NVR Logo
Thinking globally acting locally
Napa resident Patty Wyman is a presenter of the Climate Project, the program based on the Al Gore movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.” She spoke on the issue of global warming at a American Association of University Women meeting. J.L. Sousa/Register | Buy photos
Silverado teacher takes Gore's 'Truth' to the people
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Save and Share Share
Silverado Middle School teacher Patty Wyman remembers the day her world changed forever.

It was a perfect summer day, she said, in July 2006. Her daughter Samantha, then 18, was home after her first year of college, and the two were planning a girls’ day out. “Always environmentally conscious in our house,” said Wyman, Patty and Sam drove to Mill Valley to see Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.”
After the movie, when they stepped from the dark, cool theater into the harsh sun, Wyman remembers her daughter asking her, “Mama, what are we going to do?”

“It was as if I was looking at my little girl as someone that needed to be protected against the monster in the closet,” said Wyman. “She’s all grown up, but it’s a mother’s duty to protect her children, for life.”
Wyman said she replied to her daughter, “I am going to do something. I am.”

And she did.
Wyman started looking on the Internet, trying to figure out how she could get involved in global warming education. Before long, Al Gore’s climate project contacted her and informed her that they were looking for speakers. After a long application process, Patty hopped a plane to Nashville in November 2006 to be one of the first 200 speakers trained by Gore on “An Inconvenient Truth” PowerPoint presentation.

The experience, she said, was “mind blowing.” When she and the other trainees arrived, they received a binder full of materials about global warming. The binder was made of recycled cardboard, she said.

Wyman laughs as she remembers looking at the list of other trainees. Experts in the field, activists and leaders swarmed the conference. “I check the names on the list and I am saying, ‘Patty Wyman, seventh-grade history teacher,’” she laughed.

Gore was “so passionate,” said Wyman. “It was a life-changing experience for me.”

There, she made a “commitment to learn as much as I could from (Gore) and to give speeches throughout my community. That was a year ago,” she said, “Nov. 22.”

Since then, Wyman has given 12 presentations, and “as long as people want me to speak, I will continue to speak.”

There are now about 1,000 speakers throughout the world trained in “An Inconvenient Truth” presentation, she said.

“It just takes one person,” said Wyman. “It doesn’t have to be big. Just one little thing makes a difference.” It can be “one kid at a time,” she said, “one group at a time, one speech at a time. … That will be their legacy.”

Wyman’s legacy, she said, is for her children. Samantha, 20, is studying communications and global peace and security at UC Santa Barbara. Maddy, 18, is a freshman at the Napa Valley College. “I want my children to know that I made a difference,” Wyman said, adding, “I want to save the world for my children. I want my children’s children to have a world like I knew it.”

Wyman said she is “one of the environmental advocates” at Silverado Middle School, where she has taught social studies for 15 years.

Her leadership class’ theme this year is “Go Big Green,” and students are raising money for the rain forest in the Del Oso Reserve in Costa Rica by selling T-shirts and collecting cans and plastic bottles. Her goal, she said, is “to save an hour worth of burning forest.”

She has also led campus efforts to provide additional recycling bins at Silverado, and she will be presenting at the California League of Middle Schools in February “as a springboard for other teachers to get involved.” In collaboration with Redwood Middle School teacher Sharon Campbell, Wyman worked with students to distribute plants and compact fluorescent light bulbs to fellow teachers.

“I have always been an optimist,” said Wyman, who said she was “involved in every activity” ever since she was a student at Napa High. Her first foray into community service, she said, was the March of Dimes Walk-a-thon when she was in eighth grade.

A lot has changed since then, she said. She’s a teacher in the town where she was once a student. Her college sweetheart, John Wyman, is now her husband of 23 years. Her oldest daughter Sam just finished her last final at UC Santa Barbara. The image of Mt. Fuji on her classroom wall, Wyman said, “will be obsolete in my lifetime.”

Still, she is an optimist at heart, and she is out to change the world, one group and one speech at a time. “I think I’ve always taken on each cause by making it personal,” she said. “I looked at each issue and made the decision to get involved knowing that every little bit would help. … I feel compelled to spread the word and set the example.”
55 comment(s)

MarkMathews wrote on Dec 20, 2007 6:49 AM:

" I wonder if that poor young girl is aware that Mars is ALSO warming. The entire topic of Man Made Global Warming (MMGW) is a slide-of-hand by Gore, who is incapable of holding a normal job like the rest of us. I hope both women learn the real truth, that GW is a cyclical phenomenon, and no matter WHAT man does, nature will see it through; I would have thought those liberals who do not believe in a God, but DO slobber at the alter of Evolution would see this as a good way to rid the "mother earth" of we pesky, polluting humans... I am sure glad MY daughters go to a different school, in American Canyon, and will not have to interface with this new convert to this rabid scam. The science teachers at Am Can Middle School know MMGW for the scam it is! I will use this teacher's (indoctrinator’s) stance to buttress by teaching of my own daughters that there are some people out there who have drank from the kool-aid, and actually believe the hype Gore spews out, and to know the truth; that which is very inconvenient to Gore and his minions. A good place to begin learning said truth is "junkscience (dot) com," and listen to Brian Sussmann on KSFO 560 in the evenings. Have the courage to seek out the other side of the argument; have the courage to know the real truth. Beware of false prophets and their emotional minions. "

skippert wrote on Dec 20, 2007 7:38 AM:

" Patty Wyman, you ROCK. Merry Christmas, we need more people like her. Much love, The Bush Family. "

RenoDeano wrote on Dec 20, 2007 8:07 AM:

" Patty, if you really believe all the poor scientific derived stuff in Al Gore's fantasy movie you are a discredit to the teaching profession. With people like you teaching our kids via knee jerk reaction now wonder we are lagging in education. Visit Junk Science for the truth about global warming. Evidently you have not study natural science enough to able to determine that the earth goes through cycles of weather and geologic change every few million years. Patty, how long has man been on the Earth and how old is it? Man produces an insignificant effect when compared to geological, solar and reoccurring Earth axis altering events. Get informed and teach real science. "

M.G. wrote on Dec 20, 2007 8:35 AM:

" Nice sermon, Mark. Good to know you've got the market cornered on "truth." And if you're wrong, who cares? You'll be long gone and only your children and grandchildren will have to suffer. Oh well, at least you got yours... everyone else should have just been born earlier, right? "

Common Sense wrote on Dec 20, 2007 8:39 AM:

" Another reason not to send your kids to public schools. Look at the 'science' of global warming! It's not there! Notice the recent Nobel Prize given for global warming was a 'Peace' prize...not science-oriented Nobel. The Nobel Peace Prize was also given to Yasser Arafat...a terrorist! Connect the dots... "

Eagle One wrote on Dec 20, 2007 8:56 AM:

" Patty, What a nice story and so richly deserved for all your hard work.We are so proud of you and all you do for others, for all you are and who you are.We are proud to have you as our very dear friend and your entire family. Lots of love, Teri and Jeff Johnson "

Skip M. wrote on Dec 20, 2007 9:08 AM:

" PLEASE! All this global warming hype has gotten way out of control. If the dust bowl of the 1930s were to happen today, Gore and company would claim it was due to global warming. Climate change is a natural cycle. We are not going to be able to lock the earth’s climate to one certain set o conditions, ever. The planet pulses and breathes, and frequently does things we insignificant humans have no control over. “Oh mommy, what are we going to do?” The fact that someone teaching our children can be so easily taken in by Hollywood hype is what scares me. Proof again that credentials do not equate intelligence. "

boudolce wrote on Dec 20, 2007 9:31 AM:

" However one feels about the issue of global warming, the fact remains that humans in the United States consume mind-boggling amounts of energy and waste mammoth resources to keep their lives convenient and comfortable without much thought for the generations that come. If we reduce our waste, recycle and be aware of our own personal responsibility to protect the Earth, then we will do the right things, no matter how small they seem, to help protect our global family. I happen to like the Rain Forests and would like them to survive the assault of economic desperation and thoughtless destruction and if a empty can or bottle can do that, then why not encourage every child to participate? Isn't personal responsibility and accountability the fundamental issue after all? "

Gunga Ga Lunga wrote on Dec 20, 2007 9:48 AM:

" U.C. Santa Barbara emeritus professor Daniel Botkin recently lamented in the Wall Street Journal that some of his warming-oriented colleagues believe “the only way to get our society to change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe, and that therefore it is all right and even necessary for scientists to exaggerate…‘Wolves deceive their prey, don’t they?’ The Climate Project is a program designed to train mindless automatons on the Global Warmingist-in-Chief’s factually flawed slideshow so they can travel the world inciting hysteria about manmade global warming. And, of course, make Al Gore more money! Their lectures are given at community centers, senior facilities, coffee houses, and other places members of the public go to meet, greet, and eat. Would you like a schmear of propaganda with your bagel this morning, Mrs. Silverman? Dr William Gray, one of the world's foremost meteorologists, has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works". He says “We’ll look back on this in 10 or 15 years and realize how foolish it was”. Despite winning lavish praise from the environmental lobby and an Oscar from the film industry, Al Gore’s schlockumentary was found to contain “nine scientific errors” by a British court. A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence REFUTING elements of the current man-made GW scares. This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that a scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850. Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist. He has something to sell, so hold onto your wallet. "

