Take Three Minutes To Climate Watch This Weekend

It’s still Climate Week, though the marches and summit conference are over. If you’d like to spend some time doing a brief climate watch this weekend, here are a few suggestions.

These short takes are the result of surveying over 500 free and publicly available videos. Each takes around three minutes or less to watch. Each comes from a good information source and reflects current scientific study.

Climate watches won’t make you happy, but you will gain some knowledge that may help in meeting this largest of our earthly challenges. There’s still hope for the planet, even if many find it wanes every day.

This one’s an inspirational piece from the UN by policymakers, activists, and celebrities from around the world who show their support for climate action. Really good for those who don’t realize the worldwide acceptance and scope of interest in the issue.

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson gives an interview to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on climate change. Unscripted.


Awesome British climate watch piece showing how tackling climate change demands a substantial shift in the global economy. Whether you like it or not you are already involved, and if you fail to take action you are not only missing out on a tremendous opportunity, but are already accepting risks you have not been paid to take. Wide geopolitical perspective.


Two Minutes on Oceans with Jim Toomey: Adaptation to Sea Level Rise. Toomey goes pretty fast, but this is a short climate watch video on the topic of sea level rise and our responses to it, which include a wide variety of approaches, from elaborate and expensive seawalls to enhanced natural resilience, such as the restoration of mangroves, marshes, and coral reefs. For those who realize that 60% of the world is water and want to know more about climate effects.


2 thoughts on “Take Three Minutes To Climate Watch This Weekend”

  1. Much opinion is
    based on GCMs which have been demonstrated to be faulty by their failure to
    predict the flat average global temperatures since before 2001. Especially
    egregious is the failure to use, or even acknowledge, the science of
    thermalization of absorbed radiation which explains why non-condensing ghg
    changes have no significant effect on climate change, i.e. climate sensitivity
    is zero. Search “consensusmistakes” for a discussion of some of the mistakes.

    A physics-based
    equation, with only two drivers (both natural) as independent variables,
    explains measured average global temperatures since before 1900 with 95%
    correlation, calculates credible values back to 1610, and predicts through
    2037. The current trend is down.

    “AGWunveiled” for the drivers, method, equation, data sources, history (hind
    cast to 1610) and predictions (to 2037).

    1. “Much opinion is based on GCMs which have been demonstrated to be faulty by their failure to predict”

      If you think general circulation models are faulty, how about looking at Earth’s history to make a prediction?

      If it’s so likely polar ice caps will be able to withstand CO₂ as high as we’ve pushed it, why isn’t there a single previous example of them doing so in Earth’s history?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top