Al Gores inconvienient truth...

[Ole Unka Phil]

How hypocritical... How embarrasing... How typical

http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=367

[bleachit]

did you expect something different?

[deadeye9]

Gore's Energy Use (http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/02/gores-energy-use.html)


This is a textbook example of the mindless swarming behavior that is so typical among right-wing partisan flacks.
...
Moreover, Gore lives in a large home (10,000 sq. ft.). If you look at the data, it's clear that Gore's energy usage per square foot (even assuming the 221,000 kWh number is accurate) is well within the average range for his climate region. So all this accusation boils down to is a claim that it is somehow "hypocritical" for Al Gore to live in a large house.
...
Gore has installed solar panels in his home, he uses fluorescent light bulbs and other energy saving technology, and he purchases his energy from Green Power Switch, a provider which utilizes solar and wind power. He then purchases carbon offsets to reduce his remaining carbon footprint to zero.

[SCpoloRicker]

*opens popcorn*

Rules (http://automags.org/forums/showthread.php?t=165017)
Avoid topics containing religious, racial, or political discussion (they are the top three flame starting toipcs)

/damn LIEburals ;)

[Altimas]

I bet he isnt escorted around in a Hybrid...I also bet he Didnt take a Sailboat over to Europe when he debuted this thing..

[Lohman446]

Gore's Energy Use (http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/02/gores-energy-use.html)

Did you just justify conspicous consumption with "but I have a big house"?

A Hummer is a big vehicle, it does not necessarily justify the low MPG that many people (who ride without passengers) get.

What is a carbon offset? I pay money so my usage doesn't count??

[PyRo]

A Hummer is a big vehicle, it does not necessarily justify the low MPG that many people (who ride without passengers) get.
Ever been in a real hummer? Those things have the drive train basically running right through the passenger area to gain ground clearance. It only seats four meaning your average Civic is actually holds more passenger and is more spacious and comfortable then a Hummer.
Their is no justification for owning a hummer other then you want one. If you choose to drive one then you should be the last person a whine about global warming, Co2, etc. If you do then you are a hypocrite.

[Pacifist_Farmer]

What is a carbon offset? I pay money so my usage doesn't count??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offsets

Essentially yes.

[Lohman446]

Ever been in a real hummer? Those things have the drive train basically running right through the passenger area to gain ground clearance. It only seats four meaning your average Civic is actually holds more passenger and is more spacious and comfortable then a Hummer.
Their is no justification for owning a hummer other then you want one. If you choose to drive one then you should be the last person a whine about global warming, Co2, etc. If you do then you are a hypocrite.

I was not arguing for it.... I was using it as a counterexample to the "I have a big house" justification for using excess resources.

[PyRo]

I was not arguing for it....
I know. Like you said though passenger space is the most common argument for the big SUVs. Hummers have no passenger space, they suck at towing, plowing, are mediocre off road, and don't have a lot of cargo space. People have two kids and think they need a Suburban for the space then they'll go out and cry about the Republicans wrecking the environment.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Gore's Energy Use (http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2007/02/gores-energy-use.html)


According to that article he uses twice the amount of power of a similar size home. So... well... that would be two times as much... or double or more than... the same size home. Get it?

Politica? How so? Al is not running for any office is he? I am not aware of him still being involved in anything political. However he is being an advocate. Advocating you curb your energy useage while, according to that, he is not. Assuming that article is correct. I didn't write it ... just linked it for your examination.

[BigEvil]

Sometimes, a picture really can speak 1000 words.
http://www.bangedup.com/bu_posts/mainALGoreyThxSD.gif

[billybob_81067]

God I was complaining about our last two $130 gas bills!!!! It was bitter cold though and my wife has this thing about never turning off the freakin furnace whenever she leaves. (bugs the hell out of me). I can't imagine paying that much to the utilities companies!

[Niox]

Carbon offsetting is really quite simple, you pay a company money and they will do something to reduce a certain amount of carbon that you have produced. For example, flying to Ireland produces X amount of carbon, by carbon offsetting I pay a company to plant trees and such that will absorb the X amount of carbon in years to come thus reducing my carbon footprint for that trip to 0.

The thing is, you can see the flaw in that quite easily, it takes time for trees and plants and algae to grow to then be able to absorb the carbon so you have a significant time delay before your offsetting was successful.

Much love,
Niox

[grEnAlEins]

Well, obviously none of you knuckleheads understand what Big Al is doing. Don't you see? He is using ridiculous amounts of energy so the average American does not have to. He should be honored as a patriotic hero, not as a hypocritical dolt, as he is doing his part to fight global warming. You see, if he uses far to much energy, then I no longer feel the need to, as someone has already taken care of it. Maybe he is challenging America to compensate for his overuse; maybe he is really trying to help in the long run. :rolleyes: :rofl:

**Before I get flamed for my idiocy, let me be clear that the above was not a serious opinion. I had some time to waste and was feeling silly.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Carbon offsetting is really quite simple, you pay a company money and they will do something to reduce a certain amount of carbon that you have produced. For example, flying to Ireland produces X amount of carbon, by carbon offsetting I pay a company to plant trees and such that will absorb the X amount of carbon in years to come thus reducing my carbon footprint for that trip to 0.

The thing is, you can see the flaw in that quite easily, it takes time for trees and plants and algae to grow to then be able to absorb the carbon so you have a significant time delay before your offsetting was successful.

Much love,
Niox


Well I don't know if he is or isn't... but this amounts to junk science and nothing beats reduction of useage.

Many environmentalists have criticized the use of forestry carbon offsets as an inadequate substitute for long-term fossil fuel use reduction. In addition, many forestry offset projects have been conceived and/or conducted in ways that are vulnerable to criticism, drawing their net benefits into question.

It should be noted that trees consume much more oxygen than they give off when they decay. They also produce more CO2 when they decay than they consume when they are alive. The only reason we have a net of oxygen in the atmosphere is because the oxygen producing plankton (and plants) in the ocean are often covered in mud and decay without consuming oxygen in a process called sublimation.

So really its all a mirage... he should find a way to reduce his comsumption instead of planning on his Boxwood hedges and Petunia's to deliver salvation.

[PyRo]

I really hate defending this guy but it's not as bad as it seems. It still is bad though.
How many people in addition to AL Gores family live at his mansion? Does he have a full time cook, driver, maid? Do those people have families? If so then you would expect more electricity to be used then normally would be.

[BigEvil]

I really hate defending this guy but it's not as bad as it seems. It still is bad though.
How many people in addition to AL Gores family live at his mansion? Does he have a full time cook, driver, maid? Do those people have families? If so then you would expect more electricity to be used then normally would be.

Right, but I think you missed the point.. it use MORE than a house its size normally would use.

[deadeye9]

LINK: (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/16/hannity-gore/)


– Gore lives a strict carbon-neutral lifestyle both in his work and private life. That means he tries to reduce his emissions as much as possible, and then purchases carbon offsets for the remaining emissions.

– In his private life, Gore tries to reduce his emissions as much as possible. He drives a hybrid, flies commercially whenever he can, and purchases green power. In the few instances where work has demanded that he travel privately, he purchases carbon offsets for the emissions.

He buys 100% green power through Green Power Switch (http://www.tva.gov/greenpowerswitch/).

[deadeye9]

... it use MORE than a house its size normally would use.

Not true.


Moreover, Gore lives in a large home (10,000 sq. ft.). If you look at the data, it's clear that Gore's energy usage per square foot (even assuming the 221,000 kWh number is accurate) is well within the average range for his climate region.

[Lohman446]

So, his defense to use more then average American electricity is "I have a big house"?

[bleachit]

I wonder how many rich hollywood types, or Al Gores, are actually investing their own money into alternative sources of energy. like, I dunno "here's $20 million, make something that doesn't run on oil, make it economically viable, and let's market it and show people we are actually serious about using our wealth and prominence to make a real difference, instead of making everyone else change their lives whilst we bask in luxury."

edit: if Burt Rutan can send someone into space, why cant some rich folks develop something that has a chance in hell of actually weaning us off of foreign oil, and all that other garbage they complain about.

[Ole Unka Phil]

Well to the root of the problem...does anyone need 10,000 square feet of house so as to need to use that kinda energy? Should someone trying to conserve consider NOT having a huge house?

Even if one wants to believe that the smoke and mirrors of Carbon Offsets exists... then is not this something only the rich and elite can do? I mean is it not a case of "well... I need to NOT conserve because I can afford to buy my way out of it?

[PyRo]

Well to the root of the problem...does anyone need 10,000 square feet of house so as to need to use that kinda energy? Should someone trying to conserve consider NOT having a huge house?

