This is a film that demands
action. It reveals that we may have grossly underestimated
the speed at which our climate is changing. At its heart is
a deadly new phenomenon. One that until very recently
scientists refused to believe even existed. But it may
already have led to the starvation of millions. Tonight
Horizon examines for the first time the power of what
scientists are calling Global Dimming.
12/05/06 - BBC - Runtime 49 Minutes
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
TRANSCRIPT
NARRATOR (JACK FORTUNE): This is a film that demands action. It
reveals that we may have grossly underestimated the speed at which
our climate is changing. At its heart is a deadly new phenomenon.
One that until very recently scientists refused to believe even
existed. But it may already have led to the starvation of millions.
Tonight Horizon examines for the first time the power of what
scientists are calling Global Dimming.
NARRATOR: September 12th 2001, the aftermath of tragedy. While
America mourned, the weather all over the country was unusually
fine. Eight hundred miles west of New York, in Madison, Wisconsin a
climate scientist called David Travis was on his way to work.
DR DAVID TRAVIS (University of Wisconsin, Whitewater): Around the
twelfth, later on in the day, when I was driving to work, and I
noticed how bright blue and clear the sky was. And at first I didn't
think about it, then I realised the sky was unusually clear.
NARRATOR: For 15 years Travis had been researching an apparently
obscure topic, whether the vapour trails left by aircraft were
having a significant effect on the climate. In the aftermath of 9/11
the entire US fleet was grounded, and Travis finally had a chance to
find out.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: It was certainly, you know, one of the tiny
positives that may have come out of this, an opportunity to do
research that hopefully will never happen again.
NARRATOR: Travis suspected the grounding might make a small but
detectable change to the climate. But what he observed was both
immediate and dramatic.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: We found that the change in temperature range
during those three days was just over one degrees C. And you have to
realise that from a layman's perspective that doesn't sound like
much, but from a climate perspective that is huge.
NARRATOR: One degree in just three days no one had ever seen such
a big climatic change happen so fast. This was a new kind of climate
change. Scientists call it Global Dimming. Two years ago most of
them had never even heard of it, yet now they believe it may mean
all their predictions about the future of our climate could be
wrong. The trail that would lead to the discovery of Global Dimming
began 40 years ago, in Israel with the work of a young English
immigrant called Gerry Stanhill. A trained biologist, Gerry got a
job helping to design irrigation schemes. His task was to measure
how strongly the sun shone over Israel.
DR GERALD STANHILL (Agricultural Research Organisation, Israel):
It was important for this work to measure solar radiation, because
that is the factor that basically determines how much water crops
require.
NARRATOR: For a year Gerry collected data from a network of light
meters; the results were much as expected, and were used to help
design the national irrigation system. But twenty years later, in
the 1980s, Gerry decided to repeat his measurements to check that
they were still valid. What he found, stunned him.
DR GERALD STANHILL: Well I was amazed to find that there was a
very serious reduction in sunlight, the amount of sunlight in
Israel. In fact, if we compare those very early measurements in the
1950s with the current measurements, there was a staggering 22% drop
in the sunlight, and that really amazed me.
NARRATOR: A 22% drop in solar energy was simply massive. If it
was true surely Israelis should be freezing. There had to be
something wrong. So when Gerry published his results they were
ignored. DR GERALD STANHILL: I must say the publications had almost
no effect whatsoever on the scientific community.
NARRATOR: But in fact Gerry was not the only scientist who had
noticed a fall in sunlight. In Germany a young graduate
climatologist called Beate Liepert found that the same thing seemed
to be happening over the Bavarian Alps too. DR BEATE LIEPERT
(Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory): I was the same, I was as
sceptical as any other climatologist. But then, um, I, I saw the
same results er in Germany, so um I believed him.
NARRATOR: Germany, Israel, what about the rest of the world?
Working independently of each other, Liepert and Stanhill began
searching through publications, journals and meteorological records
from around the world. And they both found the same extraordinary
story. Between the 1950s and the early 1990s the level of solar
energy reaching the earth's surface had dropped 9% in Antarctica,
10% in the USA, by almost 30% in Russia. And by 16% in parts of the
British Isles. This was a truly global phenomenon, and Gerry gave it
a suitable name - Global Dimming. But again, the response from other
scientists was one of sheer disbelief.
