
(2) collecting pollution before it contaminates the environment
(3) dealing with the waste in such ways that are good for the environment and or good for the production of products.
(4) regulating human population by economically incentivizing families with 2 or fewer children and economically punishing families with too many children.
The list goes on and on. Thanks! I hope my comment is helpful to you.
p.s. It may already be too late to correct the definition of profit, but it is never too late to try; besides, there is no other viable way to reverse man-made climate change and as an added
bonus virtually put an end to homelessness.
Too little – to late. We'r fu**ed up
I have a question (may require a small grain of NaCl to digest)
I have been waiting to see if any concerned climate change activists have computed the carbon foot print of the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. I know we are all doomed to die by man made carbon dioxide emissions so this seems important to me. I don’t know much about science since I am a retired chemist who only worked a few years in the chemical industry so I am wondering if there any really smart people, perhaps even high school students here or in Europe who can help an old dummy figure this out. I am making a helpful list of things to consider below.
Carbon dioxide Sources
Fuel used to ship people and supplies to war zones, be sure to include both sides since this is everyone’s Earth.
This fuel is used by planes, trucks, tanks non-nuclear ships such as destroyers, escorts, transports or gunboats. You can exclude the nuclear subs and aircraft carriers since the are “Green” electric vehicles, however the planes and missiles they carry would contribute to their carbon foot prints. The good news is that any nuclear detonations will send particulates into the atmosphere thereby blocking out some solar gain, a win for us all!
The destroyed buildings, forests and other infrastructure needs to be included as most of the stuff will have been burned. Unfortunately you also need to include the carbon foot print of rebuilding all of that stuff, assuming there are still people to inhabit them.
Be sure not to include the nuclear carriers and subs (unless they burn up and sink), then they will need to be replaced. Do not include any electric vehicles such as cars, trucks, electric fighter planes, electric tanks, electric drones of any size. Of course you must include any payload that they fire. And the carbon foot print needed to replace these Green conveyances plus any spent ordinance.
People and animals: The people involved in these wars won’t be commuting to work so that is a big savings of carbon dioxide but they will still be generating more or less the same carbon foot print elsewhere so let’s call that a wash. Unfortunately we need to consider the dead animals and people because they will have a final carbon foot print (in some cases literally). As they decompose back to their constituent elements which includes some carbon. Lucky for us however, their carbon foot printing days are over, and as soon as they completely decompose their contribution ceases. They will not be able to be father/mother/them-ers of any offspring so that is another big win for us all. One cautionary note, don’t forget the Baby Boom that will certainly follow the war when the lonely soldiers return home, if history teaches us anything.
I am certain I have missed a few things such as Nitrogen and Sulfur oxides that will be emitted by rocket exhaust ,cannon fire bombs and bullets. Also, carbon foot print to the extra food that needs to be grow to replace the destroyed land/crops need to be calculated. I believe the even those who starve will continue to have a carbon foot print until they leave their final carbon foot print (see above). I leave that calculation to those who are wiser than me.
Assuming that the carbon dioxide results of this calculation may be somewhat higher than a net zero, it becomes important to figure out who is to blame for the weak (I hesitate to say idiotic) leadership that has allowed the wars to happen, but I don’t want to offend anyone so I will just leave that quest to others.
149k views on a channel with nearly 40 million subscribers in one of the most pivtiol points in human history, the planets history.
Says it all, good luck.
Very good talk. True, there is a lot each single person can do to adapt to and mitigate climate change. Also, the local level is very important as necessary changes tend to be reachable faster than at national, let alone international levels. But David rightly stresses "the need of supportive government policies and to stop planning (and building) for the way things have been and preparing for the way things are. –> Hold governments and business accountable!
Climate change is a lie, just ask any Republicans! They speak the truth, it's a hoax!
Paid schill. They've been injecting aerosol into the atmosphere for years. The Jews are manufacturing another ice age. Look at NOAA activities.
Microwave radiation
The heterodox economist. Steve Keen, has been calling for over a year for a WWII style rationing program to reduce or slash the GDP of the advanced nations. He'd let the rich consume more but still slash their spending. I agree. He has shown that there is a 1-1 relationship between GDP and GHG emissions. IMO, we have waited so long that now the only hope to keep civilization from collapsing is to slash emissions now, or ASAP.
There is no evidence that CO2 causes climate change.
What is the right temperature of the planet? Why choose a point in history when the Little Ice Age ended in 1850? Do we really want to return to the Little Ice Age, assuming it was in our power to control the climate?
Shifting to a plant-based diet can significantly contribute to reducing methane emissions from livestock, a substantial greenhouse gas contributor, heralding a more sustainable future for food systems.
Utter drivel.
Al Gore sure has lost weight!
It's over huh and we have 1/3 trying to elect a dictator. Great.
Hottest e apparently you have never seen temp tables far enough back in history. Shame on you
Dangerous and deceiving. There is truth in here amidst deluded myths about the future of climate change. This is a pitch for big business to profit off new climate adaption money. That is fine if he wasn’t spreading lies about where we’re headed and whether adaption is a long term solution. We need to immediately solve the problem at its roots: fossil fuels, their manipulation of world politics, and a global movement to collectively (not individualistically) build a positive, healthy (solar punk) world!! 💚 🖤💜
Hello David,
Would you like me to help you move from "shallow ecology" to "deep ecology" during this latter part of your life…Warning?!? This would take immense courage and increased hardship resiliency on your part!?!
Sincerely,
Professor-Marty.
yea, right. Tell that to those at 'the top'. They aren't giving up chit
it's called human nature
hey, it was a great run
Love it. Thank you: very enlightening!
Someone should tell the faux savant Jordan Peterson who has morphed his expertise from psychology to climate expertise based on fresh air and little else.
Bummer 😕
The climate has always changed. It isn't a problem.
Prof John Klauser (Noble Prize winner for Physics) stated decisively there is no climate emergency or any issue at all with the climate. Climate change is normal and well within normal variability. The climate scam is entirely based on CO2 (plant food) being a pollutant. CO2 is called ‘The Gas of Life’ without which we and every other carbon based life form would not exist. In other words without CO2 (plant food) this is a dead planet as photosynthesis cannot occur. This poor chap is old enough to know very basic science yet he ignores it entirely. Not only is he wrong he is stating the opposite to what is occurring.
Fear the cold, worship the warmth.
Civilisation thrived during warm periods such as the Minoan, Roman, Medieval and now the modern warm period which is cooler than the previous warm periods. In between each warm period was a cold period such as the Dark Ages and the Little Ice Age. People and life in general struggled to survive and 100s of millions died and lived short hard lives as starvation and disease were the norm during cold periods as crops regularly failed. History tells the truth and climate alarmists tell you the opposite.