10/10/10 Global Work Party: People Across The Planet Work With 350.org On Solutions To Tackle Climate Change (PHOTOS)

On 10/10/10, people in 188 countries participated in over 7,000 events as a part of 350.org's Global Work Party to show their politicians that they are willing to get to work on addressing climate change in their community, and want their governments to do the same.

Bill McKibben, author and founder of 350, brought us some of the first images streaming in from across the world, as people participated in the biggest day of environmental action in history on October 10.

From planting trees and picking up trash to installing solar panels and repairing bikes, countless groups came together to do their part in reducing their impact on the environment.

"People are discouraged but they are taking out their frustrations in action," McKibben told AFP, referencing not only failed climate legislation in Washington, but stagnant efforts toward international solutions in U.N. negotiations. "They have decided that we are going to have to show our leaders what leadership looks like."

Check out the pics below to see how people across the world are doing their part, and share with us your efforts!

Photos And Captions Courtesy Of 350.org

Washington D.C.

BIG SHOTS

Launch the fullpage Big Shots slideshow >>

Current Top 5 Slides

Rate  This  Photo

RANK# 

 | AVERAGE: 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Good Effort

Best Idea

Activists mass in front of the White House to urge President Obama to pass clean energy policies. Photo credit: 350.org/Jim Dougherty

Washington D.C.

Activists mass in front of the White House to urge President Obama to pass clean energy policies.

Photo credit: 350.org/Jim Dougherty

comments(218)

1

 / 30

Washington D.C.

Caption

Rate this Photo

RATE THIS PHOTO

 | AVERAGE: 

RANK# 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Good Effort

Best Idea

CURRENT TOP 5 SLIDES

USERS WHO VOTED ON THIS SLIDE

loading...

CURRENT TOP 5 SLIDES

CHOOSE YOUR TOP 5 SLIDES

Share Your Top 5 With Your Friends

Close

Comments

[Richard2]

11:21 AM on 10/14/2010

Given the tremendous public interest in this event, isn't it appropriate for the APS to do an objective poll of their members on this topic? And, in the American tradition, shouldn't it be by secret ballot, so that people are protected from intimidation by those who might disagree with their position?

And shouldn't the results of this membership vote be released to the public, so that people will gain knowledge about the opinions of American physicists concerning man-made global warming?

Hopefully people on both sides of this debate will support a vote by the full membership of the APS.

[Publicola]

02:41 PM on 10/19/2010

R2: "Given the tremendous public interest in this event, isn't it appropriate for the APS to do an objective poll of their members on this topic?"

And hey, while we're at it let's have a similar poll of the American Anthropological Association about what they think of evolution - per science deniers there's still "debate" in that area of science too.

[Exusian]

08:22 PM on 10/13/2010

What Richard fails to mention is the fact that Dr. Lewis was one of only 206 American Physical Society members who in 2009 petitioned the APS to reconsider its official position on climate change. That would be 206 out of APS' membership of 47,000, or around 0.45%.

Needless to say, the APS rejected the Lewis et al proposal and reaffirmed

[Exusian]

08:26 PM on 10/13/2010

... and reaffirmed their existing position dating from 2007.

For more see here:
http://getenergysmartnow.com/2009/11/11/aps-says-in-your-face-deniers/

[Exusian]

03:32 PM on 10/13/2010

Oh, look, the American Physical Society has responded to Harold Lewis' resignation tantrum and totally rejects Dr. Lewis’ claim that global warming is a “scam” and a “pseudoscientific fraud.”:

http://www.aps.org/about/pressreleases/haroldlewis.cfm

In other words, Lewis' grandstanding was a petulant non-event committed by someone who has not only never done any work in a field related to climate science, but hasn't published a paper in the scientific literature since the 1960s.

[Richard2]

06:51 PM on 10/13/2010

The APS has made its official response to the Harold Lewis resignation letter. The public can now carefully examine the two documents to judge which has greater credibility, and make up its own mind on the issue.

There is clearly a need for a wide open, spirited public debate on the merits or demerits of the points in the resignation letter. How can this best be achieved?

In terms of intellectual depth and insight, the resignation letter appears much more thoughtful than the official APS response. This is frankly surprising. The writing of only one individual exhibits more depth of intelligence than the official response of an organization that represents thousands of well educated scientists.

Perhaps it is time for the individual members of the APS to become involved in finding leadership that is more on the intellectual level of the departing Dr. Lewis.

[Richard2]

07:01 PM on 10/13/2010

One line from the APS response:

"Dr. Lewis’ specific charge that APS as an organization is benefitting financially from climate change funding is equally false. Neither the operating officers nor the elected leaders of the Society have a monetary stake in such funding."