DR GERALD STANHILL: The scientific community was obviously not
ready to deal with the fact that there was a Global Dimming
phenomena.
NARRATOR: Of course, there was a good reason for the scepticism.
Less energy from the Sun should be making the world cooler. Yet
scientists knew the Earth was getting hotter. As the carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases we emit trap ever more heat in the
Earth's atmosphere and cause Global Warming.
DR BEATE LIEPERT: My friends' reaction actually to Gerry's and to
my work at the same time too was, oh my God this is really extreme,
you are um contradicting global warming. Er do you know how many
billions of dollars was spent on global warming research and you and
this old guy er are contradicting er us.
NARRATOR: So Liepert and Stanhill's work was widely dismissed.
But Global Dimming was not the only phenomenon that didn't seem to
fit with Global Warming. In Australia two more biologists, Michael
Roderick and Graham Farquhar were intrigued by another paradoxical
result - the world-wide decline in something called the pan
evaporation rate.
PROF GRAHAM FARQUHAR (Australian National University): It's
called pan evaporation rate because it's evaporation rate from a
pan. Every day all over the world people come out in the morning and
see how much water they've got to add to a pan to bring it back to
the level it was the same time the morning before. It's that simple.
NARRATOR: In some places agricultural scientists have been
performing this rather dull daily task for more than a hundred
years. PROF GRAHAM FARQUHAR: The long-term measurements of pan
evaporation are what gives it its real value.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK (Australian National University): And the
fact that they're doing the same thing day in day out with the same
instrument.
PROF GRAHAM FARQUHAR: Yeah, they deserve a medal. Each of them.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK: Yeah.
NARRATOR: For decades, nobody took much notice of the pan
evaporation measurements. But in the 1990s scientists spotted
something very strange, the rate of evaporation was falling.
PROF GRAHAM FARQUHAR: There is a paradox here about the fact that
the pan evaporation rate's going down, an apparent paradox, but the
global temperature's going up.
NARRATOR: This was a puzzle. Most scientists reasoned that like a
pan on the stove, turning up the global temperature should increase
the rate at which water evaporated. But Roderick and Farquhar did
some calculations and worked out that temperature was not the most
important factor in pan evaporation.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK: Well it turns out in fact that the key
things for pan evaporation are the sunlight, the humidity and the
wind. But really the sunlight is a really dominant term there.
NARRATOR: They found that it was the energy of the photons
hitting the surface, the actual sunlight, that kicks the water
molecules out of the pan and into the atmosphere. And so they too
reached an extraordinary conclusion.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK: You know, if the pan is going down then
maybe that's the sunlight going down. NARRATOR: Was the fall in pan
evaporation in fact evidence of Global Dimming? Somewhere in the
journals, they felt, must be the hard numbers that could tie the two
things together.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK: And then one day, just by accident, I had to
go to the library to get an article out Nature. As you do, I
couldn't find it. And I just glanced at a, through the thing, and
there was an article called Evaporation Losing Its Strength. Which
reported a decline in pan evaporation over Russia, United States and
Eastern Europe. And there in the, in the measurements, they said
that the, the pans had on average, evaporated about a hundred
millimetres less of water in the last thirty years.
NARRATOR: Mike knew how much sunlight was needed to evaporate a
millimetre of water. So he put the two sets of figures together -
the drop in evaporation with the drop in sunlight.
DR MICHAEL RODERICK: And so you just do the sum in your head. A
hundred millimetres of water, less a pan evaporation, two and a half
mega joules, so two and a half times a hundred is two hundred and
fifty mega joules. And that is in fact what the Russians have
measured with the decline in sunlight in the last thirty years. It
was quite amazing.
NARRATOR: It was the same with Europe and the USA. The drop in
evaporation rate matched exactly the drop in sunlight reported by
Beate Liepert and Gerry Stanhill. Two completely independent sets of
observations had come to the same conclusion. Though it seemed
incredible, there was no doubting Global Dimming now.
DR BEATE LIEPERT: All of a sudden you see, oh my God the world is
dimming, and then you, all of a sudden you see oh my God this really
has a tremendous impact.
