It's high time Gore is exfoliated, and exposed for what he really is.

His Inconvenient Truth is anything but, and I'm going to start the ball rolling by pointing out some of the actual science that he has conveniently chosen to leave out of his movie......

Let's start with this, from the website for his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, and the link titled "The Science."
http://www.climatecrisis.net/thescience/

"The number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled in the last 30 years." ....the cite is from an article by Kerry Emanuel in Nature, 2005.

But look what Kerry Emanuel says in Jan 2006 in a FAQ on his MIT website.....

1.) Q: Is global warming causing more hurricanes?
A: No. The global, annual frequency of tropical cyclones (the generic, meteorological term for the storm that is called a tropical storm or hurricane in the Atlantic region) is about 90, plus or minus 10. There is no indication whatsoever of a long-term trend in this number.

3.) Q: Is the intensity of hurricanes increasing with time?
A: There is some (my emphasis added) evidence that it is.

4.) Q: But aren’t there lots of errors in the hurricane record?
A: Yes, there are...

6.) Q: You say that reliable records of hurricane wind speeds go back only to about 1950, so how can you say that there were not even more intense storms before 1950? How can you assert that the upswing in the last 50 years is a consequence of global warming?
A: We cannot say for sure......

......and this little gem:
8.) Q: I gather from this last discussion that it would be absurd to attribute the Katrina disaster to global warming?
A: Yes, it would be absurd.

--------------------------------------------------
In the start page for the the movie's website, there's a little slideshow. Does anyone recognize the location where the boats are that are grounded in the desert?? I don't suppose anyone knows the real reason that the body of water they used to float in is all dried up???

.....In the start page for the the movie's website, there's a little slideshow. Does anyone recognize the location where the boats are that are grounded in the desert?? I don't suppose anyone knows the real reason that the body of water they used to float in is all dried up???

I have not seen the movie but will make a guess; Aral Sea. Reason for lack of water? Cotton.

I have not seen the movie but will make a guess; Aral Sea. Reason for lack of water? Cotton.

Damn! You're good!! :)

Got nuthin' to do with global warming (in the sense of anthropogenic greenhouse gasses), but sure makes for good scare tactics!!

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://unimaps.com/aral-sea/aral-pic.gif&imgrefurl=http://unimaps.com/aral-sea/print.html&h=650&w=650&sz=430&tbnid=hbas1uCTFejfGM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=137&prev=/images%3Fq%3Daral%2Bsea&start=3&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=3
This is actually an incredibly good example of man's land use robbing peter to pay paul, and they both really lose in the end. It could just as easily have been something that is causing global cooling...but the bigger question is.....

The environmental impact of diverting all that water should or should not be included in carbon credits? Who would be paying what to whom???

....The environmental impact of diverting all that water should or should not be included in carbon credits? Who would be paying what to whom???

Well it was used, maybe still is, to grow cotton. This is used for clothing and eventually if the fabric is recycled for paper. Provided in the end it is disposed of in a proper cap-and-seal landfill site it will be sequestered away from decomposition so therefore a positive carbon credit :).

The perfect scam? Only an ex-law-maker could use a loophole like this and pull the wool over everyones eyes!

Gore's retirement and tax shelter plan (http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/gore_buys_carbon_credits_fromhimself)

No one can deny the climate does change. No one can deny once a politician knows how to work the system, there is always an angle after leaving office, to help themselves!


DC

I've already blasted the Snoop-Gass-Dogg for his energy hyporcrisy...now there's this
From NewsBusters

Lynn Davidson's blog
Rap Star In Gore Climate Concert Lineup Flies Dinner Across The Atlantic
Posted by Lynn Davidson on March 5, 2007 - 11:04.

"How is Al Gore going to explain this one? Multi-platinum-selling rapper Kanye West, who infamously said during the Katrina telethon, "George Bush doesn't care about black people" has something else to explain. The AP reports that Kanye asked a restaurant in Cardiff, Wales to fly a chef and a meal across the Atlantic ocean to a Manhattan business meeting this Wednesday for about $4000 "plus travel and accomodation for the restaurant's head chef" and the addition of lots of Earth-killing greenhouse gases. OK, that seems typical for the music biz, after all, Bono did have a forgotten favorite hat flown first class that was flown from London to Italy for about $1700, but now people are now paying attention to celebrity hypocrisy more closely. Kanye is signed up for Al Gore's Live Earth, which is designed to raise money for and awareness of human-caused global climate change and is the latest giant concert that will save the world. (AP didn't connect the political dots.)"

Gore claims responsibility for the internet (he didn't actually say he "invented" it..he just got it funded), then he tapped into the retirement funds of California public employees to fund his new cable TV company Current TV and wants people to email in videos....using the internet....
....and he wants us to reduce our energy consumption.

Lookey what the energy usage for the internet has gotten to for server requirements alone!!!

Environmental Valuation & Cost-Benefit News
"...Driving the server proliferation is the insatiable appetite for Web content, such as video on demand, music downloads, and Internet telephony, Koomey says.

The total electricity bill to operate data center servers and related infrastructure equipment in the United States was $2.7 billion in 2005, compared with $1.3 billion in 2000. Worldwide, the total bill was $7.2 billion in 2005, compared with $3.2 billion in 2000.

Looked at differently, U.S. data center power consumption in 2005 was equivalent to about five 1,000- megawatt power plants, or five typical nuclear or coal power plants, Koomey says.

Data center servers consumed 0.6% of all electricity in the United States in 2005. When auxiliary infrastructure equipment, including network and cooling gear, is thrown in, that figure jumps to 1.2%, about the same percentage consumption as for televisions...."

http://envirovaluation.org/index.php/2007/03/04/informationweek_www_informationweek_com

Ha! I've got 4 operational computers at home for the fambly, and 2 at work for just for me. Gimme some more 'o that web content!! We're so bad, we all sit and play on the 'puters while watching TV.....

as a human being living in a major city, and within 3/4 mile of a coal burning power plant, i still cannot help being glad Al (the obvious fibber) gore is sticking up for environmental concerns. One of the few things to back his cedability is that he put out that book in the, i think, 70s, detailing some of the same issues.

George Bush's total destruction of 'the clean air act' is shocking and shameful. The 'polution market' system that replaced it is directly responsible for this plant i live by being able to emit with no regard for the 10s of thousands of people living within a 1 or 2 mile radius of it..

Sure gore is a bit of a cock-head. But, at least he didnt scrap the clean air act.. I see a big gap between 'Evil' (scrapping clean air act) and good, if self serving (making an emotional plea for better energy policy).

There are lots of ways to use statistics.. Grasping at straws to prove climate change is one thing. Considering the reported 5,000+ low income (mexican) kids in my hood with asthma (like 85% higher than average), to not grasp at straws in favor of reasonable policy is shocking.

Reasonable policy? Like carbon credit trading??

"A responsible approach to solving this crisis," Al Gore said recently at New York University's Law School, would be "to authorize the trading of emissions ... globally."

".....So far, the real winners in emissions trading have been polluting factory owners who can sell menial cuts for massive profits, and the brokers who pocket fees each time a company buys or sells the right to pollute. "Carbon trading is a promising strategy for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions," says Dan Esty, director of Yale's Center for Environmental Law and Policy, "but the current structures have serious flaws." ......

....Since developing countries don't have any caps on emissions, companies can take the handsome payments they receive from carbon cuts and use the money to build new fossil-fuel and coal factories. India's Gujarat Fluorochemical, for instance, made €27 million in the last three months of 2006—triple its total company earnings compared with the same period in 2005—thanks to carbon credits. That boost in profits will no doubt help fund its new plant for making Teflon and caustic soda, both polluting substances....."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17435875/site/newsweek

Policy, as defined by AlGore, equals profit. As you'll see if you read this article....with caution, 'cause you know how Newsweek likes to grasp at straws....that we're paying, and they're gaining, and we all are breathing the same air. As the article points out, the carbon credit "policy" is a shell game, not a solution. Ah, but AlGore wants you to think it's a solution.