Even if one wants to believe that the smoke and mirrors of Carbon Offsets exists... then is not this something only the rich and elite can do? I mean is it not a case of "well... I need to NOT conserve because I can afford to buy my way out of it?

Yup, that's the whole problem here. You don't need such a large house. If you want it and can afford it you're welcome to buy it though, that's America. To buy it then tell everyone else they need to cut back though is just plain hypocritical.
If he is so energy conscious why not pay these people to reduce his carbon footprint and cut back at the same time putting him in the negative. That's how you set an example, not by throwing money around and pointing fingers.

[deadeye9]

...does anyone need 10,000 square feet of house ...

Of course not ... comrade.

[Lohman446]

Of course not ... comrade.

If your going to whine about global impact perhaps you should try to conserve.

Throwing your daddy's money at some carbon thing so you can feel good about yourself just does not cut it...

What sacrifice is Al Gore making personally to help with the problem he is so adamate about?

Oh, personal sacrifice, well, I didn't mean...

[Pacifist_Farmer]

The best thing about forestry carbon offsets is the fact that once matured, these forests will be a source of renewable fuels. Then some one can buy some more carbon offsets and replant the trees we just cut down, better than cutting down all the red woods.

[bornl33t]

Of course not ... comrade.

hey, the richest people have the best chance to influence the rest of us. It's always been that way. With great authority comes great responsibility. We all know money talks therefor if anyone should be putting money into tree hugging then the rich should go first.


Ever one complains about Bush. We as a nation voted the lesser of two evils, with ever move that this guy makes I am more convinced America despite their hate of Bush voted correctly.

[ntn4502]

*looks around the room shakes head, and procedes to drive back up to ODNR for the second time today*

[Tunaman]

Sometimes, a picture really can speak 1000 words.
http://www.bangedup.com/bu_posts/mainALGoreyThxSD.gifHe musta ate Hillary!

[SCpoloRicker]

Another side point; I would assume that his energy footprint is comparabl...

*meh*

LOL at Al BORE!11!

:rolleyes:

[nippinout]

The best thing about forestry carbon offsets is the fact that once matured, these forests will be a source of renewable fuels. Then some one can buy some more carbon offsets and replant the trees we just cut down, better than cutting down all the red woods.

Planting trees and then chopping down the trees would be a net carbon offset of zero.

What would stop some billionaire setting fire to a rainforest for the heck of it, and then paying Norway a few million dollars to offset the carbon output of the fire? It seems more like a "I'm rich. I'll pay you carbon offset money so I can feel good about being green. And I'll keep driving my SUV," sort of thing.

I'm still not buying into the non-scientific 'consensus' of global warming/global cooling/climate change. Heck, unless my 3rd grade teacher was wrong, I thought we were still in the middle of a mini ice age in the middle of a giant ice age.

[bentothejam1n]

Sometimes, a picture really can speak 1000 words.
http://www.bangedup.com/bu_posts/mainALGoreyThxSD.gif
john kerry>al gore
http://johnkerry-08.com/images/kerry_drop_football.jpg

[Army]

Algore has at least 3 large houses, maybe 4. His theories have been debunked.

As much as I hate john kerry, that ball was coming out of the sun. Anyone would flinch.

[Lenny]

He musta ate Hillary!
Ewww... But worthy of a QFT! :D

[Jonneh]

I am too stupid to understand this argument, and too easily persuaded by each side to make a decision so I will turn to my new favourite source of information, Conservapedia! (http://www.conservapedia.com)

It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .[4]. Also, these scientists are mostly liberal athiests, untroubled by the hubris that man can destroy the Earth which God gave him.THANKS CONSERVAPEDIA!

[wjr]

Algore has at least 3 large houses, maybe 4. His theories have been debunked.

As much as I hate john kerry, that ball was coming out of the sun. Anyone would flinch.


yeah, that man made global warming... totally debunked by scientists, no question about it.

:rolleyes:

[BigEvil]

I am too stupid to understand this argument, and too easily persuaded by each side to make a decision so I will turn to my new favourite source of information, Conservapedia! (http://www.conservapedia.com)
THANKS CONSERVAPEDIA!


NICE.

/bookmarked

[Army]

yeah, that man made global warming... totally debunked by scientists, no question about it.

:rolleyes:
Please tell me/us...where are all the glaciers that once covered North America? Did man create enough "greenhouse gases" a million years ago to melt them too?

Please explain the record snowfall in Antarctica...or for that matter, the record cold in the last few weeks here in the USA?

Algore's conclusions have been totally based on theory, not fact. That's the "inconvenient" truth.

[CasingBill]

Al Gore is obviously eating quite healthy....he now has his own climate and contributes his own personal greenhouse gas.

[NoForts4Me]

Interesting...having almost this same thread over at MCB...

The main problem I have with the Al Gore types is the hypocrisy. I could care less if he lives in a 1,000,000 sq ft house and burns more fuel than the population of NY. I have a problem when he does that, yet criticizes other people for the way they live and how much energy they use. People that live in glass houses, you know.

[iambored]

What ever happened to global cooling?!

[bornl33t]

Gore, Pulosi, Google = hypocritical tree huggers.

[wjr]

Please tell me/us...where are all the glaciers that once covered North America? Did man create enough "greenhouse gases" a million years ago to melt them too?

Please explain the record snowfall in Antarctica...or for that matter, the record cold in the last few weeks here in the USA?

Algore's conclusions have been totally based on theory, not fact. That's the "inconvenient" truth.


Record snowfall in antartica? What? I looked that up on the google... here's the first article I found: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060811-south-pole.html

Record cold doesn't really mean a thing. If the average tempertature goes up 2 degrees, which is a big change, then you'll still have cold whether, and sometimes record lows.

Also... I just don't understand how it seems like nobody gives scientists any credit. A panel of 600 of the worlds leading climatoligists(?) met in (sweden I think) a few weeks ago. Surely you heard about it. They unanimously agreed that Global Warming is being accelerated by humans.


And, I've said this many times, and I'll say it again...

Even if the greenhouse gasses we're emmiting now are not affecting the temperature now, it will eventually. So, we should do everything we can to stop it.

[Tunaman]

Record snowfall in antartica? What? I looked that up on the google... here's the first article I found: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060811-south-pole.html

Record cold doesn't really mean a thing. If the average tempertature goes up 2 degrees, which is a big change, then you'll still have cold whether, and sometimes record lows.

Also... I just don't understand how it seems like nobody gives scientists any credit. A panel of 600 of the worlds leading climatoligists(?) met in (sweden I think) a few weeks ago. Surely you heard about it. They unanimously agreed that Global Warming is being accelerated by humans.


And, I've said this many times, and I'll say it again...

Even if the greenhouse gasses we're emmiting now are not affecting the temperature now, it will eventually. So, we should do everything we can to stop it.Hell...there ae more scientists than that on Exxons payroll...

[BobTheCow]

Hell...there ae more scientists than that on Exxons payroll...
Oh come on Tuna, the IPCC scientists can't even be compared the hacks hired by oil companies and cigarette companies and the like. Number of scientists obviously isn't an indicator of legitimacy.

While I haven't read through the entire thing yet, the IPCC last month released a summary (http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf) of their most recent findings and conclusions, which, surprisingly or not, are quite similar to what was concluded in their last study, published in 2001. (I just realized I'm probably going to spend a chunk of my spring break reading up on that... oh god what's wrong with me :( )

[Tunaman]

Oh come on Tuna, the IPCC scientists can't even be compared the hacks hired by oil companies and cigarette companies and the like. Number of scientists obviously isn't an indicator of legitimacy.

While I haven't read through the entire thing yet, the IPCC last month released a summary (http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf) of their most recent findings and conclusions, which, surprisingly or not, are quite similar to what was concluded in their last study, published in 2001. (I just realized I'm probably going to spend a chunk of my spring break reading up on that... oh god what's wrong with me :( )I dunno. I just don't buy the whole global warming thing. It's a crock if you read between the lines. I say blame the caveman for all those fires they lit. Anyone ever here of sunspots? Don't you think that they MIGHT have an impact at times...a gazillion times more than man ever could? ;)

[BigEvil]

Bob, you have to keep something in mind: There are tons and tons of money invoved with this global warming busniness. Notice I said "Business". If someone tomorrow said "I can 100% prove that humans have NO EFFECT on the climate" they would be silenced so fast your head would spin.

This is a political issue now, not a matter of science.

[wjr]

Hell...there ae more scientists than that on Exxons payroll...


Don't quote me on that number... it could be more, maybe less. I know it was in that ballpark though.

Also notice that I said "leading".

[PyRo]

Global warming is a multi billion dollar industry. If all these guys said humans weren't impacting the climate do you think they would have their over payed cushy jobs?

