Global Warming at the San Diego Zoo
SAN DIEGO ZOO FOCUSES ON CLIMATE CHANGE - May 16th - FOR ENDANGERED SPECIES DAY.
You may be particularly interested in the Q&A part which is addressed at the conclusion of this note. Please let me know what additional help you may need from me.
Dennis Bussey
· 10 a.m. - Introduction, Joan Embery, Conservation Ambassador, Zoological Society of San Diego
· 10:30 a.m. - Climate Change and Birds, Alicia Frances King, American Bird Conservancy Director, Bird Conservation Alliance
· 11:15 a.m. - Polar Bears and Arctic Ice, George Durner, Senior Polar Bear Researcher, U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center
· 12:15 p.m. - Polar Bear Foraging Strategies, JoAnne Simerson, Senior Animal Keeper, Polar Bear Researcher, San Diego Zoo
· 1 p.m. - Living on Fast Food: Can Big, Hungry Carnivores Survive in a Rapidly Changing World? Terrie Williams, Ph.D., Professor of Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz
· 2 p.m. - Conservation of Threatened Reptiles in the Face of Global Warming, Nicola Nelson, Ph.D., Program Manager, Conservation Biology School of Biological Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington
· 3 p.m. - Climate Change and Coral Reefs, Stuart Sandin, Ph.D., Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Here is a summary of speaker topics:
http://www.sandiegozoo.org/invite/soes_topics.html
Here is their press release following the event:
http://www.sandiegozoo.org/CF/pressreleases/releasedetail.cfm?id=591
Allison Alberts, Ph.D., representing the zoo, kicked off the event by presenting their recently executive board unanimously endorsed "Position Statement on Climate Change" which states in part:
- ".the Zoological Society of San Diego recognizes the substantial and persuasive data on global climate change and its ramifications for endangered wildlife and habitats."
and
- ".we commit our cooperation and resources to . endorsing local, national, and international agreements to curb production of greenhouse gases."
It was apparent that all the speakers have accepted as fact the theory of manmade global warming as well as its predicted dire consequences. Further, they all urged actions to attempt to change the world's temperature. My impression is that the entire audience of about 200 concurred. There was one exception, me.
Here is a summary of my questions and the speakers' answers:
Q#1 was to Alicia Frances King, American Bird Conservancy Director, Bird Conservation Alliance. Ms. King focused much of her presentation on the starvation of birds and anticipated extinction resulting from habitat destruction directly attributable to manmade global warming.
I asked Ms. King about the positive impact of increased C02 in vegetation and the resulting benefit to birds. The research demonstrates that as atmospheric CO2 increases plant growth rate increases. Also, leaves transpire less and lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally. An example is in the study: Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide by ARTHUR B. ROBINSON, NOAH E. ROBINSON, AND WILLIE SOON, http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM150.pdf.
A#1. Ms. King said she had never heard of this, but said she would look into it.
Q#2 was to George Durner, Senior Polar Bear Researcher, U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center. Mr. Durner explained how the earth has experienced "unprecedented heating" during the past 50 years and that this was a result of CO2 in the atmosphere from man's use of fossil fuels. He went on to describe how polar bears may become extinct due to mankind's abuse of the environment.
I asked Mr. Durner what has happened to the worldwide population of polar bears during the 50 year period leading up to his calamitous warning of the demise of polar bears.
A#2 Mr. Durner informed that the polar bear population had doubled during the last 50 years.
Q#3 was to JoAnne Simerson, Senior Animal Keeper, Polar Bear Researcher, San Diego Zoo.
Ms. Simerson showed graphics and a video of the Arctic ice melting. Her twofold message was:
1. Manmade global warming is melting the ice and destroying the polar bear habitat.
2. If we don't heed the urgent call to change the world temperature, polar bears may become extinct.
I asked Ms. Simerson if there were any theories other than manmade global warming that may help us understand what is happening to the Arctic ice.
A#3 Ms. Simerson said she was not a climatologist and only intended to show us the polar bear pictures she had taken.
Q#4 was to Terrie Williams, Ph.D., Professor of Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Dr. Williams discussed the disastrous effects manmade global warming is having on mammals. An example is African lions that have been observed to be more lethargic because it is necessary for them to roam further in hunting as their habitat is being wiped out because of man's use of fossil fuels and the resulting CO2, etc. Many other mammals are impacted negatively as well. Dr. Williams concluded her presentation with pictures and sad story of a seal she saw in Antarctica. She explained that the seal became disconnected from its normal habitat when large blocks of ice unnaturally (because manmade global warming caused it to happen) broke off and prevented the seal from getting to its food source. The presentation concluded with a later picture of the seal, now frozen and dead.