Dr. Lewis' response to this statement is as follows:

"The chair of the Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) that re-endorsed the 2007 APS Statement on Climate Change sits on the science advisory board of a large international bank http://annualreport.deutsche-bank.com/2009/ar/supplementaryinformation/advisoryboards.html The bank has a $60+ billion Green portfolio, which it wishes to assure investors is safe…not to mention their income from carbon trading. Other members of this board include current IPCC chief Pachauri and Lord Oxburgh, of Climategate exoneration fame. The viability of these banks activities depends on continued concern over CO2 emissions ......."

[maxwells]

03:15 PM on 10/14/2010

Why would anyone believe anything you had to say about anything, Richard2? All you ever do is spew distortions, false innuendos, and disinformation about climate change. Lots of climate change "skeptics" posting on Huffpo do likewise, but YOU'RE NOT ONE OF THEM. You know better, way better.

You have a comment profile that practically scream out that you're nothing but a lowly paid shill.

Take a gander at Richard2's HuffPo record:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Richard2?action=comments&display=all&sort=oldest
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Richard2?action=comments&display=all&sort=newest

Who, starting day 1, would post 126 straight comments, all denying anthropogenic global warming and its impacts, and follow that up with 1,500+ more on just one topic to the near-exclusion of any others? What normal person would do that? What normal person has an interest in and opinions on only one topic?

An expert possibly? But nah. Richard2 neither claimes nor evidences the slightest expertise in this area.

So, what's left in the way of possibilities?

Isn't his profile that of a PAID SHILL?

[Publicola]

12:15 PM on 10/13/2010

The Pentagon: Global Warming Is Real and a Destabilizing Force

-----------------------------------------

From the Pentagon's Feb. 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review:

Climate-related changes are already being observed in every region of the world, including the United States and its coastal waters. Among these physical changes are increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the oceans and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows.

Assessments conducted by the intelligence community indicate that climate change could have significant geopolitical impacts around the world, contributing to poverty, environmental degradation, and the further weakening of fragile governments. Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration.

While climate change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as an accelerant of instability or conflict, placing a burden to respond on civilian institutions and militaries around the world. In addition, extreme weather events may lead to increased demands for defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian assistance or disaster response both within the United States and overseas... Proactive engagement with these countries can help build their capability to respond... DoD has undertaken environmental security cooperative initiatives with foreign militaries that represent a nonthreatening way of building trust, sharing best practices on installations management and operations, and developing response capacity.

http://www.defense.gov/qdr/images/QDR_as_of_­12Feb10_10­00.pdf

[CO2 u SAY]

03:41 PM on 10/12/2010

Severe winter

Man made climate change

Mild winter

Man made climate change

Floods

Man made climate change

Droughts

Manio madeio climateo changeio

RicoShay being rubbish at sarcasm

You guessed it!

[Gilliam G]

02:29 PM on 10/12/2010

Ever since the beginning of time
Mother Nature has a rhythm and rhyme
Then Man came along
With his industrial crimes

Human race can only survive
If we stand by Mother Nature's side
She's suffered our abuse
Up to her to decide
Can we win back trust or will she leave us behind?

If war and killing wasn't enough
Man pollutes the air with poisonous stuff
Burns rainforests and fills the ocean with oil

To hear full song (free download also):

http://gilsmusic.bandcamp.com/track/since-the-beginning-of-time

[CO2 u SAY]

03:59 PM on 10/12/2010

All God’s creatures have their place
It is just about the human race
Evolution picked us
That's what gives us the right
To kill and destroy
all that beautiful life

Global warming aint upon us now
Took us a while to figure it out
And now that we know
We need to turn the burger on the barbi round

And now they say we are being mean
We're just questioning your numpty scheme
Typing on carbon footprint screen
about rubbish that's got so routine
Instead of getting the bankers that stole the economy

They are truer and better lyrics

[michellerose10290]

09:54 AM on 10/12/2010

Though it is important for leadership to get involved in climate change, equally important is how they go about it. The carbon cuts favored by many climate activists are neither effective nor feasible enough to work. Research and development of viable green energy (which include means to transport and store it) is the way to go about the issue, keeping economic consequences in mind. Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/lomborg65/English.

[turkeywrld]

09:31 AM on 10/12/2010

One definition of Ignorance :- To beleive that millions of people, living onthe surface of a small life sustaining planet moving through space, with niether interest or understanding of the highly complicated and incredibly intricate linked systems that generate and sustain ALL known life can blindly and unashamedly exploit these systems and have no detrimental effect ...it may well be the American way .. but signs clearly point out the fact it wont be working as
'normal' for much longer .. even the exhulted wealthy elites wont survive in a dead wasteland ..

