100 thoughts on “Do the Math – The Movie

  1. The point in talking about the KXL is if we want to move beyond oil from anywhere we have to set a precedent. This is that precedent.

  2. We have to mention the human WILL and that the human will is never satisfied in this current culture. It is every re-enforcing element of "never being satisfied" that is one important part in the act of civilizational failure. What can we do here? Schools, culture and the way we know ourselves maybe.

  3. One world, one people. This is our motivation to being involved in saving our Planet from climate change. Blessings

  4. The point is that most americans and groups are in favor of Keystone. Tar sands are no more of a hazard than other il sources.

    People like McKibben need to be ignored like flat earthers

  5. Tar sands are MUCH different than other sources, it's one of the major problems of the pipeline. It is extremely thick and mechanically corrosive and they want to put it in a standard pipeline at pressures that are too high for such a thick goo. We aren't talking about synthetic crude, but raw bitumen.

  6. The pipeline proposal is triple sageguarded and specificly designed.

    McKibben is lying which is why he refuse to go on unbiased news shows

  7. From what I have read on the subject, new sections of the pipeline are better, but there are long stretches where they want to use existing pipelines which weren't designed for the bitumen.

  8. I'm a North American U.S. citizen (politically correct) and I'm not in favor of the pipeline, and guess what, I'm not alone. Whichever country you are from you can't speak for the majority, you can only speak for yourself.

  9. Don't you just show how ignorant most of you are. Fancy any intelligent person stating that we do not need CO2 emissions – if it were not for CO2 the world would end very quickly. For goodness sake learn how we survive through CO2 feeding the plant world that gives us the oxygen we and all other life forms breathe – you make me sick with your ridiculous claims – do some reading and learn before you start all this emotional crap!

  10. You are in the miority and ignorant if you believes frauds like McKibbon. most Americans and Canadians are in favor of Keystone lookat any poll

    Frill Baby Drill and Frack Baby Frack

  11. What source are you getting this from. If it a source from McKibbon it should be ignored like everything else from this crackpot.

  12. to suggest a poll requested of an uneducated population should lead the educated on the matter of life itself tells me you by choice choose ignorance.
    i HATE sharing our air with such as your spirit.

  13. yes it is true we are waking up, will it be timely enough. i doubt it with this pipeline. sadly obama is on film supporting it. he will have no climate legacy if we survive ourselves.

  14. there is no unbiased news.
    and i thank bill mckibben for fighting this fight for those of us who can't so easily get traction.
    i hate when folks as yourself pollute in word a work of generation's.

  15. you foolish one are the flat earther. staying tied to an old diemg think tank that i prayer only takes out those stuck in it.
    the reality is many innocence will be lost with you.
    ps maybe all

  16. "Subtitles in Chinese, French, German, Portuguese or Spanish" … don't work.
    I get only subtitles in English with automatical translation … nearly incomprehensible.

  17. Plants survive just fine at 280 ppm. If we go to 400 or 500 it will just disrupt other things they need such as a climate they are used to and can survive. The video does not say we don't need CO2 we just don't need fossil CO2. Animals breath it out all the time.

  18. You're right, there's always been CO2. And through most of history plants take it up at around the rate volcanoes and animals and so on spit it out. The thing that's different, the game-changer, is the amount we've been adding to this natural level. That's what McKibben and 350.org (and the vast majority of active climate scientists) are worried about, not the mere existence of CO2.

  19. We need disruptive technologies online everywhere for global human civilization to survive. But, we need disruptive social movements to implement those technologies now. Otherwise, we'll get social, economic, geopolitical, biosphere, climatic, and environmental disruptions we're not likely to survive.

  20. We already have climate refugees from island nations in the Pacific & Caribbean. What happens when the stream becomes a torrent? What happens when coastal cities have to fund flood control projects costing billions & trillions to keep functioning, or be abandoned? What does humanity do if the oceans acidify and its food chain collapses? How do we radically transform work, agricultural & industrial mfg to make them locally sustainable & reduce in every way fossil fuel dependent transportation?

  21. Most part of Humans will just go on, and they will until everything goes to Hell. Then they ask themselfs , hey how did this happen …its a shame. They will only change when they are feeling the Hurt themselfs.

  22. Well, atleast you're putting in some effort. The problem is that the exact motivation of the movement is the exact opposite of what you said. the point is to maintain environments people can survive off of.

  23. This is mostly good sounding stuff, but I didn't hear anything substantial. Ironically if you want some hard facts about how urgent this problem is there is a great site called Do The Math by Tom Murphy a physicist. He blows away any cosy feeling you may have. Just google it.

    If you want some genuine fear. I recommend the youtube video
    FjxL9kOzjt4 (just copy it into youtube's search field, I suspect they don't allow urls), you will get David Roberts' TEDx talk on it.