Clever Nickname wrote on Dec 20, 2007 10:43 AM:

" Patty, notice how the people who listen to FAUX news and KSFO 560 day and night just spit out the same old bile? You are an excellent role model for your students, your children, and your old friends from Napa High School. We couldn't be prouder. Ignore the folks who think the truth is really "inconvenient." I imagine many of your students will read some of these comments and shake their heads, wondering why anybody would be so negative about what is supposed to be a positive article during this holiday season. Some people just love to be miserable. Why would anyone be "against" trying to make this planet a cleaner, better place to be? By the by...I truly wonder if the science teachers at American Canyon Middle School even know that Mark is speaking for them, and how religion made it into his argument. If so, oy vey. "

glenroy wrote on Dec 20, 2007 11:48 AM:

" Al Gore has such a pathetic track record of telling the truth. If anyone wishes to go back a couple of decades to review his highlight comments they’d have a little better understanding of what drives this walking, talking contradiction. First it was global cooling and the world would be frozen by 2000, he mindlessly supported the shuttering of clean greenhouse gas free nuclear power plants, then he claimed he invented the internet, he claimed he supported a strong intelligence agency but led the devastating intelligence cuts of the Clinton Administration, then while Vice President the made it ‘Safe for Americans to fly with his infamous phased security plan’ only fooling himself when the 9/11 terrorist walked right through his comprehensive security plan, then it was his opposition to accessing 40 billion barrels of known reserves in Alaska claiming the world was awash in cheap oil.... he claimed the seas would rise 20 to 40' when the worst case models suggest 6". If all that wasn’t enough he attacked the President claiming the Iraqi War was lost and the surge was proof enough....anyone paying any attention to this guy ought to realize he’s becoming filthy rich praying upon his blind followers... "

Gunga Ga Lunga wrote on Dec 20, 2007 12:33 PM:

" Working for clean air and an unpolluted atmosphere is a laudable aim, but forgetting to compare the magnitude of man-made pollutants to the natural sources, or having an absolute faith in measurement data of often dubious origin, is unscientific at least, and foolish certainly. The climate is "the changing state of the atmosphere", so do not expect a steady state situation. Do not forget either that the sun is the engine which drives everything, and that the output of that engine is in constant change! No competent scientist disputes that Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased in the last two centuries. What is in dispute is the effect this will have. The well established science, the Beer-Lambert law, says this effect will be small, almost trivial in comparison with natural variations, no more than 2.0 degrees K even if CO2 concentrations exceed 1000 ppm, or more than double today's concentration. It is the radical climate alarmists who claim that a CO2 increase of the magnitude we see today will produce significant and even catastrophic changes in climate. It is this case that is not made. You can quote established science all you want. The well established science does not support the alarmist case. So Patty, being better stewards of our world is indeed a noble and worthy goal. But to wave the alarmist flag and repeat the hysterical rants and predictions of Al Gore to advance your beliefs is foolish. To Clever Nickname: Do you honestly believe that those who do not prescribe to the man-made GW theory are, as you eloquently put, “against trying to make this planet a cleaner, better place to be”? Be careful what you write if you want to be taken seriously. "

cabelas wrote on Dec 20, 2007 12:46 PM:

" Patty, please come to your senses. do a little research and correct yourself or everyone that knows you will look at you diffrently. "

hawkeye wrote on Dec 20, 2007 3:29 PM:

" Let's take Al Gore and the liberals out of the equation for a second. Whether global warming is occuring or not and whether it's man made or not, I challenge one of you naysayers to answer this question: What is so wrong with conserving energy and clean energy and getting off foreign oil? Forget the politics about it for a minute and reflect on that question. Do you realize that not only will it result in a cleaner world but you'll save money too in a lot of ways? I understand that a lot of people are angry at the way the politicians are trying to enact change by using scare tactics and exaggerating "facts", but the bottom line is a cleaner world is a happier world. I also understand that the U.S. is the most wasteful and materialistic society in the world. We want it all; 5,000 square foot home, hummer, corvette and whatever else money can buy. What we seem to be in denial about or just plain dumb, is that to power these things require output of pollution and not just CO2. The naysayers pick CO2 as their main defense, saying that the world produces massive amounts naturally and that is absolutley true. But what they seem to conveniently leave out of their argument are the other pollutants that cause damage in other ways. Ozone, SOx and NOx to name a few. What about the growing hole in the ozone layer? That has little to do with global warming but is a direct result of our pollution. The point is, why not be a little cleaner? Are our heads so far up our you-know-whats that we just don't see it or care? "

KCK wrote on Dec 20, 2007 4:34 PM:

" I agree with Hawkeye. Forget all the global stuff for a minute. I want a solar system for my house, an electric or natural gas car capable of 100 mile commute, recycled water system and anything else that will ensure my kids the same comfort we all have had. WHY do I have to pay the Saudis, Japan, Detroit or PG&E for there product? I have tried numerous times and figured many ways to afford or justify the cost, but it's not there. The system is really stacked against anyone wanting to get away from the automakers, oil companies and utility providers. It should not be this way. I feel that the people speaking global help, should also enlist many others that could help us (me) get away from our dependence on others. Find a cost effective way to help the enviroment and I will take it all. And NO, I am not a tree hugger! "

siobhan dugan wrote on Dec 20, 2007 4:57 PM:

" Patty - you are inspiring! To dedicate so much of your precious time and energy volunteering for a cause you believe so deeply in, is to be truly commended! It saddens me to see so many of these postings - what a bunch of "negative nelly's"! I ask you ... "What willi t hurt?" ... recycling ... conserving energy ... minimizing air pollution ... living a life conscious of your environment... Why shouldn't we want to focus on preserving our beautiful earth for future generations? And to those commentators who have left negative messages about Patty - you should feel ashamed. Patty has touched the lives and the hearts of so many of her students and friends. She sets a positive example for our children - showing them they CAN make a difference, they CAN effect positive change in the world, they SHOULD work toward achieving their goals and ideals, and most importantly, she inspires them to volunteer. What happened to respecting each other and individual perspective? We should be praising Patty for volunteering her precious time to better her community. We need more people in this world like Patty ... more people who care so much that they are driven to action ... more people that "do" instead of just "talk". Patty, our community, our children, our society and our earth are lucky to have someone with your level of dedication and selflessness. Thank you for all that you do - you are appreciated!!! "

napaao wrote on Dec 20, 2007 5:03 PM:

" Patty is awesome! she was my girl scout leader! i love having slumber parties at her home, very kind wormen! "

kevin wrote on Dec 20, 2007 8:01 PM:

" Here is a link to a government web site that has some actual FACTS refuting the propaganda of man made global warming. It was presented at the recent Bali conference by scientists who do not subscribe to the hype. I would urge Patty to read the material with an open mind, if nothing else, for the sake of her students, who deserve to hear both sides of the argument. http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=c9554887-802a-23ad-4303-68f67ebd151c "

winemd wrote on Dec 20, 2007 9:21 PM:

" The idea of "Go Big Green" is a good one, and I commend this teacher for challenging her students to conserve. As a scientist, however, I don't find the arguments and the modeling projections for man-caused global warming compelling evidence. I believe that humans should be good stewards of the environment, but not because of this issue. If this is part of a school discussion, the weaknesses of this hypothesis should be discussed also. That is how critical thinking is learned. There are many reasons to conserve energy and to preserve the rain forests that have nothing to do with global warming. "

boolit wrote on Dec 20, 2007 9:41 PM:

" As a former student of Mrs. Wyman, I can say that she is an AMAZING teacher. She teaches history, not science. She never forces any of her beliefs, including those on global warming, on her students. She simply advocates conservation and recycling. Mrs. Wyman is not alone in her beliefs, and is simply presenting information on a very important and current issue. "

HelloNaffy wrote on Dec 20, 2007 10:31 PM:

" Do you really believe that Ms. Wyman would go out and give these speeches without knowing all the information possible? She didn't just watch the movie once and then say to her self, 'hey, i should speak about this now.' That would be far from the truth. Everyday she is learning new information, and updating the speech she gives. Patty Wyman has my fullest respect for having the courage to go and give these speeches to the people of Napa. "

markmathews wrote on Dec 21, 2007 7:11 AM:

" Did anyone hear that a recent U.S. Senate Report stated that well over 400 Prominent Scientists have disputed Man-Made Global Warming (MMGW) claims in 2007? Did you know about the other 14,000 who have already done so? If Gore and his minions are SO sure of their belief in MMGW, then why do they insult we who are skeptics, calling us deniers and flat earth believers? Why aren’t they instead giving us concrete proof of the truth in their religion? Their actions speak volumes. M.G., no problem, and you are welcome; I have more of that coming too… "

markmathews wrote on Dec 21, 2007 7:14 AM:

" "Clever Nickname," if you are SO sure that the alternative news sources are wrong (KSFO, Fox News. et al), why not convince the rest of us and disprove them? Put your PhD where your mouth is! "

Sandra wrote on Dec 21, 2007 7:54 AM:

" Well, here we go again. Who wants to trash the planet? I don't think anyone would answer yes to that one...Why is it excusable to use misinformation because people feel the cause is just? Who made these people stewards of the facts? Who gave them the permission to spread lies because of their "just" cause? There are many truthful, excellent reasons to conserve. Why aren't these reasons good enough? Why does hysteria have to be spread in order to promote conservation? Are we a generation of idiots, that we must be manipulated to do the right thing? Or are the manipulaters laughing all the way to the bank? And for all you electric car lovers.... Check out what goes into the making of those batteries that power your cars, and all of the energy used, and the toxicity of waste when the batteries finished. "

hawkeye wrote on Dec 21, 2007 2:16 PM:

" Sandra, you've got some good points. I don't think anyone would want to destroy the earth intentionally. But I think that a lot of people don't care and are willing to have the things they want, like hummers for example, at the expense of a little extra pollution because they figure they're just one person and that they won't be around long enough to see the results of their pollution. That's the problem. The degradation of our planet is gradual enough that we don't think it's really a big deal. But anyone with half a brain or a care in the world would realize that we will eventually ruin our planet at the pace we are going. With population exponentially increasing, more demand for energy and resources, we are slowly stripping earth and leaving behind more and more by-products of our existence. At some point it must stop. The more pollution left behind the more disease and cancer we will see. Left unchecked, the natural order of things will eventually decrease our population for us by killing ourselves off. If we do something about it NOW, obviously we will be better off. The politicians however, need to realize that their scare tactics and exaggeration of the "facts" are having the opposite effect on us than they intend, by making us angry and question their integrity. The truth about global warming probably lies somewhere in the middle. Take care of earth and it will take care of you. "

les wrote on Dec 21, 2007 4:47 PM:

" Too many people are trying to pick sides either pro or con GW. The result is we defocus from the problem at hand. Whether we like it or not, the environment is being negatively impacted by humans and will take time to recover. What else besides humans is causing air pollution? What else besides humans is making our water undrinkable? What else besides humans is destroying the habitat for many animals and wildlife in general? What else besides humans is destroying the fish in the oceans? What else besides humans is dumping raw sewage and other toxic materials into our streams, rivers, lakes and oceans? We humans have to control our appetites for ever decreasing resources in a global environment and come up with real solutions today. Who really cares about the scientific arguments or evidence for or against Global Warming and the arguments about natural climate cycles? It’s all esoteric and if we don’t come up with real solutions the air we breathe will slowly kill us. "

Sandra wrote on Dec 22, 2007 8:02 AM:

" Les, humans certainly do the lions share of polluting, but in respnse to your questions.... Animal waste produces mathane, volcanoes produce gasses that are toxic....there are many natural things that add to pollution. And to Hawkeye, I agree that hummers are a waste, but I would add the hybrids to your list also. The amount of energy used in building, and then having to get rid of the toxic waste from these battery cars is quite surprising. For all of those politically correct people who have jumped on the prious band wagons, a little knowledge would be quite enlightening. What a concept, huh? Knowledge instead of hysteria..... "

russ wrote on Dec 22, 2007 6:41 PM:

" Google the U.S. Senate Committee - Environmental & Public Works Home Page, or you can go to epw - senate - gov. This is the source to which markmathews refers. Some "science deniers" can see the names, credentials and opinions of the 400 scientists from around the world who prove that there is no consensus on man-made global warming. By 2012, global warming will be a distant memory and there a new environmental scare underway. There is greater probability of a catastrophic volcanic eruption extinguishing the population of earth than death by man-made global warming. russ "

les wrote on Dec 23, 2007 8:41 AM:

" No Duh- Catastrophes will always have an impact on life on this planet and are out of our control. The things I mentioned previously are in humanities control. Why would anyone believe anything that the government would say? For the past several years the government believes it is OK to pollute our streams, lakes and oceans as long as industry is well served. "

jane wrote on Dec 23, 2007 4:10 PM:

" I find it so interesting, but not surprising, that of all the Holiday "feel good" stories printed over the last few days, this one sparked so much controversy. I love a great debate as much as the next guy, but I would remind most of you that in a proper debate, to stick to the issue at hand, and stop the personal attacks. One loses their credibility, and in turn, lose the debate. Happy Holidays, and thank you to all who are making a difference in people's lives during this Holiday season, and year round. "

russ wrote on Dec 23, 2007 4:19 PM:

" les, ridiculous! Humans, especially Americans and Napa Valley'ians are not in danger of death by man-made air pollution. The air we breathe today is cleaner than it was 50 years ago. The water in American rivers and lakes is cleaner every year as cities and industry clean up their effluents and exhaust emissions. Who besides humans cause air pollution? Every animal and plant on earth adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by living and breathing and by decomposition upon death. The 400 scientists do not work for the government, READ the report! I am so tired of hearing the gloom and doomers forecasting the imminent end of human civilation....absurd. russ "

hawkeye wrote on Dec 23, 2007 6:02 PM:

" Russ, I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, but the air within large AMERICAN cities might be a bit cleaner than it was 50 years ago, but the air in 3rd world country cities is worse than it was 50 years ago. So the overall health of the worlds atmosphere is declining and not just because of argued CO2. There are other pollutants that have a much greater and more direct impact. And yes, volcanoes and forest fires contribute to our pollution. Why should we add to it in the huge amounts we are? Your statement that American rivers and lakes are cleaner these days is questionable. The pollutants found in our water are not all from this country. Atmospheric pollution spreads accross the globe. Here in California we are finding larger concentrations of pollutants from China according to an air and water study, which should come as no surprise. In some areas, water quality may be better now, but in most areas of the world it is declining. And you're right Russ, the doom and gloom is exaggerated, even though there is some truth to it. I think the point they're trying to make by trying to scare us is that if we don't do something about it now, we'll be in trouble later. They're right, but the way they're going about it is over the top. "

kevin wrote on Dec 23, 2007 8:16 PM:

" Humans are part of the environment too. For some reason environmental whackos seem to think that people should exist without impacting the world in the slightest way! "

markmathews wrote on Dec 25, 2007 6:37 AM:

" Isn't the motto "Think globally act locally" from the eco terrosit group "Earth First?" Poor choice of article titles I would think... I also notice that once you call out the Man Made Global Warming cult beleivers, they IMMEDIATLY switch gears to their secondary tact - that of a shrill need to clean up our existing pollution, which although IS a problem, deflects the learned arguments we so-called deniers are trying to point out to them. Watch for this in future articles, and you will see what I mean. In the mean time, I drove my family around American Canyon and Vallejo last night, Christmas eve, to see the lights which my fellow celebrants have put up. I drove it in my evil SUV too; we had a hoot and a holler! Ah yes, I LOVE my carbon footprint! "

russ wrote on Dec 25, 2007 9:05 PM:

" hawkeye, you agreed with my point. The air WE breathe and the water WE drink is cleaner than it was. Your point was that China is polluting the earth and a bit of it reaches us. What should little ole' Napa do about China? I am not going to change my lifestyle because a bit of Chinese pollution reaches us. I am buying fewer Chinese products. So should we lower our standard of living to prevent growth in jobs, energy and our economy? What ever happened to acid rain? Global warming, more foolishness. "

les wrote on Dec 26, 2007 8:27 AM:

" Russ – have you eaten any mercury laced fish or shell fish from the SF Bay? How about the fertilizers that leaches into the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers? Then there are the industrial toxins being found in the wells in San Jose. Did you miss the article on the Chesapeake Bay? No shell fish, crabs or shrimp grow there in spite of efforts to reestablish an ecological balance. Would you let your kids or grand kids swim in the Napa River? I’ll admit that in California air quality is better than it was even 40 years ago, but particulate matter still reaches dangerous levels today. On a global level we are out of control., particularly in regards to the global fisheries. "

les wrote on Dec 26, 2007 8:32 AM:

" kevin: After reviewing all the posts I didn't find a single instance where someone said that people should exist without impacting the environmet. Taking the logical extreme position may be helpful in stirring emotions but not in coming up with a meaningful solution. "

les wrote on Dec 26, 2007 8:42 AM:

" markmatthews - when oil hits $100 or $110 a barrel you will be the first to whine about our dependence on foreign oil. Of course focusing on real solutions to environmental problems takes away from your arguments about the science or lack of it in regards to GW. We will have to come up with some creative solutions. Interestingly it appears that your creative solution is to keep doing what you are doing. "

kevin wrote on Dec 26, 2007 10:29 AM:

" Les, I don't think my position is any more "exteme" than those eco freaks who won't be satisfied until all humans commit suicide and leave the planet totally "natural". In order to have "meaningful solutions" one first has to ask a meaningful question. The real question should be "how do we mitigate the effects of global warming (if it is real)? Building more dams, levees and aqueducts would be a qood start. Legalizing DDT to fight malaria would be a no-brainer. Genetic modification of crops and expanding irrigation systems would seem logical. Re-zoning coastal areas that could eventually be inundated should be a concern, but concidering all the money being spent (wasted) re-building New Orleans, I don't see that one happening soon... "

russ wrote on Dec 26, 2007 1:30 PM:

" les, there is more mercury in the new, low energy light bulbs than in the SF Bay water. I am not concerned about the typical water quality in this area. The industrial toxins in San Jose were put there 40 years ago. Billions have been spent digging up old dumps and gasoline stations. More will need to be spent. You and I and our grandkids are not in danger. Our life span is increasing. It is all about politics. Green wackos have created a boogey man to scare people into voting liberal. Who is polluting the Napa River? "

kevin wrote on Dec 26, 2007 6:03 PM:

" Russ, 35 years ago the two biggest polluters of the Napa River were the Veterans Home and the State Hospital. I don't know about today, but odds are that it probably is a government entity... "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Dec 26, 2007 6:42 PM:

" I'd like to encourage the teacher to look at technological solutions to pollution of all kinds. One of the latest announcements is concerning new technology batteries from Japan. They are lithium ion batteries that charge in 5 minutes, and are big improvement in battery safety. As these batteries are coming out of the lab and into general production, they make possible the complete elimination of liquid fuels in daily commute trips. The weight of the engine and liquid fuels would be replaced by batteries and most 'gas station fillups' of liquid fuels take more than 5 minutes. Unlike the wingnuts who continue to blather tripe about "eco-freaks who want humans to commit suicide" most Americans can get comfortable with electric cars that cost about $0.02 a mile for 'fuel' and 'gas up' about as fast as you do in a smelly petroleum filling station today. There won't be any need for, as Alan Greenspan called it, any oil wars in the Middle East. We gave up horse-drawn buggies for something more convenient and we can give up petro-stink for something better too. ~Ruff "

russ wrote on Dec 26, 2007 10:02 PM:

" Thanks Kevin, I knew it was unlikely to be greedy corporate interests. So it is those who care for the elderly and sick in our community? "

russ wrote on Dec 26, 2007 10:08 PM:

" Oh no, $0.02 cent per mile Ruff is back. Actually, I have always liked the smell of gasoline, kinda reminds me of power and prosperity. Battery power comes from the electric outlet, not from burning hydrocarbons. "

hawkeye wrote on Dec 27, 2007 7:51 AM:

" Right on Les! Russ, you say it's all about politics. I say, people MAKE IT INTO politics. There are really two issues here. 1)A real threat to our planet in the form of pollution and possibly global warming. 2)The people like Russ and other denialists who make this into a purely political issue. My advantage over those such people is my ability to separate the politics from the underlying issue at hand. Our massive footprint and the politics are both problems. And russ, you don't necessarily have to sacrifice your quality of living by living greener. But if you define your quality of living by having a giant mansion, SUVs and fast cars, then I guess it's not possible. And I believe it was Kevin who says the the "eco-freaks" want us to exist without ANY effect to the environment. Some environmentalists do think that way. But it's obviously not practical. The idea is to REDUCE our footprint, not eliminate it entirely. The world can stand to reduce it tremendously, without compromising our quality of living. It's not just about conservation, it's also about clean energy. "

russ wrote on Dec 27, 2007 6:02 PM:

" hawk, you take me out of context. Obviously you are a newcomer to the science & climate discussions here. I am a scientist. The ultra Greenies, lead by Gore and other extremist liberals, have made the climate a political issue, ignoring the science, which is now piling up against man-made global warming. The topic of this page is "think globally act locally. Napa is not the place to fight the global war against pollution. As you pointed out, China is a mega polluter ...not a local problem. Napa school children are being frightened for no reason by teachers with no knowledge of science...because of politics. Boycott China-made products. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Dec 28, 2007 4:05 AM:

" Well, "russ", we just ordered our second Prius and we are biding a not-so-tearful farewell to our last $100 a week commute fuel bill. And... the 2008 model with better equipment was $3,000 dollars less!!! So far, battery development is right on schedule to deliver Plug-In Hybrid versions of the Toyota Prius and Chevy Volt when our first Prius hits 60,000 miles in 2010. The PHEV prototype Escapes and Prius have been delivered to Southern California on schedule in 2007. When the wife and I look at the way our first Prius has held value and the new 150,000 mile warranty on the hybrid drive (including the battery) in our 2008 Prius... WELL... we just have to laugh all the way to the bank! You can pull in to the gas station and breathe in those stinky gas fumes for us! My wife and I prefer the smell of all that folding GREEN we save instead. We save enough on gas to almost pay the car payment! Yep, the folks who drive hybrid cars are sure making a big mistake! -- But don't worry, "russ", the right wingnutz can be... OH, SO VERY PROUD of their contribution to the $400 million dollar retirement package Chevron gave their last CEO. Really... what is a wingnutz money for if not to plump up corporate crocodile nest eggs? Petroleum-Sniffers can really celebrate, eh? Gas will soon be even more expensive! That'll show folks who listened to Al Gore's advice and bought those impractical hybrid cars! You, make a heck of a reverse financial advisor, russ! All we do is the exact opposite of everything you recommend! Right Wingnutz have our thanks for pointing so insistently and consistently in the WRONG direction! Happy New Year! ;o) ~Ruff "

russ wrote on Dec 28, 2007 12:48 PM:

