Vineyard Activists to Join March on Climate Change

Alex Elvin Monday, September 15 2014 - 1:19pm

<p>More than 200,000 people are expect to converge on Central Park West in New York city on Sunday for the People’s Climate March. At least 22 of them will be from the Vineyard. Buses traveling to the march from Cape Cod are already full with a wait list.

A large Vineyard contingent will travel to New York city this weekend for what is predicted to be the largest climate march in history.

More than 200,000 people are expect to converge on Central Park West on Sunday for the People’s Climate March, a national cry for action from world leaders to address the impacts of climate change. The 2014 UN climate summit begins in New York on Sept. 23.

“There are thousands of buses going, from all over the country and out of the country.” said Sarah Nevin of Edgartown, who plans to march with her husband, Bruce, and daughter, Katrina. Mr. and Mrs. Nevin have taken part in local climate demonstrations before, but this is their first climate march.

“We’re going to be coming into Grand Central,” Mrs. Nevin said. “And then I’m not sure what we’re going to find, but I know the city is preparing for this enormous deluge.”

One of the main goals is to send a message to world leaders “that they need to act on this and not continue with the type of nonsense we’ve had with Kyoto and Copenhagen,” said Mr. Nevin, referring to previous efforts that fell short of people’s expectations.

Two buses organized by the Cape Downwinders, an anti-nuclear group, will leave from the Cape on Friday. The Nevins will be traveling separately, but others from the Vineyard, including a group of teachers and students from the Martha’s Vineyard Public Charter School, will be traveling with the Cape group.

The buses will leave very early Sunday and arrive in New York at 10:30 a.m. Diane Turco, who is coordinating the bus service, said both buses are full and there is a wait list. “We could have filled another bus or two,” she said. A total of 22 people from the Vineyard will be riding the buses, she said.

Several Vineyard groups and their representatives will take part in the march, including the Martha’s Vineyard Democrats, the Shalom Center, the Martha’s Vineyard Peace Council, and members of 350 Martha’s Vineyard Island, an offshoot of 350.org, a national advocacy network.

Nicola Blake, a climate researcher for the University of California, recently hosted a screening of the film Disruption at her house in West Tisbury. The film highlights the urgency of the march, and includes major voices from the climate movement. Ms. Blake will be traveling with the charter school group, which attended the screening.

Ms. Blake is a member of 350MVI, which works to raise awareness of climate change and to connect concerned groups on the Island. She has been in involved in local politics in New Hampshire, but does not necessarily consider herself an activist.

“I think it’s a little bit extreme, really, having to turn out on the streets,” she said. “But the political process isn’t working, so I feel I have to do something.”

“Nothing really substantive is being done about this issue, and I think it’s the most important issue of our age,” she said. Although the UN climate summit this week will not lead immediately to legislation, she said, world leaders will be able to make concrete suggestions for the 2015 summit in Paris. “That’s our big goal.”

Following the march, she hopes to put together photographs from the trip to share through 350MVI, and with the local students.

“What we hope for — I think everybody hopes for down there — is it won’t get chaotic,” said Mrs. Nevin.

For more information, visit capedownwinders.org or peoplesclimate.org.

Comments

Really? And, does the good

Really? And, does the good Lord live in New York City? The last I looked, He was in charge of the climate..
Climate changes have been occurring since the beginning of time.
Man's influence on that is about as significant as a pimple on a ball players behind.

I'm going to stick my neck out, and venture a guess that these same folks voted for Obama,not once, but twice....And,they think "it’s the most important issue of our age,”!???
Wonder if they have heard of the National Debt, Illegal immigrants flooding the US, No jobs to be found in America.
Oh, and how about Isis?

AAAH funny, you call yourself

PPK Vineyard Haven

AAAH funny, you call yourself a pimple. So, how much do you know about science, or do you just believe in something in the sky like the Isis followers do?

This should be our first step

JC USA

This should be our first step in the Climate March!
http://meatonomics.com/

"As environmental science has advanced, it has become apparent that the human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future: deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease." Worldwatch Institute, "Is Meat Sustainable?"

“If every American skipped one meal of chicken per week and substituted vegetables and grains... the carbon dioxide savings would be the same as taking more than half a million cars off of U.S. roads.” Environmental Defense Fund

"A 1% reduction in world-wide meat intake has the same benefit as a three trillion-dollar investment in solar energy." ~ Chris Mentzel, CEO of Clean Energy

If Al Gore can do it, you can too! I did it 26 years ago and consider it one of the best decisions of my life.
Step by Step Guide: How to Transition to a Vegan Diet http://www.onegreenplanet.org/vegan-food/step-by-step-guide-how-to-tran…

But who is going to feed

BCS West Tisbury

But who is going to feed their unicorns while they are away??

