Quantcast
 
Loading
WatchSonoma
WatchSonoma Watch

What happened to global warming?

The subject seems to have fallen out of vogue in politics. The president didn’t mention the words global warming or climate change in his State of the Union address on Tuesday. He did talk about investment in “clean energy” but primarily in the context of spurring innovation and job development – not saving the planet.

Meanwhile, Sonoma County has pledged to reduce emissions 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2015, the most ambitious goal set by any Bay Area community. But the issue didn’t really come up at the State of the County breakfast in Rohnert Park last week. In fact, right after the breakfast, Ann Hancock, director of the county’s Climate Protection Campaign, came up to me to share her frustrations that the focus of  remarks by Jerry Nickelsburg, senior economist at UCLA Anderson Forecast, was in the opposite direction – building infrastructure and housing to grow the California’s state’s economy. There was no mention of green jobs or green technology. Are they just not that significant?

It will be interesting to hear whether and how much Gov. Jerry Brown raises the issue during his state of the state address on Monday.

To keep the discussion alive, we’re publishing a Close to Home on Friday from retired Sonoma State University professor Lou Miller who takes on Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., for continuing to label global warming as a “hoax,” particularly given the snow storms dumping on the East Coast.

“The security, competitiveness and prosperity of the United States depend on our competence in science and technology,” Miller writes. “Our country’s leaders need to pay tribute to, not denigrate, our hard-working and honest scientists and, as we’ve been doing since the Revolutionary War, pay heed to their informed advice.”

The question is whether the nation has the capacity - and the courage – to head the advice of experts in repairing the economy and the environment simultaneously. Or, as with immigration reform, will it become a revolving issue, one that gets put on hold at least until the political climate in D.C. improves.

- Paul Gullixson





64 Responses to “What happened to global warming?”

  1. Cognitive Dissonance says:

    Captain Boo: 2005 and 2010 were the hottest years on record.

    But don’t argue with me, go ahead and argue with Krugman’s nobel prize.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=1&ref=paulkrugman

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

  2. Captain Boo says:

    I’ll tell you what happened to global warming. It ended 15 years ago. We had a bump in temperature in 1998, but average temps have not risen since 1995. Wake up and realize that the earth goes through temperature changes all the time. The most recent concern is global cooling. However, it all falls under the IPCC’s umbrella of “Global Climate Change.” Those people will continue their scare tactics no matter which way temperatures go.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

  3. Kay Tokerud says:

    @Clive, that was not my argument. I said man-made global warming might be real but California doesn’t have the money to tackle it right now. We cannot afford to be even less competitive than we are now, being almost the very worst state in which to do business. You seem to believe that it won’t cost anything to substantially reduce CO2 emissions. At this point in time, costs will be high because it still costs a lot more to produce renewable energy than from conventional methods. In the future, hopefully, that will change. And a slow incremental approach to increasing renewables will achieve better overall results without harming the economy. Plowing ahead without any regard for the effects on our state’s budget and the economic climate for businesses could end up with an even worse situation than we are in now.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

  4. Clive Jones says:

    Kay, your argument is that we shouldn’t do things because they are difficult. Furthermore, you’ve limited the solutions down to huge tax increases. Like any problem, we need to innovate in order to overcome. If you don’t see a good solution, then let’s start working on something that IS possible in today’s environment – not just throw up our hands.

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

  5. Kay Tokerud says:

    California is in no position to do anything about global warming even if it were true. How will we pay for all the new necessary infrastructure? Being $28 billion in the hole, it makes no sense to undertake something that will only make it more expensive and more difficult to do business in California. Yesterday’s hearings on the State budget listed California as #48 out of 50 of the worst place to start a business. 48th! This is not the time for it, sorry. The only way this effort to fight the elusive global warming could take place is to add a lot of taxes on energy production and usage. At this point, doing that would ensure that California will fail and fall into bankruptcy. California is too big to fail and we must not allow that to happen. Support governor Brown’s proposals to close the gap and then we can start talking about expensive new programs and higher taxes for energy.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7

  6. Jaak Saame says:

    @ Josh and other AGW deniers

    Water vapor produces two-thirds of the world’s greenhouse effect. All of the other gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, halocarbons, etc. – contribute the other third. The effect of water vapor is so significant that the global average temperature would be below freezing without it.