[RicoShay]

12:27 AM on 10/12/2010

Wow! And to think all those people want to make Al Gore richer. ;)

[Poptech]

03:13 AM on 10/12/2010

Indeed,

Gore Cashing in on $6 Trillion Energy Business
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Gore-Energy-biz/2007/11/21/id/322226

The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore’s Carbon Crusade
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=22663

[RicoShay]

12:05 PM on 10/12/2010

errr I was being sarcastic

[Pandoras Folly]

10:52 PM on 10/11/2010

historically the planet warming up has been a good thing for man kind. increase in rainfall and more arable land to farm. imagine Siberia instead of being a god forsaken frozen wasteland being the planets bread basket. true we will have to move the cities and population center away from the coast lines. but think of it this way it won't happen over night so we will have time to disassemble the structures and recycle entire urban areas into pedestrian friendly smart grided, ecologically sound, permaculture based, wonders of sustainable utopic living!!! Or alternatly we build big freakin arcologies stretching into the sky. Imagine a million people living and working in one building. the staples of their food produced there, waste treated and recycled there. Such a glory and wonder of man's god given infinite potential is the future.

[Publicola]

11:14 PM on 10/11/2010

PF: "the planet warming up has been a good thing for man kind."

Congressional testimony from climatologist Susan Solomon, March 2009:

------------------------

By about the end of the 21st century, carbon dioxide concentrations could become as high as 1000 parts per million if emissions worldwide continue rising at a rate typical of the last decade, which is about 2% per year. The best current science implies that with a sustained level of 1000 ppmv of carbon dioxide, an average day would become about 10°F warmer than today, which corresponds to a greatly changed climate.

Heat waves as bad or worse than the worst current heat waves (such as the one in Europe in 2003 that led to the deaths of more than 10000 people) would become common... decreased rainfall can be expected... in parts of southwestern North America, west Australia, southern Europe, and both northern and southern Africa. Droughts comparable to the dust bowl can be expected to occur in the future not just occasionally in limited regions, but in all of these places and at the same time. Many of the world’s most desolate deserts would expand...

Glaciers and snowpack that provide water to at least a billion people would disappear... fire frequency is also expected to increase... Insect pests would become more common, with attendant damage to crops and forests. All of these impacts... represent aspects of the science for which confidence is very high.

www.legislative.noaa.gov/Testimony/solomon031709.pdf

[linaya]

02:16 AM on 10/12/2010

6°F warmer than today -- very difficult for humans to survive. 10°F warmer than today -- goodbye humanity. Start carving those bronze statues so the aliens will know you were here in 10,000 years.
(Thanks for the pdf testimony)

[Pandoras Folly]

05:00 PM on 10/13/2010

sarcasm is not well taken here it seems.

[EcoCatLady]

03:57 AM on 10/12/2010

Wow. You have taken denial to new and incredible heights. I am duly impressed!

[Pandoras Folly]

05:00 PM on 10/13/2010

sarcasm is not well taken here it seems.

[milty]

10:52 PM on 10/11/2010

A brief recap of "consensus" throughout history. The "consensus" believed that:

- the earth was flat;
- all heavenly bodies revolved around the earth;
- bigger objects fall faster than smaller ones;
- hand washing would have no impact on infection;
- plate techtonics was nonsense;
- the airplane would not dominate future warfare
- etc., etc., etc.

Now the "consensus" tells us there is such a thing as AGW. Keep drinking the kool-aid.

[Publicola]

11:18 PM on 10/11/2010

Spoken like a true evolution science denier.

Do you deny the scientific consensus on evolution too, milty? And if not, why the double-standard with respect to AGW?

[milty]

09:02 PM on 10/12/2010

Evolution is not a cash cow for funding anthropologists.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=549990

[Publicola]

11:49 AM on 10/13/2010

milty: "Evolution is not a cash cow for funding anthropologists."

Anthropologists make about the same amount of money as climate scientists, and neither are getting rich off of those salaries.

In any event you didn't answer my question:

Do you deny the scientific consensus on evolution too? Your anti-science attempt at undermining the value of scientific consensus suggests as much.

For that matter do you accept the scientific on plate tectonics? If not why the double-standard there also?

[gallon]

11:38 PM on 10/11/2010

And the scientists prevailed, sometimes at risk to themselves. Now the scientific consensus is on the existence of AGW. Nice denier attempt to twist it 180, hey?