Jut some facts:

John Gault Oak Bluffs

Jut some facts:
Science is never settled, but the current state of “climate change” science is quite clear: There is essentially zero evidence that carbon dioxide from human activities is causing catastrophic climate change.
Yes, the “executive summary” of reports from the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change continues to sound the alarm — but the summary is written by the politicians. The scientific bulk of the report, while still tinged with improper advocacy, has all but thrown in the towel.
And the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change lists thousands of scientific papers that either debunk or cast serious doubt on the supposed “consensus” model.
Oregon-based physicist Gordon Fulks sums it up well: “CO2 is said to be responsible for global warming that is not occurring, for accelerated sea-level rise that is not occurring, for net glacial and sea ice melt that is not occurring . . . and for increasing extreme weather that is not occurring.”
Consider:
• According to NASA satellites and all ground-based temperature measurements, global warming ceased in the late 1990s. This when CO2 levels have risen almost 10 percent since 1997. The post-1997 CO2 emissions represent an astonishing 30 percent of all human-related emissions since the Industrial Revolution began. That we’ve seen no warming contradicts all CO2-based climate models upon which global-warming concerns are founded.
• Rates of sea-level rise remain small and are even slowing, over recent decades averaging about 1 millimeter per year as measured by tide gauges and 2 to 3 mm/year as inferred from “adjusted” satellite data. Again, this is far less than what the alarmists suggested.
• Satellites also show that a greater area of Antarctic sea ice exists now than any time since space-based measurements began in 1979. In other words, the ice caps aren’t melting.
• A 2012 IPCC report concluded that there has been no significant increase in either the frequency or intensity of extreme weather events in the modern era. The NIPCC 2013 report concluded the same. Yes, Hurricane Sandy was devastating — but it’s not part of any new trend.
The climate scare, Fulks sighs, has “become a sort of societal pathogen that virulently spreads misinformation in tiny packages like a virus.” He’s right — and DiCaprio’s film is just another vector for spreading the virus.
The costs of feeding the climate-change “monster” are staggering. According to the Congressional Research Service, from 2001 to 2014 the US government spent $131 billion on projects meant to combat human-caused climate change, plus $176 billion for breaks for anti-CO2 energy initiatives.
Federal anti-climate-change spending is now running at $11 billion a year, plus tax breaks of $20 billion a year. That adds up to more than double the $14.4 billion worth of wheat produced in the United States in 2013.
Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, calculates that the European Union’s goal of a 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions below 1990 levels by 2020, currently the most severe target in the world, will cost almost $100 billion a year by 2020, or more than $7 trillion over the course of this century.
Lomborg, a supporter of the UN’s climate science, notes that this would buy imperceptible improvement: “After spending all that money, we would not even be able to tell the difference.”
Al Gore was right in one respect: Climate change is a moral issue — but that’s because there is nothing quite so immoral as well-fed, well-housed Westerners assuaging their consciences by wasting huge amounts of money on futile anti-global-warming policies, using money that could instead go to improve living standards in developing countries.
That is where the moral outrage should lie.

Tom Harris is executive director of the Ottawa-based International Climate Science Coalition. Bob Carter is former professor and head of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University in Australia.

John Gault: I'm sorry, you

David Fielder West Tisbury

John Gault: I'm sorry, you are wrong on so many points it's hard to know where to begin. First, the current scientific consensus on climate science is very clear. The earth is warming and we, humans, are the dominant cause. No national or international SCIENTIFIC organization of any standing rejects these findings and the list of these organizations that concur is compelling (here's one neutral source for my statement, there are more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Disse…). The science is also clear that continuing along our current path WILL have catastrophic consequences. According to NOAA, current sea level rise is about 3mm/year. NOAA states: "this is a significantly larger rate than the sea-level rise averaged over the last several thousand years", and the rate may be increasing." As far as the moral imperative goes, climate change is and will disproportionately affect the world's poorest inhabitants, people who are least responsible for climate change. I could go on, but I'll end with an excerpt from a statement from the American Meteorological Society: "There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research. The observed warming will be irreversible for many years into the future, and even larger temperature increases will occur as greenhouse gases continue to accumulate in the atmosphere. Avoiding this future warming will require a large and rapid reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions."

Thank you John Gault for an

Thank you John Gault for an extensive and well researched and reported truth!
The problem for those who believe as you and I do,is that we are living on this Island in the midst of the very liberal left,where no other thought or opinion or fact counts but their own. You soon come to understand that you cannot apply logic or facts as they tend to base their own opinions on their own facts...
Poor Martha, I remember when it was different.

BF- merely calling something

Farmer5 chilmark

BF- merely calling something a 'fact' doesn't necessarily make it so. In cases like this I refer you to Pirandello who opined the 'facts are like sacks-they only stand up when you put something in them.'
You may agree with Gault but I'm afraid that the overwhelming consensus of the worldwide scientific community happens to disagree with Gault's facts and findings. The consensus I refer to includes virtually every country on the planet- not just the liberal-infested shores of Martha's Vineyard.
In the face of irrefutable and steadily mounting evidence I only wonder how many more years will it take before the naysayers give up the notion that this global warming 'thing' is just another bleeding heart scam.

Hope those are electric buses

Ryan Cobb Mississauga ON

Hope those are electric buses! And if they are electric buses I hope their batteries were charged from a resource other than nuclear, coal, or natural gas. Hopefully they're charged with solar, oh wait, can't have solar as its frying birds in the desert. Maybe wind? Oh wait, can't have wind because of NIMBYism. So, they must be taking buses, er bicycles made for 22? That's of course after they paddle across Vineyard Sound to get to the mainland. I'd really be irritated if they released all of that CO2 just getting to NYC to combat the releasing of more CO2?!?!?!? Talk about hypocritical.

Coal: It’s affordable,