    Warm air can contain more moisture than cold air. This is the basis of the water vapor feedback. As the atmospheric temperature rises and the amount of water vapor increases, the greenhouse effect is enhanced, further increasing temperature.

    Humans are not generating more atmospheric water vapor, but they are generating more atmospheric carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, etc.

    Many natural and human-made gases contribute to the greenhouse effect that warms the Earth’s surface. Water vapor (H2O) is the most important, followed by carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used in air conditioners and many industrial processes.

    The increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration is the most significant cause of the current warming. Other greenhouse gases along with other factors also contribute. Scientists have estimated the contribution to warming made by a range of gases, dust and solar radiation. They have a high level of certainty that greenhouse gases contribute the most to warming, with increases in CO2 as the greatest contributor with about 1.4 watts/meter2 and methane, nitrous oxide, and halocarbons making smaller contributions.

    Read all about what the National Academy of Sciences says about global warming, including effects of volcanoes, clouds, methane from animals, ocean circulation, earth orbital variations, sun variations, and land use changes:

    http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/causes01.jsp

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9

  7. Clive Jones says:

    James, your arguments (and the arguments of many here) are incomprehensible and read like a list of talking points and code-words with all the grammer taken out.

    No other mainstream conservative group outside the United States doubts the robust science that explains climate change. 2010 was the warmest year out of the warmest decade on record. In addition to atmospheric warming, excessive CO2 levels are acidifying our oceans and threatening already unstable fisheries (and related industries). I don’t care about how we address it (top-down or grass roots), I just care that it gets dealt with. We’re here on this earth to do things and leave the next generation with something better.

    Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6

  8. Oops, correction. The dynamic used to control the populous for ages is:PROBLEM=FEAR SOLUTION=CONTROL (transposed it, math was never my thing). Responding to Just Me;Obamacare included a ‘breath tax’. Remember a couple years ago the big fear de jour was local municipal ‘water shortage’. I was wishing our leaders would be genuine stewards of the Earth last year during the BP Gulf disaster(the ramifications from that incident have not been fully realized). Yeah, lay some Big Brother control, restrictions, regulations on them. Maybe an E.I.R. once a decade. Wanna talk about carbon emissions?

    Thumb up 4 Thumb down 10

  9. Josh Stevens says:

    @ principled

    I notice the reporting on AGW goes in cycles.

    It’s another example of “group-think” among the state-supported media.If we give ‘em a couple of months,they’ll be back on it.Especially if B.O. starts using executive orders to push Cap and Tax.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7

  10. Josh Stevens says:

    @Anyone who supports the notion of AGW

    Again,how is CO2 a pollutant?

    How many parts per million is an acceptable level of CO2?

    And how did you come to that conclusion?

    well?

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5

  11. Fiscal Conservative says:

    Al Gore, Bill Clinton and his cronies should be deported to communist china.

    The USDOE and NASA busted the myths of this carbon clown years ago, but the possibility of a new economy based on carbon trading was a real possibility.

    The goal of redisributing the American wealth to developing nations while taking a margin is criminal.

    What a complete farce.

    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 10

  12. principled says:

    The reason “global warming” doesn’t come up anymore is because it’s been proven to be a fraudulent idea. The county’s commitment to spend in that direction reveals how absurd county leaders are. They should drop everything that had anything to do with that fraud and stop wasting their/our taxpayer money. Al Gore got rich and so did some of his friends when they forced some states to invest in “green” equipment. It’s all fraudulent, folks. That’s why the news has stopped reporting on it.

    Thumb up 17 Thumb down 10

  13. BigDogatPlay says:

    Beef King wrote:

    ‘Who funded and formed the shadow group known as Regional Climate Protection Authority?
    What is their budget? What power do they have? When did this become a reality?
    Who is on the board, and who put them there?’

    A bit of research led me to http://www.sctainfo.org/.

    Apparently the RCPA is the same thing as the Sonoma County Transportation Authority. Jake McKenzie of the Rohnert Park City Council would presumably be the chair. I’d assume that the Board of Supervisors and LAFCO sanctioned it.

    Board members, professional staff, all are listed on the web site.

    This is your government at work friends. An adjunct board with a largely (so far) unknown set of regulatory powers and authority and all it seems to be doing, so far, is spending our money on studies.

    It is well past time for us to end the scam of big government. It devours resources and returns nothing of value to the economy. It’s time for the voters to turn the featherbedding professional politicians out at all levels.

    Lest they destroy us all economically and socially.

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 11

  14. Cognitive Dissonance says:

    Yes, Jason….that definitely sounds more credible than 97% of climatologists…

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 8

  15. Jason Valez says:

    The book THE DENIERS by Lawrence Solomon about the world-renowned scientists who stood up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud is a good place to start your own research into the theory of man-made global warming. The purveyors of fear have tried to overcome true scientific rigor in favor of political rhetoric used to scare people into submission to their government. We are having a reverse revolution, one in which the government is attempting to overthrow the people. The global warming scare tactic is their modus operandi and those who are asleep will certainly fall into the trap.

    Thumb up 20 Thumb down 10

  16. Cognitive Dissonance says:

    Here’s a summary of the study: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/97_of_active_climatologists_ag.php

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  17. Just curious says:

    97% ? I guess depends on who you talk to and which website you get your information from. NASA admitted in 2005 that it’s equipment was fualty and 10 years of temps were out of wack and inaccurrately too high. Some say the scientific community is split 50/50 on warming at all and even less that it is man made. The anti-gun lobby still tells you there are 35-40 children killed in America every day from gun accidents. The real number is still tragic at 32 each year, but facts are facts. All becuase someone tells you the number is 97%, doesnt mean it is 97%… Be careful where you get your facts from, if you want to be correct.

    Thumb up 12 Thumb down 8

  18. Political Scientist says:

    It’s sad to me to see the ignorance and cognitive dissonance in most of the posts on here. Take, for example the “some reputable scientists have debunked the junk science”…these ‘reputable scientists’ make up 3%. That means 97% agree that this is no “hoax”. Ninety-Seven Percent. If you can find any other issue that 97% of a specialized field of people agree on, I would love to hear it.

    How about you put your energy to better use and help solve the problem

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 19

  19. Todd johnson says:

    My 4th grade teacher told us we would die from the soon to MAN MADE arrive ice-age in 1976…her name Virginia Strom Martin at wright school…check out her facebook still super leftest

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 11

  20. Rational Observer says:

    I’m with Inhofe. If “global warming” isn’t a hoax, at least it’s just one more power grab by leftist nanny-staters.

    Trying to affect the planet’s climate by being the most “green” state or county is a complete waste of time and resources and effectively an economic suicide pact. What Jerry Nickelsburg and President Obama both realize is that being “green” is incompatible with general prosperity. The sooner our state and local politicians and activists realize this, the happier they (and all of us) will be.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 13

  21. Beef King says:

    I’m with Big Dog. Who funded and formed the shadow group known as Regional Climate Protection Authority?
    What is their budget? What power do they have? When did this become a reality?
    Who is on the board, and who put them there?
    Please PD, follow up on this group.

    Thumb up 21 Thumb down 11

  22. Jaak Saame says:

    High temperature superconductors used in power transmission are perfect direct current conductors. Wires made from superconductor materials are over 100 times more powerful than copper or aluminum wires of the same size and they can transmit power with zero energy loss when carrying direct current. The lack of resistance makes it possible, indeed practical, to construct dc superconductor cables with virtually any desired power transmission capability.

    The ASME article link below illustrates how the US national electric grid will become strong and energy efficient. The national grid will save energy, make the grid more reliable, transfer electrical power long distances without losses and connect the new wind and solar plants to the grid efficiently.

    http://memagazine.asme.org/Articles/2010/December/Nationalizing_Grid.cfm

    Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

  23. BigDogatlPlay says:

    ‘Today the Regional Climate Protection Authority reviewed it’s first year of activity and reconfirmed our collective resolve as 9 cities and the county to lead, coordinate and implement 13 program areas for GHG reduction. Ann Hancock was one of many stakeholders present as part of this annual review.We’ll have an Annual Report on our first year of activity out in February.’

    What ‘Regional Climate Protection Authority’? What is this authority’s charter, who sits on it and what is the scope of their authority?

    This is a very, very troubling bit of big government gobble-de-gook from Mr. McKenzie.

    Thumb up 18 Thumb down 11

  24. Just Me says:

    Re: my previous comment, actually you don’t have to stop breathing, just stop exhaling.

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 9

  25. Just Me says:

    Attention Please!
    To those of you who truly believe we need to reduce and eliminate our carbon footprint, please stop breathing. You will never eliminate your carbon footprint until you stop emitting C02.