  24. S.O.P SAVE OUR PLANET time is running out, perhaps Keshe Foundation may have some answers, to eliminating fossil fuels.

  25. If people are into theories about big oil companies paying researchers to make reports that there is no climate crisis, why is nobody looking into the big companies making big profites on "climate friendly" product? Does it not occur to people that both sides can pay off a bunch of researchers , and make a movie like this? In my opinion(not payed for) there is change in the climate, but no good proof it is man made. They use man made simulators and get man made results on them. Its human to err.

  26. I'm sorry.

    Your incredulity and ignorance of the science does not trump the mathematics undertaken by scientists who understand the physics involved and have concluded that it is man made.

  27. I just follow a differnt group of scientists than you, both sides do science only they dont share the same concern. I respect that you follow your scientists. I only share a differnet opinion on the matter 🙂

  28. We are all responsible for the impact of burning fossil fuels on the planet. This means that future generations can hold us accountable for the damage we have done to our only home: the earth.

  29. Thank you, whene I see a movie like this I'm proud to say that i'm on the transition team and I'm not alone.

  30. I don't understand how divestment will solve the problem. I think it is insufficient. It's not like South Africa, which was nation-state politics. The fossil energy industry doesn't need good PR. It's got us hooked by the gas and oil tanks. If i had $1m and divested it from ExxonMobil, some less ethical capital will flow right in and cancel my divestment. We need a Carbon Tax. Why does McKibben spend so much time on divestment and not a carbon tax?

  31. We all should feel responsible, but we all don't act that way. Some of us profit from the destruction of the planet a lot more than others. We're not a homogenous group, the human species. We have a few exploiters in our midst who hijack the governments as well. Future generations may blame us for doing too little, but they won't be able to sue us to get their planet back. We need to stop the worst people in the present.

  32. I used to believe in those skeptical scientists too and their point about the how negligible the CO2 emission of humans is compare to the nature's. And it is true that " a small shift in the balance between oceans and air would cause a CO2 much more severe rise than anything we could produce. However, the natural cycle adds and removes CO2 to keep a balance; humans add extra CO2 without removing any."

    for more information pls google "skeptical science"

  33. Most scientist are conducting their research adhering to the principles of scientific process, and the vast majority – so much so that it would seem rediculous to think there was still a debate going on, if there wasn't an economic incentive for doing so, all agree on the affects of CO2 on climate change and that it is driven by human activity.

  34. This is evident that out of tens of thousands of pulished papers, and thousands of reserchers working in this area, the same halfdozen contrarians get wheeled out by big oil and fox news again and again to say the opposite – often the motivation of these talking heads is not scientific enquiry. but an ideology of economic liberalism, in lockstep with their paymasters. see the Heartland Foundation and the Marshal Institute for two such biased thinktanks

  35. The idea that the oil companies are somehow the underdog facing down the "global warming and green energy funding industry" juggernaut is also laughable.
    Incidentally, the Koch brothers, major funders of the Heartland Foundation,, recently funded a study to debunk global warming, even this study came back with the conclussion that actually it was occuring

  36. Sage R asked – "We need a Carbon Tax. Why does McKibben spend so much time on divestment and not a carbon tax?"

    Answer – Because Mckibben is trying to raise consciousness of the severity of the problem. There is not enough popular support for a carbon tax. Getting academic and religious institutions to divest makes news and garners additional supporters. When dirty energy politicians start losing elections then there will be a chance for a carbon tax.

  37. Divestment is a great idea, carbon taxes too. Most people still see the use of fossil fuels as a necessary evil though and even rising fuel prices don't deter drivers from driving or planes from flying. Large movements are essential, they speak to politicians, but they also make oil companies work harder to keep people in cars. Take this issue beyond your personal travel habits, talk to family members and friends. Young people, start voting so politicians will start paying attention to you.

  38. I strongly support 350.org and a rapid move to non-carbon energy, but IMHO phrases like "a future that humanity cannot survive", "dedicated to the destruction of civilisation" & "take away our planet and our future" are exaggerations because severe climate change will cause enormous human suffering, with the deaths of perhaps billions of people, but it won't make humans extinct or destroy the planet. IMHO such phrases do more harm than good by giving opponents an easy opening to attack 350.org..

  39. "All I ever wanted to see was a movement of people to stop climate change… and now I've seen it!!"… Ugh, my heart!! Great film. DIVEST!!

  40. Fear of death? The presidents of recent years have always been puppets to the money and power.. Who are you to say that Obama is anymore ignorant then Bush.. Money causes corruption that the president has little control over.. Change doesn't happen through the actions of the president but the actions of the people…

  41. Loved "Deep Economy", and "Eaarth", I cannot wait to read the new book that is coming out in September "Oil and Honey", McKibben is the man!!!! You are a real hero, not those overpaid athletes that do not say squat.

  42. Uniting Church in Australia, NSW/ACT Synod has agreed to divest, can post a web link but look for unitingearthweb, there's a link on the front page.

  43. Those spills are going to be awful. The land and people it will destroy shouldn't be treated as a commodity and cannot be replaced. Build wind and solar energy. Forget these stupid oil sands and fracking. It's gonna be one 'natural' (anthropogenic!) disaster after the next if we don't stop these unsustainable energies. Keep up the good work, Bill!

  44. ..for a second consider…money is invented by man. We kill the planet to make more of the thing the system prints for….free! Not smart…

  45. 100% agree with your comment. Also not to forget that Carbon Tax requires government to get involved to pass new laws. On the other hand, divestment can happen tomorrow morning since its a choice that anyone can make without the need for new laws or government intervention.

    Kick Big Oil where it hurts, in their wallets !!

  46. I believe it's biofuel, as are many buses these days. I don't mean this in an inflammatory way, but here's a great article for those sort of "this is hypocritical" comments. Google "a moral atmosphere orion" and click the first link to read it!

  47. I can agree, but what we're asking for by ending the use of fossil fuel is essentially a higher price for energy. It's not dirty politics or a big bad company that will make renewable & alternative energy more expensive, it's just the fact that hydrocarbons are extremely cheap. It might also be worth arguing that if you can use x gallons of oil, bio-fuel, etc. to spread an important message to make change, it's a worthy use of that energy.

  48. too many slow motion scenes to gloried Bill as a leader, it supposed to be a movement of the people by the people. Bill looks like a candidate for something.
    I cherish the facts numbers though and support the 350.org movement

  49. Did anyone do the math? i mean there is no carbon on this planet what it can't absorb, besides it takes a lot of arrogance to think that we can change the world in any significant way. Greenland is not green, just think about that.

    Sidenote: if a prominent person goes against an industry it is certain it works for the same industry.

  50. I love a good argument…. Please share your source of wisdom. Yes this is repetitive for me. I have no problem with being called a troll when it comes to answers. 😉

  51. Pascal… Great name by the way… I was wondering when you think it will be time for the people to make decisions in the open vs votes and dishonesty?

  52. Shells were once currency.. Are shells free. Population and transit. Sometimes somethings artificial seem necessary to keep people working for something. I often find myself stuck on seeding the universe and beyond. 😉 Call me a very hopeful man.
    I hope you do not have words that surpass that. o.O =) I am the layman.

  53. At the point where it takes more than a gallon of oil to get a gallon of oil out of the ground, oil becomes uneconomical. Even bio-fuels have an energy cost. Some just aren't feasible.
    We're not going to get out of this mess until we build and live in ways that consume less energy.

  54. And if there is man Maid Climate change then it is This that causes it:
    Not the Co2.
    That also explains why the water is more acidic they dump stuff like Aluminum and barium worldwide in massive amounts to Geoengineer the globe.

  55. What everybody fails to mention is the incredible effect our banking system has on our Economical behavior!

    We actually have to serve a Black hole (with out need) by Paying the Banksters, for them Creating Money out of thin air,
    that way they suck up all we do, thats why Economy has to grow exponentially because we have a exponentially growing Dept witch we have been told to owe them and have to pay it back with interest upon interest.

    That is why Products have to be designed in a way, that they do not last to long, they call it "planed obsolescence".
    We have been maid to serve this Dept and its not Justified morally, as they claim that we rightfully owe them something they simply print up in unlimited amounts.
    They do that, simply, by our leaders Granting them the Power to do so!

    Now those who don't do the Math, will definitely don't understand the gravity of my comment, as it is Mind bending how much they suck up from us every day.
    Our Economy would look so different if we where to take that Power from them, if we don't we can not even realize any reform as long as we have to feed this ever growing Black hole we will have to grow every year bigger then the Year before ore the whole thing collapses.
    They Literally have the power to by up the whole Globe, with the Power to Create money out of thin air.

    Unless we start to understand: "The emperor is Naked"
    Unless we understand we do not rightfully owe them this money and call it of!
    No Change can be sustained!

    One has to understand what exponential growth means to grasp what i am trying to say here!

    We do not grow that much because we need more stuff, as we don't, we are actually forced to grow that much because of the foundation of our Banking system.
    If that would be changed in to a Real Honest Monetary system we could actually afford to grow much slower ore even stagnate with out any Problem for the Market.
    If we do not change that, no change can truly be maid.
    We live in a Rigged System, period!!

    End the Fed!