More and more articles are focusing on Asia's increasing pollution, which by some estimations is far worse than previously believed.....but never mind all that...it's Bush's fault.
.....ps....glad to hear you're a human being. I just hate it when people's pets log on and post here.

the people who own the power plant i live near do not consider me a human being!

Also, for some reason I have the impression that previous to george bush, there was the Clean Air Act which attempted to set standards for power plants to reduce emissions over time, with concrete goals..

Bush, if I am not mistaken, totally scrapped this in favor of an emissions market.. I gathered all of this listening to NPR all the time. I had never seen gore try and push the emissions market! I hate and loathe the emissions market! These ******** who own the power company make so much $$, and us poor-neighborhooders, we pay the same as the 'white' people for power, who are literally being subsidized by us.

I will now read this article you posted. The main point I was raising is that I am glad someone is saying something.. George W. says scary stuff where he claims this system that allows a power point in chicago to buy pollution rights from a hydro station in seattle is a great idea, and he keeps calling the clean air act 'broken'... Not to mind that he broke it.. It was like his 3rd month in office.. Before spet 11th made a man of him.

The point about these pollution profits being used to build outside the controlled area is also a good point..

Get out your gas masks.

oh. as far as 'newsweek grasping at straws', i do not beleive anything i read, unless it was on CNCzone, and ger21 posted it!

[QUOTE=vacpress;267943]Snip

Bush, if I am not mistaken, totally scrapped this in favor of an emissions market.. I gathered all of this listening to NPR all the time. I had never seen gore try and push the emissions market! I hate and loathe the emissions market! These ******** who own the power company make so much $$, and us poor-neighborhooders, we pay the same as the 'white' people for power, who are literally being subsidized by us.

QUOTE]

So, are we to gather the what comes out of NPR as a public subsidized entity, an honorable news organization that rarely allows both views but the majority being leftist spun opinions?

As history will show, the majority of any working class race subsidizes the majority of all minorities. Singling out 'whites' as the kWhr price benchmark divider, is a bit incendiary, but reflects an NPR stylized conduct in blame ethics.

Had Bush not put a stop to the burden on some power plants, which would pass that burden on to the consumer, NPR would still be the acting smear merchant against his administration not controlling energy cost. Similar demands like this were set on the auto industry to mass produce electric cars by a certain date. But the cost and lack of scientific advances take precedence as facing reality set in. It is like the NPR supporting left preference would be to have a company roll up and die as justice for impractical expectations regardless of cost. Oh, I forgot......this could be subsidized too since it can't support itself.

NPR's idea of Paradise: First a Nanny state, then a Sugar Daddy state. Socialism means never being WEANED FROM THE TIT!

DC

vacpress, was the power plant there before you moved in?

Is the power plant part of a publicly regulated utility, as they are in my area? Are the rates, profits, investments, and policies, and emissions all regulated by a state board, as they are here?

If 85% of the kids in the neighborhood are suffering ill effects objectively attributable to emissions from the power plant, isn't there an army of ambulance chasing publicity hound lawyers clamoring for millions of dollars?

--97T--

Just to add in my 2 cents without reading through the entire thread

PETA, the People for the Eating of Tasty Aminals, have just condemed Gore (yesterday I think) saying if he was really green and earth conscious he would give up eating meat and be vegan or some other flavor of vegetarian.

Additionally his mansion in TN used nore electricity in one month that the average american family uses in 1 year. But he now says he is going to switch to compact fluorscent lights.

This doesn't even take into consideration his other mansion in Verginia, which, being on the historic property list, he is banned by law from making any changes tomake it more "green friendly".

Niner,

Maybe you have never lived within a very large metropolitan area(chicago).

When I moved here, the Clean Air Act was slowly clamping down on coal burners, asking them to reduce emissions and meet some guidelines. Especially concerning the use of 'scrubbers', which i do not know the details of.

There is a documented issue of children here having asthma at rates many times (15x) the normal rate in chicago. The socio-economic makeup of my neighborhood is destined to be powerless. Chicago's Pilsen neighborhood has always been a refuge for artists, communists, foreigners.. The current makeup is charmingly old fashioned mexican families and the cities most concentrated art community.

We get literally laughed at by the city when we ask about the power plant. As for all these mechanisms you mention that may make it better. Those are ineffective. The emisssions WERE regulated by a state board, now they have the option, which they exercise, to purchase emissions credits.

The best thing going for us is also a mixed blessing. Gentrification has started to thrash the better areas. All the nicest parts of this awesome old neighborhood(it is special here. is it special where you live?) are now being converted into condos.. I havent got a huge anti-gentrification thing, but I do hope if we do need all these silly yuppies with $250,000 2-bedroom apartments, maybe when their children get asthma, the political clout of these white people will trickle down and help the ultimately helpless ethnic and art communities.


i like al gore because he has exposed himself to all of these calls of 'hypocrate' in the name of a reightious cause. he isnt an idiot. he is a scholar. i dont ever agree with much that politicians say, but i am glad he is doing something. i am glad he seems more rational and viable than most politicians talking about the environment..

if he needs to gain political capital while exposing this issue, so be it. it is clear that people have been enlightened by his presentation of the issue. even if he has an agenda and sometimes says absurd things, it is better than nothing.

i wish he would put in some energy saver light bulbs...

vacpress, was the power plant there before you moved in?

Is the power plant part of a publicly regulated utility, as they are in my area? Are the rates, profits, investments, and policies, and emissions all regulated by a state board, as they are here?

If 85% of the kids in the neighborhood are suffering ill effects objectively attributable to emissions from the power plant, isn't there an army of ambulance chasing publicity hound lawyers clamoring for millions of dollars?

--97T--

Niner,

Maybe you have never lived within a very large metropolitan area(chicago).

When I moved here, the Clean Air Act was slowly clamping down on coal burners, asking them to reduce emissions and meet some guidelines. Especially concerning the use of 'scrubbers', which i do not know the details of.

truncated, but read the whole thing, it's a good reply

ll very true, and if you want some more hypocracy, there was as EPA report issued a few weeks ago regarding the smoggiest place in America... LA. The largest single poluter in the LA area was the the hollywood industry. You know, the folks who spend their time *****ing at us about now badly we polute things. The official hollywood industry response... well if you clamp down on us and put restrictions on us then we will just make out movies elsewhere and that will screw over a large section of the areas economy.

So I guess if hollywood isn't flipping the bird at the poluters their flipping off the antipolution enforcers.

I can comprehend the Global climate debate/discussions here being somewhat political and socially informative.

However for your second offense,

While venting animosity and indignation using racial undertones can be seen as bold and progressive by some. These superficial slights would not be tolerated here or anywhere else with respectful values amongst men, given any other relative context casting similar contempt against any other group.



DC

You're right. I feel that I've been discriminated against based solely on my race.

I have the RIGHT to not be offended, and this discussion must remain politically correct with zero tolerance for contextual contempt.

...anyone see South Park last night???:rainfro:

you are correct, of course.

however, it feels allot different when you live amongst it. However, in the case i spoke of, this IS an 'ethnic community'. This is not a suburb. Unfortunately there are divisions in income and clout based on race and other such factors. I didnt say anything unfavorable about any race. Furthermore, I didnt say anything they wouldnt say in the 'Media'.

You suggest we ignore such aspects of the issue? Look around america, probably the world, you will find that there are race lines for who suffers the effects of pollution..

Just like they taught us(i wonder if it is true) that in the English industrial revolution mainly the poor lived in the polluted areas...

Whatever. PC is not ignoring race related socio economic conditions, it is having a standard of decency in communication. I am not sure I crossed that.


R

I can comprehend the Global climate debate/discussions here being somewhat political and socially informative.

However for your second offense,

While venting animosity and indignation using racial undertones can be seen as bold and progressive by some. These superficial slights would not be tolerated here or anywhere else with respectful values amongst men, given any other relative context casting similar contempt against any other group.