    Thank you.

    ps: I have a World Book Encyclopedia Annual Yearbook from 1978 where scientists say we are heading into an ice age. I guess I missed it since we are now having a melt down?
    And Graeme, thank you for pointing out that Mother Nature is our worst pollutant.

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 13

  26. Phil Maher says:

    Notes to self: Preparations for global warming-

    1. Shop for boats

    2. Recalculate how long it takes to get to the beach

    3. Don’t lease space in Manhattan below the second floor

    Thumb up 15 Thumb down 8

  27. Josh Stevens says:

    @Jake Mackenzie

    @Ann Hancock

    When you’re ready to;

    Walk everywhere
    Wash your dishes/clothes by hand(water only)
    Disconnect your furnace/AC
    Cook with fire(not on “Spare the Air” days,of course)
    Shower once a week,with reclaimed water

    …then you can lecture the rest of us.Until then,you’re both hypocrites with too much power…nothing more.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 10

  28. Just curious says:

    If 99.9% of the scientists say it is real, how come it is cooler now that 10 years ago? Just curious. If wind power was efficient, we would all have a windmill. If solar was efficient enough to truly run our homes, we would all have that. Since the GREEN energy has yet to emerge as efficient, and the temps are not rising, Stop already.

    You want comparison studies? Compare the carbon footprint of a Prius with a Ford Mustang V6. Three times the carbon footprint and they still don’t know what to do with those huge batteries, just an ecological nightmare. The difference in cost pays for enough gas to run it for 7 years, about the life of that $7000 battery. And still it will not have put as much co2 into the air as the production and waste material from the Prius.

    If your paycheck depends on telling people it is getting hotter, than you will darn sure tell them that, even if they are standing there with a decreasing thermometer. Quit squirting water on my back and telling me it is raining.

    Thumb up 18 Thumb down 9

  29. NOTUTOO says:

    @ Jaak Saame…You said “These companies fund crooked scientist and engineers.” Hmmmm… where do you suppose those scientists work now? Interestingly enough, the bulk of Earth’s greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth’s greenhouse effect and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets). The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other “minor greenhouse gases.” Humans can only claim responsibility for abut 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually, the rest of it is all natural

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10

  30. George says:

    \Nearly all climate scientists 99.9% agree that AGW is a fact\

    LOL….WOW

    Nearly all REAL scientists 99.9% agree that AGW is junk science.

    Also ALGORE is getting sued for falsely putting names of scientists on a list claiming AWG real. The person that posted that first sentence is uneducated on the subject and has not kept current on events

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9

  31. Reality Check says:

    I am sure that alternative fuels, green energy, etc., do bring with them many benefits. They also, however, bring many costs. Cost that, unfortunately, proponents never want to talk about, the most prominent non-talker being the president of the United States.

    When listening to the sales pitch, one gets the impression these lofty goals come with a price tag of zero. They don’t, of course. That proponents can’t muster the courage to honestly reveal the costs of what they’re proposing undermines, to any thinking adult, the whole pitch.

    The real cost of solar energy is, for example, 25-30 cents per kwh. Remember, California lost a governor because he was afraid to let the PUC authorize electric rates to go from 10 to 13 cents per kwh.

    The American public believes, apparently, that the right to cheap gasoline is guaranteed somewhere in the Constitution. So, the cost of so-called green fuels are hidden behind a wall of tax subsidies and tariffs.

    And so on. The green energy movement needs to a adopt a vow of truth in advertising.

    Thumb up 19 Thumb down 9

  32. Ann Hancock says:

    Rapidly transitioning from fossil fuel to clean, green, renewable energy is the solution to the climate crisis, as Obama emphasized in his SOTU speech. This transition brings with it loads of co-benefits such as energy resilience and security, improved public health (obesity, asthma), and local job creation. So even if you think the climate crisis is a hoax, there’s lots to like by reducing our addiction to fossil fuels.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 25

  33. GD says:

    The Regional Climate Protection Authority is a group of people paid with the tax payers money, that have meetings about “regional climate protection.” If it makes you happy that we are paying for this and cutting fire, police and health services, then please keep electing the same people. This is typical of our county government.

    Let’s lay off law enforcement and use that money to pay a bunch of people to have weekly meetings and then go sit back in their offices trying to decide what the next meeting agenda should be.