[Tunaman]

Bob, you have to keep something in mind: There are tons and tons of money invoved with this global warming busniness. Notice I said "Business". If someone tomorrow said "I can 100% prove that humans have NO EFFECT on the climate" they would be silenced so fast your head would spin.

This is a political issue now, not a matter of science.Oh how well I know that it is all Political. I am just laughing out loud at all the elected fools jumping on the bandwagon. Thank goodness we will have Rudy in '08! :D ;)

[wjr]

Bob, you have to keep something in mind: There are tons and tons of money invoved with this global warming busniness. Notice I said "Business".


Exactly. There is tons of money involved, and it's coming from Exxon and oil compaines trying to prove it's false. :)



If someone tomorrow said "I can 100% prove that humans have NO EFFECT on the climate" they would be silenced so fast your head would spin.

By who?

[bleachit]

Exactly. There is tons of money involved, and it's coming from Exxon and oil compaines trying to prove it's false. :)


nevermind the millions in research money being handed out to those who preach global warming





By who?



A panel of 600 of the worlds leading climatoligists(?) met in (sweden I think) a few weeks ago. Surely you heard about it. They unanimously agreed that Global Warming is being accelerated by humans.

[Mind'sEye]

You don't hear much in the news about the ADVANCING glaciers throughout the world such as those in New Zealand, Norway, Alaska, the Himalyas and Mt. Shasta, CA. Apparently they have not yet been visited by this man:

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/GOREZILLA.jpg

[CasingBill]

Lets not forget what they were preaching not too long ago.....

Global Cooling (http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf)



and we all know that the best scientists in the world, go where the money is....ie. Exxon, Merck

[wjr]

nevermind the millions in research money being handed out to those who preach global warming


Oh yeah, my bad. I forgot that scientists controlled the media.

[BigEvil]

Exactly. There is tons of money involved, and it's coming from Exxon and oil compaines trying to prove it's false. :)




By who?

By every scientist that gets grant money to research it.

As far as exxon and whomever 'trying to prove its false", so what if they are? How is what they say any more right or wrong from what anyone else is saying? No one can prove anything. Its all about who can shout the loudest. The oil companies are a prime target of the global warming Nazis. If I were them I would be trying to protect myself too.

I dont believe anything that anyone says on this matter. I make my own judgements based on what I can reason.

People as a whole are stupid and gulable. We tend to see things in relation to our lifespans. If there is an increase in the temperature of the Earth, then not only will it NOT be the first time, I also WILL NOT BE THE LAST.

Also, a volcanic eruption will spew more pollution into the air at one time than the combine totals that man has ever. Volcanos erupt all the time. Why are we still here?

There is also this great big thing nearby in space called the sun. That kinda has something to do with the climate on this planet doesnt it? It tends to be irratic sometimes.

Let the politicians spew their filth about this. Once it became an 'issue' I realized what a crock it all is. Unless we should start believing our politicians.

[BigEvil]

Oh yeah, my bad. I forgot that scientists controlled the media.

No, but the people who are simpathetic to their cause do. These are the same people who are anti capitalist, anti-commerce, and generally pro-socialist (these days). Everyone has an agenda. Trust no one.

/cue Xfiles theme song.

[CasingBill]

Same ol' Same ol'.....just different.



There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now.

The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.


The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars' worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.

To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world's weather. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”




http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/eibessential2/april_28__1975_newsweek___the_cooling_world___by_p eter_gwynne.Par.0006.ImageFile.jpg


1975

[wjr]

No, but the people who are simpathetic to their cause do. These are the same people who are anti capitalist, anti-commerce, and generally pro-socialist (these days). Everyone has an agenda. Trust no one.

/cue Xfiles theme song.


Come on.. are you telling me fox news is any of those things? Surely not. But that's not to say that I'm calling CNN anti capitalist, anti-commerce, and generally pro-socialist...

And exactly. Everyone has their OWN agenda. Which would benefit CNN's agenda more? A groundbreaking story reporting how man made global warming is false, or the normal days news? Which would be better for CNN you think?

And remember... the truth is out there. ;)

[Mind'sEye]

And exactly. Everyone has their OWN agenda. Which would benefit CNN's agenda more? A groundbreaking story reporting how man made global warming is false, or the normal days news? Which would be better for CNN you think?
Typical "normal days" news reporting in the mainstream media includes kidnappings, murders, the latest Paris Hilton adventure, doom and decline in our nation and the world. CNN has a captive audience. This approach is what their viewers obviously want and it sells ads. They've got a good thing going. Why would they focus on anything else?

[NoForts4Me]

I'll throw out a few things here:

Do we really want the earth to get colder? Where would all the Canadians go if glacial ice extended south of the Great Lakes?

What are we going to do about Mars and Pluto warming? Who's to blame for that? (HINT: see above posts by BigEvil).

It is not just about money, it is about control. There are already proposals and recommendations from the U.N. and other bodies for a global tax. Who will collect that money and control it? Will they use it for the world's best interest? That would be a LOT of money, and afford whoever had it POWER.

Why is Greenland called Greenland when it is covered in Ice?

Humans don't really know why any of this happens or understand the mechanisms that cause warming and cooling. If we did, you'd think we could at least accurately predict weather 3 days in advance (much less one day!).

[SCpoloRicker]

Why is Greenland called Greenland when it is covered in Ice?

So the Icelandics could keep their wimmens to themselves, duh.

/Icelandic

[ntn4502]

*sigh*

[PyRo]

So how many billion years old is the earth?
How many years have we been recording temperatures?
How many years have we even had thermometers for?

That's like someone studying you for the amount of time it takes you to blink your eyes and coming to conclusions.

[grEnAlEins]

We need to stop manbearpig. I'm totally serial. :spit_take

[bornl33t]

We need to stop manbearpig. I'm totally serial. :spit_take

Al Gore invented Cerial...

[PyRo]

We need to stop manbearpig. I'm totally serial. :spit_take
Come on guys, I'm super serial.
Everyone is totally stoked on me, they just don't know it.

[BigEvil]

We need to stop manbearpig. I'm totally serial. :spit_take

http://www.morethings.com/fan/south_park/photo_gallery/al-gore-is-manbearpig.jpg

[ntn4502]

So how many billion years old is the earth?
How many years have we been recording temperatures?
How many years have we even had thermometers for?

That's like someone studying you for the amount of time it takes you to blink your eyes and coming to conclusions.

:nono:

[PyRo]

:nono:
So we can look back and see the earth has gone through periods of heating and cooling, ice ages, etc. You can get a basic idea, nothing more. Meanwhile scientists are touting it is fact that temperature changes like we have now haven't occurred before.

Human induced global warming is a theory, no one has proven it and no one can prove it.

[bleachit]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

quick up for a looong video disputing man made global warming.

[robnix]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

quick up for a looong video disputing man made global warming.


Bump for something interesting about Al Gore, solar power, and the TVA Green Power program.


KIRO LISTENER ANALYZES AL GORE'S NASHVILLE MANSION ELECTRICITY BILL

Global warming evangelist #1, Al Gore, is being assailed for a monstrous utility bill for electricity use at his Nashville, TN mansion. Critics say Gore isn't doing his part to reduce global warming based on his mansion's electricity consumption.

Dori Monson Show listener, Lee, crunched some numbers about the Gore mansion kilowatt tally and submitted this analysis for Tuesday's Dori Monson Show.

Lee's e-mail (italicized portions quote the linked ABC News story):

Gore has tried to defend his amazing power consumption by claiming he purchases "green" power and takes other measures to reduce his "carbon footprint" to zero. (Gore) tries to offset that carbon footprint by purchasing their power through the local Green Power Switch program — electricity generated through renewable resources such as solar...

"In addition, they are in the midst of installing solar panels on their home, which will enable them to use less power," Kreider added.

I've taken the liberty of doing some simple calculations. The TVA's Green Power Switch program has several solar generating sites. During the period of Nov. through Jan. those sites produced a total of 90,147kWh of power while the Gores averaged power usage for those months was 55,200kWh- likely closer to 60,000 because of increased winter power requirements even in mild TN. Put another way, one guy and his wife used two-thirds of TVA's total solar power production leaving roughly 30,000kWh for the other 5,999,998 TN residents to divide among themselves. Or put still another way, Gore and Trigger each used 30,000kWh ... leaving 5 watthours apiece for each remaining state resident. Five watthours will burn a 60W bulb for 12 minutes. (Note: TVA covers several states, not just TN... I didn't feel like doing the additional math. The bottom line is that the Gores sucked up about 2/3 of the solar power available in several southern states. Of course green power is simply fed into the grid- but you get the idea).I've also estimated how many solar panels Gore would need to put on his roof in order to generate his own green power so that he can move clean off the grid. A common panel is 60W peak and measures roughly 2.5' x 3.5'. Judging by the average insolation measured at Oak Ridge, Gore would need *2324 such panels on his roof to **theoretically meet his annual load of 220,800kWh. He can purchase the panels wholesale for about a quarter million dollars... plus another $100,000 in various "electrical accoutrement." (And of course there's the issue of his huge natural gas usage for both home and swimming pool heating. He'll still need that carbon source.)

