Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
- NEWS
- SPORTS
- BUSINESS
- ENTERTAINMENT
- LIFE
- TRAVEL
- OPINION
Climate change committee debate turns ugly
October 30th, 2009, 10:00 am · 20 Comments · posted by Dena Bunis, Washington Bureau Chief
Sens. Barbara Boxer, Arlen Specter and Energy Secretary Steven Chu
It got a little testy this past week as Sen. Barbara Boxer held three days of hearings on her and Sen. John Kerry’s climate change bill.
There never has been a meeting of the minds between Republicans and Democrats on this.
The debate got ugly during the hearings. I take a look at the back on forth in this week’s Letter from Washington. Click here to read it. And it’s likely to get even more heated next week as Boxer attempts to get the votes to bring the bill to the Senate floor.
Should Congress set limits on greenhouse gas emissions?
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Comments
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our User Agreement.- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
20 Comments
Leave a Reply
-
ADVERTISEMENT
-
DENA BUNIS, Washington bureau chief, 202-628-6381 or dbunis@ocregister.com
BRIAN JOSEPH, Sacramento correspondent, 916-449-6046 or bjoseph@ocregister.com
JENNIFER MUIR, County government reporter, 714-796-7813 or jmuir@ocregister.com
JOEL WALSH, Washington bureau intern, 202-628-6381 or jwalsh@ocregister.com
MARTIN WISCKOL, Politics reporter, 714-285-2867 or mwisckol@ocregister.com twitter.com/MartinWisckol
Click here for bloggers' biographies
-
-
-
-
-
ADVERTISEMENT
There does appear to have been some warming over the past decade or two. The question is really how much, if any, is due to man and CO2. That has not been esthablished or proven.
Except you are dead wrong on all counts
‘Independent statisticians reject â��global coolingâ�� fable”
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com//2009/10/26/independent-statisticians-reject-global-cooling-fable
Science Reinforces Human Role as Climate Change Impacts Accelerate
http://www.wri.org/press/2009/07/science-reinforces-human-role-climate-change-impacts-accelerate
The Human Hand in Climate Change http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/01/the-human-hand-in-climate-change/langswitch_lang/in
Attributing Mankind
http://cce.890m.com/attributing-mankind/
Those are all enviromentally biased blogs. Enviromentalists posing as scientists.
Only an OC poll could come out this lop-sided. Pick up a book besides the Bible once in a while and leave the middle ages behind you tatooed, pickup truck driving, methheads.
The only Global Warming is due to the hot air coming from the incompetent politicians.
Global Warming is the biggest scam since Global Cooling was the rage in the 1970’s.
There was no scientific consensus on cooling in the 1970s …
Climate Change anatomy of a myth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU_AtHkB4Ms
1970s Cooling consensus myth debunked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nTw0KneNLg
Cooling climate `consensus’ of 1970s never was
Myth often cited by global warming skeptics debunked
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/37590/title/Cooling_climate_%E2%80%98consensus%E2%80%99_of_1970s_never_was
And as today…there is no scientific consensus on MAN-MADE global warming!
The media for the most part seems to ignore climatologists who say that the climate is cooling. They also for the most part don’t put Gore on the spot to put his own money where his mouth is and made his own mansion energy efficient. Reportedly it isn’t and he is too busy trying to force others to make changes to clean up his own house first. Oh, and of course he stands to make millions or more if cap and trade goes through.
Reminds me of indulgences in the middles ages. They can pay to pollute. What good will that do? Big expensive bureaucracy and what will it actually do to reduce emissions?
Oh, and how much change in the warming or cooling will all the proposed changes make? I’ve read some that are even very much alarmists about it that say it would be a drop in the bucket.
So we are being asked to do these massive programs that will hurt the economy and even some global warming alarmists don’t think it will really make much difference.
Global warming is caused mainly by hot air and methane gas passed by Senators Boxer and Feinstein and the the rest of the gas bags in DC and Sacramento.
Ever notice that these geniuses never talk about cooling? Not once in the history of this planet has the Earth ever “over heated”, but we know for a fact there have been innumerable Ice Ages. I do not waste my time elephant proofing my home and I do not understand why they think the greatest threat to mankind and the planet is something for which there is no precedence. We are roughly 4000 years overdue for an Ice Age. If we are warming, that is good. Also of interest to me is the fact that virtually no money has gone toward investigating any other source of warming aside from man made CO2. This is not science. Fear the cold, fire the politicians.
I don’t support cap and trade, but your statement that the earth has never warmed is incorrect. According to the biogenetic theory of petroleum, the earth overheated as a result of vulcanism. The ice caps melted, and the oceans became stagnant. Algae covered most of the oceans, and the bacteria that would normally eat it were killed by the lack of polar currents and associated poisonous conditions below the surface. The preserved algae sank and was covered by silt, sank into the earth and ultimately became petroleum. This removed enough CO2 from the atmosphere to eventually restore the ice caps and re-start polar currents, oxygenating the oceans once again. This is not a seriously disputed theory.
Basic energy law means the earth will cool over the very long run. There may be blips, but global warming is a scam by a bunch of politicians who do not know how to spell thermodynamics. On the other hand, if we are warming due to CO2 build-up, who says that is bad? The #1 problem facing humanity is hunger. Global warming will help solve this problem. There will be more areas that can produce more plant fruit with greater efficiency and lower water requirements. At higher background CO2 levels, plants produce more, with significantly less (40-60%) water requirements and are more robust against bugs and disease. They also are more fruitful. Whose to say that our current temperature is ideal anyway? Still all of that is meaningless, because the earth will cool in the long run.
If 80% of the people understand it is a farse why don’t the politicians get it.
This is another waste of time and money for the American People.
Our government should be completely focused on cutting waste and fraud out of all government programs to ensure when they cut programs they are doing the very best to keep all the programs they can.
We need to cut government spending and get it in line with the pocketbooks for the people. The politicians are running away with our money! We should fire them all and look for replacements that are fiscally responsible.
Democrat hypocrites (but I repeat myself) want to control the lives of everyone else even as they jaunt around and around and around the world. Take Al Gore, please. The pretense that we should, or even CAN, cut carbon dioxide emissions 80% by 2050 is the height of pretension and dishonesty.
And now please this:
http://theglobalwarmingscam.blogspot.com
What we are seeing is not a reasoned discussion about if the global climate is changing due to human activity, but a pack of wolves fighting over a carcass.
The politicians are ignorant to the facts, using the boogeyman of AGW to bring home more “bacon”(money) to their “constituents”(contributors). This has become about money and power, not science. Even if the knowledge fairy descended upon the EPA this very day, that would not be enough for those at the table feasting upon what is left of manufacturing in America. The average american is not equipped to separate fact from fiction when speaking science and math. The teachers unions have seen to that, trading geometry, calculus and physics for multi cultural studies courses. Taking their “facts” from the cinema, the average citizen does not have the requisite critical thinking skills to know when they are being bamboozled.
We have thrown the baby out with the bath water. Toxic emission regulation and curtailment was the focus of the environmental movement. Declaring CO2 an emission shows how far the pendulum has swung. How can the emissions from our own bodies be considered pollution? The ignorance of government just boggles the mind.
Clean up toxic waste streams? you bet! Draconian regulations to “save the planet”? No thanks.
I weep for our future as I witness the hubris, ignorance, and greed that is our government at all levels. Megalomania reigns supreme from city hall to DC, and we have our deficits and ever increasing regulatory burden to prove it.
IF politicians actually believed in Climate Change, they would pay attention to a believer in Anthropogenic Global Warming - Professor Lomborg. HIs group’s proposals are not only more effective for less than a tenth the cost, but would work whether temperature goes up or down.
Instead they pay attention to the likes of Gore, who believes that when the ice in his drink melts it raises the water level in the glass by the total amount of ice.
Can anyone really be so stupid… So ignorant… So mindless and brainwashed to really believe that there is no such thing as global warming?
Jobilizer, I guess a lot of people (like you) can be so stupid and ignorant–to not hear nor understand the EXPERTS’ concensus. Chew on this:
48% of Americans thnk most climate scientists do not agree that the Earth has been warming in recent years, and 53% think climate scientists do not agree that human activities are a major cause of that warming (Doran and Zimmerman poll, 2009). A poll performed by Doran and Zimemrman at Earth and Environmental Sciences, Univ. of illinois at Chicago of 3,146 Earth scientists showed that 96.2% of climatologists who are active in climate research believe that mean global temperatures have risen and that 97.4% BELIEVE THAT HUMAN ACTIVITY IS A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR in changing mean global temperatures. Petroleum engineers were among the biggest doubters with only 47% believing in human involvement.
So the EXPERTS on climate change (climatologist who work in that field–and not TV weathermen or climatologists who retired 20 years ago) show a huge consensus–and for absolutely no financial boost nor power gain! What in the heck kind of conspiracy would you imagine in your little head would account for their actions? It is no surprise to me that petroleum scientists had a different result in their poll–they are NOT climate experts and they have EVERYTHING to gain from potential big oil employers.
Oh geez, Jobilizer, I just saw the “No” such thing on your post! Obviously, those two little letters that I missed mean everything!. So sorry, I need glasses, I guess, since we’re on the same page. I’ll direct my comments instead to Mark Green, Sparky and others.