    Thumb up 24 Thumb down 10

  34. Jaak Saame says:

    Nearly all climate scientists 99.9% agree that AGW is a fact. They have shown that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that traps heat. This fact is also endorsed by worldwide governments and by worldwide engineering, scientific, military and financial organizations.

    Some politicians (like Sen. James Inhofe)and their friends in the oil, gas, coal and related companies are the ones who reject this science because it hurts their bottom lines – just like tobacco companies rejected lung cancer concerns, and auto companies rejected exhaust pollution concerns. These companies fund crooked scientist and engineers.

    Climate change conspiracy theories are funded by companies like EXXON and by biased media like Fox News are baseless.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 25

  35. Snake says:

    If AGW is really happening then the result would be Manhattan being flooded in 40 yrs per Al Gore. Now try getting an answer from the same believers on what it would take fact-wise to convince them AGW is NOT happening. Would Manhattan not being flooded by 2050 do it or are we to expect another onslaught of re-reasoning then?
    Also I wonder what the consensus of scientific findings would be if the government only funded global cooling studies…

    Thumb up 19 Thumb down 9

  36. Eric says:

    On the one hand, Sonoma County is doggedly going ahead with reducing CO2 emissions by 25% below 1990 levels in four more short years. And on the other, there’s an article on the right column of the page titled “Supes look for options to erase $42 million deficit.” Our county elected officials really think they can close this deficit AND impose the mandates on businesses needed to reduce carbon emissions by that much in such a short time? Good luck. What utter junk science. God help us all.

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 8

  37. grant says:

    global warming. it is better to say extreme climate change. That is what is happening not due to just pollution but also the lowest average sun spot count since the the mini ice age. The sun spot count indicates the relative temperature of the sun emmissions. there is normaly a lull in spots but then after a burst of sunspots, didn’t happen this time.
    Freeze Ya Later! bye

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4

  38. Beef King says:

    The Regional Climate Protection Authority is an enemy of every free American.
    Jake, why not abandon the facade and state your true intentions?
    It’s not climate control you seek, it’s the control of people that is your goal.

    Thumb up 31 Thumb down 11

  39. NOTUTOO says:

    @Jake Mackenzie… “Regional Climate Protection Authority.” I have no idea what that is but the sound of that scares the crap out of me…

    Thumb up 27 Thumb down 10

  40. Jim says:

    @NOTUTOO

    manbearpig… still laughin.

    I wonder if any else get’s that.

    Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6

  41. pj says:

    They can’t get the weather right for the next week and I’m supposed to believe they got it pegged 50 years down the road.

    OK tell me the temperature for the next 5 days within 1 degree and I’ll believe you can get within 2 in fifty years.

    Hell will freeze over first, oh wait it just did.. take my word for it because it waws so cold my camera froze so I couldn’t take any pictures when I was just there but it was frozen over and I have imaginary data to prove it 100000%.

    Thumb up 23 Thumb down 9

  42. George says:

    Anybody that has legitimately kept up on this issue knows that the climate has been cooling since 98.

    NASA knows it, The scientific community knows it, and the fake global warming scientist know it ( hence “hide the decline”).

    Despite these facts Micheal Mann still got 10s of millions of dollars in stimulus money for deliberately deceiving tax payers. He should be convicted of fraud and rot in prison.

    Thumb up 35 Thumb down 11

  43. Pearl Alquileres says:

    It would be a shame if the efforts to reduce pollution were to experience a backlash when the Global Warming hoax becomes irrefutable.

    Thumb up 26 Thumb down 11

  44. John says:

    “January 27, 2011 at 9:47 pm Today the Regional Climate Protection Authority reviewed it’s first year of activity and reconfirmed our collective resolve as 9 cities and the county to lead, coordinate and implement 13 program areas for GHG reduction. ”

    Wonder how many fat-pensioned pencil-pushers we’re paying to sit on this board. At a time when police and fire jobs are being cut an obvious way to save money just suggests itself.

    Thumb up 29 Thumb down 9

  45. NOTUTOO says:

    Obama’s cooling it on the Global Warming-Climate Disruption rhetoric (manbearpig)until after the 2012 Presidential election. American’s don’t believe it’s happening. When he’s out of office he won’t care anymore about it than the average citizen.