The man is a phony. The claim is that the bills are due to retrofitting his house to make it more energy efficient:

Kreider says she's confident that the Gores' utility bills will decrease. "They bought an older home and they're in the process of upgrading the home," she said. "Unfortunately that means an increase in energy use in order to have an overall decrease in energy use down the road."

And:

"Considering that he spends an overwhelming majority of his time advocating on behalf of and trying to affect change on this issue..."

That's how he would like to justify his enormous thirst for power- political and energywise. His time is worth more than anyone else's time, so he's burning up his personal wealth helping us poor dumb boobs become environmentally aware. (expletive deleted). Jerry Brown pushed for alternative energy and built wind generators in CA. And while he was governor he lived in a four room apartment and chucked the limo in favor of a small sedan. He walked the talk, Gore doesn't.

2,324 photovoltaic modules at 60W each would have a peak output of 139,440W. The average daily insolation for Oak Ridge, TN is 4.37 solar noon hours; so 139,440W x 4.37 hrs= 609352.8wH per day average... x 365 days = 222,413,772wH... /1000W = 222,413kWh annual production, which covers the 220,800kWh Gore uses with "some power to spare" for inefficiencies. (**HOWEVER, under CA photovoltaic installation guidelines you would figure a 35% inefficiency right off the top of the PV module array rating...a peak output of 139,440W would become 90,636W of usable energy. These inefficiencies involve line loss, heat, battery storage, air particulates, power inversion, etc.) And since daily power production is simply averaged over the year, with power production higher in summer (5.06 insolation) and lower in winter (3.22), actual power consumption would have to roughly follow production.

For the record, Cloudhaus has used 33,081kWh of power since January ... 2003. No natural gas, no LP gas, and this winter just two fires in the wood stove: Thanksgiving and Christmas.

[CasingBill]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

quick up for a looong video disputing man made global warming.


good video!!..I only got halfway through it last night. I'll finish it later. Great points in there.

[Phillips]

So how many billion years old is the earth?
How many years have we been recording temperatures?
How many years have we even had thermometers for?

That's like someone studying you for the amount of time it takes you to blink your eyes and coming to conclusions.

You do realise there are other means of recording temperatures and sea levels?, we know temperatures that where present before man even existed.
This is a fact.

Also I find it funny how you sem to be the only country in the entire world than doesn't believe the accepted theory of global warming.
Also the presedent neatly changed his stance about global warming in 03/04ish agreeing with the majority that global warming is accelerated by mankind.


Al gore, who cares what he does anyway? He has probably done more positivework than negative. Almost all politicians are in it for themselves in my opinion, why would he be any different?


p.s. If the worlds leader's agree with the theory as readily as they agree with evolution why are people so unable to see the bigge rpicture?
It has been PROVEN that companies such as Exxon have funded illigitamate research to try and discredit the theory, yet they have not even been published in a scientific journal.
Lets think why would Exxon try to do this..................MONEY.


My 2p.

[CasingBill]

You do realise there are other means of recording temperatures and sea levels?, we know temperatures that where present before man even existed.
This is a fact.

Also I find it funny how you sem to be the only country in the entire world than doesn't believe the accepted theory of global warming.
Also the presedent neatly changed his stance about global warming in 03/04ish agreeing with the majority that global warming is accelerated by mankind.


Al gore, who cares what he does anyway? He has probably done more positivework than negative. Almost all politicians are in it for themselves in my opinion, why would he be any different?


p.s. If the worlds leader's agree with the theory as readily as they agree with evolution why are people so unable to see the bigge rpicture?
It has been PROVEN that companies such as Exxon have funded illigitamate research to try and discredit the theory, yet they have not even been published in a scientific journal.
Lets think why would Exxon try to do this..................MONEY.


My 2p.

HEY JACKHOLE!!! Most of the people in that video that completely discredit the human attribution to global warming are from the UK!

[Phillips]

Believe me they are in the severe minority, by the way I did not mean it as offensive. I just found it amusing why people find human accelerated global warming so hard to believe, for instance some people who did not realise that we could recover evidence to show temperatures before mankind even existed.

By the way I would like to see you call me that to my face, agression is always the first weapon of an idiot.

p.s. If the worlds best scientists believe that human accelerated global warming exists, then that is good enough for me. The worlds most powerful governments believe in human accelerated global warming, including the English/ Welsh government, Presedent Bush, China and I could go on.

[CasingBill]

Believe me they are in the severe minority, by the way I did not mean it as offensive. I just found it amusing why people find human accelerated global warming so hard to believe, for instance some people who did not realise that we could recover evidence to show temperatures before mankind even existed.

By the way I would like to see you call me that to my face, agression is always the first weapon of an idiot.

p.s. If the worlds best scientists believe that human accelerated global warming exists, then that is good enough for me. The worlds most powerful governments believe in human accelerated global warming, including the English/ Welsh government.


Umm...I would have no problem telling you you're a jackhole to your face. Oh, but I didn't mean it as offensive....lol.

watch the video.....the scientists in the vid, have the same opinions as most of us have already stated. they could easily come up with 2500 scientists against global warming. and that authors shouldn't count as scientists.....theres also no mention of them being the "worlds best scientists" as you put it.....just scientists.

[Phillips]

Yes there is, look for the scientists top in their fields of expertise, i.e. climate change.
Answer me one signle question, why if human accelerated global warming doesn't exist would basicly all of the world's governments believe in the theory, aswell as putting billions into helping prevent such acceleration?
The Bush administration has even changed their stance, Tony blair has always been a supporter of combatting accelerated climate change.

I would take an example of Steven Hawking, he blieves that human accelerated global warming exists, although it would be far more valuable putting money and resources into tackling things such as famine, disseas and drought.
He has more intelligence than most if not all on this forum, It's not as if these views are not widespread or are coming from misinformed people.


God I hate Tommy tankers.

[bentothejam1n]

Answer me one signle question, why if human accelerated global warming doesn't exist would basicly all of the world's governments believe in the theory, aswell as putting billions into helping prevent such acceleration?
The Bush administration has even changed their stance, Tony blair has always been a supporter of combatting accelerated climate change.

My explantion for that would be approval rates. The media has scared people into believing that man has caused global warming. Now that people are scared they want to see their government do something about it. The candidate whose views support research and prevention of so called global warming, will get a good chunk of votes over another candidate who has the exact same views except on global warming. You said President Bush changed his views around 03/04. Hmmm that seems right around election time.

[Phillips]

Oh I agree with you there, although the governments don't agree that mankind caused global warming, just that it sped the entire process up.
I doubt that an entire government would fabricate something with such huge consiquences because of approval rates, if that where so I know at least Britain would not have any troops left in Iraq.

p.s. Blair has always maintained that human accelerated global warming exists, with no correlation to how popular or unpopular the idea was or is.

[trevorjk]

even if humans are not accelerating global warming, it sure is nice to finally have all the big companies lower there emissions and green house gases. it also boost in the design of more modern vehicles that does not rely on a gas supply that will run out. all im saying is this whole global warming thing is definetly advancing technology to help keep our earth clean. and you cant argue with that.

[grEnAlEins]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

quick up for a looong video disputing man made global warming.

No kidding, it was looong... but very interesting. Well worth the watch IMHO :headbang: :hail:

[bentothejam1n]

even if humans are not accelerating global warming, it sure is nice to finally have all the big companies lower there emissions and green house gases. it also boost in the design of more modern vehicles that does not rely on a gas supply that will run out. all im saying is this whole global warming thing is definetly advancing technology to help keep our earth clean. and you cant argue with that.
agreed

[Mind'sEye]

Also I find it funny how you sem to be the only country in the entire world than doesn't believe the accepted theory of global warming.

