Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 17, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

Star-Spangled Baggage
Science Finds New Routes to Energy

Paul Robeson: A Life

Truthdig Bazaar more items

A/V Booth

Google Earth Maps Out a Catastrophic Threat

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Sep 25, 2009
Google Earth

Who’s that booming baritone talking about the environment? Al Gore stars in a promotional video developed by Google Earth that shows environment degradation via the popular mapping program, a sort of “climate change simulator” of ice-sheet melting and rising sea levels. The promo was made to coincide with the Copenhagen climate conference.  —JCL


The Guardian:

If a picture is worth a thousand words, how many words should we afford Google Earth? Hours can be lost skydiving your way towards your favourite locations. Seeing somewhere you know so well from above provides valuable extra servings of knowledge and perspective.

It’s pleasing, therefore, to see Google announcing on its official blog that it has developed some nifty new features to coincide with the Copenhagen climate conference, now only a matter of weeks away.


Square, Site wide
In collaboration with the Danish government and others, we are launching a series of Google Earth layers and tours to allow you to explore the potential impacts of climate change on our planet and the solutions for managing it. Working with data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we show on Google Earth the range of expected temperature and precipitation changes under different global emissions scenarios that could occur throughout the century.

To help introduce us all to these features, Google has asked Al Gore – who acts as a “senior advisor” to the company – to provide the commentary on an accompanying video.

Read more

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By C.Curtis.Dillon, September 29, 2009 at 3:31 am Link to this comment

Fat Freddy:

Nice video and right down the tack I’m taking.  It is dangerous to just dismiss the possibilities that might happen.  It is, of course, all economic.  Big corporations don’t want to address the issue because they are a major cause of the problem.  It will cost them dearly to fix what is coming so they just push it off for someone else.  And, given all the contrary information being published, many are willing to postpone any real action until it is too late.  Unfortunately, we are in the experiment and whatever happens will fall on all of us.

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, September 28, 2009 at 7:32 am Link to this comment


Your argument reminds me of this video:

This is the only argument that really needs to be made, in my opinion.

Report this

By C.Curtis.Dillon, September 28, 2009 at 2:12 am Link to this comment

I don’t even know if I want to comment on this but here goes:

1) Assume that the naysayers are right ... there is no global warming.  What we see are just natural cycles.  Then doing nothing changes nothing and the world goes on as before.  We keep stripping the forests and creating deserts along with adding CO2 and other “green house” gasses to the atmosphere.

2) Now, assume they are wrong and we do nothing about it.  We keep killing trees and burning fossil fuels.  The planet warms and lots of bad things happen.  At it worst, there will be significant changes in weather and much of our farm lands will no longer be usable for crops.  It will be either too wet or dry.  Most forecasts go with the dry scenario.  So there is mass starvation.  And much of our coastal zones are flooded like the Pacific islands so we have huge population displacements (100s of millions at the very least since many countries are barely above sea level now).  Climate extremes become commonplace with massive storms (more Katrina type storms) consuming more and more property.  Polar ice melts meaning the temperature moderation effects of freezing and melting large quantities of ice disappear (freezing and melting ice takes massive amounts of energy ... energy which would heat the atmosphere when there is no more ice to melt).

Which of these scenarios would you choose if you didn’t know anything about the science or thought it might be wrong?  A rational person would assume the second scenario and work toward mitigating the potential damage.  If global warming is not real, he would still have made sane decisions and would have also made the planet a better place.  More growing vegetation and less CO2 in the atmosphere are probably good things under any circumstances.  A person in denial leans toward the first scenario because it doesn’t impact his current situation.  However, if the second scenario is, in fact, the most likely outcome, he is not prepared for the impact and is more adversely affected by it.

If your neighbor threatens war, do you ignore the threat and not make preparations?  Only if you are stupid.  You assume the threat is real and plan accordingly.  Well, if the threat of global warming is real (and not just some political trick by Al Gore to make money), do you really think it is wise to discount the possibility and ignore what might happen?  By the time you are 100% convinced, the water will be lapping at your doorstep and it will be too late.  Wisdom and concern for your children (and grandchildren) dictates you must act even when the threat is not 100% known.  Anything less is suicide!