PROF GRAHAM FARQUHAR: There had to be dimming in Europe in
America and in Russia, this is on a global scale. And we thought,
this is really important because the amount of dimming was enormous.
So this is BIG on a global scale.
NARRATOR: But what was causing it? Scientists knew that there was
nothing wrong with the sun itself. The culprit had to be here on
Earth. And as they searched for clues, they would make another
startling discovery. Global dimming is a killer. It may have been
behind the worst climatic disaster of recent times, responsible for
famine and death on a biblical scale. And Global Dimming is poised
to strike again.
NARRATOR: The Maldives: a nation of a thousand tiny islands in
the middle of the Indian Ocean, so recently battered by the Asian
tsunami. It was here that Veerabhadran Ramanathan, one of the
world's leading climate scientists first began to unravel the
mystery of what's causing Global Dimming. He had first noticed
declining sunlight over large areas of the Pacific Ocean in the
mid-1990s.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN (University of California): But we
didn't know at that time it was part of a much larger global
picture, but I knew we had to find out what was causing that.
NARRATOR: Ramanathan was certain of one thing, the big drop in
sunlight reaching the ground had to be something to do with changes
in the Earth's atmosphere. There was one obvious suspect.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: Almost everything we do to create
energy causes pollution.
NARRATOR: Burning fuel doesn't just produce the invisible
greenhouse gases which cause global warming. It also produces
visible pollution, tiny airborne particles of soot and other
pollutants. These produce the haze which shrouds our cities. So
Ramanathan wondered: Could this pollution be causing Global Dimming?
The Maldives were the perfect place to find out. The Maldives seem
unpolluted, but in fact the northern islands sit in a stream of
dirty air descending from India. Only the southern tip of the long
island chain enjoys clean air coming all the way from Antarctica. So
by comparing the northern islands with the southern ones, Ramanathan
and his colleagues would be able to see exactly what difference the
pollution made to the atmosphere and the sunlight. Project INDOEX,
as it was called, was a huge multinational effort. For four years
every possible technique was used to sample and monitor the
atmosphere over the Maldives. INDOEX cost twenty-five million
dollars, but it produced results - and they surprised everyone.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: The stunning part of the experiment
was this pollutant layer which was three kilometre thick, cut down
the sunlight reaching the ocean by more than 10%.
NARRATOR: A 10% fall in sunlight meant that particle pollution
was having a far bigger effect than anyone had thought possible.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: Our models led us to believe the
human impact on the dimming was close to half to one per cent. So
what we discovered was tenfold.
NARRATOR: INDOEX showed that the pollution particles were
blocking some sunlight themselves; but far more significant was what
they were doing to the clouds. They were turning them into giant
mirrors. Clouds are made of droplets of water. These only form when
water vapour in the atmosphere starts to condense on the surface of
naturally occurring airborne particles, typically pollen or sea
salt. As they grow, the water droplets eventually become so heavy
they fall as rain. But Ramanathan found that polluted air contained
far more particles than the unpolluted air, particles of ash, soot
and sulphur dioxide.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: We saw ten times more particles in
the polluted air mass north of the Maldives compared with what we
saw south of the Maldives which was a pristine air mass.
NARRATOR: In the polluted air billions of man-made particles
provided ten times as many sites around which water droplets could
form. So polluted clouds contained many more water droplets, each
one far smaller than it would be naturally. Many small droplets
reflect more light than fewer big ones. So the polluted clouds were
reflecting more light back into space, preventing the heat of the
sun getting through. This was the cause of Global Dimming.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: Basically the Global Dimming we saw
in the North Indian Ocean, it was contributed on the one hand by the
particles themselves shielding the ocean from the sunlight, on the
other hand making the clouds brighter. So this insidious soup,
consisting of soot, sulphates, nitrates, ash and what have you, was
having a double whammy on the Global Dimming.
NARRATOR: And when he looked at satellite images, Ramanathan
found the same thing was happening all over the world. Over India.
Over China, and extending into the Pacific. Over Western Europe...
extending into Africa. Over the British Isles. But it was when
scientists started to investigate the effects of Global Dimming that
they made the most disturbing discovery of all. Those more
reflective clouds could alter the pattern of the world's rainfall.
With tragic consequences.