" ruff, I will wait for the Prius price to go down some more, then buy the big one. By then they will get the gas mileage problems fixed and make them safer. I see that gasoline prices have come down and are headed below $3. It's all those folks buying electric cars. All of these new technology developments are due to supply and demand economics and that is good old free enterprise. When is CalCars coming out with their first model? I am still counting on big auto and big energy companies to keep us mobile. russ "

kevin wrote on Dec 30, 2007 5:57 PM:

" Russ, you might want to hold off on that Prius; the numbers just don't add up. Comparing to the Toyota Corolla, the fuel savings are less than $500 per year (fueleconomy.gov) yet the Prius costs almost $7,000 more. That's a lot of years driving to see any savings... "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Dec 30, 2007 6:17 PM:

" "Russ", you have been wrong on every detail of energy economics for as long as I have read and posted here. You are wrong about the trend in oil prices because our Republican debauched falling dollar is going to continue kicking up prices for everything in 2008. I'll be looking to document just how wrong you are on economics for the upcoming year. CalCars.Org does not build cars for the public and you know it since you say you have visited the site. What CalCars.Org does do is put the lie to all the disinformation you and your Bushite Republican buddies push on the unwary. Anyway, you still have the first 'Ruffie Reverse Weathervane Award' for being both consistently and insistently WRONG concerning economics, true prosperity, money, and investments. Please buy another gas-guzzler, you are behind on funding the half-billion dollar retirement nest egg of the current Chevron CEO. Your money belonga them, right? ~Ruff "

hawkeye wrote on Dec 31, 2007 8:10 AM:

" russ, you're still missing the point. China is a mega-polluter, and it's massive amounts of pollution are beginning to show up in significant quantities in our local environment. So YES, it is a local problem. What happens on one side of the globe will eventually show up on the other. You say you're a scientist? Not one thing you have said so far would allow me to believe you. You also say Napa is not the place to fight global warming. Well, actually, Napa is one place to fight it. There are millions of other places in the world to fight it too. You say it's the politicians who are making this a political issue. That's true, but, the denialists can't see past the political garbage and see the big picture. So in essence they're keeping it a political issue. Whether or not global warming is actually occuring we have to do something more than we are now. There are more problems with our pollution and oil consumption than just global warming. "

markmathews wrote on Jan 3, 2008 6:38 AM:

" Les, I agree that we must come up with something; how about these two mentioned solutions? There is NOTHING wrong with continuing to do what I do. When oil hits that high, I will be carpooling with a third co worker, and I will not be whining, but protesting those liberals have not allowed either ANWAR drilling nor nuclear power plant production over the past few decades. While Rome is burning, these ‘60’s dope smoking liberals have fiddled, and now here we are! And now with the brouhaha over dead birds, our wind generators will not doubt be stopped by PETA.

Ruff, (too bad you don’t use your real name, but there you have it…) can you explain why the Oakland democrat Don Peratta is driving a 2006 Chevrolet Charger with 22” rims, a state provided vehicle, and not a Prius? If it is such a good idea, how come our do as we say not as we do liberals not walking the walk? Same thing with AlGore and his mansion; sell it, or donate it to the homeless and buy an overpriced cracker box like the rest of us working stiffs. These need to clean up their own acts before anyone follows them.

Hawkeye, you said that Whether or not global warming is actually occurring we have to do something more than we are now… Why?
"

hawkeye wrote on Jan 4, 2008 7:56 AM:

" markmathews, we have to do more than we are now because there are other problems than potential global warming associated with our ever increasing use of fossil fuels. Pollution, rising costs, rapidly dwindling supply. Come on! It doesn't take a phd to realize we must come up with alternatives. Europe already has and is way ahead of the rest of the world. "

MarkMathews wrote on Jan 23, 2008 11:47 AM:

" Hawkeye, I do not agree with the premise that man IS causing ANY warming to the environment. Else, what DID melt the glaciers that carved the Colorado River basin, or the global warming that turned the Hanging Gardens of Babylon into the Islamic populated desert it is today? I am all FOR alternatives, such as nuclear power, but no Democrat will allow it to be built! We as a country HAVE oil in ANWAR, but again, Democrat special interests will NOT allow us to drill there! Population can be stemmed by deporting illegal aliens back to where they came from before they reproduce in large numbers HERE, which also means LESS need for fuel, and LESS carbon footprint of our own country. THAT would be a small start; THEN, get liars like Al Gore OUT of his mansions, as well as ALL those Hollywood liberals who are preaching to us about how to change OUR habits. No, until THEY walk the walk, they can just go to H. E. Double Hocky Sticks and pedal their snake oil to those more prone to consume that Kool Aid.
"

MarkMathews wrote on Aug 20, 2008 8:39 AM:

" I guess my last comment put it to rest, eh? LOL... "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy