By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
So does alcohol and tobacco and they are both still legal. Could it be justified by the enormous sin taxes taken in?
What you asked in the challenge was; and I copied and pasted your statement, so it hasn't changed, is -
"Name a few personal freedoms you have personally lost in the last 50 years."
So I answered just with 4 auto-related examples.
Now topic specific to the purported GW; which my Ambient Temp of -15F at 7:45am (so probably not the low of the night) this morning doesn't agree with. I and many others believe in personal freedom and put it first, over the Greater Good. This individual freedom is the same desire to live well that Al Gore enjoys. I aspire to live like Al Gore with the big boat and houses, and only caring about the "Good for All" in words, but not thru actions.
Actually people like me, gagrice, and ruking have a much smaller carbon-footprint than Gore, and at least are not hypocrites like Gore.
In general when it comes to listening and following the majority of our political and business leaders, many times in the name of good, I remind myself of: 1) 99% of these people are proven either to be idiots or crooks, OR BOTH, and 2) that the reason behind most new legislation is to increase the power and wealth of the political class and the wealthy who lobby and buy these guys, for their mutual benefit.
Corporations and other wealthy people did not spend $2B during the elction campaigns for nothing, and the 40,000+ lobbyists in DC are there for a reason. They are there to create a system that legally robs and steals your $ thru taxes, and gives them power by promising the sheep of society, increased safety in return.
Many people like Al Gore believe that the world would be a better place if the populace would just agree to let government make the decisions as to what is good for you. They could tell you what temp. to keep your house (save energy), what to eat for balanced meals (ban bad foods), what to drive (or bike), when to cut the grass, whether you can cut a tree and whether you could burn the wood, ...
These are all personal choices that government should not interfere in.
We as a society need to rebel and buy the biggest, baddest SUV or PU that will fit in our driveway in protest of this horde of wealthy elitist. :shades: Or you can just sit in front of your flat screen and vegetate into a society that is being planned for you by the likes of Al Gore and Henry Waxman.
Better move to Alaska Kernick - Anchorage set a record today of 50°F. That's above btw..
I agree it is an assault on the poor people of the earth. All the CC money making schemes will not affect me like it will the couple trying to make a decent living in today's screwed up economy. We have nearly 10% unemployed or we will have shortly. Our lame brained Congress can only think of ways to make cars and utilities more expensive than they already are.
Larsb " Dangerous, makes insurance rates and hospital visits go up for all of us, kills kids, increases death rates for all "
I vote we remove the car vacation - 5,000 miles round trip in a car when you really should take public transportaion Must be stopped for the good of the poeple.- oh and to use your logic - 5,000 mile car trip, use up gas, increase global warming makes things bad for kids, increased potential for an accident, etc, etc, etc....
:shades:
As you point out vacations that require travel are certainly focused on individual happiness, and have a lot of negatives for society in general - wasting time that could be used for services and products for society, and using fossil fuels for unnecessary transport.
I certainly don't want the government involved in legislating whether people should be skydiving, hiking, skiing, boating, racing, eating french fries, smoking, drinking ... The government can educate people about topics, but that should be where the line is drawn.
It's also a slippery-slope when we start to think that government should be able to tell you what temperature to set your house at, what sort of fuel you can burn, what color you can paint house, or otherwise limit rights to use property.
So the state under the guise of Global Warming has mandated alternatives and the Feds, local and Indians have blocked most attempts to accomplish the mandate.
Larsb cannot understand why I despise all government and their stupid ill conceived regulations. This country is on the verge of self destructing. And it is government that is the root cause. NOT MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING. We will destroy our way of life long before the oceans rise to drown US.
Might as well take a vote....NAY. Please revise the tally as you vote.
Nays 1 Yeas 0
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Yeas 1 Nays 0
Nothing like coming to a scientific consensus by popular vote. :shades:
Meanwhile in the news, an anti-gravity expert, U.S. Astronaut Jack Schmitt Joins Global Warming Skeptics. The Heartland Institute is taking the same poll that you guys are.
Hansen - head of the Goddard Institute of Space Studies and winner of the WWF's top conservation award - first warned Earth was in danger from climate change in 1988 and has been the victim of several unsuccessful attempts by the White House administration of George Bush to silence his views.
So we have Dr. Hanson preaching gloom and doom and Dr. Schmitt with just as stellar credentials claiming the opposite.
“As a geologist, I love Earth observations,” Schmitt says. “But, it is ridiculous to tie this objective to a ‘consensus’ that humans are causing global warming when human experience, geologic data and history, and current cooling can argue otherwise. ‘Consensus,’ as many have said, merely represents the absence of definitive science. You know as well as I, the ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes, and decision making
Who do you believe is the question? Here is my anecdotal evidence over the last week of very warm January temperatures. We now have 32 local weather stations tied into Madis in a 10 mile radius from my home.
The Meteorological Assimilation Data Ingest System (MADIS) is dedicated toward making value-added data available from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) Global Systems Division (GSD) (formerly the Forecast Systems Laboratory (FSL)) for the purpose of improving weather forecasting, by providing support for data assimilation, numerical weather prediction, and other hydrometeorological applications.S
When we were registering record temperatures last week I was amazed as my two thermometers on the porch in the shade were a full 10 degrees below what most of these Personal Weather Stations were inputting to MADIS. There is no scientific controls on these 1000s of PWS around the globe. It was much warmer in the sun than in the shade on my patio. How much weight is given to the reporting of temps that are not actual ambient? We know that the government weather stations are using flawed data taking temps from within cities that are giant heat sinks.
Lastly, I question Dr. Hansen's credentials. Who cares if he got a conservation award from the World Wrestling Federation? :shades:
You need to work on your math skills.
Yeas 1 Nays 3
Nothing scientific about this, just informed opinion.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Oh and as far as the WWF. I get letters every week to join them in the fight against GW. They are tied so close to A. Gore and that kook Bobby Kennedy that I would not donate a penny to their cause. Just like Audubon that I was a member of until last year, they have good ideas. They have been taken over by the kook fringe. They are all smoking to much medical marijuana.
Maybe we can get Hulk Hogan to put a "big hurtin'" on Global Warming.
Perhaps you should cut Hansen some slack, after all, he did create The Muppets.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Re Hansen's credentials, he's a Ph.D. in physics. Schmitt has a Ph.D. in geology. Hansen's got 3 other degrees in math and astronomy but neither one could be considered a lightweight.
Hansen won $250k in the '90s in recognition of his GW research and in 2007 he shared the million dollar Dan David Prize (with two others apparently). I guess that's why he feel comfortable bucking his administrators and the political establishment in his job at NASA - he can afford his house payment even if he gets fired.
At December's U.N. Global Warming conference in Poznan, Poland, 650 of the world's top climatologists stood up and said man-made global warming is a media generated myth without basis. Said climatologist Dr. David Gee, Chairman of the International Geological Congress, "For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming?"
I asked myself, why would such obviously smart guy say such a ridiculous thing? But it turns out he's right.
The earth's temperature peaked in 1998. It's been falling ever since; it dropped dramatically in 2007 and got worse in 2008, when temperatures touched 1980 levels.
Meanwhile, the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center released conclusive satellite photos showing that Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels. What's more, measurements of Antarctic ice now show that its accumulation is up 5 percent since 1980.
In other words, during what was supposed to be massive global warming, the biggest chunks of ice on earth grew larger. Just as an aside, do you remember when the hole in the ozone layer was going to melt Antarctica? But don't worry, we're safe now, that was the nineties.
Dr. Kunihiko, Chancellor of Japan's Institute of Science and Technology said this: "CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or the other ... every scientist knows this, but it doesn't pay to say so." Now why would a learned man say such a crazy thing?
This is where the looney left gets lost. Their mantra is atmospheric CO2 levels are escalating and this is unquestionably causing earth's temperature rise. But ask yourself -- if global temperatures are experiencing the biggest sustained drop in decades, while CO2 levels continue to rise -- how can it be true?
There's more
“I am a skeptic Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly .As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.
The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC “are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico
“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?” - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.
“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.
“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.
“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.
“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another .Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.
“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata.
Plus 9000 more PHDs are coming out of the closet to denounce the man made GW theory. Dr. Takeda Kunihiko said it best. GW was concocted to control the emerging countries.
Gary says, "GW was concocted to control the emerging countries"
I Say: Come Again, Say What?
The term and the fear of it was around long before AlGore.
People have not always known about global warming. The idea had to start somewhere. The history of the global warming concept is probably older than you might think. It all began in the late 1800's.
There was a scientist named Svante Arrhenius who was studying fossil fuel combustion in Sweden towards the end of the 19th century. An 1859 prediction claimed that the burning of such fuels would eventually lead to the process of global warming. Svante Arrhenius recognized that temperatures on the earth's surface were related to carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.
Arrhenius studied global warming to find out the average surface temperature of the earth. He figured that doubling the carbon dioxide in a greenhouse effect would raise the surface temperature by five degrees Celsius. He also concluded that human activities could be to blame for future global warming. His focus, though, was on how much carbon dioxide would have to be taken away to cause global cooling.
Infrared spectroscopy was developed in the 1940's that could be used to measure the sun's radiation. It was used to measure the absorption of radiation with and without added carbon dioxide. Gilbert Plass determined that the increased carbon dioxide would cause the earth to absorb more radiation, and so cause global warming.
From late in the 1950's to early in the 1960's, Charles Keeling produced curves of the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. He showed the scientific community that the earth had gone through 32 distinct weather variations. It had previously been thought that there had only been four.
Much changed in the 1980's. The curve was followed and it was discovered that temperatures were getting higher at a rapid rate. Suddenly people stopped preparing for a cooling planet and began pondering global warming. Since Stephen Schneider first gave global warming a name in 1971 and predicted its coming in 1976, the emphasis on the subject by the media grew more and more intense.
The history of inquiry into the nature of global warming is over 110 years old. There have been advances and retreats in the field. However, the future of global warming research and activism seems positive.
So, um, NO, Categorically NO, GW was not "concocted" to "control" anyone or anything. It was originally based on scientific study and observation.
Al Gore is a politician and the Nobel committee gave him a big fat prize for spreading lies. So what is your point? I say that politicizing GW is a total use of meager scientific data to control the weak minded masses.
Svante Arrhenius advocating burning more fossil fuel:
English translation: Worlds in the Making (1908) directed at a general audience, where he suggested that the human emission of CO2 would be strong enough to prevent the world from entering a new ice age, and that a warmer earth would be needed to feed the rapidly increasing population.
He was the first person to predict that emissions of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and other combustion processes would cause global warming. Arrhenius clearly believed that a warmer world would be a positive change
I agree with Svante Arrhenius. We need to use more coal and get the place warmed up. Kernick is freezing his butt off. The ice caps are growing and something must be done to warm up the world before it is TOOO late.
He is scientist who "doesn't study anything even remotely connected to the climate."
That plays to his qualifications to be speaking on the subject. Any scientist in any field can have an opinion, as can non-scientists.
I do not believe the data behind the GW issue is faked or half-baked. Just interpreted one way by one group and another way by another group.
I got no problem with scientists debating theories. I get upset when they want to steal money from my wallet under the guise of some half baked theory. And it already is costing money. Our utility bills have gone up due to mandates for alternatives that get blocked by environmentalists and Senators. etc etc. CA has blocked all use of coal generated electricity. That is a direct result of these GW THEORIES. So we pay more as a result of our legislature drinking Al Gore Koolaid.
Let's separate this issue from Global Warming for a second.
Everyone knows that coal burning is a NASTY, NASTY pollution factor. Anything that reduces coal burning ought to be applauded and lauded, not condemned.
So you are telling me that CA at this very moment is using ZERO coal-fired electricity? Or is that mandate for FUTURE-built coal-burning plants?
Some other predictions from that period said that the earth was only 4000 years old and that fossils were put there by god to play a joke on us.
I don't know, that god's joke stuff sounds like it could be true.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
As decided by the California legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger four months ago, the state's electric utilities will be prohibited starting Feb. 1 from investing in traditional coal-fired plants or signing new long-term contracts with such plants in an effort to combat global warming.
So we get no coal, no solar, no wind, no geo-thermal, NO NUCLEAR and we are mandated to have 20% renewable by 2010. Or the utility pays fines. Who do you think will be the LOSERS? The consumer as always. Many new subdivisions are putting in their own gas fired turbine gen sets. localizing the GHG within the suburbs. How good is that? In my opinion the GW hysteria is causing more chaos in a very chaotic World.
Well, if you stopped using your air conditioning there in Arizona in the summer, it would in all likelihood reduce coal burning. Would you applaud that? Just asking.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Are you sure you don't mean record highs though?
xwesx, "Subaru Crew - Meet The Members II" #30837, 16 Jan 2009 1:03 pm
My utility bill averages about $83 a month. My utility bill in December was $51 and according to my utility, comparable homes my size in Phoenix had a bill of $235.
I spent about $9K extra on my house when I bought it in 2004, putting in energy-efficient technologies, and have continued that with about $7K more added since then.
I addition, I pay extra on my bill every month for renewable power fees. I'm financing clean power myself and using far less dirty power than just about anyone I know.
If everyone in Phoenix was as energy-efficient as I am, we'd burn a whole heck f a lot less coal.
I'm doing my part by far. I have no A/C guilt.
If other states adopt California’s approach, it will make renewable energy more competitive with cheap coal. On May 3, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire signed a law modeled on Perata’s legislation. “California is telling Wall Street and Main Street that it is time to switch sides and invest in clean energy exclusively,” said Bernadette del Chiaro, director of clean energy issues for Environment California.
But the DWP, she says, has a long way to go. “Los Angeles is one of the sunniest cities in the world, but it remains in the dark ages, with the bulk of its electricity coming from coal. Its solar program remains underfunded, understaffed and poorly designed. But the potential is there – the sunshine, the wind, tidal and geothermal power nearby. LADWP could become the nation’s premier green utility.”
By shutting down future coal expansion, they are forcing the hand of utilities to make investments in clean power. Even if rates have to go up in the short-term, the cleaner air in the long-term is worth it to your grandkids - trust me on that one.
And solar is coming down in cost FAST this year now that the silicon shortage is over.
Thanks to a large cold airmass that refuses to budge, temperatures throughout Alaska have been well below normal for nearly two weeks. The cold snap began shortly after Christmas and daily temperature departures remain 20 to 30 degrees below normal for the 11th consecutive day. As is often the case during winter, the lowest temperatures of this cold snap remain in the sheltered valleys of the Interior region. Some locations have topped the 60 below zero mark during the first week of 2009.
http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/News/2009/cold_09.html
I have friends that just left to drive back up to Glenallen. Tok was reporting -70 last week. I don't miss that cold AT ALL... It was 80 here in Alpine yesterday. Should be the same today with no wind. May get rain Thursday. That would be nice. The paper white daffodils are blooming a bit early. We could still get some frost. Hoping the fruit trees do not get the wrong timing. If they get screwed up I'm blaming it on Gore...
I spent about $9K extra on my house when I bought it in 2004, putting in energy-efficient technologies, and have continued that with about $7K more added since then.
I addition, I pay extra on my bill every month for renewable power fees. I'm financing clean power myself and using far less dirty power than just about anyone I know.
Your carbon foot print is bigger than I thought. Just think of all the resources you used up by stuffing your home with all that extra insulation, etc.
Given the dollar amounts you spent and the time lines involved, you should recoup your investment sometime around 2020. Until then your total monthly outlay is almost double the average for your area. At least you are doing your part for the economy.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
The house will still be there long after I'm not in it, saving the planet one unused kilowatt hour at a time...........:)
You just do not get it do you? The Utilities are spending millions on alternatives. They are hitting road blocks at every turn by the very same enviro wacko weirdo eco terrorists that preach this renewable crap. Whether it is that lame Bobby Kennedy blocking a wind farm where he goes sailing or a desert enviro type that wants to protect the 3 toed horned lizard. I follow the SDG&E attempts at alternatives closely. It is all out their to read. That and the people claiming to have solar alternatives that are not ready for actual service. It will come with time. Mandates have proven to be the WRONG way to do things. The EV-1, MTBE and ethanol are prime recent examples of mandates gone wrong.
Since the public is not informed the details, and the news outlets don't question how the data is collected, the people taking the data have some liberty to use data from where and when they want to "prove" their case.
Meanwhile the ocean's have not risen, the northern sections of this country and all of Canada, are much too cold to live without burning lots of fossil-fuels, and scientists around the world tell us the world was much warmer about 1,000 years ago. I really don't understand how people can want the earth to stay this cold; and I really hope that I could change the climate warmer. If we are changing the climate, and I believe we do have a tiny impact, it is imperceptibly small compared to what has happened thru the ages.
On average I'd like to see the world have a climate similar to Hawaii. 60-100F would be nice. I'd like to see the lower-48 such that we never get snow.
It's not the fault of the people trying to get the air clean, Dude !!!
If the regulators and companies and enviro groups cannot get on the same page, then that is bad, and they need to work it out.
But just saying, "IT'S TOO HARD TO WORK IT OUT, so let's just keep the dirty status quo" is FAR FAR FAR WORSE.
We are not going to get rid of coal powered generation in our lifetime. Best bet is to get it burning as clean as possible. I prefer nuclear, though the cost to fight the eco terrorist groups makes it a poor choice. We have enough geo thermal in CA to power the state. Most of it is on Federal land and OFF limits. You seem to think because one wayward government agency says something should be done that all the others will agree. Government has never worked that way in the History of man. And it is worse today than at any time in history. We were supposed to have that huge solar generator on line last year. Just read where the people blocking it are not going to give in on the power line to get the power from the desert to the people in the city. So much for large solar projects.
Stirling Energy Systems has perhaps perfected (perhaps not) a remarkable-looking solar energy technology but it will not build the major installations for which San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) has already signed power purchase agreements if California regulators do not approve the new transmission needed to get the electricity to market.
Environmentalists don’t believe the technology is going to work and therefore do not want the Sunrise Powerlink transmission system built because without the solar installation, the new lines will violate desert and mountain wildlife habitat and ecosystems only to provide for the delivery of more fossil fuel-generated electricity.
It’s called a conundrum. Which comes first, the solar system or the wires?
http://www.solarfeeds.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5329:stir- ling-in-the-sun-&catid=80:80&Itemid=173
Speak for yerself on that. I'm planning on living about 50 more years.
There's as much a chance of the Arizona Cardinals going to the Super Bowl again in my lifetime as there is of coal plants becoming a thing of the past like steam locomotives.
This is an instance where guvmint needs to step in and say, "you folks get a grip, comb your dreadlocks out, have a latte and a tofu burger, and we're getting the line put in."
Sounds like someone just needs to "silence" this one fellow, "engineer and activist Bill Powers of San Diego.":
"SAN DIEGO ---- When Southern California's largest utility said recently that it was going to generate 250 megawatts of electricity from solar panels on warehouse rooftops, it introduced a new element in the debate over a proposed power line in San Diego County.
Southern California Edison's announcement has implications for San Diego Gas & Electric Co.'s proposed $1.5 billion Sunrise Powerlink transmission line. One of the power line's opponents has proposed a similar project in place of wires to power the county's future: solar panels on the roofs of large commercial buildings and over sprawling parking lots.
That opponent, engineer and activist Bill Powers of San Diego, is scheduled to take the stand Tuesday during a court-like proceeding examining the merits and environmental impacts of the power line.
The California Public Utilities Commission is expected to rely on evidence gathered at hearings this week in San Diego and later this month in San Francisco to decide this summer whether to license the project.
Tuesday's hearing is the second of three scheduled through Wednesday at the California Center for Sustainable Energy.
The San Diego utility is proposing to string a 150-mile high-voltage line from El Centro to Carmel Valley by 2011, if given the green light by either state or regulators. If denied by the Public Utilities Commission, the utility can appeal, as early as October, to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
The line would pass through Anza-Borrego Desert Park, Santa Ysabel, Ramona and Rancho Penasquitos. Many residents of the communities and environmentalists oppose the project; business leaders and a number of prominent politicians support it.
In previously filed written testimony, SDG&E dismissed Powers' vision for 920 megawatts of rooftop solar energy as "hypothetical and not feasible," saying nowhere near that amount could be developed. The company expressed strong skepticism at Powers' suggestion that solar panels could be installed at a cost of approximately $5 per watt, saying more than $7 was more realistic."
I wonder what the temps will be when those Inaugural Ball Gowns go to the various official Balls!! ??
link title
We on the left coast are trying to cope with a blustery 67 degrees.
Tok has another 11 degrees to go if they want to break the record of minus 81. link
That airmass is the same one that's hammered Kernick and our other East Coast and Southern friends I think.
Meanwhile Anchorage set a record high of 50, wind gusts hit 105 mph, and not only were the schools closed (due to heat - imagine that), but the ski resorts had to shut down for three days in a row.
GW means weather extremes and a ~100 degree temperature swing in a week is pretty extreme, not to mention being hard on paint.
If you want to reduce CO2, you need to get these 150,000,000 people renewable energy each year, + work on getting renewable energy to the existing 6+ BILLION people.
Also if this population growth continues in areas where there is a lot vegetation then the cutting and burning of forests reduces the amount of CO2 that is absorbed.
The manufacture of a million hybrids/year or several windfarms or solar plants only slows the rate of increase. Population increase is the main environmental problem. Until that is addressed, people will use whatever resources they can get their hands on to be comfortable.
It's very convenient to have a theory that does not predict anything specific anywhere, so that you can tell anyone anywhere that any extremes or changes are part of GW.
I don't have a home AC, it barely got above 90F all summer, and I heat my house 8-9 months per year. Whatever anyone wants to claim about the climate, I still reach the conclusion that the Earth is too cold. I believe the average is 59F, and I think people would prefer 70F.