[Robert Masters]

09:40 PM on 10/11/2010

You guys still believe that the State can change the hearts of man, the climate and the tides.

Grow up.

[Publicola]

10:07 PM on 10/11/2010

Are you a Glenn Beck wannabe, RM? Your rhetoric is like his, and you kinda look like him too.

In any event, when you have to mislead to make your point you have no point.

[Robert Masters]

10:28 PM on 10/11/2010

In what way am I misleading? I am sure you won't respond because you just say things.

[Robert Masters]

12:30 AM on 10/12/2010

Laws cannot promote harmony. Government does not change minds.

[Exusian]

10:49 PM on 10/11/2010

Nature doesn't care what we humans believe, it simply responds to what we do to it.

[Robert Masters]

11:02 PM on 10/11/2010

But you still think that your tyrants control nature. And progressives claim to be intelligent?

[Exusian]

10:19 AM on 10/12/2010

Do you always claim to know what other people think and put words in their mouth?

[CO2 u SAY]

08:00 PM on 10/11/2010

I had to come and gloat when i saw this

http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclucus/reasonmclucus/15835660/professor-emiritus-hal-lewis-resigns-from-american-physical-society/

And this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1316469/Royal-Society-issues-new-climate-change-guide-admits-uncertainties.html

Just though I'd let you know, as you guys love ignoring facts ;)

But we're running out of oil anyway so you can all calm down.

http://www.gafunds.com/lp6.asp?GOoilpeak

Go on then huffers, start huffing.

[Exusian]

08:14 PM on 10/11/2010

You're gloating over your own ignorance.

Hal Lewis, a retired physicist who never did any work related to the science of climate, failed to garner the support of even 1% of the membership of the American Physical Society for his position, so he quit and stopped paying dues.

Boy, that oughta teach 'em.

If you're going to try the "appeal to authority" argument you might want to choose someone who is, you know, an actual authority on the science of climate.

[CO2 u SAY]

08:16 PM on 10/11/2010

Yeah and the Royal Soceity know nothing too.

Don't bother answering I'm off to burn fossil fuels. Numpty

[Exusian]

08:28 PM on 10/11/2010

Show me a climate scientist who doesn't openly talk about the uncertainties of their science.

Oh, wait, you can't.

For some ignorance truly is bliss.

[HowthCastle]

02:37 PM on 10/12/2010

Every scientific fact involves uncertainty. For example, the measurement of the charge of an electron is uncertain by 0.30 parts per million (ppm), while the electron mass is uncertain by 0.59 ppm. The gravitational constant is uncertain by 128 ppm.

[samtee]

06:11 PM on 10/11/2010

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100058265/us-physics-professor-global-warming-is-the-greatest-and-most-successful-pseudoscientific-fraud-i-have-seen-in-my-long-life/

What a joke.

[Exusian]

07:41 PM on 10/11/2010

Another JASON (look it up) goes emeritus.

Not that he ever did any work in a field relevant to the science of climate anyway.

[CO2 u SAY]

08:14 PM on 10/11/2010

Neither did the Royal society did they numpty?

[Publicola]

09:23 PM on 10/11/2010

CO2 u SAY: "Neither did the Royal society did they numpty? "

-------------------------
Numpty

Someone who... by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=numpty
-------------------------

I love science denier irony.

Your science denier rhetoric here demonstrates you have a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject, CO2 u SAY - you evidently do not realize that the UK's Royal Society just officially re-affirmed that anthropogenic global warming is likely real, and that due to the seriousness of the threat it needs to be addressed.

From the concluding remarks of the Royal Society's new "Climate Change: a Summary of the Science":

------------------------------

There is strong evidence that changes in greenhouse gas concentrations due to human activity are the dominant cause of the global warming that has taken place over the last half century. This warming trend is expected to continue as are changes in precipitation over the long term in many regions. Further and more rapid increases in sea level are likely which will have profound implications for coastal communities and ecosystems...

The potential impacts of climate change are sufficiently serious that important decisions will need to be made."

http://royalsociety.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=4294972963

[CO2 u SAY]

08:07 PM on 10/11/2010

Ha! Ha!

I just saw that too, they won't listen their weird in the head.
I wasn't gonna come back but when i saw it i had too. I love the way they get angry about it's not the end of the world. HaHA!
The big issue, the banks doesn't enter there little blinkered minds. Bet they all still drive cars and use loads of energy while huffing and puffing. HAHA!
Laugh out loud
hehehe

Right I'm off to burn fossil fuels, later!

[LMPE]

05:56 PM on 10/11/2010

I hope that someone forced the owned of the burst Hungarian reservoir to see these.