It's a difference in philosophy. There are many people in the U.S. who continue to resist adoption by the "Nanny State" also. The primary weapon of tyranny is fear. What better way to promote a global system of government than with global fear? The fact that you, over there, cannot tell us what to do over here is a good thing. You can't compare the U.S. to a European country or even all of Western Europe. http://goeurope.about.com/od/europeanmaps/l/bl-country-size-comparison-map.htm We are a much larger republic. California, the world's 6th largest economy, has set a 25% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2020 and reduction to 1990 levels by 2012. It'll be up to other the states to decide what they want to do. For instance, Tennessee may not feel the need to impose targets. According to the NASA GISS 126 year official record for Nashville, there appears to have been too much natural flucuation in the surface temperatures over the years to be able to determine whether or not Al Gore's excessive energy consumption is having a significant impact on the area.

https://home.comcast.net/~l.b.stanchfield/wsb/media/1870787/site1058.jpg

red-summer green-spring orange-autumn blue-winter

[Tunaman]

Did you all know that TERMITES produce more methane in one year that does more damage to the ozone layer than all of mankinds best efforts to destroy the planet with hydrocarbons?
Global warming is a crock of crap. Hey Al? Does the 10 years it will take to destroy the planet start from when you first said it or does it start from today...again. Better hurry and propogate kiddies...ain't much time left! We are all doomed! :rolleyes:

[Dark Side]

Did you all know that TERMITES produce more methane in one year that does more damage to the ozone layer than all of mankinds best efforts to destroy the planet with hydrocarbons?

I love National Geographic.

Lets not forget-------

Swamp gas - lots of Methane there.
Volcanoes - Has nothing to do with Global Warming, Al said so.
Geyser eruptions - Who knows what's in there :rolleyes:
Undersea methane eruptions - Once again Methane.
Earth is coming out of an Ice Age- Who knew.
I guess it's my fault too, I had the Cats cut off of my exhaust.

I know, lets start a world wide campaign against termites. The 2 degrees raise in average world wide temp since the Industrial Revolution about 130 years ago is stupid to even bring up. It's less than a blink of the eye in our world's life. I have not seen here the truth that these greenhouse gases are not affecting us as they used to. NASA had pics taken since the 70's of the Ozone layer, even the hole over Anartica. Since then there has been (If I remember then percentage correctly) a %300 decrease in it's size. And that was in the 90s that I last saw a comparison done.




Believe me they are in the severe minority, by the way I did not mean it as offensive. I just found it amusing why people find human accelerated global warming so hard to believe, for instance some people who did not realise that we could recover evidence to show temperatures before mankind even existed.

By the way I would like to see you call me that to my face, agression is always the first weapon of an idiot.

p.s. If the worlds best scientists believe that human accelerated global warming exists, then that is good enough for me. The worlds most powerful governments believe in human accelerated global warming, including the English/ Welsh government, Presedent Bush, China and I could go on.
Do not forget since we are on the subject of what Governments believe. It was not that long ago that...
The world was square.
The Earth was the center of the universe.
The Church was far more powerful than the English Monarchy (I believe this was what ensured the Dark Ages)
Minorities and women were lower class citizens IF considered at all.
Don't get me started on the Third Reich.

Just because entire governments believe it, well you know where I am going. Never believe what a man tells you, especially if that man told you he invented the internet.

[bleachit]

Never believe what a man tells you, especially if that man told you he invented the internet.


but he also saved us from Manbearpig... that has to count for something!

[ntn4502]

/Just got back from our polar research center(always a good time, besides it being freaking freezing)

I would argue points with you, yet I know whatever the fact I try prove to you guys, somebody well throw up some numbers from a rogue scientist claiming the opposite,(I could probably find a recent report saying the world is flat). My point being that no matter what is said throughout the thread nobody is gonna change their mind on the subject because they know deep down that whatever their 9th grade civics teacher/local newspaper/parents have told them is true.

I have been to about a dozen seminars that have gone to polar extremes in terms of their stances as to not let bias be a hinderance to my own personal beliefs. If anybody would like to talk to me further on it, talk to me further get ahold of me on aim or pm. If you would rather read about subject, then you can find some things over on http://www.ipcc.ch/

Nelson

[wjr]

/Just got back from our polar research center(always a good time, besides it being freaking freezing)

I would argue points with you, yet I know whatever the fact I try prove to you guys, somebody well throw up some numbers from a rogue scientist claiming the opposite,(I could probably find a recent report saying the world is flat). My point being that no matter what is said throughout the thread nobody is gonna change their mind on the subject because they know deep down that whatever their 9th grade civics teacher/local newspaper/parents have told them is true.

I have been to about a dozen seminars that have gone to polar extremes in terms of their stances as to not let bias be a hinderance to my own personal beliefs. If anybody would like to talk to me further on it, talk to me further get ahold of me on aim or pm. If you would rather read about subject, then you can find some things over on http://www.ipcc.ch/

Nelson

Cool! I never would have thought there was a geologist on the boards. Keep up the good work!

What organization are you currently working for?

[FactsOfLife]

You do realise there are other means of recording temperatures and sea levels?, we know temperatures that where present before man even existed.
This is a fact.

Also I find it funny how you sem to be the only country in the entire world than doesn't believe the accepted theory of global warming.
Also the presedent neatly changed his stance about global warming in 03/04ish agreeing with the majority that global warming is accelerated by mankind.


Al gore, who cares what he does anyway? He has probably done more positivework than negative. Almost all politicians are in it for themselves in my opinion, why would he be any different?


p.s. If the worlds leader's agree with the theory as readily as they agree with evolution why are people so unable to see the bigge rpicture?
It has been PROVEN that companies such as Exxon have funded illigitamate research to try and discredit the theory, yet they have not even been published in a scientific journal.
Lets think why would Exxon try to do this..................MONEY.


My 2p.

that's because we are actively attempting to NOT let the Socialistic/Stalinistic fools run rampant over here, the way they do over there.

I love how global warming advocates constantly spew their bilge about "PROOF!" that any dissenting view was illegitimate.

I submit it's people like you, and your hot air, that are the cause of global warming. My advise, stop breathing.

[AirAssault]

What is so wrong with wanting to live in a greener manner? Why are some of you so against our leaders making changes that will do nothing but help our environment? I personally believe that global warming is happening at an increasing rate and that increasing rate is due to humans. Some have posted many things about the natural occurrence of green house gasses and that’s great. The earth can take care of those natural causes. Now add in all the man made causes, are you willing to take the chance that maybe YOU are wrong? You say sure now but when the costal communities of the world are under water what do you say then? OOPS, guess I was wrong!!! Well by then it’s too late. There is no harm in trying to lower our emissions of green house gases. Check out a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car and you will see why there is such a fight. It is so oil companies can make tons of money and bush and his corrupt cronies can make a lot of money. Wake up, oil runs America. bush went to war in Iraq for it and our soldiers are being killed for it. So, if we all do small parts, then we won’t need as much oil, and lots of people have a better life. What’s so wrong with that?

[iambored]

Global Warming? Did we already leave the Global Cooling Scare?
Honestly, the icecaps have been melting for a while and that was during the Global Cooling junk. Even though lots of evidence backs global warming, they had alot to back Global Cooling, too. I figure one of these days we'll figure out what we're doin' wrong and fix it.

[bleachit]

Wake up, oil runs America. bush went to war in Iraq for it and our soldiers are being killed for it.


you are silly.

[billybob_81067]

but when the costal communities of the world are under water what do you say then?

I say that's what you get for living on the coast you bunch of tards! :D

[ntn4502]

Cool! I never would have thought there was a geologist on the boards. Keep up the good work!

What organization are you currently working for?

I am starting out at Ohio Department of Natural Resources, but still do a lot of work at our Polar Research center http://www-bprc.mps.ohio-state.edu/

[SlartyBartFast]

No kidding, it was looong... but very interesting. Well worth the watch IMHO :headbang: :hail:

Then you read the arguments against the video:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2032575,00.html
http://inthegreen.typepad.com/blog/2007/03/deconstructing_.html
http://reasic.wordpress.com/2007/03/10/the-great-global-warming-swindle-questions-answered/
:p

And some background on the director:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2000/03/16/modified-truth/
:rofl:

And remember: Many of the "scientists" under the employ of Big Oil to discredit Global Warming are the same bunch of hired idiots that worked for the Tobacco to convince the world that cigarettes weren't addictive and didn't cause cancer. Note also that the global effort is also coordinated by the same PR group that worked for Big Tobacco.

That alone is enough to convince me that the Global Warming is a fact.

And some more good reasons as to why we need to re-evluate our lifestyles and consumption:
http://www.celsias.com/blog/2007/03/12/communists-and-nazis/

[SlartyBartFast]

The primary weapon of tyranny is fear. What better way to promote a global system of government than with global fear?

That's really funny coming from a citizen of a country terrified by the threat of global terrorism.

Trying to live in harmony with the Earth certainly seems less onerous than going into wars under false pretexts and spending billions to allow the government to spy on you and control your lives.

[FactsOfLife]

What is so wrong with wanting to live in a greener manner? Why are some of you so against our leaders making changes that will do nothing but help our environment? I personally believe that global warming is happening at an increasing rate and that increasing rate is due to humans. Some have posted many things about the natural occurrence of green house gasses and that’s great. The earth can take care of those natural causes. Now add in all the man made causes, are you willing to take the chance that maybe YOU are wrong? You say sure now but when the costal communities of the world are under water what do you say then? OOPS, guess I was wrong!!! Well by then it’s too late. There is no harm in trying to lower our emissions of green house gases. Check out a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car and you will see why there is such a fight. It is so oil companies can make tons of money and bush and his corrupt cronies can make a lot of money. Wake up, oil runs America. bush went to war in Iraq for it and our soldiers are being killed for it. So, if we all do small parts, then we won’t need as much oil, and lots of people have a better life. What’s so wrong with that?


yet another Bush hater heard from.

[wjr]

Then you read the arguments against the video:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2032575,00.html
http://inthegreen.typepad.com/blog/2007/03/deconstructing_.html
http://reasic.wordpress.com/2007/03/10/the-great-global-warming-swindle-questions-answered/
:p

And some background on the director:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2000/03/16/modified-truth/
:rofl:

And remember: Many of the "scientists" under the employ of Big Oil to discredit Global Warming are the same bunch of hired idiots that worked for the Tobacco to convince the world that cigarettes weren't addictive and didn't cause cancer. Note also that the global effort is also coordinated by the same PR group that worked for Big Tobacco.

That alone is enough to convince me that the Global Warming is a fact.

And some more good reasons as to why we need to re-evluate our lifestyles and consumption:
http://www.celsias.com/blog/2007/03/12/communists-and-nazis/


Wow, that's really interesting. I'm eager to hear responses on those points.




yet another Bush hater heard from.

Yet another liberal hater heard from. :tard:

[Lohman446]

What is so wrong with wanting to live in a greener manner? Why are some of you so against our leaders making changes that will do nothing but help our environment? I personally believe that global warming is happening at an increasing rate and that increasing rate is due to humans. Some have posted many things about the natural occurrence of green house gasses and that’s great. The earth can take care of those natural causes. Now add in all the man made causes, are you willing to take the chance that maybe YOU are wrong? You say sure now but when the costal communities of the world are under water what do you say then? OOPS, guess I was wrong!!! Well by then it’s too late. There is no harm in trying to lower our emissions of green house gases. Check out a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car and you will see why there is such a fight. It is so oil companies can make tons of money and bush and his corrupt cronies can make a lot of money. Wake up, oil runs America. bush went to war in Iraq for it and our soldiers are being killed for it. So, if we all do small parts, then we won’t need as much oil, and lots of people have a better life. What’s so wrong with that?

Nice debating skills... from more than one person

The concept of this discussion is that Al Gore is a hypocrite. He preaches about conservation while practicing conspicuous consumption. The idiocy of his very vocal stance, when mirrored to his own actions, make the accuracy of his stances irrelevant. He preaches about global warming, and that it exists, and admonishes society as a whole for not taking steps to conserve or seek alternate means of consumption, while at the same time doing exactly that which he admonishes the rest of us for.

[warbeak2099]

I personally believe that global warming is happening at an increasing rate and that increasing rate is due to humans.

May I see your PhD in geology or any of the other sciences? Oh you don't have one. Oh well then by all means continue to challenge accepted scientific evidence. I'm sure you know better than those silly guys in the labcoats that do it for a living. Your reading the New York Times makes you much more qualified than those sillies.



Check out a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car and you will see why there is such a fight. It is so oil companies can make tons of money and bush and his corrupt cronies can make a lot of money. Wake up, oil runs America. bush went to war in Iraq for it and our soldiers are being killed for it. So, if we all do small parts, then we won’t need as much oil, and lots of people have a better life. What’s so wrong with that?

Yes, because no other politicians are corrupt. Especially not Al Gore...

Your wisdom amazes me good sir. Where can I purchase some?

[wjr]

May I see your PhD in geology or any of the other sciences? Oh you don't have one. Oh well then by all means continue to challenge accepted scientific evidence. I'm sure you know better than those silly guys in the labcoats that do it for a living. Your reading the New York Times makes you much more qualified than those sillies.


That doesn't really make sense. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but most of the scientific community would say that global warming is being accelerated by humans.

[grEnAlEins]

Your wisdom amazes me good sir. Where can I purchase some?
Al Gore runs a sister company to that green credit company. You purchase wisdom there (logic not included ;) ). And if you buy now with a credit card, he will include two free green credits and two intranets for FREE!!!!!11! That is an infinity dollar value, FOR FREE! (plus S&H) :tard: :rolleyes:

Sorry, I couldn't sleep last night, so I watched infomercials instead :D

[grEnAlEins]

That doesn't really make sense. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but most of the scientific community would say that global warming is being accelerated by humans.
Not really though... There is no definitive proof around. In fact there is proof to the contrary :)

If your only "proof" is a UN study, then I pity you. If I want the truth on something, the most corrupt and political machine on the planet is the last place I would turn. Just Sayin... :D

[Lohman446]

Not really though... There is no definitive proof around. In fact there is proof to the contrary :)

If your only "proof" is a UN study, then I pity you. If I want the truth on something, the most corrupt and political machine on the planet is the last place I would turn. Just Sayin... :D

I find it amusing that one refers to the other sides evidence as inconclusive, and there own as "proof".

[grEnAlEins]

I find it amusing that one refers to the other sides evidence as inconclusive, and there own as "proof".
I should have said legitimate scientific evidence, sorry :rolleyes:

[wjr]

Not really though... There is no definitive proof around. In fact there is proof to the contrary :)

If your only "proof" is a UN study, then I pity you. If I want the truth on something, the most corrupt and political machine on the planet is the last place I would turn. Just Sayin... :D


Where did I say "proof" in that sentance? Generally when you put quotes around something that's what it means.

And I'm not sure you understand what I said there. It had nothing to do with proof at all. It had to do with what is commonly accepted by scientists and researchers. The truth is that the majority of scientists and researchers beleive that global warming is being accelerated by humans.

[grEnAlEins]

Where did I say "proof" in that sentance? Generally when you put quotes around something that's what it means.

And I'm not sure you understand what I said there. It had nothing to do with proof at all. It had to do with what is commonly accepted by scientists and researchers. The truth is that the majority of scientists and researchers beleive that global warming is being accelerated by humans.
Or it means for lack of a better word, and that is how it was intended. Sorry for the confusion, it was a bad move on my part. :)
And the vocal bunch does suggest humans accelerate global warming. This is true. But they do have something at steak. They need you to believe in global warming so that they can get grant money from the worlds governments. That is how climate scientists get money, through grants. If there is more concern about an issue, grant money will flow like wine. And as far as the majority of scientists agreeing to this, I doubt it. Even the UN study used non-scientists in the study to boost the number of people who worked on it. They created an illusory credibility. Also several real scientist have requested that their names be removed from the study due alterations made by the UN committee that review and edited the study. Even the global warming side acknowledges that their viewpoint might not be correct, but the course of action the recommend should be undertaken regardless of the truth. I doubt that this statement came from a scientist, unless there was an underlying motive (e.g. funding). Global warming is essentially a business for those involved.

[wjr]

Or it means for lack of a better word, and that is how it was intended. Sorry for the confusion, it was a bad move on my part. :)
And the vocal bunch does suggest humans accelerate global warming. This is true. But they do have something at steak. They need you to believe in global warming so that they can get grant money from the worlds governments. That is how climate scientists get money, through grants. If there is more concern about an issue, grant money will flow like wine. And as far as the majority of scientists agreeing to this, I doubt it. Even the UN study used non-scientists in the study to boost the number of people who worked on it. They created an illusory credibility. Also several real scientist have requested that their names be removed from the study due alterations made by the UN committee that review and edited the study. Even the global warming side acknowledges that their viewpoint might not be correct, but the course of action the recommend should be undertaken regardless of the truth. I doubt that this statement came from a scientist, unless there was an underlying motive (e.g. funding). Global warming is essentially a business for those involved.

That's a very cynical way to look at things. How do you think that lie would have started? A convention of geologists, plotting to get more grant money? I've never heard of scientists requesting to be removed from the UN study... but I have heard of them saying that while the claims are true, some of the time frames are a bit exaggerated. Are you sure that's not what you're talking about?

"...the course of action the recommend should be undertaken regardless of the truth."

What's so wrong with that? If we start the recommended course of action, we'd cut down on emissions and get an all around cleaner environment. That's something that ought to be done reguardless of global warming.

[Mind'sEye]

That's really funny coming from a citizen of a country terrified by the threat of global terrorism.

Trying to live in harmony with the Earth certainly seems less onerous than going into wars under false pretexts and spending billions to allow the government to spy on you and control your lives.

LOL, I live in a modest 1300 sq.ft. house. I recycle and drive a car that gets 35 miles to the gallon. My state, California, has led the nation in emission controls for years. When guys like Al Gore And Leonardo Dicaprio start living off the grid in small energy efficient houses, when they stop flying around the world in their jets and when they begin to drive electric cars, which they can no doubt afford to have custom made for them, I will take them a little more seriously.

I don't have much use for federal government interferance. My son in law is British. He moved his audio/software business over here because the opportunities and business climate are much better than back home in the EU. :)

[grEnAlEins]

That's a very cynical way to look at things. How do you think that lie would have started? A convention of geologists, plotting to get more grant money? I've never heard of scientists requesting to be removed from the UN study... but I have heard of them saying that while the claims are true, some of the time frames are a bit exaggerated. Are you sure that's not what you're talking about?

"...the course of action the recommend should be undertaken regardless of the truth."

What's so wrong with that? If we start the recommended course of action, we'd cut down on emissions and get an all around cleaner environment. That's something that ought to be done reguardless of global warming.
I guess I am a very cynical person. In fact, I know that I am.

Not quite what I am saying about the "convention of geologists" but that notion did make me chuckle. I am stating that it has become fashionable to make this claim. I am suggesting that they do gain from it, and I question their motivation. I think it is more politics and economics than legitimate science.

As for the several scientist that have requested that their names be withdrawn, someone posted a video in this thread (I forgot who posted it, sorry) that interview one of these people. He had to threaten legal action to have his name removed. Yes, I am sure that I am talking about the correct subject :D

The problem with that is it is not logical. "Even though what I have presented as evidence might not be accurate, you should still do what I say." You really, really do not see an issue with this? I am all for a cleaner environment, as pollution kills animal. If pollution kills animals, then I cannot (I am a hunter). But I do object to fear tactics and end of the world rhetoric. That is why I object to this global warming scare. It is presented as rhetoric to induce wide-spread fear. If you examine the rhetoric for what it is, you will see that the discourse is heavily rooted in fallacy. I see a huge problem with this. That is really what I am getting at.

[wjr]

The problem with that is it is not logical. "Even though what I have presented as evidence might not be accurate, you should still do what I say." You really, really do not see an issue with this? I am all for a cleaner environment, as pollution kills animal. If pollution kills animals, then I cannot (I am a hunter). But I do object to fear tactics and end of the world rhetoric. That is why I object to this global warming scare. It is presented as rhetoric to induce wide-spread fear. If you examine the rhetoric for what it is, you will see that the discourse is heavily rooted in fallacy. I see a huge problem with this. That is really what I am getting at.


That's not how I interpret it. I see it as "We could be wrong, but why risk it?". Why take the chance?

I don't understand the idea of global warming inspiring global fear. People sure don't seem scared by it. I'd say the majority of America doesn't believe in/pays no heed to the threat of global warming. To be honest, I wish it did inspire global fear... it would at least get people to clean up their act.

[grEnAlEins]

That's not how I interpret it. I see it as "We could be wrong, but why risk it?". Why take the chance?

I don't understand the idea of global warming inspiring global fear. People sure don't seem scared by it. I'd say the majority of America doesn't believe in/pays no heed to the threat of global warming. To be honest, I wish it did inspire global fear... it would at least get people to clean up their act.
Fair enough, we just interpret the situation differently. You called me out on being cynical, and I agree, I am. I guess I am just overly suspicious of people.

Quite a few people do fear the ramifications of global warming. In fact, several live down the hall from me. There is a reason that Americans are not up to our anal cavities in fear, we are skeptics. A lot of us are anyway.

If you do not understand the idea that this movement is a fear tactic, watch the news sometime. Watch how the idea is presented and the story is covered. "90% of the land mass will FLOOD FLOOD FLOOD! When will it happen? SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY!!" (note that this rendition is not completely serious; it is done in satire, but my fear tactic point is valid IMHO)

The fact that you do not mind the idea of instilling global fear disturbs a me a little bit to be honest. Fear tactics have not traditionally done the world a whole lot of good...

[Recon by Fire]

Oh teh noes! Global Warming! Yes it exist.... because the world is still coming out of The Little Ice Age. Not the start of a cataclysmic event.

Al Gore is also a green capitalist who makes money off of the fear mongering, he is a cannibalistic slug. But he did invent the internet, and pants too.


:cheers:

[FactsOfLife]

Wow, that's really interesting. I'm eager to hear responses on those points.




Yet another liberal hater heard from. :tard:

with good reason. tardboy.

[grEnAlEins]

he is a cannibalistic slug.

:cheers:
Now now... he does not actually eat people... does he? :p

[Recon by Fire]

I saw graphic pics of him doing on FNC, I swear. :rofl:

[grEnAlEins]

I saw graphic pics of him doing on FNC, I swear. :rofl:
:spit_take HAHAHAHAHA!

[FactsOfLife]

Oh teh noes! Global Warming! Yes it exist.... because the world is still coming out of The Little Ice Age. Not the start of a cataclysmic event.

Al Gore is also a green capitalist who makes money off of the fear mongering, he is a cannibalistic slug. But he did invent the internet, and pants too.


:cheers:

and he and his wife's fat *** were the subject of A Love Story.

which of course was the epic search of a husband, to locate some fresh pineapple to go with the cottage cheese on his wife's backside.

[wjr]

If you do not understand the idea that this movement is a fear tactic, watch the news sometime. Watch how the idea is presented and the story is covered. "90% of the land mass will FLOOD FLOOD FLOOD! When will it happen? SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY!!" (note that this rendition is not completely serious; it is done in satire, but my fear tactic point is valid IMHO)

The fact that you do not mind the idea of instilling global fear disturbs a me a little bit to be honest. Fear tactics have not traditionally done the world a whole lot of good...

I do watch the news. I admit that some claims are exaggerated, but it's not as if that's being hidden. It was pretty well publicized that scientists were saying many time frames, including Al Gores, were exaggerated. At least so far I've heard it on NPR, BBC, and somewhere on TV... can't quite remember where.

I wouldn't say that I advocate fear tactics. Using fear tactics would mean making people scared with lies. People ought to be worried about the truth of global warming. If they aren't worried, then they would do nothing to change anything.

[grEnAlEins]

and he and his wife's fat *** were the subject of A Love Story.

which of course was the epic search of a husband, to locate some fresh pineapple to go with the cottage cheese on his wife's backside.
Holy brutality Batman! :eek:

[Rooster]

The belief in global warming is no different than the belief in any other psuedo-religion. The planet is getting warmer. It does that from time to time. It also gets colder from time to time. This is easy enough to prove. What is very difficult to prove is if man is having an impact at all. If you want to live a green lifstyle, good for you. You are a nice little moral person. You return dropped wallets and you drive a hybrid car. Good for you. You aren't saving the planet, and these green businessmen are laughing all the way to the bank on your hard earned dollar.

Frankly, my v-8 eats gas like there is no tomorrow. If you pull up behind me, you might choke on the fumes. You know what, if you don't like it, plant a couple trees tomorrow.

[FactsOfLife]

Anyone know who Václav Klaus is?

This guy is my new personal hero.

For those of you who don't know, he's the Czech Republic's president. He testified before Dingell's committee in the House on so called global warming.

and this quote is why this man is my new personal hero:

"global warming, environmentalism, is simply the new home for communists. It is the single greatest threat to individual liberty since communism."

choke on it, you enviro-fascist anti American scumbags.

[Jonneh]

Anyone know who Václav Klaus is?

This guy is my new personal hero.

For those of you who don't know, he's the Czech Republic's president. He testified before Dingell's committee in the House on so called global warming.

and this quote is why this man is my new personal hero:

"global warming, environmentalism, is simply the new home for communists. It is the single greatest threat to individual liberty since communism."

choke on it, you enviro-fascist anti American scumbags.Dude, you're a douchebag.

[grEnAlEins]

I do watch the news. I admit that some claims are exaggerated, but it's not as if that's being hidden. It was pretty well publicized that scientists were saying many time frames, including Al Gores, were exaggerated. At least so far I've heard it on NPR, BBC, and somewhere on TV... can't quite remember where.

I wouldn't say that I advocate fear tactics. Using fear tactics would mean making people scared with lies. People ought to be worried about the truth of global warming. If they aren't worried, then they would do nothing to change anything.
But a lot is being hidden. Take the UN report for example. The reason that several scientists have had their names removed is because the results in the final report were either omitted or otherwise altered.
The fact is that global warming is likely to be causing the rise in CO2 levels. As is well known, decomposing "crud" in the oceans are the #1 contributer of CO2 (by far). As is also well known, CO2 dissolves in cold water better than warm water. As the atmosphere warms, so does the ocean (it takes longer due to water's higher specific heat). As the water warms, it releases more CO2 that usual, as CO2 comes out of solution in warmer water (like when your can of pop goes flat quicker when the pop is at room temperature than when refrigerated). Also in the video I mentioned earlier, scientists show that the CO2 levels in the atmosphere following the rise in temperature (CO2 levels change lag behind that of temperature by 800 years. This is according to data shown in the video, by on of the ice core dudes. It is shown at around the 20 minute mark of the video that I keep mentioning.). If a change CO2 levels follows temperature change, then Co2 cannot be causing the change, as it is a product of said change. There was also some mention of the significance of Sun-spots. I did not fully comprehend this, as I am not an astronomy aficionado. I am, however, a chem-nerd, which is why I understood what was explained above. This was also presented in the video that I keep mentioning. The guy who is claiming that this theory is correct is a professor of oceanography at MIT. I bet that he has knowledge on the subject.

Seriously, watch the video, you might find it interesting. Although I will warn you, it takes forever and a day to download :p

As for fear your not advocating fear tactics:

To be honest, I wish it did inspire global fear... it would at least get people to clean up their act.
The above quote is where I got the silly notion that you support instilling global fear as a means to achieve a desired end ;)

[grEnAlEins]

Did anyone watch Gore talk today?
"An immediate freeze on CO2 emissions"
"ban on incandescent light bulbs"

Is he joking? :(

[AirAssault]

you are silly.

Ok silly huh? How much time have you spent in Iraq? Did over a year there with the 86CSH. So until you know what you're talking about, maybe YOU should shut it. It makes you look like the silly one.

[iambored]

choke on it, you enviro-fascist anti American scumbags.

And you believe that America is pure democracy and without any corruption? There are reasons that we have done minimum research into alternative fuels, and there are reasons that lots of other things happen. But take this as a fact:
no democracy, uncorrupt, will not remain uncorrupt. It is human nature to use power and democracy hands people alot of power at one time. Democracies give a small group the power to will a nation do as they choose, and they don't have to force it. (<= One of the reasons people believe this global warming thing, if your good state politician gets a check from the Big Oil Company, he'll say that Global Warming is real and that company is making cleaner fuel)

[AirAssault]

yet another Bush hater heard from.

You say I’m a bush hater? You darn right I am. You doubt this war is about oil. What do you think production sharing agreements are all about? Well it is about British and American oil companies going into Iraq to pump oil and not having to hire Iraqis. It is about the majority of those TAX FREE profits going to said companies. It is about the COMPANIES and not the Iraqi government or people deciding when they have recouped their investment. When he invaded bush said we will not be occupiers, then why are we building a complex in Iraq BIGGER THAN THE VATICAN? You don’t build something that big unless you’re planning on staying a while.

The bush admin has lied to you my friend. He has lied to the American people to get us into this war so his oil buddies and halliburton friends could make a lot of money at the taxpayers’ expense. Why do you think bush made laws saying contractors in Iraq could not be sued? Fraud waste and abuse is what all the contractors in Iraq are all about. I’ve been there, I’ve seen it. Have you? You say bush never lied, ok let’s give you some examples. Condi Rice went in front of Congress and said they had aluminum tubes that can only be used to enrich nuclear material. Our own nuclear experts refuted that, and told the bush admin so. Yet she still went in front of Congress and LIED. Mobile chemical trucks to make WMD were a LIE. Collin Powell went in front of the UN knowing the story was probably not true, and LIED about it. He now admits he really thought those stories were false and now regrets doing so. Our liar in chief went in front of the American people and talked of yellow cake from Niger and aerial vehicles capable of spraying the US with chemical weapons. Both lies total lies and he knew it. That’s why he changed the words from American to British intelligence has found out. He knew it wasn’t true. Ever hear of Valerie Plame? Her husband told them it wasn’t true. Aerial vehicles, well if you call model airplanes that can’t fly more than 20 minutes w/o refueling a weapon capable of spraying the US with chemicals that makes you a LIAR. Need more? OK how about cheney. Insurgency in its last throws, rummy we know where they are, they are in areas north, south, east and west of Techrite, LIES. Mission accomplished on the air craft carrier, LIE. Oh and then his admin says the sailors put that banner up. Sure, they may have put it up but the bush admin brought it with them and told them to. Outing of a covert CIA operative, and then lying about it. Treating our injured soldiers like crap, and telling these soldiers they can’t talk about it. I was in building 18 in 1998. It had just been “re-done” then and it looked like crap. I’m sure 10 years later it is way worse. How can you send our soldiers to war and not equip them? You go to war with the Army you have huh rummy, well kiss my butt jerk off. You’re not the one dieing in un-armored hummers. So you say I hate bush, your darn right I do. I am and was a nurse when I served; I have seen what’s going on there. Have you? Yeah maybe you would hate the bastard too.


May I see your PhD in geology or any of the other sciences? Oh you don't have one. Oh well then by all means continue to challenge accepted scientific evidence. I'm sure you know better than those silly guys in the labcoats that do it for a living. Your reading the New York Times makes you much more qualified than those sillies.



Yes, because no other politicians are corrupt. Especially not Al Gore...

Your wisdom amazes me good sir. Where can I purchase some?

It's called an opinion. Never said it was fact. So until you learn how to read, I guess there is no hope for you.

[AirAssault]

Nice debating skills... from more than one person

The concept of this discussion is that Al Gore is a hypocrite. He preaches about conservation while practicing conspicuous consumption. The idiocy of his very vocal stance, when mirrored to his own actions, make the accuracy of his stances irrelevant. He preaches about global warming, and that it exists, and admonishes society as a whole for not taking steps to conserve or seek alternate means of consumption, while at the same time doing exactly that which he admonishes the rest of us for.

At least he is doing something. He is trying to do his part. He does not admonish any person. He simply is trying to let people know there is another way. He runs several different things from his home, not just a place to live. So if he had his house he lived in and a few office buildings to work out of would that make a difference for you? The man has been fighting for the environment pretty much from his teens until now. He is not a Johnny come lately, he has been living it.

[Lohman446]

At least he is doing something. He is trying to do his part. He does not admonish any person. He simply is trying to let people know there is another way. He runs several different things from his home, not just a place to live. So if he had his house he lived in and a few office buildings to work out of would that make a difference for you? The man has been fighting for the environment pretty much from his teens until now. He is not a Johnny come lately, he has been living it.

What does he run that accounts for the massive use of electricity? He has not been living it - his lifestyle says that.

[SlartyBartFast]

The idiocy of his very vocal stance, when mirrored to his own actions, make the accuracy of his stances irrelevant.

Just because a conservative right-wing politician that campaigns on Family values and staying faithful to your wife gets caught sleeping around does not disprove the virtue of monogamy and committed family life.

It only proves that that politician is a scum-bag.

Just as all the lying, cheating, choir boy molesting priests neither prove nor disprove anything about the sanctity of faith.

I expected better of you Lohman.

Unsurprisingly, none of the right-wing red neck contingent that is so vocal here on AO seems willing to comment on the links I provided.

While Bono and Al Gore campaign for worthy causes, I do find their pompous demands on the rest of us "normals" more than a little irritating. As rich people being paid outrageous amounts of money and living far beyond the means of the rest of us, they are more guilty than the rest of us when it comes to hogging the worlds resources.

However, personal disdain against them and their own wasteful ways aside, their measure of guilt or hypocrisy in no way allows us to neglect our responsibilities.

[Lohman446]

Just because a conservative right-wing politician that campaigns on Family values and staying faithful to your wife gets caught sleeping around does not disprove the virtue of monogamy and committed family life.

It only proves that that politician is a scum-bag.
.

Actually I'll agree with you 100% and admit to poor wording. His stance is not a poor stance, its just him making it so vocal, considering his lifestyle, is a problem. The scum-bag comment goes both ways :p

[AirAssault]

Actually I'll agree with you 100% and admit to poor wording. His stance is not a poor stance, its just him making it so vocal, considering his lifestyle, is a problem. The scum-bag comment goes both ways :p

Hey man I'll agree with that, they are all crooks.

[Recon by Fire]

I’ve been there, I’ve seen it. Have you?


Yes, I have and I respectfully disagree with you. You have spouted more lies than you accuse the Bush Administration of.


Opinions, like... well, you know....


:cheers:

[ntn4502]

May I see your PhD in geology or any of the other sciences? Oh you don't have one. Oh well then by all means continue to challenge accepted scientific evidence. I'm sure you know better than those silly guys in the labcoats that do it for a living. Your reading the New York Times makes you much more qualified than those sillies.



OOOO! I'm one of those silly guys in labcoats(actually cleansuits), care to crap all over my work/living?

[AO Moderation Team]

Avoid topics containing religious, racial, or political discussion (they are the top three flame starting toipcs)