DC

I'd submit to you.

I have seen plenty of small cities around the country that were very nice home town metropolises great to raise kids in and safe to walk on the streets at night. Once the city officials decided there was a need to build low income housing, the cities became rough neck territory, filth and pollution followed. Then the business moved out. People with clout and power created it as a platform for opportunity, yet someone else trashed it. Now the issue is turned again on the people with power, seen from the inside of misery looking out as the problem again. Go figure!


Now, merely by changing only the color of the people within your argument, implied as bringing an unwelcome calamity on any community. Regardless of what scenario or excuse that can be used to defend implicating one race at fault as a whole. No one can deny the dynamics of the offense level escalates many fold into a race bating comment.

Don't get me wrong, I am not offended. I just view the double standard as unconscionable. "Whatever"........kinda backs that up, don't it?



DC

Fair enough.

I think the issue is complex and that many viewpoints have some validity.

I have sidetracked the original intent of the thread a bit, sorry.

Yes. Al Gore's hypocrisy is disheartening. Long live oil\coal power and profiteering.

Carry on.
:)

vacpress,

That power plant --

Was it there before you moved in?

Do the people in your neighborhood get governmental assistance from programs to help them pay their utility bills?

How much money has been spent on scrubber technology by the utilities, and how can you say they are ineffective? Why haven't you looked up the numbers on how much of what is in the discharges, and compared them with occupational exposure levels yourself?

How much more would you and the people in your neighborhood be willing to spend for less pollution from the power plants? Especially if the people in your neighborhood are the least able to afford it?

What difference does it make, where I live?

How do you know that the asthma rates are not caused by some other factor? If it has been proven that it is because of the power plant, who proved it, and which chemical is to blame? Does the incidence follow prevailing wind patterns?

Would Gore be on this campaign if he ever produced anything useful in his life, and traded it to a willing buyer?

I ask these questions because it is apparent to me that Gore has seized upon pseudoscience to scare the ignorant and to ride the scare as a vehicle to power, in his quest to continually expand the powers of government and diminish the freedom of the individual. The producers and honest businessmen of society might be seen as a convenient target for the envy of the have-nots, and the environ mentals can paint them as deserving of having their possessions and income confiscated. But the real victims are the dupes that let Gore do their thinking for them, for they are the ones who are selling their own limited economic freedoms out for a hand-out. They can cheer more expensive energy, punitive taxes, and socialist nanny-state programs too numerous to mention, never realizing that it is themselves and their own offspring who will end up living in perpetual servitude to the state through their own DEPENDENCE on it. Gore thinks YOU use too much energy, and he aims to regulate how much you can afford. Whether it will result in a greener world is immaterial. What is material is that you will do what you are told, when you are told, according to the dictates of politicians who are not held to any standard of truth for the reasoning behind their megalomaniac schemes to regulate, rule, and tax your very sustenance and every aspect of your life. Am I exaggerating? Just watch and see, because there is nothing that myself or people like me can do to stop it. History going back to the ancients shows that every civilization over a certain size follows a path of self-destruction, and the sheeple never see through the trickery and buncombe, no matter how ridiculous it is. The few who know, can take measures to sidestep these movements, which will wash over our society as inexorably as a rising tide. What you can expect out of this, is ever rising numbers of people consuming fewer and fewer goods produced, because over time ever fewer people become willing or able to produce much only to have it confiscated. And we are already near the breaking point on that score. When this causes the inevitable economic crash, possibly in conjunction with a monetary collapse, you will see the government pursue war as a way to keep everyone on subject and working to support them. Despite the iniquities and outrages that take place during the decline, what any freedom loving person is really afraid of, is the plans for maintaining control when the crash comes. Isn't the groundwork being laid already? Didn't we already do this once? How much government expansion can a people sustain the next time?

People who know the way history repeats itself see this decline in full force already. The signs of this are already apparent, as you can see in today's papers, where General Motors outlines its strategy for the future, expecting soon to sell more vehicles outside the U.S. than domestically. These vehicles will not be produced in the U.S. What is happening to the U.S. is a larger scale example of what happens to cities that elect socialistic, tax-and-spend-for-kickbacks, regulate everything nanny governments. It's called capital flight. General Motors and every other large manufacturing concern that has the ability to do so are taking every spare dollar in cash flow that comes in, and removing it from the jurisdiction of the looters, while steadfastly refusing to invest in production capacity here. This strategy began with the divestment of virtually all parts making plants, an admission that they cannot make money building cars here, and telegraphing their intention to just walk away from the U.S. market, and the government, and the unions along with them. Faced with ever stronger unions, more workplace regulation, higher taxes, mileage standards, idiotic ethanol and hydrogen schemes, higher energy costs, higher steel costs, continued inflation, and generally worsening conditions for every measurable business condition, they are fleeing the neighborhood for their very life. Just like any inner city. And just like the major city that I live near, the people who are left are the dependent ones. They take over the government and enact new, higher taxes, more regulation, more hand-outs, more graft and corruption. What they get out of it is a wholesale departure of every business in the city, along with whatever families can afford to get their children out. Then, what is left are crime-ridden neighborhoods full of welfare dependents, where no sane businessman who has any other option would risk his life to do business. Immigrants scratching out a living are the only ones brave enough to open a corner store or gas station, and one of them gets killed in a robbery near here every few weeks.

The goose that laid the golden egg is about dead. Watch what happens to the standard of living of people when not only is half their sustenance eaten out before they get to keep any, but when the cost of energy raises the price of almost everything beyond reach. When this happens, the sheeple will bleat out for the government to take over, because those greedy capitalists have ruined it all, and then they will all have what they so richly deserve -- a life of watching the Al Gores of the world heat their mansions and drive their limousines with rationed power that they are not allowed to have, while they chat with others in the bread line about how much bluer the sky is, now that all manufacturing and most farming is done on another continent.

Perhaps this terrible vision won't come fully to pass very soon, perhaps it will happen sooner than we think. But this is not good or bad, it's just inevitable when a majority sees that they can use the power of the government to extract ever more from the producers of wealth. They will get what they want, even if they ignore the obvious point that less of what they want will be available to them, and eventually it will be denied them completely. While we witness what happened in the USSR, and Germany, and Italy, and the slow stagnation of the EU economies, we continually try to accelerate our own course down the same path.

I'll be watching it unfold from the sidelines with great amusement. Nothing will stop this government machine or steer it from the path that is being set on so many levels. So my words aren't intended to convert anyone who isn't already inclined to agree. They are only written in the hope that some person of the right mind might see them, and educate himself, and find some means to get out of the way of the juggernaut before it comes his way.

--97T--

I think what you brought to the thread is valid and complex, as far as trickle down effects go. There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around when it comes to finger pointing rather than toward the direct individuals responsible for the decisions, conditions and why.

IMHO, socio-economics in so many respects, becomes self imposed through generations. It's literally frozen to the point cultural icons and peer pressure are misguiding the youth with careless irresponsibility and having spite on their own kind, that do try to earn their way out of poverty with an education to capture the American dream. Not unlike how intense hatred and avoiding external interference is openly taught in Middle Eastern medrases and accepted as destiny. False comfort?

The people that do take on the challenge and struggle to succeed do not hold onto the victim mentality stigmatisms that prevent prosperity nor do they pass them on to their children. Outside influences that do make bad impressions are not always recognized for what they are or the effect they have. One bad apple spoils the bunch or Misery loves company sound familiar? As I have been taught, it is the sins of the father that plague future generations. It doesn't take many generations for cultural chaos to develop a helpless people unwilling to rise above its grip. False hope?

It is rather amusing watching some folks putting so much faith into the likes of social icons that are ridiculously inept in so many of life's issues, but cling to radical causes to retain the spotlight oblivious to how phony they look. I am simply amazed by the apathy over just how some of these icons garnered wealth and whether they walk the walk. It's like being enamored by the icons mere bigger than life, rich image is enough to make their words gospel. We give far to much weight to Super Star popularity, when they rarely have the integrity or knowledge to speak intelligently for the cause, beyond their bank accounts. False witness?

What........Gore's family money was never connected to profiteering?

If there is money to be made, Gore isn't dumb enough to let it slip by. I can see a market explosion for Al Gore Popsicles to ease the GW heat suffering youth as potential converts..........and revenue streams. At least he's making it look like he is doing something in the media, while he does everything else behind the scenes and his supporters are none the wiser and wouldn't believe it anyways. If there is money to be lost, you can bet there is a line item tax deduction to cover it too. Although, if you are vested in a California retirement plan, the Gore's Current channel investment looks be a pretty dirty secret if it does fail.

DC

"I'll be watching it unfold from the sidelines with great amusement."

...Speaking of watching...I broke down and watched An Inconvenient Truth tonight. What a load of crap. What a load of cinematic horse crap.

I can see why it is sooooo popular. If you don't know any better, if you don't know any of the facts behind his claims, you'll be lulled like a sheeple in a good ole baptist revival. Yeah, Gore is that good. He was born to preach.

If you're naive to the ways of Hollywood, you won't catch the subleties, like Gore riding in a yellow cab. Or the small little corner of the Lincoln limo that just barely makes it in frame he exits from on his way into a one of his "thousand" presentations. Yup. Like that's all real. Just like him walking through airport security metal detectors while wearing a metal belt. .....and not a secret service droid in sight.

It's a brilliant example of film and editing, scripting and acting. But it ain't a documentary about anything but AlGore's aspirations of power and influence.

How many of you who've seen it remember the bit about the peer-reviewed publications that didn't have a single dissenting opinion about the source of global warming???? 920+ papers, and ZERO papers not in agreement. Gore didn't mention the study was that of Naomi Oreskes, and Benny Peiser took her study to task and found it was B.S. His efforts to unmask her were met with REAL censorship.

Wanna see??? http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/Scienceletter.htm

Gore also spends time playiing the poor me card with the tripe of his loss to Bush. He lost, ancient history, boo-fricken hoo, and it has NOTHING to do with global warming, anthropogenic or otherwise.

Gore spends his time preaching. That's what this movie really is, a gimme that old time religion sermon, with the bible repaced, and CO2 as satan. If what he were preaching were true and without deception, it might be ok, but it ain't.

Gore is a sleaze, a hypocrite. He's today's $300 man.

One Of Many,

Thanks for your reply. It has ever been thus.

Fizz,

I think what we are seeing here with this is a natural consequence of the weakening of traditional religion; something must follow to fill the vacuum. Most people have a deep need to be told what to think, what to do, and most of all, how to belong. This movement satisfies all needs. Ever notice how the dire predictions sound like something out of the old testament? Heh.

You've got every ingredient in there to make a church ladies' busybody committee happy. Apocalyptic visions. Fear. Guilt. Self sacrifice to atone for your own unworthiness that will give you a feeling of membership with the group. A comforting absolute conviction in knowing the Real Truth. A tasty slice of making people behave the way they ought to. A delicious helping of plundering those you are envious of. Relief from the responsibility to know anything or to think for yourself. Psychic and monetary rewards for those willing to demonstrate ever deeper faith in the cause, against all external circumstances. Castigation of anyone who relies on reason and logic instead of consensus to form conclusions. A steady stream of drivel promoting and reinforcing the group-think. And the final piece of the puzzle, converting enough people to the Real Truth so that only venal politicians who play along will succeed, all others will be forced out of the game. Once it becomes a state sponsored religion, voluntary contributions are not required. The coffers will be filled at the point of the tax man's gun. It then becomes a vehicle to be used by the lowest form of politicians to ride to power and influence, always in an effort to expand it. The new doctrine suffuses all levels of society, reinforced from the university level to kindergarten, from scientific papers to the cartoon page of the daily rag. There will be no escaping it.

It's a very old formula, preying on a fundamental human weakness, and it appears to be as effective as ever.

Are we at the eve of a new dark age?

Here we see an effort to seize absolute control over the most fundamental aspects of human existence on a global scale, handily destroying capitalism and any national sovereignty in the process. Even limited success along their path will cause monetary and economic convulsions large enough to bring calls for tightening control yet further; history shows that if a spoonful of poison makes the economy sick, we must pour it in by the gallon.

Real lessons learned from history at such great cost have already been forgotten, as we sacrifice a bright future for the comfort of letting authorities tell us what to think.

And so might end a brief spark of human freedom and material wealth in the long history of human enslavement; an experiment in granting the rabble inalienable rights, intellectual freedom, property ownership, the right to keep what one earns. It has been squandered -- the responsibility is too great, whatever the potential rewards are. We shall turn our society into a great Hospital where we are fed and diapered by our keepers. Ever so much more comfortable than going out into the cold, cruel world and mastering it ourselves.

Read how easily this fundamental human weakness can be exploited here:
http://www.vaniercollege.qc.ca/Auxiliary/Psychology/Frank/Thirdwave.html

--97T--

I had dinner with friends over the weekend, and they brought their son along. He related that his science class is being required to memorize the periodic table. Without learning anything about chemistry first.

On discussing his science class further, it turns out that he is being pumped full of drivel about alternative energy, without being taught anything about energy. Alternative fuels, without knowing what a fuel is. About industry creating pollution, without learning anything about what it takes to make anything.

This must be conscious, this effort to turn people away from ever wanting to learn anything about a subject by forcing them to memorize a stunning array of inert facts that have no connection whatever to real life experience so that in later life the mind will recoil in horror whenever the subject comes up in conversation.

Look around you, and see the result. People are conditioned from a very young age to never again consider math, science, or history with anything but a serious yearning to avoid the drudgery.

The logical connections, the joy of discovery, the delight in mastery of a subject to actually produce something useful will forever be denied most of them.

It is evidently not the aim of a communist model of public schooling to turn out competent individuals. Rather we will strive to produce compliant citizens.

--97T--

The story of the student being fed charts reminds me of a study that was done at a university in Washinton (WSU maybe?) some 8 or 10 years ago. They were trying to figure out why so many people dropped or flunked out of science classes, physics in particular.

What they found was that the classical approach resulted in students who seemed to believe that all you needed to do is find the right equation. When the researchers had students form study groups and taught them principles first without any math, they learned better and faster.

Yet even today students shy away from physics because of the stigma of painful equations and insolvable problems. Some instructors are finally implementing an approach of demonstrations and discussion of principles,,,,THEN introducing the math.

.....Now, if we could only get 'em to learn how to DRAW!!!!

.....Now, if we could only get 'em to learn how to DRAW!!!!

Which ones; Instructors or students?

And don't we all feel good today getting up an hour earlier to save energy and combat global warming.

LOL!!! Students AND instructors!!....and techs.

As long as they're willing to learn, I'm ok with 'em. Its when they simply DON'T get the message, and I hear "..Pro E just does that..." more than once I get pissed. REALLY pissed.

Thanks to global warming, I was able to get out of the house an hour before my usual and not have to wear a jacket!!

97T, that was an interesting little piece on group mentality!! AlGore is surely a fine one to lead us into the 4th Wave!!!

Geof....so, how was antartica (that's Gore's pronunciation, not mine)?? You didn't stand on any collapsing ice shelves, didja?? Btw, didn't mean to ignore your currents reply, I just got side tracked.

....Geof....so, how was antartica...

Picture taken February 20, 2007 at Whalers Bay, Deception Island. Supposedly late summer in the Southern Hemisphere.

Is that the Paul Gauguin?? Cook's Bay in the background??

Is that the Paul Gauguin?? Cook's Bay in the background??

Don't I wish my finances did run to the Paul Gauguin. :) But I like cold vacations not hot ones.

Not to laugh at anyone's misfortune, but the irony is just too much:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_sc/polar_trek_1

Of course, one crucial feature of any religious theory is that it can't be disproven. So if the temperature rises, it's evidence of global warming, but if the temperature dips, its because of wider temperature fluctuations caused by .... global warming.

--97T--

Just something to thro in here, the movie is 75 minutes long

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=24760_The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle&only

Hmmmm, could it be :idea:

Possibly communication with the beyond. A term called Scrying (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_ball) comes out of the blue. They see their simulated models gazing back and postulate the power they possess must be a glimpse into a very warm future.

Could it be they simply fear going to hell for lying, but they're gonna tempt fate anyways? (flame2) And they are not about to go alone!:argue:

:D DC :D

Not to laugh at anyone's misfortune, but the irony is just too much:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_sc/polar_trek_1
--97T--

You won't mind if I howl for a couple of hours, would you??? (picture howling-with-laughter icon here...)

Al Gore Tells Congress to Tax Pollution and CO2 to Solve Global Warming Crisis
Posted by Noel Sheppard on March 21, 2007 - 14:55.

As most of you know, former Vice President and soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore spoke in front of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the House Committee on Science and Technology Wednesday about the dangers of anthropogenic global warming (video available here).

What you probably didn't know is that the global warmingest-in-chief actually recommended a tax on pollution to solve the problem.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11563

He ain't even in politics and he wants to raise our taxes! No question in my mind that he wants those taxes to go to companies that invest in green technology...like ...uh....
Generation Investment Management, Gore's company.

Good idea. Force us to invest in HIS future.

The Jim Jones of this generation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNUbyzzDAiQ

And don't miss the website where he will cleanse your sins by allowing you to purchase carbon offsets.
http://climatecrisis.org/

I just love John Travolta. Never suspected he'd become such an incredible hypocrite!


With five private jets, Travolta still lectures us on Global Warming
From the "do as I say, not as I do department..."

Original article from This is London.com

His serious aviation habit means he is hardly the best person to lecture others on the environment. But John Travolta went ahead and did it anyway. The 53-year-old actor, a passionate pilot, encouraged
his fans to "do their bit" to tackle global warming

(see his jets at:)
http://www.norcalblogs.com/watts/2007/03/with_five_private_jets_travolt_1.html

When I was a professor teaching college astronomy some 35 years ago I warned my students that in their lifetime (not mine) they would see how increases in CO2 would increase the green house effect. I cited the data about Venus that has a run-away green house effect with its pure CO2 atmosphere. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the Sun. I bet most of you did not know that little tidbit.

Little did I know that the third world, namely China, would advance so quickly to use coal to run its economy. The data show conclusively how CO2 from fossil fuels has increased. I warned back then that it does not take much CO2 to start the greenhouse effect. I am amazed that I am now seeing it happen in my lifetime.

I do not understand why so many people refuse to accept the evidence. It reminds me of the people saying evolution is just a theory to which I reply tongue in cheek that Relativity too is just a theory and therefore nuclear bombs do not exist. This debate also remind me of the Flat Earth Society that was so prominent before the Moon landings.

My take on this is that most people (Americans) are incapable of logical analysis. Americans will believe politicians about WMD in Iraq before apolitical scientists showing data about global warming. Our educational system has failed to train us to think logically. Democratic rule requires an enlightened electorate. We are running at 25 watts and getting dimmer.

I am a Ph.D. astrophysicist and have watched this development longer than many of you have lived. The facts are solid. Delude yourselves and face calamity. Be smug about this and face the dire consequences.

.... Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the Sun. I bet most of you did not know that little tidbit....

How does the fact that Mercury puts the same side to the sun all the time while Venus rotates. I think that is correct but not being an astrophysicist I am not sure. However, if it is the case I am not sure how you could compare the temperature of the two planets with any validity because they are very different systems. Sort of like comparing the ground surface temperature in Atacama with the Dry Valleys; after all they are both deserts.

EDIT: I like the nom-de-plume; but a bit ostentatious.

Simple answer Geof,
What we're seeing is the difference between planetary science and astrophysics.

First of all, why haven't we seen runaway temps in the past when CO2 was much higher??? MUCH higher!!

Why is there an 800yr lag between CO2 increases and temperature? Even the pro AGW'ers concede that.

Mars is warming, and it's got a CO2 atmosphere, so with a pure 'greenhouse gas' atmosphere, shouldn't the temp be taking off? Hey, shouldn't the temp be taking off here? Whoops. Observed temps say nope. So much for theory.

So much for the models.

Which brings me to the point of the IPCC's prediction of possible temps in the future....after $50Billion in research, the predicted range of global temperature increase is WIDER than in the last report. That's what I'd call research dollars well spent when it comes to computer modelling.

I love this snippit from Wikipedia....

Surface air warming in the 21st century:
*Best estimate for a "low scenario"[5] is 1.8 °C with a likely range of 1.1 to 2.9 °C (3.2 °F with a likely range of 2.0 to 5.2 °F)
*Best estimate for a "high scenario"[6] is 4.0 °C with a likely range of 2.4 to 6.4 °C (7.2 °F with a likely range of 4.3 to 11.5 °F)

"Low scenario" low to "high scenario" high is a range of 1.1 to 6.4 deg C....I wish Vegas odds were that good.

Simple answer Geof,
What we're seeing is the difference between planetary science and astrophysics.
... .


Whoa, so called fizzissist. Stop right there. Red flag on your first sentence. This is nonsense. You are playing fast and loose with gibberish. This is cerebral diarrhea. And the rest is worse!


=========
Geof: I really don't understand your point about rotation rates and mean surface temperatures. In fact, what you said goes against your point.

Also, if you knew who Thrasyllus was, you would have said instead what a cool moniker this is.

Geof: I really don't understand your point about rotation rates and mean surface temperatures. In fact, what you said goes against your point....

Please elucidate. My point was a question; how can Venus and Mercury be compared with validity, they are very different systems.


...Also, if you knew who Thrasyllus was, you would have said instead what a cool moniker this is.

Just from the spelling I figured it was Roman, Greek or something so I Googled.

"Thrasyllus was an Athenian strategoi (general) and statesman who rose to prominence in the later years of the Peloponnesian War. First appearing in Athenian politics in 410 BC, in the wake of the Athenian coup of 411 BC, he played a role in organizing democratic resistance in an Athenian fleet at Samos. There, he was elected strategos by the sailors and soldiers of the fleet, and held the position until he was controversially executed several years later after the Battle of Arginusae."

I still think it is an ostentatious moniker. But, I suppose, appropriate for someone who delights in dispensing tidbits and accusing other people of cholera of the cranium.

But I suppose I am only feeling jealous. It appears someone has come on the scene who can out-pompous me; I am shattered :( .

When I was a professor teaching college astronomy some 35 years ago I warned my students that in their lifetime (not mine) they would see how increases in CO2 would increase the green house effect. I cited the data about Venus that has a run-away green house effect with its pure CO2 atmosphere. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the Sun. I bet most of you did not know that little tidbit.

Little did I know that the third world, namely China, would advance so quickly to use coal to run its economy. The data show conclusively how CO2 from fossil fuels has increased. I warned back then that it does not take much CO2 to start the greenhouse effect. I am amazed that I am now seeing it happen in my lifetime.

Well, I'll be g'danged, a natural condition created without the influence of humans on another planet. Run-away and a minor increase are not even relatively comparable to the 6th grade mathematician. Whether we are headed towards runaway with third world countries growth is debatable, as I have stated in another post.

I do not understand why so many people refuse to accept the evidence. It reminds me of the people saying evolution is just a theory to which I reply tongue in cheek that Relativity too is just a theory and therefore nuclear bombs do not exist. This debate also remind me of the Flat Earth Society that was so prominent before the Moon landings.

Some people still believe the moon landing was shot in some desert near Hollywood. So far the improvable theory is related to how much human influence is affecting the climate, with less regard to external conditions that are happening simultaneously. I suspect the changes that are taking place are natural to a greater degree in coincidence than leading proof. I see the parallel as a mere glance at dueling circumstances while neither has enough data to be pinpointed as the driving factor. We can agree that greenhouse gasses create climate change, but that has happened without human influence too. No one can predict that as the climate changes, the ratio of natural greenhouse gas increase will dwarf our own influence.

