HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Environment & Energy » Environment & Energy (Group) » Chasing Ice
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 04:30 AM

Chasing Ice

"In the spring of 2005, acclaimed environmental photographer James Balog headed to the Arctic on a tricky assignment for National Geographic: to capture images to help tell the story of the Earth’s changing climate. Even with a scientific upbringing, Balog had been a skeptic about climate change. But that first trip north opened his eyes to the biggest story in human history and sparked a challenge within him that would put his career and his very well-being at risk.

Chasing Ice is the story of one man’s mission to change the tide of history by gathering undeniable evidence of our changing planet. Within months of that first trip to Iceland, the photographer conceived the boldest expedition of his life: The Extreme Ice Survey. With a band of young adventurers in tow, Balog began deploying revolutionary time-lapse cameras across the brutal Arctic to capture a multi-year record of the world’s changing glaciers.

As the debate polarizes America and the intensity of natural disasters ramps up globally, Balog finds himself at the end of his tether. Battling untested technology in subzero conditions, he comes face to face with his own mortality. It takes years for Balog to see the fruits of his labor. His hauntingly beautiful videos compress years into seconds and capture ancient mountains of ice in motion as they disappear at a breathtaking rate. Chasing Ice depicts a photographer trying to deliver evidence and hope to our carbon-powered planet."

http://www.chasingice.com/about-the-film/synopsis/

I saw the film tonight, and afterwards James Balog had a Q&A. One quote: "People ask me if I get discouraged or resigned about climate change, and to be honest there are times when I feel as discouraged as anyone in this room, or maybe everyone put together. But allowing ourselves to become resigned to climate change is a luxury that none of us can afford."

9 replies, 1412 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to wtmusic (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 04:58 AM

1. "allowing ourselves to become resigned to climate change is a luxury that none of us can afford"

Affordibility has little to do with inevitability. When I was a kid, we couldn't afford meats, and had to eat rice or potatoes. Rice or potatoes were inevitable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joshcryer (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 11:44 AM

4. Climate change is inevitable. Catastrophic climate change is not. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 07:06 AM

2. Breathtaking!

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 07:31 AM

3. "This is just more of that science, fact, and reality shit, isn't it?" - Republicans (R)

"Well then count us out. We much prefer the Corporately Funded Lies we get told so prettily by Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly and our other BEloved Chickenhawk Propaganda Pimps.

"You can take this fact-reality stuff and shove it. We don't do science."

- Republicans (R)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 03:08 PM

5. How many alarms do we need to sound?

I saw this movie last week. It was such an amazing film and very powerful. I hope it wins the Oscar.

Still, towards the end of the film, I kept saying to myself "OK, OK, I get it! We're royally screwed. What can we DO to mitigate the damage?"

I understand the need for films like this. But personally, I've heard the alarm and I'm well aware the problem exists and is serious. At this point, I'd love some direction on what to do next (beyond the obvious things like conservation, recycling, driving electric, and so on...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tinrobot (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 01:04 AM

6. There can't be too many.

Of course you get it, I get it. But with every one of these a few more are converted and it all goes toward building a critical mass.

There is change, even on FOX.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wtmusic (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:20 AM

7. Agreed. But what next?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying we should stop sounding the alarm.

But - If you sound the alarm and people finally respond, you have to follow that up with some sort of guidance about what to do. I'm not seeing much of that at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tinrobot (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:02 AM

8. This is the problem with sounding the alarm over predicaments

We may be able to do some small things like what you've mentioned,at the personal and local levels. But what we need to do to "solve" the planetary problem is to stop using fossil fuels entirely. Can we get there from here before the temp hits +4C? Given the current global structures of politics, finance, business, and the promises and the promises about future opportunity we've made to the poor at home and around the world? I don't see how.

And that leaves us in a very shitty situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tinrobot (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:14 AM

9. That's the hardest part.

As much as I respect what James Balog has done, he seemed naive even by E&E standards when it came to solutions.

I asked him his opinion of nuclear energy. "What do we do with the waste?", he said, then went on to explain how Germany is "powered by 20% renewable energy." These are antinuke talking points which reflect only a cursory understanding or sense of proportion of current energy issues. In his defense, that's not why he was there. But it illustrates how if someone with his current influence is misinformed, maybe the focus should be gradually steered to letting experts run the show, letting them decide about what's going to realistically get us out of this mess.

In my own case, I realize I've been naive in my support of biofuels after reading Harmut Michel's statement. But there's really nothing that looks faulty in his analysis, and it actually confirms a lot of what I believe about the hidden costs of renewables.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread