Go to 6:15 of this youtube clip and you'll see Mitt Romney mocking Barack Obama on the issue of climate change at the Republican national convention. As Amy Goodman then points out, however, neither candidate (and none of the moderators) bothered to mention climate change at the debates. This is an incredibly sad state of affairs.
I couldn't agree more with Bill McKibben. it's time to get angry.
So far we’ve raised the temperature of the earth about one degree Celsius, and two decades ago it was hard to believe this would be enough to cause huge damage. But it was. We’ve clearly come out of the Holocene and into something else. Forty percent of the summer sea ice in the Arctic is gone; the ocean is 30 percent more acidic. There’s nothing theoretical about any of this any more. Since warm air holds more water vapor than cold, the atmosphere is about 4 percent wetter than it used to be, which has loaded the dice for drought and flood. In my home country, 2011 smashed the record for multibillion-dollar weather disasters—and we were hit nowhere near as badly as some. Thailand’s record flooding late in the year did damage equivalent to 18 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). That’s almost unbelievable. But it’s not just scientists who have been warning us. Insurance companies—the people in our economy who we ask to analyze risk—have been bellowing in their quiet, actuarial way for years. Here’s Munich Re, the world’s largest insurer, in their 2010 annual report: “The reinsurer has built up the world’s most comprehensive natural catastrophe database, which shows a marked increase in the number of weather-related events. For instance, globally, loss-related floods have more than tripled since 1980, and windstorm natural catastrophes more than doubled, with particularly heavy losses from Atlantic hurricanes. This rise cannot be explained without global warming.”I'm getting really tired of hearing people talk the talk, without walking the walk. All of us do it, me included (what else can you say when I take a long airplane trip to vacation in San Francisco, despite the fact that I often ride a bicycle to work?). In the meantime, we are living in the only industrialized country that is still debating whether burning fossil fuels is heating up the planet. I'm tired of people driving to Earth Day in big SUVs. I'm tired of the fact that most of us who whine about sustainability (including me) live comparable lifestyles to those who downplay the importance of such issues. And how is THIS for a sobering talk? The speaker is Dr. Peter Raven who, in a gentle voice, is reading the riot act to the audience (his speech "Saving Ourselves" runs from 5:55 to 29:00). Raven is a courageous speaker who is not afraid to tie the exhaustion of natural resources to the exploding number of human beings on planet Earth. His facts and figures are not in dispute by any thinking person. [At the 29:00 mark, Raven describes an attempt to reclaim a precious preserve of extremely bio-diverse land in Costa Rica--this video was created at a fundraiser for that effort, titled the "Children's Eternal Rainforest."] As Bill McKibben says, it's time to severely devalue mere talk and to start making things really happen. The path is going to require some conscious change at the highest levels, because we cannot depend on ourselves to keep making the right decisions--we don't have that kind of willpower. We don't yet know exactly where we are headed, but we do know that we need to steer sharply away from fossil fuels. We also have some reason to believe that this future devoid of fossil fuels could be an opportunity as much as it is a crisis--see this talk by Amory Lovins, who argues that it is time to "Reinvent Fire."
At Huffpo, Ted Kaufman begs us to take the issue of climate change serious, pointing readers to the websites of serious science organizations and warning us of the horrific consequences of doing nothing.
Virtually every reputable organization of scientists in the world has reached the same basic conclusion. Climate change is real and poses a threat to every living thing on the earth. To not take climate change seriously, you must somehow believe there is a gigantic international conspiracy involving the world's top scientists, all of whom have agreed to distort their data. Come on.
I highly respect Ted Kaufman for speaking up when we needed to hear him, both on this issue and with regard to banking reform. He often seemed to be the lone thoughtful voice among the clowns and chaos of Congress. He's no longer in Congress, but I do think he's spot on here. Unfortunately, it seems that the people (at least the people I know) have made the leap from climate change skepticism to climate change resignation. I remember wincing when I heard Al Gore's line at the end of Inconvenient Truth that we shouldn't make this leap--it seemed even then that our economic incentives are all in the wrong places and that is exactly what we would do. I fear that is what we are now doing. Here's what I'm sensing out there: "Yep. We're destroying the Earth. We're destroying it in a thousand ways, and climate change is but one of these ways. And we're not willing to do much of anything about it. We don't even like the low efficiency light bulbs, so please leave us alone about this issues of climate change."
Consider the joy shown by Americans celebrating the Fourth of July. 
If the Fourth is such a happy time, shouldn’t we now be equally furious that the government has been rigged to ignore the needs and wants of the People? Over the past few years, I've heard dozens of educated middle class Americans admit that Congress has ben bought―federal corruption at the highest levels is now accepted as unquestionable truth.
More recently, I’ve run into more than a few people who have become frustrated with the Occupy movement. For instance, last week I heard this from an acquaintance, who was speaking of the protesters:
Acquaintance: “They should get a job. What the hell are they expecting to accomplish out there?”
Me: Isn’t it a huge problem that all three branches of our federal government make decisions to accommodate large corporations, often ignoring the needs of ordinary citizens? Isn’t that worth protesting.
Acquaintance: “Still, the protesters are stupid.”
Me: What is your solution? Ordinary people are barred from participating in a government that is supposedly to be run by ordinary people. Further, the news media is largely under the control of these same interests―they are too often serving as stenographers for the corporations that pull the strings of the federal Government. [Fourth of July flag photo]
Acquaintance: [Silence].
Along the same lines, here’s an excerpt from an email I recently received from a DI reader:About your note regarding ways to support the Occupy movement... yes, you are right to encourage people to talk about what is going on, but don't you think that it is time for those who are actually doing the "occupying" to go home and do their homework. It seems pretty apparent that it is mostly the late teen to early 20 year olds that are involved and that they don't seem to have any really intelligent, well thought out ideas or goals. The media and general public are already bored with the story, and the whole thing will have been an exercise in futility unless they move on in a dignified way. Their goal should be to have an effect on the 2012 election which is a full year away. They should go home and get organized and become better informed in order to form a voting block that will further their agenda (that is if they can come to a consensus as to what that agenda is).
In short, this reader wants the Occupiers to return home to do the same thing that millions of people have been doing for the past decade, i.e., doing nothing likely to invoke change. [More . . . ]At Occasional Planet, Mike Davis discusses the ubiquitous TV commercials touting the green-ness of natural gas and Canadian tar-sand oil. At my workplace lunchroom, there is a TV, and I've seen these misleading commercials many times. I've also seen many recent ads for "clean coal," even though no such coal plants exist. Interesting how the industry never even attempts to argue that coal ash is "clean." Mike notes a lack of media stories critical of these ads, not surprising given the ad revenue the media receives for running these commercials.