    Thumb up 30 Thumb down 9

  46. Tom says:

    Bill batton

    You are uninformed on the issue. global temps have decreased since 98 and are continuing to decrease.

    You must have gotten your numbers from scientists that have a vested interest in AWG. I would recommend you check their work but, of course , they deleted all their source data ( so much for peer reviewed science)! Maybe that’s why they had to “Hide the Decline”

    Thumb up 29 Thumb down 8

  47. James Bennett says:

    Jason-big high five! I would like to have a beer with you. Wishing no disrespect to believers, anyone of pure intention trying to make the World better is to be honored. This is heavy stuff however because (man induced) global warming is the postulate under which the New World Order imposes its restrictions, guilt, etc.. Same basic dynamic has been used (to great effect)for generations. Fear=problem Control=solution. If they can get us at odds with each other, that’s a bonus. Can’t use religion any more, what better fear machine than Mother Earth. The U.N. has employed the most credible scientists in the world to come up with the ‘goods’ (kinda like WMDs) then kept the real findings a secret.(Google:globalwarminghoax)
    We’ve all been brainwashed to some extent. There are other legitimate environmental issues not in the spot light, the Gulf comes to mind.

    Thumb up 27 Thumb down 9

  48. Graeme Wellington says:

    The CO2 from the recent volcano eruption in Japan has placed more CO2 in the atmosphere than the CO2 saved changing to CFL lighting by the entire United States for 100 years. We think so much of ourselves don’t we? Please.

    Thumb up 32 Thumb down 11

  49. No change says:

    I truly wish there was logic here. Crying wolf is lying for the excitement. 2010 the hottest year on record? That is insane. The last high temp was in 1998, according to NASA. If your guru told you the global temp was rising would you just believe it? Would you look at records that showed since 1880 the temp has only increased point seven degrees and believe it? No. Would regional warming be a possibility? No, theres no money in that. Why was the carbon exchange licensing only given to a few select companies? I tried to get one, no go. Al Gore’s company got $480 million stimulus money to build $70,000 electric cars in Europe. This helps GW? No, GW is really a hoax. That is why when we go to environmental summits, the rest of the countries in attendance call it an Economic Summit, they are there for our money.

    Thumb up 31 Thumb down 12

  50. Reginald Manboobs says:

    AGW is the perfect theory, because any weather event that happens proves it. Whether it be flood, drought, high temperatures, low temperatures, more snow, no snow- it all \proves\ global warming. A basis of the scientific method is that hypotheses be testable. How can you test something when opposite results prove the hypothesis?

    Did anyone get a clue when AGW advocates stopped calling it Global Warming and started calling it Climate Disruption?

    The fact that AGW proponents have fudged or ignored data, refused to release data that did not support their conclusions, ignored the peer-review process in some cases, refused to publish scientific papers of well-known scientists who disagree with the AGW hypothesis, demonized dissenting scientists and admit their \science\ has a political component.

    The Sun, not a harmless essential trace gas, drives climate change.

    Thumb up 27 Thumb down 13

  51. Skippy says:

    Science is flexible, depending on the perspective and motive of those drawing conclusions.
    Here’s why I don’t buy AGW.
    It has nothing to do with record lows or highs, the glacial record or the wool on the caterpillars.
    It’s all about the sales staff.
    For 40 years I have listened to the same salesmen selling the same prescriptions for a wide variety of ailments.
    Whether it was the USSR, Bangladesh, Biafra, oil crises, nuclear winter, acid rain, jihad, global warming or the metric system, the answer to the insurmountable crisis du jour was simple;
    the diminishment of America and her influence, and the redistribution of her wealth to others more deserving.
    At this point, if God himself appeared on a commercial during the Super Bowl and validated every lie in the AlGore slideshow, my doubt would not decrease.
    You cried wolf once too often.
    No sale.

    Thumb up 32 Thumb down 14

  52. Jim says:

    If the alternative to global warming is an ice age, I think I will take warming.

    @Mechazawa

    You are sort of neglecting the great big body of water called the Pacific Ocean, have you heard of it? Should fresh water become scarce we have the technology and the means to all the water needed though it will cost more than it does today.

    Thumb up 19 Thumb down 11

  53. Josh Stevens says:

    The CO2 emissions that the left decries are the ones that come from industry.If you control the amount of emissions,you in essence,can control what that industry can or will produce.This will establish a staggering level of economic control,not only for governments,but also for the financial entities that will profit from the trading of “carbon credits”.

    CO2 IS NOT A POLLUTANT,WE’RE BEING SET UP!

    IGNORE LIBERALS,AND NEVER ACCEPT THEIR PREMISE(whatever it may be)

    Thumb up 28 Thumb down 15

  54. Bill Batten says:

    Let’s be clear here. We all know that the fossil fuel energy companies and their CEO’s fund organizations that make arguments conducive to their profits. If we don’t know that, we should have learned it from things like “The Tobacco Institute.” When scientists are paid good money to find a given result, some of them will make sure they find it and if they don’t, they’ll obfuscate the issue enough to create confusion.

    2010 was the hottest year on record. Five of the hottest years on record have come in the last decade. Things just don’t change that quickly without some help. That’s not the way natural history works. And, no amount of Koch brothers money will change these facts.

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 35

  55. Steve Klausner says:

    Being on the coast like we are I’m guessing more cold foggy summers. Give up the backyard tomatoes and grow more greens.

    Thumb up 13 Thumb down 6

  56. Jake Mackenzie says:

    Today the Regional Climate Protection Authority reviewed it’s first year of activity and reconfirmed our collective resolve as 9 cities and the county to lead, coordinate and implement 13 program areas for GHG reduction. Ann Hancock was one of many stakeholders present as part of this annual review.We’ll have an Annual Report on our first year of activity out in February.

    Thumb up 11 Thumb down 23

  57. Mike says:

    Yes, boys and girls earth warms and cools from time to time. The sun determines how warm or cold the planet will be. Bicycles, funny little electric cars and protests have nothing to do with real climate change.

    Sonoma County, as majestic as it is, is a very small place on a very small planet. What the politicans and Ann Hancock may do and don’t do has no impact on how warm or cold Santa Rosans feel in the winter or summer.

    Our climate is more closely regulated by the Pacific Ocean than by any ordinance or regulation passed by the Board of Supervisors or any City Council.

    These climate regulators have the impact of a gold fish on a aircraft carrier in mid ocean.

    Our air is cleaner than it has been in years. Our water is drinkable and safe and the world moves on.

    Thumb up 42 Thumb down 16

  58. Steve says:

    Seems to me that Yosemite was created by the retreating glaciers. How was this possible without the man made global warming?

    New York was once under ice. How did it retreat without man made warming?

    Maybe someone can tell us exactly what the correct temperature of the earth is supposed to be?

    Maybe someone can tell me exactly how much warmer the earth is today versus the year 1411? 1511? 1711? Can you prove it is warmer or did you just hear that on tv? I saw superman once on tv, did that make him real?

    Maybe someone can tell us why the temperatures have to be recalculated to prove global warming?

    Maybe someone can tell us why global warming is happening on Venus? Oh never mind, that is George Bush’s fault.

    Maybe you believers can help me understand why on the first earth day the scientists were claiming the ice age was inevitable and to change it global warming?

    Maybe one of you believers can share with us why we have had two ice ages and both melted without the help of man?

    Has anyone one of you believers considered that maybe the earth has not yet reached the correct temperature from the last ice age?

    I don’t expect real answers from the believers. You seem to be unable to think for yourselves. If the tv doesn’t tell you the answer you want to hear, you don’t believe it.

    Thumb up 46 Thumb down 15

  59. Mechazawa says:

    John,

    Do you have any produce in your house? Do you know where it comes from?

    Well, if it’s from California, it probably comes from the Central Valley. The Central Valley gets its water from the Sacramento River. This is true for about 90% of California.

    And where does the Sacramento River get its water? From the Sierra Nevada watershed (snow runoff).

    So if the world warms up and it no longer snows in the Sierra Nevada, what’s going to happen to the Sacramento River? And if the Sacramento River dries up, what’s going to happen to all that produce in your fridge?

    This pattern is common for most of the world. The Himalayan watershed, alone, provides water for over two billion people in India and China. Most of the entire continent of South America gets its water from Andean watersheds. What will happen to those populations if those rivers get smaller or dry up is not rocket science.

    Use your brain. Please. Warmer weather doesn’t translate to longer growing seasons when there’s no water to grow the plants.

    Thumb up 16 Thumb down 40

  60. John G. says:

    The scientific method is perfectly suitable to prove any scientific theory with the exception of AGW? Until someone can find an identical planet, put aside 4.5 billion years, and inhabit that planet with equally disbursed populations with identical economic conditions utilizing fossil fuels are omitting carbon into the atmosphere you cannot prove that human carbon consumption has anything to do with AGW.

    If you are able to prove that the planet is getting warmer (I am with Sussman that it is probably junk science) why would you look at it as a bad thing? Warmer weather would mean longer growing seasons, more food growth, and healthier populations. And to make all of you liberals happy would could feed the entire third world. Plus, wouldn’t it be awesome to be wearing shorts and flip-flops in November on the Northern Hemisphere?

    Thumb up 28 Thumb down 18

  61. Mechazawa says:

    Jason,

    Riiight, it’s all part of some huge conspiracy to raid your pocket and control resources.

    If you gave a damn about rights being taken away, dishonest profits, and control, you would’ve been screaming (and still screaming) seven years ago about the invasion of Iraq. Halliburton sure did make a pretty penny off of that venture.

    This is why your criticisms fall on deaf ears. If deniers really cared about anything they claim to be a serious issue, they would’ve been screaming 9 years ago… or 30 years ago, with the systematic destruction of our economy into something that doesn’t produce anything. They only whine about it now because they have a convenient target with a funny name in the White House.

    Maybe it IS all a conspiracy. Maybe it is an excuse. And maybe there’s a lot we don’t know. But there is also a lot we DO know, so much that it doesn’t matter. The potential costs involved if we don’t act far outweigh the costs if we do. By leaps and bounds, even, so much that causation is irrelevant. And we can only better ourselves by moving in the right direction. Fossil fuels, for example, are a huge national security issue. What’s to be lost by getting off of them? Environmental stewardship and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive.

    If you want to see global warming first hand, it’s not tough. Just go visit Alaska. Miles and miles of thawing tundra turned into an unusable, toxic sea of rotting, knee-deep sludge.

    This is why I have no tolerance for the deniers. It’s laziness. Laziness, selfishness, and willful ignorance keeps you from doing what’s right. And if we continue down this path, those labels could stick with us for all eternity. If we can’t do anything about global warming, oh well. At least we tried. And if we find out later that we were duped- oh well. It’s not the end of the world. But if we can, but don’t, because our heads are too far stuck up our behinds, we will go down in history as one of the worst generations of all time. The lazy generation. The generation that ruined it for everyone, that refused to stand up when it was their time. We will be the complete antithesis of our parents and grandparents who selfishly arose to their occasion and gave the ultimate sacrifice for us. If we can do something, but choose not to, your grandchildren, great grandchildren, and their children will have you to thank for the mangled, diminished place your sloth, selfish, and ugly scorched earth “I got mine you get yours” world view left them. If we can’t do anything, oh well. At least we tried. Better to try and fail then not try at all.

    Thumb up 20 Thumb down 48

  62. The weather says:

    People are funny. I have a brother in Boston and today’s cold weather proves to him that global warming is a hoax and a sister in Santa Rosa and today’s warm weather is proof that the globe is warming. A cloudy June day here and a hot humid day in Boston will be all the evidence either needs to prove the other wrong.

    Had Al Gore said the planet was cooling, Rush Limbaugh would have been busy proving that it was warming. People are funny…funny like puppets.

    Thumb up 24 Thumb down 23

  63. Jason Valez says:

    Of course it’s a hoax. The way you know is that they keep using it as an excuse to take people’s rights away. Being more energy efficient should not require the government to become tyrants that are attempting to take control of every aspect of our lives. Using energy will become a crime almost because the, gasp, ‘carbon footprint’ of man is killing us. What a crock if I’ve ever heard one.

    Lots of people aren’t buying it. Some reputable scientitsts have debunked the junk science that supports the theory. It’s all about the government controlling our land and natural resources. The man-made global warming theory is creating the perfect storm to usher in one world government all in the name of saving the planet. The upcoming cap and trade scheme will end up being the largest transfer of wealth ever.

    Thumb up 50 Thumb down 29

  64. cyclist says:

    “Meanwhile, Sonoma County has pledged to reduce emissions 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2015, the most ambitious goal set by any Bay Area community. ”

    How is this going to happen in 4 years time with Sonoma county’s population being so automobile centric? And so many oppositions against bike and pedestrian pathway or bike lanes.

    Thumb up 22 Thumb down 34

Leave a Reply