Report this

By stcfarms, September 28, 2009 at 1:33 am Link to this comment

Those of us going to the ocean will reduce the demands upon the remaining
land. Anyone can build a trash island with hand tools. First use the rivers and
then the ocean for all your food, water and energy. With the islands being self
sufficient there would be no need for the debt, wars, pestilence et cetera that
he rich find so profitable. When the islands are large enough they could supply
good food, pure water and green energy at a price so low that the
corporations cannot compete. I doubt if many rich Americans will be going but
there is a lot of interest in the third world. It is true that there is no law on the
frontier, but then with the bankers, lawyers, cops and other bottom feeders all
still on land, there would be little need for law. Be bold, the future will not
treat the timid well.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, September 27, 2009 at 10:12 pm Link to this comment

We don’t have enough land for billions to be scattered about searching for food that may not be there. With the changing weather patterns the growing seasons are off and some food does not grow as well either. Most of our agriculture is of a mono-type which is also dangerous should some kind of disease organism infect them at just the wrong time like now.

The implication is that some of the very rich will have the facilities and hoard so much of the necessities that the rest of us could find ourselves fighting and dying amongst each other. The fortresses of the wealthy would be well nigh impenetrable by us if they are prepared. The only life may be either a vagabond or exurb existence, once the roving gangs are gone, or for any of the corporations which will offer a job and life. They will be armed with some nasty weapons including some that won’t kill you—-just torture you.

Many possibles could happen or even parts of several could happen depending upon what goes on before. We will just have to prepare for the worse and hope for the best. And then luck does favor the prepared anyway.

Report this

By diamond, September 27, 2009 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment

I’d love to be wrong, Canyon Critter, but the evidence is in and the oceans are already rising. The question is not ‘Is climate change a reality’ the time for that question is over. The question is what will we do about it and how soon will we do something about it? And will it be soon enough to save us from climate disaster?The age of the deniosaurs is over: whatever your cherry trees are doing.

Report this

By stcfarms, September 27, 2009 at 5:47 pm Link to this comment

Perhaps wealth will not save the people that got us into this mess. I think that
bright, innovative people that are willing to alter their lifestyle have the best
chance of surviving. Of course the farther that you get from population centers
the better off that you will be.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, September 27, 2009 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment

Yes some may survive, I am betting that many of them will be the very rich who put us into this mess. The poor will do what they can but many will die through no fault of their own. Tragic but that is the way of things.

Who knows how many will and in what state they will be in? Pockets maybe of varying degrees of technology certainly but other than that? It won’t be pretty, it it is televised that is.

Report this

By RobertinWestbury, September 27, 2009 at 7:23 am Link to this comment

“as a matter a fact here in montana its been getting colder and spring is non existing. i can tell because my cherry trees that used to ripen about the 4th of july now ripen in august. so right here we are getting global cooling. “

Canyon Critter, you obviously don’t know what you are talking about.  Most do not.  I’ve heard radio personalities joking about cold weather in July and Al Gore. 

The fact is that warmer temperatures melt the ice cap and ice sheet of Greenland… And when that extra fresh water runs off into the ocean (salt water), currents are affected and altered, which causes us down here more storms (like Katrina), and cooler, wetter weather.  In the end, the warming can cause another ice age (which is cooler)...

Your weather in Montana is an indication of the climate crises Gore has warned about, not proof that nothing is wrong..

Report this

By stcfarms, September 27, 2009 at 1:43 am Link to this comment

You raise an interesting point, will there be no prisoners? Will no one survive?
I believe that some will survive, maybe none of the non believers will survive. I
intend to survive unless the morons decide to go out with a nuclear bang. One
must adapt to the changing environment or die out. It sounds as if those that
do not believe are in the greatest danger because they will not prepare
themselves for that which will not happen. This is as it should be. It is time to
leave the sheep to their fate and move on.

By Night-Gaunt, September 26 at 7:17 pm #

If we don’t handle it then nature will take its course and there are no
prisoners. A fact of life.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, September 26, 2009 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

The URL will automatically active if you have it linked up correctly. Use the “preview” button to see then rectify.

Also Special K was your observation of Al Gore’s unnamed mentor’s dieing observations backed up by anything but innuendo? You are too use to dealing with simpletons to think that vacuosity will sway anyone here. How about some rock hard details. How about the fact that things are going worse than what was predicted before, in the worse case scenarios, is now happening 20 to 70 years sooner should give you pause. Does it? Do you understand what you are even saying? Regurgitation of what someone else says without first understanding it makes anyone who does just a parrot. Imitation isn’t actually knowing it.

Projecting long term trends is actually easier than short term weather patterns. The dynamics of melting ice is new, they are seeing things on such a huge scale like never before. Did you know that the melting goes on at the base of the ice and it builds to a critical point to where the ice suddenly collapses once a threshold had been reached in the stressing and sliding? Or that for every foot of rise you can get as much as 100 feet inland? Just some things you and everyone else needs to know.

Some other greenhouse gases used in manufacturing that are many times worse than CO2. Measured against it.

Methane is 23X that of a single CO2 molecule
Nitrous Oxide (NO2) is 269X
Nitrogen Flouride (NFL3) manufacturing LCD screens
Hexaflouride gas, manufacturing of nuclear material for bombs and fuel

There are many others I can’t even name and they tend to not be listed in their effects on the major climate models. H2O in vapor form traps heat but reflects it in cloud form.

The torrid zone around our equator has expanded between two and three miles recently. The north pole runs the risk of an ice free summer not in 2050 or 2100 but maybe within ten years or less. Do you see the problems? Glenn Beck doesn’t but he thinks God will save him or it isn’t happening or God is doing it. You can’t speak logically with mystics.

If we don’t handle it then nature will take its course and there are no prisoners. A fact of life.

Report this

By canyon critter, September 25, 2009 at 11:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

diamond your all wet, must be that rising water. truth be told climate has always been changing 5000 yrs ago the columbia ice sheild didnt exist. the mini iceage ended in the 1850 when the temperature went up around 8degrees in a decade. as a matter a fact here in montana its been getting colder and spring is non existing. i can tell because my cherry trees that used to ripen about the 4th of july now ripen in august. so right here we are getting global cooling. by the way al bore is a poor spokesperson for global warming as he is a terrible polluter/miner,,hea al is a miner he leases his property out zinc mine. he has also made over 100 million because of this global warming facade and with cap and trade credits will make millions more.

Report this

By diamond, September 25, 2009 at 4:25 pm Link to this comment

Special K you are wrong and Al is right and I can understand how threatening his activities are to you and those you represent, the people now known as deniosaurs. And if you don’t believe the ocean is already rising go and ask the people on islands like Kirabas, Tuvulu and the Maldives what they’re experiencing as their homes slowly sink beneath the waves. You can argue semantics and statistics as much as you like but these people are going to become refugees whatever you say. If nothing’s done Manhattan could also sink beneath the waves, but I know you will never believe it until your feet get wet.

Report this

By Special K, September 25, 2009 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Your Comments On…
New Analysis Brings Dire Forecast Of 6.3-Degree Temperature Increase
Climate researchers now predict the planet will warm by 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century even if the world’s leaders fulfill their most ambitious climate pledges, a much faster and broader scale of change than forecast just two years ago, according to a report released Thursday by…
By Juliet Eilperin
Gonzage1 wrote:
(From the Dallas Morning News)
WASHINGTON – Climate change is happening faster and on a broader scale than the world’s scientists projected in 2007, according to a report released ...
< >”.

The foregoing take on what’s happening climate-wise
Seems to fit “Other findings include the fact that sea level MIGHT rise
    by as much as six feet by 2100 instead of 1.5 feet . . .”—
Whether this is a “fact(ual)” finding or an educated guesstimate,
The careful reader can only cautiously venture to surmise.

As the cited piece indicates:

World’s scientists seem not to have done very well
At prediction over a brief two-year span.
Is it not probable that 100 year predictions
Will tend to be less accurate as guides to development of any plan?

An underestimate observed after only two years
May be followed by an overestimate after four,
And another underestimate after six—and so on,
Till reading about periodic repetition of this pattern becomes a bore.

Anyhow, we have heard that to provide a break in the boredom,
Google Earth Climate Change Simulator (starring) Al Gore
[(VIDEO) By The Huffington Post News] will be available
Our sense of humor, perhaps, to restore.

Incidentally, Al’s late Harvard mentor,
(Who taught Al what Al still thinks is true)
Before he died, concluded that what he’d taught Al was not valid,
But Al still clings to the original view.

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.