NEWS REPORT - MICHAEL BUERK VOICE OVER: Dawn, and as the sun
breaks through the piercing chill of night on the plain outside
Korum it lights up a biblical famine, now in the 20th Century. This
place say workers here is the closest thing to hell on earth.
NARRATOR: The 1984 Ethiopian famine shocked the world. It was
partly caused by a decade's long drought right across sub-Saharan
Africa - a region known as the Sahel. For year after year the summer
rains failed. At the time some scientists blamed overgrazing and
poor land management. But now there's evidence that the real culprit
was Global Dimming. The Sahel's lifeblood has always been a seasonal
monsoon. For most of the year it is completely dry. But every
summer, the heat of the sun warms the oceans north of the equator.
This draws the rain belt that forms over the equator northwards,
bringing rain to the Sahel. But for twenty years in the 1970s and
80s the tropical rain belt consistently failed to shift northwards -
and the African monsoon failed. For climate scientists like Leon
Rotstayn the disappearance of the rains had long been a puzzle. He
could see that pollution from Europe and North America blew right
across the Atlantic, but all the climate models suggested it should
have little effect on the monsoon. But then Rotstayn decided to find
out what would happen if he took the Maldive findings into account.
DR LEON ROTSTAYN (CSIRO Atmospheric Research): What we found in
our model was that when we allowed the pollution from Europe and
North America to affect the properties of the clouds in the northern
hemisphere the clouds reflected more sunlight back to space and this
cooled the oceans of the northern hemisphere. And to our surprise
the result of this was that the tropical rain bands moved southwards
tracking away from the more polluted northern hemisphere towards the
southern hemisphere.
NARRATOR: Polluted clouds stopped the heat of the sun getting
through. That heat was needed to draw the tropical rains northwards.
So the life giving rain belt never made it to the Sahel.
DR LEON ROTSTAYN: So what our model is suggesting is that these
droughts in the Sahel in the 1970s and the 1980s may have been
caused by pollution from Europe and North America affecting the
properties of the clouds and cooling the oceans of the northern
hemisphere.
NARRATOR: Rotstayn has found a direct link between Global Dimming
and the Sahel drought. If his model is correct, what came out of our
exhaust pipes and power stations contributed to the deaths of a
million people in Africa, and afflicted 50 million more. But this
could be just of taste of what Global Dimming has in store.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: The Sahel is just one example of
the monsoon system. Let me take you to anther part of the world.
Asia, where the same monsoon brings rainfall to three point six
billion people, roughly half the world's population. My main concern
is this air pollution and the Global Dimming will also have a
detrimental impact on this Asian monsoon. We are not talking about
few millions of people we are talking about few billions of people.
NARRATOR: For Ramanathan the implications are clear.
PROF VEERABHADRAN RAMANATHAN: There is no choice here we have to
cut down air pollution, if not eliminate it altogether.
NARRATOR: Fortunately, tackling air pollution needn't be too
difficult. It wouldn't mean giving up on oil and coal altogether.
We'd just have to burn them more cleanly. And in Europe we've
already made a start: scrubbers in power stations, catalytic
converters in cars and low sulphur fuels, though they do nothing to
reduce greenhouse gases, have already begun to cut down visible air
pollution. This should be good news for the Sahel, and in recent
years the droughts have been nothing like as bad. But there's a
terrible catch. Because while Global Dimming is itself a major
threat to humanity, it now appears it has been protecting us from an
even greater threat. Which means that as we reduce the dimming, we
may find ourselves faced by something even worse.
NARRATOR: It was David Travis who first caught a glimpse of what
the world could be like without Global Dimming. It happened in those
chaotic days following the tragedy of 9/11. For fifteen years,
Travis had been studying the vapour trails, or contrails, left
behind by high-flying aircraft. Though each individual contrail
seems small, when they all spread out, they can blanket the sky.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: Here are some examples of what we call outbreaks
of contrails. These are large clusters of contrails. And here's a
particularly er good one from Southern California. Here's the west
coast of the United States. And you can see here this lacing network
of contrails er covering at least fifty per cent, if not seventy
five per cent or more of the sky in that area. It doesn't take an
expert to er realise that if, if you look at the satellite picture
and see this kind of contrail coverage that they've got to be having
an effect on temperature at the surface.
NARRATOR: But the problem Travis faced was to establish exactly
how big an effect the contrails were actually having. The only way
to do that was to find a period of time when, although conditions
were right for contrails to form, there were no flights. And, of
course, that never happened. Until September 2001. Then, for three
days after the 11th virtually all commercial aircraft in the US were
grounded. It was an opportunity Travis could not afford to miss. He
set about gathering temperature records from all over the USA.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: Initially data from over 5,000 weather stations
across the 48 united states, the areas that was most dominantly
affected by the grounding.
NARRATOR: Travis was not looking just at temperature - that
varies a lot from day to day anyway. Instead he focused on something
that normally only changes quite slowly: the temperature range. The
difference between the highest temperature during the day and the
lowest at night. Had this changed at all during the three days of
the grounding?
DR DAVID TRAVIS: As we began to look at the climate data and the
evidence began to grow I got more and more excited. The actual
results were much larger than I expected. So here we see for the 3
days preceding September 11th a slightly negative value of
temperature range with lots of contrails as normal. Then we have
this sudden spike right here of the 3 day period. This reflects lack
of clouds, lack of contrails, warmer days cooler nights, exactly
what we expected but even larger than what we expected. So what this
indicates is that during this 3 day period we had a sudden drop in
Global Dimming contributed from airplanes.
NARRATOR: During the grounding the temperature range jumped by
over a degree Celsius. Travis had never seen anything like it
before.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: This was the largest temperature swing of this
magnitude in the last thirty years.
NARRATOR: If so much could happen in such a short time, removing
just one form of pollution, then it suggests that the overall effect
of Global Dimming on world temperatures could be huge.
DR DAVID TRAVIS: The nine eleven study showed that if you remove
a contributor to Global Dimming, jet contrails, just for a three day
period, we see an immediate response of the surface of temperature.
Do the same thing globally we might see a large scale increase in
global warming.
NARRATOR: This is the real sting in the tail. Solve the problem
of Global Dimming and the world could get considerably hotter. And
this is not just theory, it may already be happening. In Western
Europe the steps we have taken to cut air pollution have started to
bear fruit in a noticeable improvement in air quality and even a
slight reduction in Global Dimming over the last few years. Yet at
the same time, after decades in which they held steady, European
temperatures have started rapidly to rise culminating in the savage
summer of 2003.
Forest fires devastated Portugal. Glaciers melted in the Alps.
And in France people died by the thousand. Could this be the penalty
of reducing Global Dimming without tackling the root cause of global
warming?
DR BEATE LIEPERT: We thought we live in a global warming world,
um but this is actually er not right. We lived in a global warming
plus a Global Dimming world, and now we are taking out Global
Dimming. So we end up with the global warming world, which will be
much worse than we thought it will be, much hotter.
NARRATOR: This is the crux of the problem. While the greenhouse
effect has been warming the planet, it now seems Global Dimming has
been cooling it down. So the warming caused by carbon dioxide has
been hidden from us by the cooling from air pollution. But that
situation is now starting to change.
DR PETER COX (Hadley Centre, Met Office): We're gonna be in a
situation unless we act where the cooling pollutant is dropping off
while the warming pollutant is going up, CO2 will be going up and
particles will be dropping off and that means we'll get an
accelerated warming. We'll get a double whammy, we'll get, we'll get
reducing cooling and increased heating at the same time and that's,
that's a problem for us.
NARRATOR: And that's not all. Climatologists like Peter Cox have
begun to worry that Global Dimming has led them to underestimate the
true power of global warming. They fear that the Earth could be far
more vulnerable to greenhouse gases than they had previously
thought.
DR PETER COX: We've got two competing effects really, that we've
got the greenhouse effect, which has tended to warm up the climate.
But then we've got this other effect that's much stronger than we
thought, which is a cooling effect that comes from particles in the
atmosphere. And they're competing with one another. And we know the
climate's moved to a warmer state by about point six of a degree
over the last hundred years. So the whole thing's moved this way. If
it turns out that the cooling is stronger than we thought then the
warming also is a lot stronger than we thought, and that means the
climate's more sensitive to carbon dioxide than we originally
thought, and it means our models may be under sensitive to carbon
dioxide.
