San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

I stand corrected - I hope, seeing what they've decided to publish on the topic in the past, they will be agreeable to running some stories that actually go into the real science behind climate change, the fact it is controlled by forces well beyond human control or influence, and the fact that despite several decades of alarmist rhetoric, NOTHING that the IPCC, Al Gore and the "Hockey Team" have warned us about is showing ANY SIGN of coming about. The only thing they DO have going for them is they keep fiddling with both the past hard data concerning temperature measurements, and in the case of JONES he actually destroyed the original data, plus they keep eliminating any stations that show cooling trends or help show that global temperatures are in fact NOT changing significantly. As for the sea levels, I was walking in Torrey Pines one day and some self-proclaimed expert was talking about how devastating sea level increases driven by anthropogenic climate change have been for San Diego. Since my family has been here for generations and there are plenty of old photos showing that in fact very little change in sea level has occurred, the coast is essentially where it has been for much of San Diego's recorded history with only normal, natural erosion changing things much, it was easy to see FROM HARD DATA AND ACTUAL FACTS, that the worries about forthcoming huge changes in sea level were just more nonsense. But here, if you're willing to stipulate that Scripps Institute of Oceanography does contain more than it's fair share of climate alarmists, why do you think they just spent millions to build a facility within a stone's throw of the mean high tide line on a bluff that certainly will be quickly eroded out from under it if their claims have any validity? Why, if Al Gore's fear of major sea level increases is true, did he buy a million dollar property on the shore? My perception is that people who share your views are generally convinced to do so by emotional arguments and, for some curious reason, are resistant and even immune to actual hard scientific data as well as common sense. I'm trying to express it as politely as I can so please don't take it the wrong way. But the simple fact is this isn't rocket science and the evidence is there - why can't you at least consider it? If we were really headed for those huge temperature increases the alarmists, and your article, says are coming, and indeed people like you have been saying were actually underway for the last three decades, why is it not happening? Why is it not here? Time has proven you wrong, yet you cling to a disproven set of beliefs. Why?
— December 5, 2012 2:18 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

If you really want to believe that, I suppose anything that emits CO2 "contributes to climate change", but only if you fall for the belief that the atmospheric CO2 level is driving atmospheric temperature levels. I invite you to head on out to Anza-Borrego any clear night and you will find out quickly how false the idea CO2 is forming some sort of "blanket" or "barrier" really is. You do know that daily temperature fluctuations all over the world more or less destroy that myth, don't you? Plus, again, we've already had demonstrated for us we cannot trust those who have taken over control of temperature records. They keep adjusting them to fit their theories - as I said in another post yes, in that respect global warming/climate change is indeed "MAN MADE". When you falsify (or adjust, if you insist on not accepting it's done deliberately to support a philosophy, not scientifically) temperature records to fit your political and social goals that is not climate change - it's fraud.
— December 5, 2012 2:09 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

ABSOLUTELY!
— December 5, 2012 2:05 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Obama repeatedly states that his plan is to essentially tax the rich until there are no rich no more. He has been preaching "wealth redistribution" since before he was ever first elected to public office. Obama rolled back welfare reforms made under Clinton which made that system a hand up, not a hand out. This is a tried and true way to buy votes but it is disastrous in the long run. The more people who board the gravy train the less there are to propel it and, eventually, it grinds to a halt. But we're a bit off topic now and it's part my fault so perhaps we should meander back to the issues of your story.
— December 5, 2012 2:04 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

"Most scientists" is a political argument, not a scientific one. Plus that is incorrect, as a visit to http://www.petitionproject.org/ quickly reveals. Those same "climatologists" have been caught red handed faking data and though many have attempted to whitewash and cover it up, the fact remains that even the U.K. Met office now admits there's been no statistically significant warming in 16 years despite continuing steady miniscule increases in atmospheric CO2 year over year. As human CO2 use has fluctuated over the last 150 or so years the CO2 level has continued an essentially linear rise suggesting that the two are NOT related. Much of the surface temperature rise you cite was indeed man-made or should I say "MANN-MADE" as it was "scientists" like Mann who have continually adjusted the data to support their theories. That is not science, that is propaganda. But there's a bigger question I have not yet seen you or anyone address. Who, other than Al Gore, has any HARD evidence that current temperature and CO2 levels are optimum and that warming or higher CO2 is bad? If you bother to check, the current atmospheric CO2 levels are at relatively historic lows. If you bother to check the Earth tends to go through periods of intense cold that last a long time. The warming we are currently experiencing, that started around 15,000 years ago before humans had anything to do with it, is not a bad thing - it is a good thing! Warmer would not necessarily be worse and, as I pointed out in another post here, the conclusions that temperatures will go up uniformly are hasty and already proven false. Much of the alarmism stems from a period where several known REGIONAL climate cycles happened to all line up on the hot side of things and yes, we did have some unusually warm nights and mild winters then, but we do not have the sustained high temperatures alarmists keep saying will be here soon - and they've been issuing dire warnings about that for what, three if not four decades now? All the fuss about two storms, Katrina and Sandy, when in fact the measure of tropical storm intensity, the Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index, shows there is no major uptrend in tropical storms as claimed. Go ahead - tell me what claim of the alarmists you still believe and I'll present HARD DATA that refutes it.
— December 5, 2012 1:59 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Thanks!
— December 5, 2012 1:49 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Oh, and by the way, if your own statement that, "Sempra Energy, San Diego Gas & Electric’s parent, has among the highest profits of American utilities, and the local rates are among the nation’s steepest." isn't a clear indication of the FAILURE of government involvement in energy, I don't know what is. CA is one of the most regulated, taxed energy markets on the planet, isn't it? And there's your result. A better argument for abolishing government meddling I don't know, other than the rest of your article perhaps!
— December 4, 2012 11:27 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Coincidence does not prove causation. Nobody's denying climate change, that's a straw man that only people with no valid arguments use. Here, want to borrow my mirror so you can see what I'm saying? Nobody's denying CO2 is increasing. However, a mechanism that explains that, along with a slight move towards NEUTRAL (of course alarmists talk of a dangerous acidification when it is no such thing) of the ocean surface waters is known and gee, it's all natural! A naturally warming planet with naturally upwelling cold, carbon rich waters tends to see some of that carbon go into the atmosphere and some go towards a slight decrease in ocean surface water pH. We cannot stop climate change. It is real and it is a constant. Constantly changing, that is. Beyond our ability to alter in any significant way, whether due to economics if you must believe only that or the more realistic view that it is driven by natural forces which are demonstrably orders of magnitude greater than anything we can do. Anyone bother to estimate how much CO2 insects produce annually? You should. Meanwhile, see my other posts. Turns out global warming is actually good, if you bother to ask NASA or check the geologic record.
— December 4, 2012 11:25 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Sort of blows your belief in his smarts... Funny how Obama and the Democrats are part of that U.N. effort to drive everyone DOWN to the same level, yet people still vote for them. Low information voting sure did surge this time around!
— December 4, 2012 11:19 p.m.

San Diego big business and the city whistle past the greenhouse-gas graveyard

Well I know pretty much EVERYTHING Rachel Carson ever predicted turned out to be NOT TRUE. Her work against pesticides led to many deaths around the world. And if you'd stop devouring and regurgitating propaganda for just a moment and start looking at what geology and other real sciences can teach us you would know the warm, wet times are the times that the biosphere, and human civilization, thrives. The cold, dry times are the times of the great extinction events. Global warming is actually good - who would have guessed? Too bad there's been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/26/no-statisti… Now watch you attack the messengers and ignore the message, which you know is true - you can't refute.
— December 4, 2012 11:18 p.m.