  56. Wow, why does the objective satellite measurements of earth temp not support the global climate change models? Why were concentrations of CO2 higher before the industrial revolution? Why do climate change radicals feel the need to manipulate temp measurements to fit their climate change models? Why do climate change radicals overstate atmospheric sensitivity to CO2 levels? Why do these climate change radicals deny the fact that current levels of atmospheric CO2 are historically low and the planet would benefit from higher levels of CO2?

  57. Cut to 2018. CO2 levels at 412 ppm locked in for a thousand years. That’s right. We cannot “get back to 350ppm”.
    Arctic ice about to be gone and a blue ocean event likely this summer. Which means we’re done, extinct like the dodo and previous human cousins of ours.
    All the marches did nothing.

    Time to live like we’re dying and stop believing the Rockefeller funded mouthpiece McFibben.
    Extinction is the next chapter of the Anthropocene.

  58. In Thomas Jefferson’s book, Note on the State of Virginia, he argued for the United States to be founded on an agrarian ideology. In the excerpt we read for class today, Jefferson called for an American economy built on agriculture and to “let the work-shops” remain in Europe” (Jefferson, 18). He recognized the need for some domestic industry but believed the vast land of America could be utilized by farming. Alexander Hamilton’s views contradicted Jefferson’s and his views on manufacturing and industry prevailed; consequently, America has progressed into a state of manufacturing rather than an agrarian state. This trend has become increasingly evident over time. Today, less than 2% of Americans farm. “Even though everyone still eats, taking part in the practice of growing food has less direct influence on people’s lives than at any point in our history (Hagenstein et al 3). Thus, we see the prevailing view of Alexander Hamilton as having profound impacts on the American economy and the global environment.

    Thomas Jefferson adamantly advocated for the founding of this country to be based on agrarian ideals. Agrarianism supports working on land in ways that can last due to its focus on the interconnectedness of life (Freyfogle xix). Agrarians are sustainable and understand that humans need the Earth, land, and animals for our very subsistence. In the agrarian mindset, the health of humans is dependent in the long run on the well being of the larger land community (Freyfogle xix). Clearly, agrarian views dissent greatly from the views of the majority of modern people, especially those living in urban or suburban settings in the United States. Agrarians “believe that those who buy products are implicated morally in their production, just as those who discard waste items are morally involved in their final end… Producers and sellers, too, are morally responsible for their work, and in ways the market cannot absolve or cleanse when their products are sold”. Of course, one cannot live in a place without altering it, however, agrarians are about harmonizing their relationship and effect on nature, not exploiting it. From these readings, I came to be constantly asking myself the same question, “If Thomas Jefferson’s agrarian ideology prevailed, would we still be in the current state of environmental degradation we are currently in?

  59. If you did THE MATH like James Hansen, the BEST way to decarbonize is More RE, BUT MUCH MORE NUCLEAR POWER!

  60. 395PPM? OLD m ovie! 420's now —–SO  , geothermal only, one global government only re environment management, population control (now 2.6 births to 1 death: idiotic right ??!!!), EV's only , laws against consumerism, (new junk plastic based toys , pc's cars etc. , will be illegal to 'buy ad nauseum'. …………. WE CAN DO THIS! COME ON, HUMAN RACE, LET'S GO !!!


  62. Great small film, incredibly informative. Wish they had also done a version that was chopped up in to more easily digestible segments.

  63. Why is 350.org Anti-Nuclear? James Hansen, the NASA Scientist, who gave 350 ppm CO2 in atmosphere your name "Time to go Nuclear" 2013 but has advocated for Nuclear Power since the 1980's, why because it is the BEST Solution. ANTI-Nuclear=350.org does NOT want Nuclear Power 100% RE is a FALSE!! It condemns Earth's poor to Energy poverty and will never reduce emissions to stop climate change == DO THE REAL MATH!! 350.org condemns EARTH==Venus

  64. I'd be glad to drink== FUKUSHIMA – Japanese Politician Drinks Radioactive Water! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BiK1iDGPSE&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR16TUsaiHxmKRvCl7d96tojcyOIEJe_LApPm3V_DT-rcRvcytFtZtAbxEk It's just water, people! It contains only 214 Bq/L. Brazil nuts contain 400 Bq/kg.

    MOST PV's are warranted for 20 -25 yrs. A solar panel has two warranties: a performance and equipment guarantee. A solar panel’s performance warranty will typically guarantee 90% production at 10 years and 80% at 25 years. An equipment warranty will typically guarantee 10-12 years without failing.==https://news.energysage.com/shopping-solar-panels-pay-attention-to-solar-panels-warranty/ == pro-solar Granted some PV has 30 years but few. EU == PV law classify PV as TOXIC E-WASTE GERMany == FAIL=RE, has to recycle PV, that will probably burned in Africa releasing TOXIC Pb, Cd, Ar and thin film is more TOXIC. 300X Toxic Waste / watt, compared to ENERGY DENSE NUCLEAR POWER!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *