More Mike Hulme: "Can climate change be seen"?

In a short and entertaining presentation, Mike Hulme talks about a central problem in the climate debate: Do we just believe in climate change, or can it be seen? He starts with three examples, New Orleans 2005, Bangkog 2011 and Somerset (England) 2014. Only the image of the flooded Somerset landscape can be linked to climate change, as the flooding resulted from more intense rainfalls - just as projected by climate scientists. 
From here, Mike Hulme contrasts "visibilists" and "invisibilists". He takes the example of the Higgs Boson - all you can see is a graph. You can see Somerset flooding, but you have to believe in the Higgs Boson. You see because you believe - or not?  In the following, he takes an example from a different sphere in order to discuss the question of visualization: the resurrection of Christ. Thomas does not believe, unless he sees the nail marks in the hands of Jesus. It is the most daring argument in Mike Hulme's presentation. To believe without seeing - isn't that what Jesus asks for?

In the following, Mike Hulme compares the hockeystick (work of "invisibilists") with the testimony of anthropologists, who have seen ("visibilists") climate change when doing research in cultures with memory of changing environments - they don't need climate science to believe in climate change.

Mike Hulme ends with "constructive visibilists", that is, artists. He displays a few well-known "postcards" - the photo-shopped polar bear, rice planting in London and a high water installation in Bristol (?).  In my opinion, each of these "constructive visibilities" artfully play with the seeing - believing problem, but maybe they lack the depth - the ontological stake -  of Mike Hulme's religious example.

(thanks to O.Bothe@geschichtenpost for the link to this presentation).