Voters in Texas ready to address climate change.

In Texas.
If anyone wants some pointers, I tried my hand at a public meeting last spring. (above)

Houston Chronicle:

It seemed like a preposterous idea as we gathered along the sofas of my living room last summer.

Could we really pull off a candidate forum specifically about climate change, in a congressional district held by Republicans since George H.W. Bush and home to more of the oil and gas industry than just about anywhere in the country?

But none of us had ever planned a candidate climate forum. And we had more than a bit of skepticism about whether candidates would be willing to speak out on a controversial topic and how many voters would care enough to listen.

But recent surveys debunk the misperceptions of voter apathy on climate. A survey by Harvard and Politico showed that Democrats rank climate change neck-and-neck with healthcare and Trump-Russia allegations as the top issues motivating their vote in 2018. Another survey showed that even most Republicans wanted President Trump to remain in the Paris Climate Agreement. That’s why I’ve asserted climate action could be an issue that motivates Democrats without alienating Republicans.

So we plowed ahead with our plans. And, sure enough, all the Democratic candidates agreed to participate. Congressman Culberson’s office declined our invitation.

Registrations quickly topped the capacity of the Rice University lecture hall we had originally reserved. The administration of West University Elementary School graciously offered their larger space, where more than 400 people attended the forum this past Saturday.

Congressman Beto O’Rourke kicked off our event while receiving an award from Environment Texas.

Read the rest of this entry »


If you had any questions about Scott Pruitt’s integrity, this should remove all doubt.

The Pat Campbell Show
KFAQ Talk Radio 1170 Tulsa Oklahoma
Interview with Scott Pruitt
February 4, 2016

Pat Campbell: Given your comments about hubris, I’m going to say that you’re probably not a big Trump supporter?
Scott Pruitt: No. No, He’s the very…and you say that Pat but do you know what’s interesting? I believe that Donald Trump in the White House would be more abusive to the Constitution than Barack Obama – and that’s saying a lot.
Pat Campbell: Wow. That’s a news clip.
Scott Pruitt: I really believe he would use a blunt instrument. This president at least tries to nuance his unlawfulness.
Pat Campbell: Right.
Scott Pruitt: Donald Trump has said many, many times they want… I’ll do this I’ll do that. And those things that he’s mentioned cannot be done. I think executive orders with Donald Trump would be a very blunt instrument with respect to the Constitution.
Pat Campbell: So this is amazing because, coming from you, as the state Attorney General, and obviously the credibility you’ve got with our audience – you’re echoing basically what Glenn Beck has been saying for months. Everything that we loathe and detest about Barack Obama and the abuses of power, Donald Trump is the same thing except he’s our bully.
Scott Pruitt: That’s right.
Pat Campbell: And even with the executive orders because Ted Cruz has promised on day one he’s going to overturn every executive order that Barack Obama’s done and so has Donald Trump, however, when confronted by a reporter who said, does that mean you don’t believe in executive orders? Oh no, I’ll use them, but mine will be good ones.
Scott Pruitt: And unapologetically. I mean, this president – I’ve been in DC the last couple of days. I was at the Reagan Library over the weekend, as I was sharing with you, speaking about federalism principles to the Federalist Society. This president has basically taken an approach that says that if Congress doesn’t act or they don’t act the way that I want them to, then I can act in their place.
Pat Campbell: Right.
Scott Pruitt: Well, that’s just not how our system works. This, if Donald Trump is the nominee and eventually the president, he would take, I think unapologetic steps, to use executive power to confront Congress in a way that is truly unconstitutional.
Pat Campbell: It’s funny because I had a conversation with my dad not long ago, and my dad is an immigrant. He came here as a young child after World War II. And he doesn’t – he’s not real long-winded, like me. He summed up Donald Trump in one word. He said: he’s dangerous.
Scott Pruitt: You know, your dad is very astute because I’ll say to you – I think he has tendencies that we see in emerging countries around the world where – he goes to the disaffected – those individuals. And says, look you give me power and I will give voice to your concerns. And that’s a dangerous place to be. And rule of law today – this president has done more to injure rule of law – he owes President Nixon an apology with respect to the use of executive power. But President Obama, we don’t need to replace him with another individual – as you said, our bully – in the White House, to do what he’s done from the Republican side of things.

Generally Trumpers can’t learn. Witness the “Mexico will pay for wall”.

Nevertheless, teachable moment, for those that can hear.


Seriously guys, I did this one seven years ago.

Recently updated for Senator Ted Cruz.

AP did it. Give the comedians a chance, too.

New handbook on climate communication from the IPCC has been released.

It follows the basic principles that those on the front lines have worked out over the past few decades.

  1. Be Confident – people will trust you more if you use an authentic voice
  2. Talk about the real world, not abstractions
  3. Connect with what matters to your audience
  4. Tell a human scale story – show the human face of science – your own story, perhaps
  5. Lead with the knowns, not the uncertainty
  6. Use effective visual communication – focus on the human side of the equation

The greatest advances have not been on the science, but on how we get the mass of people to understand it – see experts weigh in below.

Below, a few years ago, John Cook asked leading scientists to give their best “Elevator Pitch” on climate. They generally incorporate some best practices. Read the rest of this entry »

The increasing domination of Republican grass roots by, well, let’s face it, Religious nut jobs, has lead the party to embrace the paranoid and irrational, while fleeing the discipline of reason and evidence.
I have no quarrel with sincere spiritual feeling or insight, but using religion as an excuse for paranoia, hatred and racism is one of history’s oldest con games.

Hence, Obama born in Kenya, Mexico will pay for wall, there is no climate change.

In a related development:


This morning Fox & Friends, Donald Trump’s favorite TV show, ran a segment on the deadly flu season, which has killed at least 37 children so far. Dr. Marc Siegel, a practicing physician and Fox News contributor, suggested various techniques to avoiding contracting or spreading the flu and emphasized the importance of getting a flu shot.

“The flu shot, which I still say everybody out there should get, is about 30-percent effective, but it actually decreases spread around the household, it decreases severity, and it’s very smart to get it. Of the children that have died, 80 percent of them in the past hadn’t gotten a flu shot,” Siegel said.

At the very end of the segment, Siegel asked if the three Fox hosts — Brian Kilmeade, Steve Doocy, and Ainsley Earhardt — had gotten their flu shot. “No, I have not gotten one,” Kilmeade said.

Earhardt then revealed that Kilmeade refuses to get flu shots. Kilmeade confirmed that and dismissed flu shots as only 30 percent effective — a point that Siegel had already addressed. When Siegel told Kilmeade he should get the flu shot to protect his children, Kilmeade said that he would not because his kids needed to “build up their immunity.”

Read the rest of this entry »