New Documentary Reveals Human Face Of Climate Change

For the first time in world history, a new crisis is forcing people into the uncertain life of a refugee: climate change.

A climate refugee is a person displaced by climatically induced environmental disasters, and thousands of these displaced persons have already been set adrift around the world because their countries simply weren’t prepared to deal with the dramatic consequences of climate change.

The Pentagon now considers climate change a national security risk and the term climate wars is being talked about in war-room like environments in Washington D.C.

Climate Refugees
is a non-partisan, award-winning documentary that seeks to open people’s eyes to the human face of climate change, and the dire consequences that await countries that refuse to take action until it’s too late.

Watch the Climate Refugees trailer below:

Related Reading:
Climate Change Refugees: Plants, Animals and Insects Will Need To Keep Moving
Paradise Denied: Climate Change Refugees In Panama Flee To Mainland
One Billion Displaced By 2100, Scientists Warn Climate Negotiators
Americans May Be Among First Climate Refugees

Image Credit: Flickr - plane stupid

Love This? Never Miss Another Story.


Duane B.
.3 years ago

Thank you for sharing.

Martha Eberle
Martha Eberle4 years ago

Read about this, a year ago, and truly, when people lose water to drink and to water their crops, we will see huge migrations going across borders, killings as border guards try to stop them. It will be a gigantic tragedy. Want to see the movie.

Popular Tech
Popular Tech4 years ago

Skeptical Science is a website run by a cartoonist.

I have yet to see evidence of these imaginary tens of thousands of papers supporting AGW theory.

I have no idea what evolution has to do with anything as I fully support evolution theory.

Sandy H.


This is frankly more than I need to provide. I suggest that those who are trying to deny the results of thousands upon thousands of peer-reviewed studies and mountains of evidence should be the ones who have to prove their stance. In other words, the burden of proof is on you, just as it always is when you are trying to disprove any well backed-up hypothesis or scientific theory, such as evolution.

Sandy H.

I like how these denialists choose to call Skeptical Science a "propaganda" website and claim that I haven't provided any peer reviewed literature, when the site is chock full of citations of peer reviewed sources. Barely a sentence goes by without a citation. But denialists are too lazy to bother actually looking at the resources I've provided.

Since you won't even bother source-checking yourselves, here are a few citations from each article I provided before.

For example, for 1, 2, and 3: Indermühle A., T.F. Stocker, F. Joos, H. Fischer, H.J. Smith, M. Wahlen, B. Deck, D. Mastroianni, J. Tschumi, T. Blunier, R. Meyer, B. Stauffer. 1999. Holocene carbon-cycle dynamics based on CO2 trapped in ice at Taylor Dome, Antarctica. Nature 398:121-126.

Boden, T.A., G. Marland, and R.J. Andres. 2009. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn.

Tripati, A.K., C.D. Roberts, and R. A. Eagle. Coupling of CO2 and Ice Sheet Stability Over Major Climate Transitions of the Last 20 Million Years. Science 4 December 2009:
Vol. 326 no. 5958 pp. 1394-1397

P. Ghosh, W.A. Brand. Review: Stable isotope ratio mass spectrometry in global climate change research International Journal of Mass Spectrometry 228 (2003) 1–33

Alexandra Rodda
Alexandra Rodda4 years ago

It is ironic that as the effects of climate change (that still means man made global warming) are becoming more sinister and devastating, so the denial and ignorance about it seems also on the increase. It just means that most people are drop outs in science, manipulated by the Koch brothers, and/or stupid. It may be that they can't face reality and want to be comforted by fables.
You can do something to help. The Environmental Defense Fund is sending out a petition to support the EPA and Department of Transportations's in its effort to implement a joint proposal to adopt America's first-ever climate pollution and fuel economy standards for freight trucks and buses.

These vehicles – from the largest pickups to 18-wheelers – use more than 100 million gallons of oil per day. They are also responsible for about 20% of the climate pollution from America's transportation sector.
If implemented, it would make the USA independent of oil imports from Iraq.
This measure is likely to receive opposition from th USA's right wing government. Please google this and sign this petition. I can't because I live in Australia.

Popular Tech
Popular Tech4 years ago

@Sandy H. says Jan 25, 2011 2:17 AM

"Go here instead:"

It helps if you know what you are talking about and actually read the supporting notes following the list, all of that nonsense has been completely refuted,

Rebuttal to "Poptart's 450 climate change Denier lies"

"Greenfyre's rambling blog post of lies is something alarmists find when they desperately Google for anything to discredit the list. They ignorantly believe that because a criticism is posted online it must be true. As demonstrated below, absolutely nothing in his post is factually accurate. Many of these corrections to his nonsense were made in the comment section to his blog post but Greenfyre dishonestly refused to make any corrections. Instead he hopes people will reject the list based on his propaganda...."

Popular Tech
Popular Tech4 years ago

@Sandy H. Jan 25, 2011 1:59 AM

"As of November, 2009, it was 450. Before that, it was 320, then 299, then 286...regardless, its the same list, with more examples."

Incorrect the first published release of the list was 450, it has never been smaller. Yes it is obviously the same list with more papers added to it, thus larger and more inclusive.

"80 of those alone came from the bogus, not peer-reviewed journal Energy and the Environment, which is backed by energy lobbies."

This is total nonsense, E&E is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. It receives no funding outside of subscriptions and is backed by no one but the publishing company, Multi-Science.

All of this is debunked here,

Correcting misinformation about the journal Energy & Environment

Wez L.
Wez L.4 years ago

To Sandy H - continued....

Correction - my previous should have read...
", the oceans can NOT become acidic."

As for ocean acidification:

My previous comments have been already validated and you can find an in depth discussion between many scientists, chemical, physical and other doctorates on this very subject - I'll try to find the URL for you and post it here.

Your attitude toward this subject is very typical - you assume/trust in what you have been told and lead to believe.
I tell you now and everyone else - do NOT trust anyone and never EVER believe anything you hear or read in the media unless you research and validate it.

If you want the unadulterated TRUTH you must do your own research.
The media are only interested in selling papers and advertisement time - they spin everything in order to arouse concern and interest using fear and hype. The news is NOT news anymore - its entertainment.

I urge all to research the science and real world data BEFORE jumping on the AGW ideology bandwagon of doom.

Think about it - total human C02 emissions are less than 3.8% of ALL C02, the remaining 96.2% is from nature.

It is a scientific FACT that cutting all C02 (total emissions 3.8%) and forcing cave man like living conditions will NOT make any detectable difference to temperature OR climate.
The physics is crystal CLEAR on this point.
Anyone saying differently is either ignorant of the science and underlying physics or is lying to you.


dawn dodson
dawn dodson4 years ago

this is only the beginning.