There were plenty of supposedly "well educated" flat earther's (and still a few exist) that misinterpret inconclusive data, but swear by their own coincidental data's validity. Which group can I, as a layman, place your educated caricature among, because in my experience, logic has little to do with ones degreed credentials?


My take on this is that most people (Americans) are incapable of logical analysis. Americans will believe politicians about WMD in Iraq before apolitical scientists showing data about global warming. Our educational system has failed to train us to think logically. Democratic rule requires an enlightened electorate. We are running at 25 watts and getting dimmer.

I have met Phd's that couldn't use a screwdriver or a hammer, let alone turn on a computer. Book smarts may be the experiences others have concluded given a finite envelope. We can follow the leader only so long. With your logic and your suspicious data in hand, you can be as misleading as any other authority figures with unrelated data gathered from many fields of expertise, but that alone does not prove your logic sound until after the facts are laid out in hind sight. That can make your logic just as suspect as over reacting to so called evidence you yourself have not seen fall apart yet. Which begs to question the very same logic you use to question WMD's (which may still be hidden), human induced Global Warming may very well follow the same path of inconclusive for eons to come. Being “smug” is to deny fallibility in a theory. I have never claimed I was correct, just suspicious that the data is too broad and inter-tangled to make a concisely distinct connection to human’s creating it. No one is dense enough to say we are not adding to it, but zero human generated CO2 won’t prevent it either.


I am a Ph.D. astrophysicist and have watched this development longer than many of you have lived. The facts are solid. Delude yourselves and face calamity. Be smug about this and face the dire consequences.

We were born facing calamity, pretty much every day we live. I doubt I will ever see the dire consequences, nor who is deluding whom. It is hard enough avoiding imaginary freight trains, let alone control hungry, paranoia wielding idealog's with power and expectations of conformity with consequences for not following them. Usually involving monetary compensation of some sort.

Even if the physics of better environmental alternatives drove the market, someone would still find something else to b**ch about in an attempt to reach for a fleeting moral high ground. In every walk of life, there seems to be some desire for superiority to achieve something over someone. Pick your poison, good or bad. Eventually it is a shared resource too.

DC

Niner,
i like al gore because he has exposed himself to all of these calls of 'hypocrate' in the name of a reightious cause. he isnt an idiot. he is a scholar. i dont ever agree with much that politicians say, but i am glad he is doing something. i am glad he seems more rational and viable than most politicians talking about the environment..


vacpress..

i am amaized with your selfchosen blindness to this issue. Precisely - Gore is not an idiot, he knows exacltly what he's doing and how to profit from it.
The only REAL thing he is doing is terrorizing the nation and our children. I was tought that if i wanted to be a good human being i needed to treat others the way i would want to be treated by them, to be an example to others. Gores hypocraticism goes beyond reasonable. His own energy consumption surpasses most likely that of your whole neighborhood. The car he drives in the movie; powered by an all american big block V8 with no more than 10MPg and fitted with all ammenities the mexican families living in your neighbourhood will never even begin to dream about; is as big of the thread to the environement as his THEORY is.

The bottom line is, we have no clue what influence we have on earth atmosphere. We have largely insufficient historical records to draw any conclusions. To use such a BS to terrorize our children for me is not irresponsible - it is simply criminal offence.
Im an immigrant and a business owner. I take pride in what i do. I work hard to make things, add value to community.
Mr. Gore makes millions on scarring people. Where is the value in that i ask?
You, I and your mexican neighbors pay for Gores expenses. But hey - he is a lawyer.... why am i suprised!

P.S. Your biggest enemy - President Bush - lives on an energy efficient farm, utilizing internal resource to irrigate and / or generate power. Did you ever hear about that?

About those flat-earthers ......

It was the scientific consensus, the widely held view.

It turned out the skeptics who didn't see how the mainstream dogma added up were right after all.

Why do all the consensus-pushers get this backwards?

The 'apolitical scientists' designation is laughable. They publish hockey-stick temperature graphs that are later proven by outsiders to be from cooked data, using our tax dollars, to push a political agenda to rule the world. And they keep their algorithms secret. Yep, that's apolitical, all right. I suppose they won't propose the use of force to impose their rule, either. Perhaps Dr. Mengele was apolitical, to his peers.

I think I will make my new handle SyPhallus. No, not pretentious enough. Darnit ........

--97T--

About those flat-earthers ......

Now here is a little tidbit most of you probably don't know; the Greeks knew the earth was not flat. One even measured the diameter and obtained and obtained an answer within 2% of the correct value. At least I think it was 2% my memory may be failing.

DC

OneOfMany..

I pray for the day i'll be as articulate as you were in your post.... very well said

P.

It wouldn't surprise me if Al Gore released this statement:

"There is growing scientific consensus that the combustion of fossil fuels is directly linked to the extinction of dinosaurs."

Whoa, so called fizzissist. Stop right there. Red flag on your first sentence. This is nonsense. You are playing fast and loose with gibberish. This is cerebral diarrhea. And the rest is worse!


Sorry pal, I stand firm on what I said, and I say it with qualification. If you really are a PhD'd astrophysicist, you should KNOW the truth of the statement.

As expected, when someone has zero basis in fact for his scientific position, he slings invectives, as you immediately did. I'm not surprised in the least.

Thrasyllus, you really should stick to writing horoscopes.

Sorry pal, I stand firm on what I said, and I say it with qualification. If you really are a PhD'd astrophysicist, you should KNOW the truth of the statement.

As expected, when someone has zero basis in fact for his scientific position, he slings invectives, as you immediately did. I'm not surprised in the least.

Thrasyllus, you really should stick to writing horoscopes.

I thought cerebral diarrhea was really quite witty, not just a mere invective.

EDIT I assume you don't really need the smiley to conclude I am joking :) .

If it works for Gore's carbon footprint, why not extend the concept a little...

http://www.cheatneutral.com/

If it works for Gore's carbon footprint, why not extend the concept a little...

http://www.cheatneutral.com/

Too funny!

Clinton, Obama Sign Onto to Boxer’s $4500 Climate Tax on American Families
May 9, 2007

Senate Environment & Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) have proposed the "Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act" aimed at combating climate change. The proposed partisan bill (S.309) is supported by another 15 senators, including: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY); Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL); Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT); Sen. Joseph R. Biden (D-DE); Sen. Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI); Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-WI); Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-HI); Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA); Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ); Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT); Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ); Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI); Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI); Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-MD), and Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD).
FACT: A new MIT study concludes that the Sanders-Boxer approach would impose a tax-equivalent of $366 billion annually, or more than $4,500 per family of four, by 2015. And the annual costs will grow after 2015. [Read full MIT study]


http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Facts&ContentRecord_id=71d7ea1f-802a-23ad-47d6-eeb1dabe3d24&Region_id=&Issue_id

Here we go folks!

When I was a professor teaching college astronomy some 35 years ago I warned my students that in their lifetime (not mine) they would see how increases in CO2 would increase the green house effect. I cited the data about Venus that has a run-away green house effect with its pure CO2 atmosphere. Venus is hotter than Mercury which is closer to the Sun. I bet most of you did not know that little tidbit.

Little did I know that the third world, namely China, would advance so quickly to use coal to run its economy. The data show conclusively how CO2 from fossil fuels has increased. I warned back then that it does not take much CO2 to start the greenhouse effect. I am amazed that I am now seeing it happen in my lifetime.

I do not understand why so many people refuse to accept the evidence. It reminds me of the people saying evolution is just a theory to which I reply tongue in cheek that Relativity too is just a theory and therefore nuclear bombs do not exist. This debate also remind me of the Flat Earth Society that was so prominent before the Moon landings.

My take on this is that most people (Americans) are incapable of logical analysis. Americans will believe politicians about WMD in Iraq before apolitical scientists showing data about global warming. Our educational system has failed to train us to think logically. Democratic rule requires an enlightened electorate. We are running at 25 watts and getting dimmer.