I asked Dr. Williams was it true that the earth had warmed about one degree Fahrenheit during the last 100 years. She agreed.
I then asked if I understood correctly the essence of her presentation. Are we to understand that all the problems to mammals she had described are directly attributable to that portion of the one degree Fahrenheit over the last 100 years that is the manmade part? In other words, it is some fraction of one degree Fahrenheit over 100 years?
A#4 Dr. Williams answered yes.
Q#'s 5 and 6 were to Stuart Sandin, Ph.D., Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Dr. Sandin described how coral reefs worldwide are being destroyed by manmade global warming. Coral, he explained, is very sensitive to water temperature, and the ocean temperature increase caused my man through the use of fossil fuels is tipping the balance with devastating consequences. Further damage is caused by increased acidity also attributable to the man induced higher levels of CO2. Complicating coral welfare further is the prospect of more frequent and intense hurricanes also resulting from the same culprit of humanities use of fossil fuels.
Q#5 to Dr. Sandlin was what are we to make of the recent discoveries of measurements that the ocean temperature is decreasing?
A#5 Dr. Sandlin acknowledged that this new information is valid, but informed that nevertheless the overall ocean temperature is still increasing.
Q#6 to Dr. Sandlin was what are we to make of the recent studies that conclude that the increased manmade CO2 has a positive effect on the oceans through enhanced growth of algae which contributes to the welfare of the entire ocean ecosystem?
A#6 Dr. Sandlin informed it's true that the algae is better off because of the increased level of CO2. The ocean however is, he explained, worse off because:
1. The algae is blocking the sun from reaching lower levels thereby creating new manmade problems and
2. The manmade induced algae are confusing the creatures of the ocean and may distract them from their natural habitats, feeding patterns etc.
At the conclusion of the conference I felt like I was swimming upstream in a river of nonsense.
Regards,
Dennis Bussey
----- Original Message -----
From: Roni
To: dennisbussey@earthlink.net
Sent: 6/12/2008 7:22:47 AM
Subject: Re: Dennis request re: San Diego Zoo experience..............
Sorry to bother you Dennis, but did we ever finish this? I just checked www.GoodNeighborLaw.com and couldn't find.
Please indulge me and re-send what we "were?" going to post.
My apologies - and thank YOU!
Roni
----- Original Message -----
From: DENNIS BUSSEY
To: Roni
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 3:58 PM
Subject: RE: Dennis request re: San Diego Zoo experience..............
Hi Roni,
I'd be glad to have it included in the web site.
Please let me know what (if anything) else you need from me tomake this happen.
Regards,
Dennis Bussey
----- Original Message -----
From: Roni
To: dennisbussey@earthlink.net
Sent: 5/19/2008 7:33:49 AM
Subject: Dennis request re: San Diego Zoo experience..............
Dennis,
Forgive my invasion - but - Dr. Soon privately shares pertinent notes with me - and my question for you is:
Would you mind putting your "San Diego Zoo Experience" post ready for www.GoodNeighborLaw.com
We'd be honored.
We MUST turn back these global warming crooks.
Many thanks Dennis.
Roni
----- Original Message -----
From: Soon
To: Roni Sylvester
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 4:45 AM
Subject: Re: Board to consider global warming fees
thanks roni ...
we must keep fighting ..
i am happy to keep reassured that you and chuck
will continue to fight for the benefit of all ..
willie
----- Original Message -----
From: Soon
To: dennisbussey@earthlink.net
Sent: 5/18/2008 8:07:58 AM
Subject: Re: Global Warming at the San Diego Zoo
dear Dennis,
thanks for your comprehensive and educational questions to the
speakers, their answers are more or less expected ... but i felt
that we should just keeping asking good scientific questions and
then go about answering them ... this is a long war (i wonder if you
remember president klaus statement about the battle may be over global warming
by co2 but the war is on freedom ...)
and i always will believe that truths and facts will manner regardless how
things may look at short moments of cheap thrills and empty rhetorics ..
just some interesting news below for your interest related to the
self-less efforts by all of us in this work with art robinson .
if you want to see signature of freeman dyson ... here it is
http://www.nationalpost.com/520843.bin
ps: lawrence solomon also wrote his article on this
32,000 deniers
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/17/32-000-deniers.aspx
willie
-----------------------------
http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/ADVISORY:+Dr.+Arthur+Robinson+(OISM)+to+Release+Names+of+over+30,000+Scientists+Rejecting+Global+Warming+Hypothesis/3654512.html
ADVISORY: Dr. Arthur Robinson (OISM) to Release Names of over 30,000 Scientists
Rejecting Global Warming Hypothesis
May 15, 2008 12:39 PM EDT
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)
Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM
What: release of names in OISM "Petition Project"
When: 10 AM, Monday May 19
Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington,
DC
Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more
than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global
warming. The purpose of OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim
of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor
of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is
wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition
text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this
hypothesis.
It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including
9,021 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition
statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists
are not "skeptics."
CONTACT: Audrey Mullen, +1-703-548-1160, for the Oregon Institute of Science and
Medicine
/PRNewswire-USNewswire -- May 15/
SOURCE Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine
-----Original Message-----
From: DENNIS BUSSEY
Sent: May 18, 2008 10:47 AM
To: vanlien@earthlink.net
Subject: Global Warming at the San Diego Zoo
Hello Dr. Soon,
You don't know me, but you are one of my heroes. I met you at the NYC climate change conference in March. Your paper, Â?Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon DioxideÂ? was the central document I used in preparing my global warming presentation to the San Diego World Affairs Council in February.
I thought you may be interested in an event I attended Friday May 16 at the San Diego Zoo. The title was SAN DIEGO ZOO FOCUSES ON CLIMATE CHANGE FOR ENDANGERED SPECIES DAY. You may be particularly interested in the Q&A part which IÂ?ll address at the conclusion of this note.
Here is the schedule of speakers:
· 10 a.m. � Introduction, Joan Embery, Conservation Ambassador, Zoological Society of San Diego
· 10:30 a.m. � Climate Change and Birds, Alicia Frances King, American Bird Conservancy Director, Bird Conservation Alliance
· 11:15 a.m. � Polar Bears and Arctic Ice, George Durner, Senior Polar Bear Researcher, U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center
· 12:15 p.m. � Polar Bear Foraging Strategies, JoAnne Simerson, Senior Animal Keeper, Polar Bear Researcher, San Diego Zoo
· 1 p.m. � Living on Fast Food: Can Big, Hungry Carnivores Survive in a Rapidly Changing World? Terrie Williams, Ph.D., Professor of Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz
· 2 p.m. � Conservation of Threatened Reptiles in the Face of Global Warming, Nicola Nelson, Ph.D., Program Manager, Conservation Biology School of Biological Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington
· 3 p.m. � Climate Change and Coral Reefs, Stuart Sandin, Ph.D., Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Here is a summary of speaker topics:
http://www.sandiegozoo.org/invite/soes_topics.html
Here is their press release following the event:
http://www.sandiegozoo.org/CF/pressreleases/releasedetail.cfm?id=591
Allison Alberts, Ph.D., representing the zoo, kicked off the event by presenting their recently executive board unanimously endorsed Â?Position Statement on Climate ChangeÂ? which states in part:
- Â?Â?the Zoological Society of San Diego recognizes the substantial and persuasive data on global climate change and its ramifications for endangered wildlife and habitats.Â?
and
- Â?Â?we commit our cooperation and resources to Â? endorsing local, national, and international agreements to curb production of greenhouse gases.Â?
It was apparent that all the speakers have accepted as fact the theory of manmade global warming as well as its predicted dire consequences. Further, they all urged actions to attempt to change the worldÂ?s temperature. My impression is that the entire audience of about 200 concurred. There was one exception, me.
Here is a summary of my questions and the speakersÂ? answers:
Q#1 was to Alicia Frances King, American Bird Conservancy Director, Bird Conservation Alliance. Ms. King focused much of her presentation on the starvation of birds and anticipated extinction resulting from habitat destruction directly attributable to manmade global warming.
I asked Ms. King about the positive impact of increased C02 in vegetation and the resulting benefit to birds. The research demonstrates that as atmospheric CO2 increases plant growth rate increases. Also, leaves transpire less and lose less water as CO2 increases, so that plants are able to grow under drier conditions. Animal life, which depends upon plant life for food, increases proportionally. An example is in the study: Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide by ARTHUR B. ROBINSON, NOAH E. ROBINSON, AND WILLIE SOON, http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM150.pdf.
A#1. Ms. King said she had never heard of this, but said she would look into it.
Q#2 was to George Durner, Senior Polar Bear Researcher, U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center. Mr. Durner explained how the earth has experienced Â?unprecedented heatingÂ? during the past 50 years and that this was a result of CO2 in the atmosphere from manÂ?s use of fossil fuels. He went on to describe how polar bears may become extinct due to mankindÂ?s abuse of the environment.
I asked Mr. Durner what has happened to the worldwide population of polar bears during the 50 year period leading up to his calamitous warning of the demise of polar bears.
A#2 Mr. Durner informed that the polar bear population had doubled during the last 50 years.
Q#3 was to JoAnne Simerson, Senior Animal Keeper, Polar Bear Researcher, San Diego Zoo.
Ms. Simerson showed graphics and a video of the Arctic ice melting. Her twofold message was:
1. Manmade global warming is melting the ice and destroying the polar bear habitat.
2. If we donÂ?t heed the urgent call to change the world temperature, polar bears may become extinct.
I asked Ms. Simerson if there were any theories other than manmade global warming that may help us understand what is happening to the Arctic ice.
A#3 Ms. Simerson said she was not a climatologist and only intended to show us the polar bear pictures she had taken.
Q#4 was to Terrie Williams, Ph.D., Professor of Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz.
Dr. Williams discussed the disastrous effects manmade global warming is having on mammals. An example is African lions that have been observed to be more lethargic because it is necessary for them to roam further in hunting as their habitat is being wiped out because of manÂ?s use of fossil fuels and the resulting CO2, etc. Many other mammals are impacted negatively as well. Dr. Williams concluded her presentation with pictures and sad story of a seal she saw in Antarctica. She explained that the seal became disconnected from its normal habitat when large blocks of ice unnaturally (because manmade global warming caused it to happen) broke off and prevented the seal from getting to its food source. The presentation concluded with a later picture of the seal, now frozen and dead.
I asked Dr. Williams was it true that the earth had warmed about one degree Fahrenheit during the last 100 years. She agreed.
I then asked if I understood correctly the essence of her presentation. Are we to understand that all the problems to mammals she had described are directly attributable to that portion of the one degree Fahrenheit over the last 100 years that is the manmade part? In other words, it is some fraction of one degree Fahrenheit over 100 years?
A#4 Dr. Williams answered yes.
Q#Â?s 5 and 6 were to Stuart Sandin, Ph.D., Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation, Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Dr. Sandin described how coral reefs worldwide are being destroyed by manmade global warming. Coral, he explained, is very sensitive to water temperature, and the ocean temperature increase caused my man through the use of fossil fuels is tipping the balance with devastating consequences. Further damage is caused by increased acidity also attributable to the man induced higher levels of CO2. Complicating coral welfare further is the prospect of more frequent and intense hurricanes also resulting from the same culprit of humanities use of fossil fuels.
Q#5 to Dr. Sandlin was what are we to make of the recent discoveries of measurements that the ocean temperature is decreasing?
A#5 Dr. Sandlin acknowledged that this new information is valid, but informed that nevertheless the overall ocean temperature is still increasing.
Q#6 to Dr. Sandlin was what are we to make of the recent studies that conclude that the increased manmade CO2 has a positive effect on the oceans through enhanced growth of algae which contributes to the welfare of the entire ocean ecosystem?
A#6 Dr. Sandlin informed itÂ?s true that the algae is better off because of the increased level of CO2. The ocean however is, he explained, worse off because:
1. The algae is blocking the sun from reaching lower levels thereby creating new manmade problems and
2. The manmade induced algae are confusing the creatures of the ocean and may distract them from their natural habitats, feeding patterns etc.
At the conclusion of the conference I felt like I was swimming upstream in a river of nonsense.
I of course would be pleased to hear thoughts you have on my experience at the San Diego zoo.
Regards,
Dennis Bussey
-----Original Message-----
>From: Roni Sylvester <WPDuck@msn.com>
>Sent: May 18, 2008 10:09 PM
>To: Soon <vanlien@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: Board to consider global warming fees
>
>Willie,
>Had a terrific interview with "Mary" today.
>I asked "If you could meet anyone, who would you like to meet?"
>Her answer: Dr. Willie Soon!
>I made a promise to her that we'd make that happen.
>More later.
>Keep up the great, great work Willie.
>We have a plan,
>Roni
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Soon<mailto:vanlien@earthlink.net>
> To: bob f<mailto:bferguson@sppinstitute.org> ; Jane Orient<mailto:jorient@mindspring.com> ; Art Robinson<mailto:art@oism.org> ; roni slyvester good neighbor<mailto:WPDuck@msn.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 8:54 AM
> Subject: Board to consider global warming fees
>
>
> http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_9286411<http://www.mercurynews.com/healthandscience/ci_9286411>
>
> Board to consider global warming fees
> By Denis Cuff
> Contra Costa Times
> Article Launched: 05/16/2008 05:33:12 PM PDT
>
>
> Environmentalists and regulators say the Bay Area's air pollution district is taking a small but important first step toward saving the Earth by proposing to charge businesses for global warming gases they emit.
>
> Oil refineries say the agency is jumping the gun and threatening to set a bad precedent that could lead to a patchwork of local fees and rules that could disrupt state efforts to combat global climate change.
>
> Those conflicting views move to center stage Wednesday when the Bay Area's air pollution board considers what is thought to be the first pollution fee in the nation aimed expressly at global-warming gases from oil refineries, power plants, factories, gas stations, bakeries and other businesses.
>
> The annual fee - as much as $190,000 for a large oil refinery, $85 for a large bakery, and $1 for a service station - would pay for district efforts to estimate and study sources of global warming gases, and consider ways to reduce them.
>
> The biggest fees would be imposed on the biggest emitters of carbon dioxide, a global warming gas from fossil fuel combustion.
>
> "I think the best place to institute strong policy is at the federal level, but we do not have leadership from the Bush administration on global warming," said John Gioia, a Contra Costa County supervisor from Richmond and member of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District board. "The hope here is that we will have a model that can be adopted on the federal
> level, or by other regions and states."
>
> An industry trade group representing five oil refineries in the region contends that the local intervention could confuse and disrupt the California Air Resources Board's efforts to carry out an historic 2006 state law to reduce global warming gases by 25 percent by 2020.
>
> "We're committed to working with the state on a thoughtful program to address climate change," said Tupper Hall, spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association. "What's troubling is if (the Bay Area proposal) leads to a patchwork of local programs with their own fees and goals. It's very hard for the state to meet its goals, and this could make it more difficult."
>
> The petroleum association questions whether the Bay Area pollution board - 22 county supervisors and members of city councils - has clear authority to raise the fees.
>
> Hall also said the group worries that any new fee imposed on gasoline refineries could lead to higher prices for gasoline, already near $4 a gallon.
>
> The five refineries in the trade association include Chevron in Richmond, Shell in Martinez, Tesoro between Martinez and north Concord, Conoco-Phillips in Rodeo, and Valero in Benicia.
>
> Jack Broadbent, the air district's chief executive officer, said oil refiners would pay the largest share of the proposed fees because they are the largest carbon dioxide emitters.
>
> The district would collect $1.1 million in greenhouse gas fees annually from 2,500 Bay Area businesses that already have district permits and pay fees for emissions of other pollutants, such as smog-forming reactive gases.
>
> Nearly two-thirds of the businesses would pay less than $1 per year, according to a district report. About 850 would pay $1 or more. Five oil refineries and the two power plants in Antioch and Pittsburg each would pay in excess of $50,000 because of their large carbon dioxide emissions from burning fuel.
>
> "The fees are very modest," Broadbent said. "Tackling climate change is a big challenge. We need the combined efforts of federal, state and local agencies."
>
> Broadbent said the Bay Area air district would be the first to collect fees to recover the costs of regulating global warming gases, but he asserted his agency has authority to do so. His and other pollution agencies commonly collect fees to recover costs of regulating smog and soot, pollutants that have been regulated for decades, he said.
>
> To determine the proposed fees up for a vote Wednesday, the air district divided the $1.1 million it spends annually on global warming studies and regulation by the 4.4 million metric tons of global warming gases emitted annually in the Bay Area. The result is a fee of 4.4 cents per ton.
>
> Motor vehicles account for about half the global warming gases in the Bay Area, but they are regulated by the state rather than local districts.
>
> The Bay Area district already has taken measures to limit global warming gases from home water heaters and industrial boilers, which burn less fuel that oil refineries but still produce global warming gases.
>
> Global warming fees set by the Bay Area board will be integrated into any state fees the California Air Resources Board may adopt to curb global warming gases statewide, said Jerry Hill, chairman of the Bay Area pollution board and also a member of the California Air Resources Board.
>
> Linda Weiner, a spokeswoman for the American Lung Association of California, applauded the proposed fees as a significant first local step toward reining in a worldwide problem.
>
> "We've taken too long to deal with global warming," she said. "There is no time to waste."
>
> Contact Denis Cuff at 925-943-8267 or dcuff@bayareanewsgroup.com.
>
> If you go
> The Bay Area Air Quality Management District meets at 9:45 p.m. Wednesday at its headquarters, 939 Ellis St., San Francisco, to hold a hearing and consider approving global warming fees for businesses.
Good Neighbor Committee
P.O. Box 155 - La Salle, CO 80645
info@goodneighborlaw.com
| Good Neighbor Law© 2006 |