Nine places that prove climate change is real

The planet is in a climate crisis, these are the places that prove it.

Nine places that prove climate change is real

After a summer of devastating bushfires right across Australia, it is incredible that there are still people in denial about climate change and the impact it is having on the world.

If those climate change deniers need proof that the climate crisis is making the world less hospitable, they should try visiting these nine places around the globe.

1. The Great Barrier Reef
We don’t have to go too far from home to start seeing the impact global warming is having on the environment. The 2300km–long ecosystem comprises thousands of reefs and hundreds of islands made of more than 600 types of hard and soft coral. It is home to countless species of colourful fish, molluscs and starfish, plus turtles, dolphins and sharks. The Australian Institute of Marine Studies reports that between 1985 and 2012 the world lost 50 per cent of the Great Barrier Reef. The Great Barrier Reef is also experiencing the most widespread bleaching ever recorded, with 60 per cent of reefs across all three regions affected, according to a detailed survey of the system this year.

2. Glacier National Park
This stunning US national park in Montana was once home to more than 150 glaciers. Today there are fewer than 25 and, according to current climate change predictions, those remaining could be completely gone as early as 2030. The area is home to grizzly bears, mountain goats, lynxes and wolverines, all of which will be under threat as the ecosystem continues to undergo significant changes.

Click NEXT to see more

    1  2  3  4  5  Next


    To make a comment, please register or login
    6th Jun 2020
    There are still (and always will be ) people who don't believe that the climate is changing. You can't hammer a nail into concrete, as my Dad used to say. But that's OK, it is their problem. You cannot use science or logic to change an idea born in emotion or faith.

    The main question is really the CAUSE of climate change, not whether it is happening. There is some scope (albeit infintessimally small) for som argument there by folk who don't/can't understand the enormously complx science that surrounds it all.

    The cost of doing nothing is far greater than the cost of being precautionary and doing somthing.

    This is a simple argument, and the work to do "something" is beneficial to our world, so we would be stupid not to reduce our pollution. The unfortunate fact is that whatever we (humans) do now, the effects are well under way, and it may be too late. We just need to minimise the effects, and adapt to them.
    2 Bob’s Worth
    6th Jun 2020
    Lewis-Livingston Ranges, Glacier National Park
    The total ice-covered area in the Lewis and Livingston ranges of Glacier National Park is about 40.5 km2, representing 59% of the total ice-covered area in the state. There are 604 individual glaciers and perennial snowfields, 52% of the total number in the state. The largest glacier, and the largest glacier in the state, is Blackfoot Glacier, 1.75km2 (1966). Of the ten largest glaciers in the state, nine are found here. Only 39 glaciers are named, about two-thirds of the named glaciers in the state. The mean elevation of glaciers and perennial snowfields range from 1651 m to 3110m, with an average elevation of 2260m. As outlined in the section on Early Explorations, glaciers in Montana were first ‘discovered’ in this region and most intensively studied.
    6th Jun 2020
    To continually denigrate and stomp all over those who simply hold a different opinion by naming them "deniers" is grossly insulting and accusatively dangerous mis-use of common language. In other words, if someone does not agree with, question, doubt, or vary in his/her understanding of any science, or agree that climate is changing but hold another view as to the reason, that person is hounded down to make him/her submit, as un-desserving of the human right to speak and be heard. That person is shamed, rudely referred to as a "denier"when all they are doing is thinking and uttering. The more that the know-alls force-feed their opinions and rudeness onto doubters who proffer different statistics, the more disgraceful becomes the never-fill-the-dams-again argument. There's more than enough science out there to provide reasonable questions and raise alternative opinions. When an opinion is shut down by over-bearing politically connected intellectuals, thedissenting or questioning rest may as well give in to the forceful, controlling socialist underbelly elements skulking around and wanting to domineer our society.
    6th Jun 2020
    Well said Brissie girl.

    Remember when it was "Global warming" and then that was changed to "Climate change" when it was shown their facts were wrong.

    I'm a big believer in "climate change". For me it happens 4 times every year and we call it the seasons.

    On a longer time scale I believe that our planet heats up and cools down about every 400 years and I believe it has been doing this for a long time.
    6th Jun 2020
    Brissie girl, we all know you hold conservative views, and no one hounds you on every jot and tittle, but the unfortunate point of view you have is that unless there is incontrovertible proof, everyone is entitled to their own point of view, - nontheless you are required to wear seat belts or you are fined and eventually lose your right to go on the road.

    Human society is being and will continue to be destroyed by "Climate change", formerly called global warming as that is what is happening in most places, but now called Climate Crisis, yet some people will never admit that it is happening as exampled by the people who supported your post, = alan, country john, has been, etc, who will be denying Climate Crisis every time they can jump high enough out of the water to yell "it is not happening" Normally the word Freedom is the concept that we can do what we want unless it is hurting others, - eg preventing others from doing what they want, so eventually the ones who are preventing us from doing what is needed to save the human race will have to lose their licence and drive no more.

    That these sort of people are called Deniers is a strict description, that is what they are, and should not be felt as an insult by them if they believe what they say.

    To look at itanother way, - if you believe in nudity, you can advance as many proofs as you like, and be nude whenever you are at home or where there is no one else, to complain, but walking down the main street in almost every country in the world nude will get you locked up or such.
    You may argue that that is unfair, but you will be locked up because most people will regard you as abusing their own freedom to choose acceptable dress.
    Therefore because of the enormous amount of proof that we are being affected by the world's measured Warming, Denialists are being regarded as equivalent to Nudity Fascists.
    So it goes.
    6th Jun 2020
    Well stated Brissiegirl.

    Welcome to cultural Marxism.
    6th Jun 2020
    Overbearing politically correct intellectuals. Hmm... Oxymoran I think.
    6th Jun 2020
    Lookafar and we all know your left bent too, but using 'deniers' is not simply a description. It is used, as you well know, as a perjoritive to put someone else down who doesn't share your opinion. There is no debate because those subscribing to the notion that human activity is the sole cause of climate change and only they have the 'right science' will go to any lengths to silence them, including name calling and attempts at public humiliation.

    Trouble is, those exporting others to listen to the science, are the very same people not listening to the science on protests around Australia and the world today. Seems selective listening is not the prerogative of the so called 'deniers'. But that doesn't fit the narrative.
    6th Jun 2020
    Dear Lookfar,
    You have every right to make nudist analogies but can you tell me this: Given that water is a natural "leveller" (that's why liquid is used in spirit levels), if sea levels at Port Arthur in Tasmania have not risen, and sea levels in Sydney Harbour have not risen, then why have they risen around the Pacific Islands? Or is it more likely the already shallow pacific islands are subsiding, or perhaps going by your nudist analogy, oceans actually do run uphill from Port Arthur. Funny thing that. My science teachers always taught that the world's oceans and rivers are equally level - everywhere.
    Country John
    6th Jun 2020
    For a start Brissie Girl. I could not have said it better.
    I am not a scientist but if temps at a set place like Antartica or the Himalayas are currently say minus 40 degrees and the worlds temp is rising 1 degree per yewar how come the se 2 places will have no ice in 10 or 15 years. The temps don't add up.
    When I was in school we were taught the Amazon basin was being cleared at some 150 acres per hour 24/7. Now its 50 years on and it is still being cleared. My calculations say it should have gone years ago. esides the food being produced in that size area would have flooded the world markets. Where is it all. Climate change?? No. A normal rise and fall in temps is more likely. If pollution in the seas is so bad why not visit 3rd world countries and see the pollution they dump into the oceans each year. Our pollution would not even get on the score board.
    6th Jun 2020
    You’re right the climate does change. So, I will make sure I get to those places sometime in the next 100,000 years.
    6th Jun 2020
    If this writer had enough maths he would be able to understand the math that proves that CO2 can not do the things attributed to it by the global warming crowd.

    I can't know if this piece is a political exercise, or just the ramblings of a useful idiot, but I do know it is utter garbage.
    double j
    6th Jun 2020
    When my grandfather was alive, he died age 98 , we used to discuss climate change and said something I always remember he said “ when I was growing up we called it weather”
    6th Jun 2020
    We all get old double J the trick is to stay in touch.
    7th Jun 2020
    There's a big difference between climate and weather. Google them.
    6th Jun 2020
    My problem with climate change is the story changes as they are proven wrong.
    Also the more radical just make noise to drown out balanced discussion.
    The radicals in ANY cause are the ones who do the cause the most harm.
    Just mention ALL possible sources of electricity generation and some go into overdrive to kill the discussion.
    As one journalist said '"You could give the Greens 99% of what they want, and that would leave nuclear power as the only viable source to keep the country viable".
    Not a good scenario.
    As for "the science", why isn't a concise document released outlining the science so it can be audited by anyone interested.
    And, used as the baseline document at the world climate gabfests.
    I don't consider myself a denier, but I am waiting to be convinced by auditable facts.
    6th Jun 2020
    The believers need to watch ' Planet of the humans" and follow the money, If they still believe in Climate Change, Santa Cluas is in with a good chance !
    6th Jun 2020
    The believers need to watch ' Planet of the humans" and follow the money, If they still believe in Climate Change, Santa Cluas is in with a good chance !
    robin hood
    6th Jun 2020
    So right Alan and Brissie Girl
    6th Jun 2020
    I see some commentators quoting the science behind climate change, and the majority of scientists that state climate change is real, the scientists do in fact state we have climate change, which I agree there is definitely a change in the climate, I have looked at two of the main studies regarding climate change, No1 is the American study by a majority of US university’s, 97.3 % of scientists declared climate change is real, the second study was a worldwide study in which 99,1 % of scientists agreed there is climate change, in both of these studies the scientists claimed that 53 % of the change can be attributed to human activity?
    7th Jun 2020
    Are theses the same scientists who have not invented a vaccine for Corona or just another bunch of academic idiots.
    6th Jun 2020
    Yes, there are stallwarts who still believe the earth is flat, corona virus is caused by 5G, mass immunisation is a conspiracy, and climate change is a myth. Unfortunately one cannot rescue people from their own stupidity. Focusing on the cause seldom leads to change, what we need is a focus on the solution, in practical, committed, world wide terms. With the morons we now have in charge of the USA, China, Russia, and a few other nations, and the millions of idiots following them blindly, I really don't hold much hope for our planet or our grandchildren.
    7th Jun 2020
    Agreed - it's very worrying and sad.
    8th Jun 2020
    Rod63 still a lowlife from the left no idea of anything
    micky d.
    7th Jun 2020
    Hold it Folks!
    I don't wish to sound trite, but I do think I may have found a solution to the great perplexities surrounding the climate change/global warming problem.
    IF the problem can be solved by human intervention/action, then I propose that as from this coming week-end all barbies be immediately banned. Outdoor barbies are, of course, the most devastating climate modifying factor and are, absolutely not to be countenanced henceforth.
    This information is about as useful in saving the planet by building a wind farm.
    Let the scientists speak.

    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles

    You May Like