Combat Climate Change

  • submit to reddit
The Story of Change

Anthony Leiserowitz, the director of the Yale Climate Change Communications Center, recently told Bill that there are “six Americas” in terms of the public perception of global warming. If you’re part of the 40 percent who are “alarmed” or “concerned,” you’re probably looking for ways that you can to make a difference, in your own community and on behalf of the planet.

But where to start?

The organizations below are working at the grassroots level to demand and support environmental legislation, to protest fossil fuel subsidies and to promote sustainable planning at the local level in transportation, energy and development policy.

CURRENT CAMPAIGNS Bill McKibben's global movement to solve the climate change crisis, one parts per million of CO2 at a time.

Do the Math / A new campaign from in which students and faculty at colleges encourage their schools to divest from all fossil fuel investments. Cities and towns are joining the divestment movement, too.

Global Green: For nearly two decades, Global Green USA has been advocating for "smart solutions to global warming" including green building for affordable housing, public schools and cities.

Institute for Sustainable Communities: Collecting the best practices from private and public entities, the ISC is committed to promoting active citizenship in order to address climate change. Finding out more about how they define a sustainable community.

Story of Stuff: Changemaker Personality Quiz: If you're keen to get started, take this two-minute quiz to find out how your particular talents might be used to combat climate change. After you take the quiz, vote on ideas submitted by other members of the "Story of Change" community.

  • submit to reddit
  • Prof. John M. Tamine

    For many years, I’ve had great admiration for Bill Moyers. I admire him for having the courage to champion unpopular ideas when he believed the majority to be wrong. On more than one occasion over the years, he was the lone small voice in the wilderness of “mass media” who dared to question US policies, politicians, and/or big business. So I was profoundly disappointed by the current show on climate change.

    The bias of the show is eminently clear from the title, “Ending the Silence on Climate Change,” as if the reality of anthropogenic climate change were a foregone conclusion. Nothing could be further from the truth. Around a quarter-million graduate degreed physicists and chemists have signed a petition to the President of the US declaring that the theory that human generated “greenhouse gases” are the driving force of unprecedented climate change is not only unsubstantiated, it is patently false. Yet the guest of the show so much as branded anyone who dissents as a “conspiracy nut.” [His exact words.] There is a wealth of scientific information available for anyone to wishes to educate themselves. For the open-minded, I recommend the following brief reading list:

    “Climate: The Counter-Consensus – A Palaeoclimatologist Speaks” by Robert Carter

    “A Primer on CO2 and Climate,” 2nd Edition by Howard C. Hayden

    “Global Warming False Alarm: The Bad Science Behind the United Nations’ Assertion that Man-made CO2 Causes Global Warming” by Ralph B. Alexander

    “Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam” by Brian Sussman

    “Climatism: Science, Common Sense, and the 21st Century’s Hottest Topic” by Steve Goreham

    And in the second place, the suggestion that there IS a “silence” on the matter of climate change is, in and of itself, utterly preposterous. A cursory review of print and broadcast media would demonstrably prove that climate change (the so-called “Greenhouse Effect” and “Global Warming”) is the single MOST discussed environmental issue of all time. Yet the title of the show is deliberately designed to illicit a knee-jerk emotional response, and induce a sense of urgency, panic, and righteous indignation. In fact, the deluge of media attention on “Global Warming” has already done much real harm, by diverting attention away from a litany of real and pressing environmental issues, and focusing concern on an imaginary one. For a more detailed exposition on this aspect, the open-minded may consult:

    “The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the Obsession with ‘Climate Change’ Turning Out to Be the Most Costly Scientific Blunder in History?” by Christopher Booker

    Shame on you, Bill Moyers, shame. I challenge you to have a real and impartial scientist on the show to present the facts. If you are indeed the man I believed you to be, if you are one of the FEW journalists in the mass media with the courage to champion unpopular ideas, then have the courage now to finally get the truth out, and help to end the smear campaign to brand anyone who dissents with the party line as a “conspiracy nut.”

  • Lou Puls

    “Shame”? Good grief, which corporate carbon-monger are you on the payroll of?

  • Anonymous
  • William P. Gloege

    Too bad 98% of climate scientists disagree with the above comment. Events like melting of Arctic Ocean ice, Greenland ice, new instability in Antarctic glaciers, super storms, massive droughts and much more are the evidence before your lying eyes, Mr. poster. With all due respect, you sound ridiculous given the proof before we see almost daily now.

  • William P. Gloege

    Can I edit my comment? sorry.

    “…the proof we see before us daily now.”

  • William P. Gloege

    Actually the reality on climate is much worse than we hear, even from good sources like Mr. Moyers. We have a huge reduction in sunlight hitting earth today due to the soot, dust, condensation trails of jets and other pollutants kicked up into our atmosphere by 7 billion humans and their industries. One Israeli scientist measured a 22% reduction in sunlight compared to 20 or more years ago. That material in the atmosphere, unlike CO2, can come down relatively quickly due to say a world economic slump, war or some other event. That material is actually cooling earth and damping down global warming to a great degree. Should the material fall to earth, temperatures would spike up enormously over a short time. There was a spike due to 9-11 when US and other airlines were grounded for three days. Temperatures rose one degree C just from decline in condensation trails and exhaust of jets. Imagine a big shut down of many world pollution sources. One degree rise in temperature in three days is “huge” according to scientists.

  • Prof. John M. Tamine

    i teach at a private college. i receive no grants, funding, or consideration from any “corporate carbon-monger,” from any industry, public or private, government agency, or individual. but thank you for your sleazy and libelous ad hominem attack. it highlights the intelligence of the average global warming zealot. have you ever stopped to ask what vested financial interests the perpetuators of “global warming” have? i’m guessing not.

  • Prof. John M. Tamine

    what 98% of climate scientists would you be referring to? have you taken a poll yourself? and what qualifies someone as a “climate scientist?” an illiterate child with a BS in meteorology from the community college, playing with a computer model that he/she neither created nor understands? the chemistry and physics that underlie the proposed mechanism are taught at a very rudimentary level to disinterested students of “climate science.” as such, most “climate scientists” are not competent to evaluate either the accuracy of the model, or the implicit assumptions that were made when it was created. and like many too many others, you confuse the certainty of climate change occurring before our eyes, with a certainty as to the cause. how ridiculous is THAT?

  • Vivian Fulk

    We need a revenue neutral greenhouse gas tax to encourage pollution emitters to clean up their waste and investment in clean energy solutions.

  • moderator

    We love smart debate at, but we have a very strict comment policy. We ask that you remain civil with each other. As the policy states, “profanity, personal attacks, hate speech,off-topic posts, advertisements and spam will not be tolerated.”

    Thank You,
    Sean @ Moyers

  • Prof. John M. Tamine

    although you have inaccurately paraphrased the report, i believe the speculations that you are referring to were reported in an episode of NOVA on PBS entitled, “The Dimming Sun.” the evidence presented actually contradicted their specious conclusions. and IF airborne particles were in fact reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the surface of the earth by 22% (an absurd number), then all of that energy is going where? well, it would be absorbed by the particulate matter, which would become heated as a result, would it not? and this is cooling the world? do YOU actually have any clue what you’re talking about? or are you just reciting the dogma that fits your pre-conceived conclusions? the initial observation that initiated the ridiculous conclusions regarding “the dimming sun” was that pan evaporation rates have shown a steady decline over a period of several decades. there are only two factors that control the evaporation rate of water in an open pan. temperature and humidity (the amount of water vapor already in the air). increasing the temperature would increase the rate of evaporation, and increasing the humidity would decrease the rate of evaporation. since you insist that the earth has gotten warmer over that same period, the only VALID conclusion from the observation that pan evaporation rates are down, would be that the earth has become more humid over that time period, NOT that the amount of sunlight reaching the earth is less. and the alleged effect that was observed when all commercial flights were grounded following 9/11 is perfectly consistent with that, because those contrails you see in the sky AREN’T carbon dioxide, they are WATER! burning fossil fuels produces MORE water vapor than carbon dioxide. btw, water vapor absorbs many times more infrared energy than carbon dioxide, and there is several hundred times MORE water in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide. so how is it that a few percent increase in a minor component of the atmosphere, which is itself a weaker “greenhouse gas” is the “cause” of “global warming?” the theory would be laughable if the consequences of this widespread delusion were not so dire.

  • Prof. John M. Tamine

    AGAIN, proof of climate change is NOT proof of any hare-brained theory about what is causing it. the climate of the earth has undergone countless variations in the past which DWARF the insignificant changes seen in the past century, and all of the past climate changes were long before human industrial activity. btw, most all creatures, great and small, survived. it’s called adaptation, and life is VERY good at it. furthermore, we have been able to measure the temperature of the other planets and moons in the solar system over the past few decades, and we know with equal certainty that EVERY planet and moon in the inner solar system has also gotten warmer while the earth’s climate has warmed. in fact, the temperature rise in earth’s atmosphere is SMALLER than the rest. so unless those martians are burning fossil fuels faster than us, your theory is a joke.

  • moderator

    Please everyone, read the comment policy and refrain from personal attacks.

    Sean @ Moyers

  • Arianna

    I believe you are not taking cloud albedo into account Professor i.e. the energy from the sun is not absorbed by the suspended particulates or at least not much of it, yes, a percentage is reflected back out into space, but more of the heat is trapped in between particulate suspension layers. As the oceans warm and the ice sheets melt, we lose albedo from those earth forms too. So, in the end, more heat is trapped within the atmosphere and we get the, currently disturbing and soon to be exponentially more damaging, swings in climate. We are not talking about “global warming/cooling” climate is an engine that, if tampered with too much, will stop running smoothly, at least for human kind as well as other parts of the natural world. As to the “non human caused” climate changes of the past, you may want to check in with some dinosaurs on how they felt about the last massive swing in worldwide climate.

  • MaggieF

    Also Citizens Climate Lobby – writing op-ed and letters to editors to bring the issue to the newspaper reading public

  • MaggieF

    See the Citizens Climate Lobby idea about Carbon fee and dividend. Its time has come!

  • Anonymous

    I hope Mr. Moyers will will add Citizens Climate Lobby to “Essential Links” listed above. This group is engaged in exactly what Prof. Leiserowitz said is crucial, many
    voices coming from concerned citizens. The website is: Every Wednesday evening we host an introductory call for those considering becoming involved. One can register for the call on the website.

  • Anonymous

    A natural gas provider co-op is pushing its way into our Ohio rural/farm community–driven by the local grain farmers for cheap alternatives (their third energy boondoggle in 15 years) to run grain dryers, which they will surely abandon when the price becomes prohibitive in the near future because this boom will end quickly and leave the other small-use consumers stuck with the results: higher prices for a dwindling resource and because the big user, the farmer, has jumped out of the co-op; gas furnaces; gas hot water heaters; gas stoves; gas dryers;…. Electricity is the future, with better ways to produce it and transfer/deliver it. Fossil fuels are dangerous dinosaurs.

    This “out-of-county” co-op came to us with a joke of a 1 paragraph contract (NO protection for the landowner) to run pipeline through our property and the offer for “cheap” gas. We wisely refused. We, grandparents, are looking forward for our children and grandchildren. We live in an area that was slated for a wind farm, but because there was concern by farmers on the road conditions that would be created during construction, the farm was moved further west. For that reason, we intend to invest in a wind turbine and solar.

    We, as citizens, must call our fellow citizens to task on short-term/backward thinking–say NO to short-term solutions that do not move us forward. We must strive to make them see that renewables are the future we need to be headed toward and its financial rewards are there for the taking.

  • Bernadette D.

    I am aware of the destruction that global warming has on our planet through my own experience. This summer, traveling in the Tetons, you couldn’t see these beautiful mountains because fires were burning in Idaho and Montana filling 3 states with smoke and haze. Friends have sent me pictures of fires raging in the Gila National Forest and the Jemez mountains of New Mexico. I used to live in both of these areas. I was appalled by the devastation of these fires. My friend who lives in Texas told me that because of the drought, her onions were sizzling and cooking in the ground last summer.

    Watching Bill’s interview with Anthony Leiserowitz has motivated me to dust off my activist hat and join one of the initiatives on climate change. In addition, because I believe in the power of prayer, I am asking my friends and networks to join me in daily prayer: 1) for the healing of the planet, 2) that our world and corporate leaders and all citizens of the earth do everything in their power to reduce their carbon footprint.

    Thank you Bill for spurring me to action. Our planet is desperate for our help!

  • rationalist

    Thank you Prof John M. Tamine for standing up to the Climate Cult and Big Environment.

    In 100 years you will be remembered with the likes of Galileo and Sophie Scholl for having the bravery to call out the madness of the masses, while those who benefit from inciting fear will be consigned to the ranks of those who who made the world a poorer place (in many ways).

    I hope Bill Moyers takes note, since he seems to have the integrity to seek the truth, but is clearly under the spell of the climate cult.

  • Solarman Jd

    3 top problems any Major Metropolitan City Worldwide (including USA):
    1. adequate health care
    2. clean drinking water
    3. never enough low cost housing

    This is why I have created a not for profit
    and introduced Low Cost Solar Housing (Environmental Prototype Homes of Tomorrow EPHOT) each equipped with a Air to Water (ATW) technology for drinking water from thin air and self sufficient…Grid or not…

    LOW COST SOLAR HOUSING KITS can be erected on slabs using locale labor any were in the WORLD…

  • Paul Maher

    Hello Mr Moyers,

    What do you think of Cold Fusion? They sure like it at MIT. See what Professor Hagelstein has done on his desk for the last year and a half. Check out the relationship between Brillouin Energy and SRI and Michael McKubre. And take a look at what Lockheed is doing at the Skunk Works and how they are putting a 100 Megawatt generator on an 40′ trailer. I am a big admirer of yours. Slow to anger and quick to see what’s going on. For the latest on the subject visit

    Thanks for the time, Paul D. Maher

  • James Fenimore Cooper

    Much of the particulate matter reflects sunlight away from earth and back out into space, just as polar ice and snow does. Absent that stuff we put up that reflects sunlight, those sun rays come down and hit dark sea or continents and result in heat being generated. So if the matter falls out of the atmosphere and is not replaced because of say a world depression, we get more heating. The whole global warming cycle is pretty simple. What we don’t know is how earth systems like ocean currents, the jet streams, etc will interact regarding exaggerated heating, rainfall, storms, hurricanes and all the movements of air and water on the planet’s surface.

  • James Fenimore Cooper

    If you believe suspended, man made materials in the atmosphere are mostly not reflective, you must then explain the 1 degree C rise in world temperatures when 9-11 grounded much of the world’s commercial air fleet. That jump in a day or two was huge and shocking to climate scientists.

  • James Fenimore Cooper

    Prof TAmine: I suggest you check the position of academies of science for nations and read their statements about global warming. They are all in very close agreement – earth is warming at an alarming rate because of excessive CO2 (mainly) put in the atmosphere by mankind’s rapid industrialization, especially on the massive scale we see in China and India. It is easy to Google these institutions and find their official statements on global warming.

  • James Fenimore Cooper

    Almost as interesting as climate change itself is the reaction of conservatives toward the phenomena.

    A meek scientist giving a detailed, scientific talk in Australia was confronted in the lecture by a man holding up a hangman’s noose and suggesting the speaker should not be saying what he was saying about global warming.

    Why the emotional reaction about a discussion of science? It is reminiscent of Galileo being threatened with burning at the stake unless he stopped claiming the the earth revolves around the sun

  • James Fenimore Cooper

    Right you are. It would seem wise to start working on a “Plan B” addressing human responses to extreme heating of earth. Some scientists think may could possibly survive in polar regions. Global warming is accelerating much faster than the IPCC predicted. Prayer is good, but political and group action is better in this case.

    Some hate to admit this could happen, but what evidence is there that man will every curb CO2 emissions as long as there dollar to be made?

  • James Fenimore Cooper


  • William Nayer


  • William Nayer


  • William Nayer

    To Tamine.
    You should really be ashamed of yourself.
    Unless you are extremely stupid, you know very well what water vapour does and does not do and what CO2 does. It’s very clear that you are only trying to confuse people.
    It is estimated that the atom bomb on Hiroshima released 63 TJ. Some sources cite 66 TJ, some 67. If you do not know what a Joule is, please look it up. One terajoule equals one trillion joule (10 to the 12th). Hansen estimates the effect of manmade pollution at 400, 000 times this number. That’s what we are dealing with.
    Your rant about the incompetence of climate scientists does not make any sense either. It just betrays your bias and your stupidity. Climate science made enormous progress over the years and it can do things which are absolutely mindblowing.
    Are you actually a professor? I am. I can send you a copy of my PhD if you like. Will you do the same? I doubt it.

  • Peter Meyer

    I have to say that my wife is even more passionate and driven than I am, but I just submitted a letter to our local paper today. (keeping my fingers crossed that it gets printed) We are active with out local CCL and chapters, and my son and I took a bus to DC for the Forward on Climate Rally on a very cold day in Feb. I’m conserving wherever possible and trying to educate others whenever I can.

    In Sept, I will pedal from NYC to DC as a part of Climate Ride to raise money for CCL and with 149 other cyclists. (go to and put Meyer in the rider search and donate!)

  • Anonymous
  • Alan Roberts

    So, here’s where I’m coming from… the last few years have put me (and many of my neighbors) in a spot where global warming isn’t an issue. paying the bills, putting food on the table, etc IS IT. but i have reciently looked at HOW i am dealing with this, and I find that food is king. and food production/distribution seems to be high on the list of causation. So, what if we work on helping individuals and communities become food independant…(you can follow that with energy independant, and you have solved most of the problem (and crashed the system in the process…)) We have been turning things off the past few months… cable is gone, ac isn’t an option this summer. wood heat (collected from local stands and fence rows) saw us through the winter. We have many things we found we dont need, but food is still there. If we can make it locally sustainable, we will have made real inroads on the global warming issue.

  • lightingonads

    My meager contribution to this increasingly divisive question of global warming is to burn less fossil fuel, to drive less. What “vested financial interests” does driving less serve Prof.? One need not be a “zealot” in order to understand what climate change and global warming are about. You want proof of global warming? Don’t you trust educated information and scientific analysis of the issue that is online? For unequivocal proof the the earth is warming read the evidence from satellite data, borehole analysis, glacial melt observations, sea level rise, permafrost melt and many other indicators. Why you haven’t read this by now “i’m guessing not”. I am wondering about a Poe though.

  • William Nayer

    I do not understand why you deleted my comment, which was absolutely not insulting. In the meantime, professor Tamine, who teaches *forensics* for heaven’s sake can come in here; he can talk about zealots, he can belittle and insult climate scientists, he can go on telling complete nonsense about water vapour and that is all good and well with you.

    Since Tamine has a degree in chemistry, there is no doubt that he knows what water vapour does not do in the atmosphere and what CO2 most certainly does. And so, Tamine can say that no one pays to tell unbelievable stupid crap online, I do not believe him and if you would know what this is really about, you, moderators, wouldn’t either. I guess that every school child knows this – in Europe, in the USA, I do not know what you know over there. So let Tamine go on feeding you completely wrong information – in the name of a fine debate.

  • William P Gloege

    MikeyBC: There is something emotional, irrational and downright weird about the hysteria of the Deniers. They stamp their feet and squeal wildly at any suggestion 7 billion humans and fossil fuel companies might possibly have something to do with our rapid climate changes.

    I think we need the help of Psychologists, not just climate scientists, to help understand these people. Was it some traumatic childhood experience?

  • Bill

    Dear Professor at a private college. Try to be more polite and respectful. You violate the rules of this blog. That undermines your words. thank you.