I am a Ph.D. astrophysicist and have watched this development longer than many of you have lived. The facts are solid. Delude yourselves and face calamity. Be smug about this and face the dire consequences.

Number 1 mr, professor, If it is as bad as you say, and if it is truely caused by burning MINERAL OIL, then why are all the Jet and turbine engines allowed to exist? They are the worse CO2 polluters of all, saying nothing for the excessive NOx they spew. There are very few Jets and turbines in the hands of the general public. And the companys that use them can be highly controlled by governmental authorities. If there is a huge problem then why do the worlds governments allow these things to pollute. Billions of tons daily.
This pollution could be more than cut in half by converting all the aircraft to recip CI engines and fuel savings cut in half as well.
I also wish you would stop spewing that CO2 out of your nose as well.
How do you know that CO2 is a problem? What are the experiments that you have run ? Or is it something you have been told?

How do you know that CO2 is a problem? What are the experiments that you have run ? Or is it something you have been told?

CO2 levels are at an all time recorded high!! 380,000 ppb!!!

Mouth Breathers Unite!!!

this nonsense is still going on..

it has almost totally turned me off of th' zone.

Carry on... Just an idea, find a forum about the environment\energy to discuss this stuff in.. that way it will be a discussion, not chest beating by the sorts of people who have 2500 posts, and have only started 10 threads....

knee-jerk reactions, tourists criticism\analysis, etc are NOT didactic discourse, and can prove nothing.

i gather many of you are older gentlemen. this does not make you 'correct', this complex issue would only seem like such a contest to a jilted egotist. your combative and preaching tones are not surprising for the internet, but i really think your attitudes are shocking.. the open aggression and self-satisfied hearsay-mongering is really first-rate.

it is like a caricature of 'cranky know it all' mixed with a caricature of 'man who is capable of moralizing any transgression if they happen to be part of the group that benefits by this transgression'.

Disgusting. Because I like to try and help promote a more empathetic and reasonable society, I am posting this even though I have begun to get possible referrals for work from this otherwise lovely site, and this sort of immaturity on my part doesn’t present a good public face. Still, I would be totally ashamed to be the Google researching ‘environmental experts’ here, who are trying to prove that it is just fine and dandy to continue to burn noxious, costly, politically charged substances even when there are alternatives. I suppose every Detroit autoworker both absolutely hates the car industry, and also supports their lobbyist efforts 100%.. we have all heard about some of the positions our car industry has successfully lobbied for over the years.(they will fire you anyway, even if your political capital does help them stifle innovation. Please, side with humanity, not ‘institutions’)

I feel it is my 'moral responsibility' as an active member of this site to at least mention the existence of an alternative point of view; 'global warming cannot be proven, various people are profiteering off the topic in general, therefore it is OK to pollute, after all, volcanoes and jet engines do it' is not a logical argument, and can barely be taken seriously enough to make this warning: none of us are as smart as we would like. Many large societal issues do not benefit from ‘party line’ behavior. This could be ‘the party of people who work in the traditional energy industry’, ‘the party for those who absolutely hate environmentalists for some reason’, or even ‘the

whoever tried to reason that because airplanes are massive polluters, and our society generally accepts them as necessary, this means that anyone who questions the legitimacy of continued fossil fuel abuse is 'wrong'... you are a sad man; please realize that the post you are eloquently responding to has already identified you as having received an inadequate exposure to logical thought, you have done an admirable job of both proving your own intellectual standing; ‘Number 1 mr, professor,’.. don’t respond unless you feel like wasting time, i am going to do what i can to hide these global warming forums from myself as soon as i send this. I do not ask you to agree with me. Only to understand why the topic you are commenting on is so complex you should not be making any claims worth defending so aggressively without an appropriate advanced degree and a few decades using it. Astrophysics, in my opinion, is not an absurd background from which to evaluate this topic, at least certain aspects.


The way you guys sound, global warming could be a red herring, designed by ‘the oil industry’ to make people forget the clean air act, the reasonable goal of not having coal-burning power plants in densely populated areas, the cost of carbon scrubbers… where, Oh Where are those scrubbers? Sure, I hear they are marginally effective.. But, that is one purchase I am happy to subsidize via my power bill. I would prefer to stop subsidizing the ridiculous bonuses these companies give their leaders, or the idea that some rich guy in a huge place pays the same for power in his gated community that I do 500 yards from the smoke stack. Again. You all disagree with the relevancy of this. I sincerely hope noone bothered to read this far anyhow.

Seriously; I shouldn’t have even posted this.. I should have just removed the global warming forums from my cnczone preferences, which I hear is possible.

Today in Chicago is extremely pleasant; enjoy that ‘fresh air’, where ever you are. I feel confident I will not see to much of you guys posting in the useful, interesting, and respectful forums. These forums do not present a difficult and emotional political argument that loud mouths can use to brag that they make money from the continuation of our somewhat alarming energy system…

I actually hope you are all correct.. Really, I do.

<3

it is like a caricature of 'cranky know it all' mixed with a caricature of 'man who is capable of moralizing any transgression if they happen to be part of the group that benefits by this transgression'.

I must be getting old, my memory goes fuzzy. Wasn't it you who wanted to use the power of the government gun to confiscate another man's legitimately earned property so that it can be handed to you? So that you can force the public to buy your product that they wouldn't pay for by their own choice?

Wasn't it you who moved in next door to a power plant, and wanted to use the power of the government gun to raise the cost of electricity for everyone in order to suit your desires?

And now you want to use the power of the government gun to shut off my access to energy? So that I would stop producing the kind of products you take for granted?

I guess you got one part of the equation right -- when a gun is brought to the table, there is no need to bring any evidence to support your position. No need to persuade with logic based on evidence. This explains why your posts don't answer questions, refute points, or cite evidence.

The evidence shows that our heat comes from the sun. Therefore there is no need to install a fascist New World Order government, thank you very much. So no, I won't go willingly.

--97T--

Now I'm going to go out and commit some more fossil fuel abuse by driving my 450 HP car to work, and use tremendous amounts of power to produce ... MORE CAR PARTS!

Gentlemen,

Thank you for this fascinating discussion... a techy nerd like myself rarely spends enough time researching the popular news topics and values the opinion of articulate individuals much more than that reported by the news media.

I have followed several of your posted links and sadly once again found evidence of the mind police. Subversive lying and misrepresentation of the facts... with willful intent to coerce a mindless concensus.

As long as forums exist where free thinking people can express their opinions as you eloquent gentlemen do then the mind police can never subvert us.

God has many eyes... be sure to express your own holy point of view... especially to your children... so that free thinking can continue to flourish.


Gary

Here's hoping Big Brother never succeeds in controlling the internet the way the press and the airwaves have been regulated. This is something that was never counted on -- a free exchange of information between individuals. It's our last, best hope for freedom in the world.

But, with the most popular sites being places like MySpace ....

--97T--

Al Gore forms the Alliance for Climate Protection....the foundation for the $300Million "we" campaign.

[L]like the energy barons of an earlier age, Mr. Gore has the chance to achieve enormous wealth after being named last week as a new partner at the famously successful venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins. No fewer than three of his new colleagues sit on the Forbes list of wealthiest Americans. If Mr. Gore can develop market-based solutions to environmental challenges, we will cheer the well-deserved riches flowing his way. On the other hand, if he monetizes his Nobel Peace Prize by securing permanent government subsidies for nonmarket science projects, he’ll have earned a different judgment.

"The Journal is onto more than it realizes here. Gore has said, and it has been printed in several places, that he’ll donate his (undisclosed) salary at Kleiner to the Alliance for Climate Protection, an advocacy group of which he is chairman and which he founded. (He’s also giving the group his Nobel winnings of $750,000.) What nobody reported on is that he is NOT giving away his profits from Kleiner’s investments. (I know this because I specifically asked Gore’s spokeswoman.) When venture capital is done well the profits, also known as carried interest, are much, much bigger than a partner’s salary. The profits also currently are taxed at a lower rate than ordinary income, which is the subject of current legislation in Congress..."
http://gowest.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/category/alliance-for-climate-protection/

Look at the principle players....

Cathy Zoi - CEO, Alliance for Climate Protection
Debbie Boger, Director, Community Programs
Brian Hardwick, Director, Development and Communications
Erin Kassoy, Director, Solutions Development and Analysis
Matt Howes, Director, Online Communications
David Tuft, Grassroots and Community Partnerships
Libby Dame, Manager, Business Services
Aria Marinelli, Special Assistant

Board of Directors
Accessed October 2007:

Al Gore, Jr.
Theodore Roosevelt IV Managing Director, Lehman Brothers; Chair of the Pew Center for Global Climate Change
Larry J. Schweiger, President & CEO, National Wildlife Federation
Carol M. Browner, Principal, The Albright Group, LLC; Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton
Brent Scowcroft, President, The Scowcroft Group; National Security Advisor to President Gerald R. Ford and President George H.W. Bush
Lee Thomas - Retired President and COO, Georgia-Pacific Corp.
Orin S. Kramer - General Partner, Boston Provident, L.P.
Congressman Sherwood L. Boehlert, U.S. House of Representatives 1983-2006; Member, House Intelligence Committee
Kevin Wall, CEO, Control Room; Producer, Live Earth/SOS.

Advisory Committee
Accessed October 2007:

Frances Beinecke, Natural Resources Defense Council
Pete Cartwright, Former Calpine CEO
Karen Florini, Environmental Defense
David Foster, Blue-Green Alliance
Michel Gelobter, Redefining Progress
KC Golden, Climate Solutions
Paul Gorman, National Religious Partnership for the Environment
Jonathan Lash, World Resources Institute
Bill Mitchell, Flatcoat Consulting
Billy Parrish, Energy Action
Carl Pope, Sierra Club
Jerome Ringo, Apollo Alliance
Rob Sargent, U.S. Public Interest Research Group
Read Smith, Smith Farms
Stephen Smith, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy

That gives me an idea, Fizz.

Just look at the names on that list, and what they represent.

Venture capital, huh?

What we should do is cook up an impressive-sounding energy-from-garbage proposal, and take them to the cleaners with it. That's what most of the 'researchers' are doing anyway, right? As long as it's not taking tax money, and it's coming from boneheads like that, it's fair, right?

Hahaha!

Venture capital. Making money. Getting rich.
Saving the planet. SAVING THE PLANET????
What's that got to do with getting rich?

Gore is a modern day high priest that wants to sacrifice YOUR 15 year old virgin daughter to make the rain god happy. On top of that, he wants YOU to PAY him to do it.

Look back at history, and there was always an AlGore there to sacrifice the virgins, burn the witches, or kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out. Religion has killed countless millions, but seldom is the real issue belief, but control. Belief, or religion, has been the justification.

Now comes AlGore, the preacher, pronouncing gloom and doom, and our only salvation that of paying a tax that just happens to make him rich. If you don't immediately kneel to his climate-god, you're a denier, a contrarian, a sinner. After all, we're talking about mankind's very survival.

Sound familiar?
Just like Jim Jones' followers, we're all gonna be drinking GoreAid.

Investor's Business Daily:

"Gore's reaction to the death and destruction caused by a cyclone ravaging Burma was to utter an emphatic "I told you so" Tuesday on National Public Radio. In an interview on NPR's "Fresh Air" broadcast, the jolly green giant made the charge while talking about the paperback release of his ironically named book, "The Assault on Reason."

Ignoring the fact that the rising death toll is due in part to an incompetent, isolationist and authoritarian government that allows most of its people to live in shanty towns of tin and bamboo, Gore claimed that "we're seeing consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming."

In other words, people die in Rangoon because of an SUV in Richmond, Va.

There's a "trend toward more Category 5 storms," Gore claimed, and this trend "appears to be linked to global warming and specifically to the impact of global warming on higher ocean temperatures in the top couple of hundred feet in the ocean, which drives convection energy and moisture into these storms and makes them more powerful."

Except, as we recently noted, the trend in the world's oceans — as shown by measurements taken by a fleet of 3,000 high-tech ocean buoys first deployed in 2003 — is toward cooling. As Dr. Josh Willis, of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, noted in a separate interview with National Public Radio, "there has been a very slight cooling" over the buoys' five years of observation.

As Joseph D'Aleo, the Weather Channel's first director of meteorology, told National Review Online's Deroy Murdock that the slight warming trend "peaked in 1998, and the temperature trend the last decade has been flat, even as CO2 has increased 5.5%. Cooling began in 2002." He added: "Ocean buoys have echoed that slight cooling since the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration deployed them in 2003."

In fact, Ryan Maue of Florida State University's Center for Ocean-Atmosphere Prediction Studies says 2007 "will rank as a historically inactive tropical cyclone year for the Northern Hemisphere as a whole."

In the past 30 years, Maue adds, only 1977 had less hurricane activity from January through October. Last September had the lowest activity since 1977 while the Octobers of 2006 and 2007 had the lowest activity since 1976 and 1977, respectively.

So why the hype? Well, global warming is a growth industry designed to keep Earth and some bank accounts green.

Gore himself joined the venture capital group, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers just last September. On May 1, the firm announced a $500 million investment in maturing green technology firms called the Green Growth Fund.

The group announced another $700 million to be invested over the next three years in green-tech startup firms. But if the green technology business, uh, cools down, there will be no return on that investment. There would be no need for such investments if global warming wasn't a threat. So Gore just launched, among other things, a $300 million on an ad campaign to convince us it is so.

Speaking at a conference in Monterey, Calif., on March 1, the former vice president admitted to having "a stake" in a number of green investments into which he recommended attendees put money rather than "subprime carbon assets" such as tar sands and shale oil. He also is co-founder and chairman of Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offsets that allow rich polluters to continue polluting with a clear conscience.

We have a prediction all our own — that disastrous global warming will not occur. Then the greenies will take credit for preventing it and ask us if we're glad we spent trillions in fighting it. Al Gore will be laughing all the way to the bank."

Didnt Gore invent the internet?


heheh

There is a trend towards more hot air .... and more gullible people sucking it up as fast as it comes out of these blowhards.

pretty much says it all.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESxvY1tQHTo&eurl=http://www.junkscience.com/

pretty much says it all.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESxvY1tQHTo&eurl=http://www.junkscience.com/

He probably flew to the city in a private jet as well. No mingling with the lower classes. Do as I say, not as I do.

What's sad is that many people are dumb enough to pay to listen to him speak. Pathetic.

Uh, that would be the "overpopulated" lower classes?

I think you have me confused with someone else.

I think you have me confused with someone else.



As an independant observer, I think you have yourself confused with someone else.

Sep 16, 2008
Lehman Brothers Close Ties to Gore, Hansen and Carbon Trading

"Al Gore’s carbon trading business GIM was banked with Lehman Bros. It will be interesting to see how this will play in the future but I suspect that this increases the risk of participating in Carbon trading. Merrill Lynch, was also deeply involved in this business.

Last year Lehman Brothers released a long and highly publicized report about climate change in which they preached about decarbonization, trying to make their investors keep getting high profits from the Kyoto carbon trade scheme and the support of huge public subventions. All that, of course, with the applause of the usual choir of politicians, the entire media and the Greens.

A year ago they couldn’t predict their bankruptcy but were predicting the climate 100 years ahead....."

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate

[QUOTE=fizzissist;502166]Sep 16, 2008
Lehman Brothers Close Ties to Gore, Hansen and Carbon Trading

Dear fizzissist,

You may have seen this piece. I think Skippy alerted me to it.

YouTube - Bird and Fortune - Subprime Crisis

Laugh or cry...???

Best wishes,
Martin

Lehman Brothers Close Ties to Gore, Hansen and Carbon Trading



This is huge - let's see what the tree-huggers have to say about it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x171786