Climate Change: The Facts, BBC 1, BBC iPlayer, presented by Sir David Attenborough, produced and directed by Serena Davies.

climate chane.jpg

The facts are global warming is taking place now and the concerted action to limit it 1.5 degrees centigrade by reducing fossil fuel emissions, which was agreed by the Paris Accord, 2015, looks highly unlikely to happen.

‘What we do now will profoundly affect the next thousand years,’ David Attenborough tells us.

Fossil fuel companies have already been working hard to smear the science behind global warming. They employed the same tactics used by tobacco firms to dispute that smoking was bad for your health. And their propaganda has been highly successful. The moron’s moron in the Whitehouse, for example, withdrew from the Paris Accord and denied there was such a thing as global warming. America, as you’d expect, has the highest carbon emissions in the world.  Paradoxically, those countries that produce the least carbon emissions, in the equator, for example, are likely to experience drought and mass starvation.

Not only can we expect mass species extinction in land and sea. Attenborough in his programmes has shown it is already happening. Coral, for example, bleaching and dying. Species dependent on this underwater ‘rainforest’ dying. With warmer oceans we can also expect an increase in wildfires, Antarctica to melt, sea levels to rise, increased severity of hurricanes and tsunamis and storm surges. Apart from modelling, we’re not really sure how this will play out. What we do know is that all the methane locked in the ground will bubble up and lead to a vicious circle of ever increasing temperatures.

Professor Tim Lenton’s model predicts that with three to six degrees and runaway global warming taking place we can expect about 600 million people to become refugees. Let’s round it up to a billion or more. How we treat refugees now does not bode well.

The question of how we can turn a vicious circle of inaction, greed and ineptitude into a virtuous circle of carbon capture and the eradication of fossil fuel from our energy diet is not convincing.

The one clear cause of global warming is mankind.

The solution depends on mankind working together. It means rewriting the history books and the rich sharing with the poor and the lion lying down with the donkey. James Lovelock’s Gaia hypothesis comes into effect here. Everything we do is connected. Our planet, our blue planet, doesn’t really care what we do. It’s a self-regulating system and since we can’t regulate ourself it will send out shocks and reminders. It will not be ignored. We keep hearing the same thing, no pain, no gain. The earlier we act the less costly will be the costs of climate change. Our children and our children’s children will pick up the tab. I guess we’ll have sucked the life out of the planet and it will have sucked the life out of us and them by then.  Climate change is the most important fact of our time. You can stand with the moron’s moron or you can stand with the ninety-nine percent of scientists that agree it is happening and it is happening now.   We need more than consensus. We need action now. What we’ve had is inaction and drag-back to the status quo. Conservatism has never been so stupid. Do nothing and die. Do something radical for your children. And their children’s children.


It was a terrifying programme, but shouldn't have come as a surprise. Scientists have been telling us this for years, and we have chosen not to listen. The Extinction Rebellion lot are marvellous. 'What good does having a load of tree huggers blocking the road do anyone?' various persons ask. A lot more good than sitting on your arse, twats at the Mail and The Sun.

well, airy, me and you will be dead, but it's the legacy we leave. Four horseman on the apocalpyse isn't a good start. 


I'm glad you posted about this. I've not watched it as don't do telly, but get unearthed etc and World Service. I'm not sure anyone has developed a costed plan yet, have they? Think that's what the IPCC is doing at the moment? I've heard several people say the green new deal is not feasable, because the changes needed to get out of carbon are going to be too expensive to be able to afford social change as well. By trying to do so much they will fail to do anything. Which woud keep the koch brothers happy.

World Service last night there was a program featuring climate change protesters. All of them said they still drove and went by plane. Though said they tried to keep it to a minimum. I switched off. Why on Earth should anyone respect people who think they are so important it's ok for them to destroy the planet but not anyone else? On question time the other day everyone was spouting green stuff but (with the exception of Caroline Lucas who is a superhero) no one would say that we should ban aeroplanes. Or at least ration them. Maybe everyone on the planet should be entitled to one flight every five years, and if you don't use yours you could sell it to the highest bidder That would redistribute wealth at least.

Why is there no debate about the damage going into space all the time must be doing? How can it be justified to those whose homes are going underwater?

If the world were a house we in the west would be partying so loudly the walls would be crumbling, but we don't care, just turn up the volume of fake news and hope everyone else gets squashed by the falling rubble so we don't have to worry about them.

Why are we making weapons for Saudia Arabia? How much iof the steel that is taking so much electricity and water to make, is being used for weapons/fighterplanes etc?

Why is it ok for more and more stuff to be made by fewer and fewer people? Surely if not using people's energy and skill manufacture will be using another kind of energy - whjich we are supposed to be cutting back on. All so rich at the very top and their shareholders get even richer.

Over and over again lobbying comes up as the problem. Lobbying stopped action against use of anti biotics to cause weight gain in American factory farming. Lobbying stopped investment in electric vehicles. Lobbying stopped government funded research into renewable energy. So long as political parties are allowed to get private funding they will be corrupted by lobbying. If those paying lobbyists have enough money to bribe governments they are not being taxed enough.

In movies it is aliens who threaten the Earth's destruction, and mankind are the heroes. But it is our success that threatens the Earth.

We have to accept that we cannot keep going this direction, this isn't "progress". Why is it so hard even to tax single use plastic? To ban coloured plastic as they have in Japan? To subsidise electric vehicles  instead of oil powered? I'm looking forward to reading the IPCC report, then at least will know what to ask the government to do.

Macron tried to cut back petrol by raising taxes while not subsidising an alternative.

If we are going to survive we have to look at everything differently. Cannot just say of capitalism "there is no alternative" like Mrs Thatch. That will mean there is no alternative to destruction of all life now


we need to work together, rich countries must help the poor countries. The latter are loaded down with the rich countries's carbon debt. China, for example, had until the 1970s, very little carbon debt. Now a new coal-burning station opens every day. .I can see global wamming spiraling out of control and India claiminng all the water in the nile and ganges. I can see nuclear conflict. What I can't see is a peaceful settlement. That woudl be too grown-up for the vested interests that enrich themselves through other people's misery. Not that I'm miserable. I'm all-right-Jack. That's the problem. Wait until we're not alright and it's too late.