One of the world’s leading ice experts has predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years.
In what he calls a “global disaster” now unfolding in northern latitudes as the sea area that freezes and melts each year shrinks to its lowest extent ever recorded, Prof Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University calls for “urgent” consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures.
In an email to the Guardian he says: “Climate change is no longer something we can aim to do something about in a few decades’ time, and that we must not only urgently reduce CO2 emissions but must urgently examine other ways of slowing global warming, such as the various geoengineering ideas that have been put forward.”
These include reflecting the sun’s rays back into space, making clouds whiter and seeding the ocean with minerals to absorb more CO2.
Wadhams has spent many years collecting ice thickness data from submarines passing below the arctic ocean. He predicted the imminent break-up of sea ice in summer months in 2007, when the previous lowest extent of 4.17 million square kilometres was set. This year, it has unexpectedly plunged a further 500,000 sq km to less than 3.5m sq km. “I have been predicting [the collapse of sea ice in summer months] for many years. The main cause is simply global warming: as the climate has warmed there has been less ice growth during the winter and more ice melt during the summer.
“At first this didn’t [get] noticed; the summer ice limits slowly shrank back, at a rate which suggested that the ice would last another 50 years or so. But in the end the summer melt overtook the winter growth such that the entire ice sheet melts or breaks up during the summer months.
“This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.
Wadhams says the implications are “terrible”. “The positives are increased possibility of Arctic transport, increased access to Arctic offshore oil and gas resources. The main negative is an acceleration of global warming.”
“As the sea ice retreats in summer the ocean warms up (to 7C in 2011) and this warms the seabed too. The continental shelves of the Arctic are composed of offshore permafrost, frozen sediment left over from the last ice age. As the water warms the permafrost melts and releases huge quantities of trapped methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas so this will give a big boost to global warming.”
So, Chris Brown got what is quite obviously a tattoo of a woman who has been battered in basically the same way as he battered Rihanna. This isn’t up for dispute, but of course it’s being disputed. As much as I wish I could say I’m surprised, I’m not. This is very typical of how batterers, rapists, and other men on a dominance trip over women tend to act. They want to brag, but they also don’t want to be caught out openly advocating for violence against women. So they test boundaries, see how much they can get away with. They tell their stories, but tweak the details, claiming there was consent when there wasn’t or that it was murkier than it was. They talk about getting one over on the bitch, but they don’t use the word “rape”. As we saw on this blog recently, they brag about sexually harassing women, but feign ignorance and pretend they didn’t see the women’s awkward attempts to escape without making a scene. And they depend on others to make excuses for them, to say they didn’t mean it that way or to claim that maybe they really don’t know what they’re doing or claim that they just lost their temper or that it’s just a joke.
So we’re seeing that now, with people scrambling to claim that Brown’s tattoo is somehow not what it seems. But it is what it seems.
This is not surprising. There’s a myth that men who beat and rape women just “lose control” and that after they act out, they sit around stewing in shame. That is because this is what these men tell people they are trying to ingratiate themselves with, in order to gain their acceptance and forgiveness. But inside, as many victims who have seen their true face can tell you, they are defiant. They believe they are entitled to dominate women, and they feel victimized by a world that doesn’t give them what they believe is theirs. They act out, looking for little ways to assert the right to dominate they believe is theirs.
Watch Pat Robertson, for instance, in this video where he plays around with the idea that what a “rebellious” woman needs is a good, old-fashioned smackdown.
His glee is so evident. He’s talking back to those “PC” police that won’t let him say what he thinks, that women should be beat down, though he then basically goes ahead to say it. This is the narrative that dominates so-called “men’s rights activist” forums, this notion that they are the victims, because of a perceived loss of the “right” to dominate women, with violence if so desired.
It’s not so hard to understand, is it? When you have a belief that is outside of the mainstream, the reaction is rarely shame, but a defiant desire to rub people’s faces in it and tell them to fuck off with their their objections. I have plenty, dare I say daily, moments when I want to grab a bullhorn and say, “There is no god, marriage is a silly institution, and ‘The Avengers’ was okay but hardly the greatest thing that ever happened.” Keeping unpopular beliefs to yourself is stressful. Tipping over a sacred cow feels good.
Of course, the difference is that my unpopular beliefs by and large don’t hurt anyone, outside of butthurt at having sacred cows tipped. But the belief that male dominance is wrong and that using violence to enforce it is evil is not a “sacred cow”, but just the fucking truth.
Still, it’s important to understand where guys like Chris Brown are coming from, because to understand it means you’re better at fighting it. Men who beat and rape women want to feel powerful. They want to feel manly. And because hitting women and raping women makes them feel these things, they want to brag about it. Indeed, telling others about it and watching them recoil basically means reliving the power trip all over again. Not only did they dominate the victim, but they have provoked anger and disgust in you, and that makes them feel powerful all over again. A tattoo commemorating beating down your girlfriend is a trophy. I suspect a lot more batterers wish they could get such a trophy, but they don’t have the same social support that a rich and famous man like Brown has, so they have to curtail their bragging quite a bit.
With that, I’ll turn this away from the single data point of Chris Brown, and turn you over to a researcher who has interviewed many rapists, who have similar motivations as batterers, David Lisak:
It might seem like it would be hard for a researcher to get these men to admit to something that fits the definition of rape. But Lisak says it’s not. “They are very forthcoming,” he says. “In fact, they are eager to talk about their experiences. They’re quite narcissistic as a group — the offenders — and they view this as an opportunity, essentially, to brag.”
They want to brag. Chris Brown wants to brag. They will brag as much as they can get away with, and when you make excuses for them or minimize their behavior, you’re giving them parameters within which they can brag. Tell them consent is confusing, and they’ll talk about how they had sex with that woman and uh, only realized halfway through that she wasn’t into it. (In reality, they always knew.) Tell them everyone loses their temper sometimes, and their story of hitting their wife will be shaped into that form. Or, if you tell them—as many Chris Brown fans have—that it’s all the victim’s fault and you love him no matter want, well, apparently they’ll get a tattoo that rubs your face in their crime.
Today Talisman Energy (TLM) announced its decision to cease oil exploration activities in the Peruvian Amazon and to exit the country upon completion of ongoing commercial transactions.
“We have fought long and hard against Talisman’s drilling in our territory because of the negative environmental and social impacts we have seen from oil drilling around the world,” said Peas Peas Ayui, President of the National Achuar Federation of Peru (FENAP). “Now that Talisman is leaving we can focus on achieving our own vision for development and leave a healthy territory for future generations.”
Talisman is the fifth oil company to withdraw from controversial Block 64, located in the heart of indigenous Achuar territory in a remote and bio diverse region of the Amazon rainforest. Talisman has been exploring in Peru since 2004 and has come under increased pressure by human rights groups and shareholders for operating without Achuar consent.
“Talisman has had to face up to what the Achuar told them when they first invested in Block 64: The company cannot drill without the consent of the Achuar people,” said Gregor MacLennan, Peru Program Coordinator at Amazon Watch. “Talisman’s exit sends a clear message to the oil industry: Trampling indigenous rights in the rush to exploit marginal oil reserves in the Amazon rainforest is not an option.”
Despite Talisman’s claim of attaining local support from communities and signing good neighbor agreements with 66 communities downriver from their operations, the company never had the consent of the majority of communities living within Block 64. Talisman first invested in Peru one year after leaving Sudan and became sole operator in 2007, shortly after John Manzoni’s appointment as CEO. Manzoni was replaced by ex-TransCanada CEO Hans Kvisle on Monday this week.
“We are the owners and the original people of this land,” said Peas Ayui. “No outside person or company may enter our territory by force, without consultation and without asking us. We have been fighting against oil development on our land for 17 years and we maintain the same vision to protect our territory and resources for future generations. Let this be a clear message to all oil, mining and logging companies: we will never offer up our natural wealth so that they can extract our resources and contaminate our land.”
Block 64 is just one of several new efforts to extract oil from the headwaters of the Amazon in Northern Peru and Southern Ecuador, among the most bio diverse places on earth. Anglo-French company Perenco was recently awarded a production license to operate in Block 67 in Peru despite a legal case against them for drilling in isolated peoples’ territory. ConocoPhilliips has faced mass protests in Iquitos, Peru over plans to drill wells in a protected area in the Nanay river basin east of Block 64. In Ecuador, the government plans to auction new oil blocks on the Peruvian border despite strong indigenous opposition. The Kichwa community of Sarayaku recently won a case in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights against the Ecuadorian government for signing an oil contract without their consent or consultation.
On Wednesday, September 12 activists calling themselves the Genetic Crimes Unit (GCU) shut down shipping and receiving access points at Monsanto’s Oxnard seed distribution facility located at 2700 Camino Del Sol. By peacefully blockading the exit and access points the group effectively shut down the distribution of genetically engineered (GMO) seeds for a day.
Monsanto is the largest producer of GMO seeds and is being called out for their genetic crimes by a network called Occupy Monsanto. Today’s protest is the beginning of a series of over 65 different autonomous actions that officially start on September 17, a year since Occupy Wall Street movement began. Actions are planned throughout the world including the US, Germany, Canada, India, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Argentina, Australia, Spain, Russia, and Japan. More info as well as video available for media use of today action can be found at http://Occupy-Monsanto.com
After occupying all three shipping and receiving entrances to the Monsanto facility using flashy theatrics including a car with a giant “fish-corn” on top of it and a 6-foot high jail cell complete with someone dressed up like the CEO Hugh Grant of Monsanto inside. Eventually after 5.5 hours the fire department was called in and 9 anti-GMO activists were arrested and charged with trespassing.
“The reason I am occupying Monsanto and willing to put myself at risk of arrest is because Monsanto has genetically engineered food crops to contain novel untested compounds that result in more weed killer sprayed on our food, without informing consumers. Unlike most industrialized countries including every country in Europe, Japan and even China, in America right now there are no labels on our food informing us whether we are eating GMOs or not. We have a right to opt out of this experiment: it’s not up to chemical companies what I feed myself and my family. Monsanto has bought and sold both parties and has handpicked henchmen at FDA and USDA making sure we are kept in the dark. Monsanto is also currently fighting the California Prop 37 GMO labeling initiative that would give consumers the right to know if they are eating GMO foods. said GCU member Ariel Vegosen.
The GCU arrived onsite wearing bio-hazmat suits and with giant banners saying the “99% V. Monsanto” and “Seminis and Monsanto bringing weed killer GMO food to your table.” Next week there will be more protests all over the nation.
“In the name of Wall Street profits, chemical corporations such as Monsanto genetically engineer crops to withstand high doses of their toxic weed killers that contaminate our food and water, and have not been proven safe. We deserve to know what we are eating and we should put the GMO crops back in the lab and off the kitchen table. The US chemical lobby has so far made sure Americans are kept in the dark and we are tired of inaction by Obama, “ said GCU unit member Rica Madrid.
“We are here today in civil disobedience because we believe strongly that we have no other option,” said GCU unit member David Pillar. “Its time for healthy food now.”
On Sept. 17, 2012 Occupy Monsanto is calling for hundreds of actions internationally.
By Ronald Suarez, Network of Peruvian Indigenous Communicators, Ucayali
Over 400 villagers in the Native Community of Canan de Cachiaco in the Ucayali region of the Peruvian Amazon have taken control of nine oil wells, belonging to oil company, Maple Gas, in oil lot 31B.
Community members took over the oil wells on September 2nd, and continue to hold them as a result of 37 years of oil contamination in their territory by the company.
The community leader, Basilio Rodriguez Venancio, said the action was made necessary because the company did not consider the environmental impact assessment carried out by an independent consultant.
The community is demanding that the company pay them compensation for the use of their lands and for the environmental damage they have suffered for 37 years. Such damage includes the contamination of their rivers, their only source of drinking water, and the contamination of their soils due to the company’s use of chemicals and heavy minerals, which the population says has significantly affected the productivity of their land.
Several community members testified that they have become sick due to the company’s negligence and contamination of their drinking water. There have been several instances in the past years of cancer and ¨unknown deaths¨ that the community attributes to company abuses.
The community awaits the arrival of state representatives from the Ministry of Energy and Mines and Ministry of Environment, scheduled for Thursday, September 13th, to resolve this conflict.
Meanwhile the villagers are still stationed in the camp until authorities settle their claims.