NARRATOR: The models that everyone has been using to forecast
climate change predict a maximum warming of 5 degrees by the end of
the century. But Cox and his colleagues now fear those models may be
wrong. Temperatures could rise twice as fast as they previously
thought with irreversible damage just twenty-five years away.
DR PETER COX: If we don't do anything by about twenty thirty we
could have a global warming of exceeding two degrees, and at that
point it's believed the Greenland ice sheet would start to melt in a
way that you wouldn't be able to stop it once it started it, it
would melt. Take a long time to melt but ultimately it would lead to
a sea level rise of seven or eight metres.
NARRATOR: Once the Greenland ice cap begins to melt, nothing will
stop it. Many of the world's major cities will be living on borrowed
time. Decade by decade, the risk of catastrophic flooding would
increase inexorably. But unless action is taken it won't stop there.
Because after Greenland, the world's tropical rainforests will start
to wither in the heat.
DR PETER COX: 2040 it could be four degrees warmer, the climate
change could have led to big drying particularly in the Amazon
Basin, that would make the forest unsustainable, we'd expect the
forest to catch fire probably, turn into savannah and maybe
ultimately even desert if it gets really really dry as our model
suggests.
NARRATOR: And as the rainforest burnt away, it would release vast
amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, driving global
warming still further. Cox calculates that in just a century, the
world could be 10 degrees hotter, a warming more rapid than any in
Earth history. If this were to happen, the landscape of England
would be utterly transformed.
DR PETER COX: We're talking about a change from er a lush, moist
climate, environment like this, to a North African climate in just a
few decades or a hundred years.
NARRATOR: Most British plant species could not survive a North
African climate. With vegetation dying everywhere, soil erosion
would become a severe problem. From a green and pleasant land,
England would become a country of extremes, with winter flooding
giving way to summer dust storms. And it will be far worse
elsewhere.
DR PETER COX: You can imagine ten degree warming in the UK in a
hundred years is catastrophic. Ten degree warming in a hot country
already makes it essentially uninhabitable.
NARRATOR: And just when one might think things could get no worse
in the far North a ten degree warming might be enough to release a
vast natural store of greenhouse gas bigger than all the oil and
coal reserves of the planet.
DR PETER COX: We will be in danger of destabilising these things
called methane hydrates which store a lot of methane at the bottom
of the ocean in a kind of frozen form, ten thousand billions tons of
this stuff, and they're known to be destabilised by warming.
NARRATOR: At this point, whatever we did to curb our emissions,
it would be too late. Ten thousand billion tons of methane, a
greenhouse gas eight times stronger than carbon dioxide, would be
released into the atmosphere. The Earth's climate would be spinning
out of control, heading towards temperatures unseen in four billion
years. But this is not a prediction - it is a warning. It is what
will happen if we clean up pollution while doing nothing about
greenhouse gases. However, the easy solution - just keep on
polluting and hope that Global Dimming will protect us - would be
suicidal.
DR PETER COX: If we carried on pumping out the particles it would
have terrible impact on human health, I mean particles are involved
in all sorts of respiratory diseases, that's why they're being
brought under control, and of course they effect climate anyway. If
you, if you fiddle with the, the balance of the planet, the
radiative balance of the planet, you affect all sorts of circulation
patterns like monsoons, which would have horrible effects on people.
So it would be extremely difficult, in fact impossible, to cancel
out the greenhouse effect just by carrying on pumping out particles,
even if it wasn't for the fact that particles are damaging for human
health.
NARRATOR: Instead we have to take urgent action to tackle the
root cause of both global warming and Global Dimming - the burning
of coal, oil and gas. We may have to make very difficult choices,
about how we live and how we generate our electricity. We have been
talking about such things for 20 years. But so far very little has
been done in practical terms. The discovery of Global Dimming makes
it clear that we are rapidly running out of time.
DR PETER COX: One of the real driving forces is that you leave an
environment that is comfortable for your children. And we carry on
going the way we're going, we're not going to do that, we're going
to leave an environment that's much worse than the environment we
lived in; and it will be down to what we did when we were using that
environment, and that would be, um, tragic really, if that happened.
In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation
whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information
ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story. We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do not include personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to notify us if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.