Al Gore goes brown

[Locutus]

It's hypocrites like this 'lecturer' on environmental geography, biology and such that really have to watch what they preach. Do as he says, not as he does. Remember his house?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801823.html

http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/02/al_gores_house.php

Well now he's doing what that loudmouth Bonehead (I mean Bono) does...zooms around in big Gulfstream jets. Outstanding. His Reservoir Rats name is officially changed from Mr. Green to Mr. Brown.

http://www.drudgereport.com/gore.htm

 

[wallyj]

There is no doubt that the goracle will buy carbon offsets to neutralize his pollution. After all,he does run a company that deals in "CARBON OFFSETS". His concern for the enviroment is making him a very rich man,and alot of people are buying into his scam.

 

[YoungJoonKim]

I love when people start to criticize about a person that says things, mostly from right-wing media.
I agree, let's do it.
Why not?
Liberals do it, everybody does it.
Michael Moore does it too (liberal)
Everybody loves their private life after all.

 

[Extrafire]

Yeah, here's how Al and his friends do it:

Remember the Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore global-warming pitch at the Academy Awards? Before they spoke, the screen at the back of the stage flashed not-so-subliminal messages about how to save the planet. My personal favorite was "Ride mass transit." This to a conclave of Hollywood plutocrats who have not seen the inside of a subway since the moon landing and for whom mass transit means a stretch limo seating no fewer than 10.
Leo and Al then portentously announced that for the first time ever, the Academy Awards ceremony had gone green. What did that mean? Solar panels in the designer gowns? It turns out that the Academy neutralized the evening's "carbon footprint" by buying carbon credits. That means it sent money to a "carbon broker," who promised, after taking his cut, to reduce carbon emissions somewhere on the planet equivalent to what the stars spewed into the atmosphere while flying in on their private planes.
In other words, the rich reduce their carbon output by not one ounce. But drawing on the hundreds of millions of net worth in the Kodak Theatre, they pull out lunch money to buy ecological indulgences. The last time the selling of pardons was prevalent--in a predecessor religion to environmentalism called Christianity--Martin Luther lost his temper and launched the Reformation.
A very few of the very rich have some awareness of the emptiness--if not the medieval corruption--of ransoming one's sins. Sergey Brin, zillionaire founder of Google, buys carbon credits to offset the ghastly amount of carbon dioxide emitted by Google's private Boeing 767 but confesses he's not sure if it really does anything.
Which puts him one step ahead of most other eco-preeners who actually pretend that it does--the Goracle himself, for example. His Tennessee mansion consumes 20 times the electricity used by the average American home. Last August alone it consumed twice as much power as the average home consumes in a year. Gore buys absolution, however. He spends pocket change on carbon credits, which then allow him to pollute conscience-free.
What is wrong with this scam? First, purchasing carbon credits is an incentive to burn even more fossil fuels, since now it is done under the illusion that it's really cost-free to the atmosphere.
Second, it is a way for the rich to export the real costs and sacrifices of pollution control to the poorer segments of humanity in the Third World. (Apparently, Hollywood's plan is to make up for that by adopting every last one of their children.) For example, GreenSeat, a Dutch carbon-trading outfit, buys offsets from a foundation that plants trees in Uganda's Mount Elgon National Park to soak up the carbon emissions of its rich Western patrons. Small problem: expanding the park encroaches on land traditionally used by local farmers. As a result, reports the New York Times, "villagers living along the boundary of the park have been beaten and shot at, and their livestock has been confiscated by armed park rangers." All this so that swimming pools can be heated and Maseratis driven with a clear conscience in the fattest parts of the world.
The other form of carbon trading is to get Third World companies to cut their emissions to offset Western pollution. The reason this doesn't work--and why the carbon racket is a farce--is that you need a cap for cap-and-trade to work. Sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S. were capped, and the trading system succeeded in reducing acid rain by half. But even the Kyoto treaty doesn't put any cap on greenhouse gases in China and India, where billions of these carbon credits are traded. Sure, you can pretend you're offsetting Western greenhouse pollution by supposedly cleaning up a dirty coal plant in China. But China is adding a new coal plant every week. You could build a particularly dirty "uncapped" power plant, then sell hundreds of millions in carbon credits to reduce it to a normal rate of pollution. The result? The polluter gets very rich. The planet continues to cook. And the Gores of the world can feel virtuous as they burn up the local power grid.
If Gore really wants to save the planet, he can try this: Turn off the lights. Ditch the heated pool. Ride the subway. And spare us the carbon-trading piety.

 

[talloola]

We are 'all' guilty of leaving our 'carbon' footprint behind, and we all arrived at this place in time
together. Now Gore is being criticized for speaking out in a 'helpful' way. It should be the homeless,
who have nothing, who should be the ones speaking out 'I guess', as they don't have anything at all, the rest of us are 'all' guilty.

It has to start somewhere, give the guy/guys a chance. What have you done lately, but criticize.

 

[gopher]

A lot of people are dying via suicide bombings, are crossing the border into foreign lands, and the USA is going broke because of Gore's action.;-)

!!IMPEACH GORE!!

 

[Extrafire]

We are 'all' guilty of leaving our 'carbon' footprint behind, and we all arrived at this place in time
together. Now Gore is being criticized for speaking out in a 'helpful' way. It should be the homeless,
who have nothing, who should be the ones speaking out 'I guess', as they don't have anything at all, the rest of us are 'all' guilty.

It has to start somewhere, give the guy/guys a chance. What have you done lately, but criticize.

Except that Gore isn't speaking out in a "helpful" way. He's conning suckers. If he really believed what he preaches he'd reduce his personal lifestyle to what he wants us to do with ours.

 

[Curiosity]

Posted this in August - fits in here too


Green Houses

House #1 A 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms ) heated by
natural gas. Add on a pool ( and a pool house) and a separate guest
house, all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more
energy than the average American household does in a year. The
average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In
natural gas alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the
national average for an American home. This house is not situated
in a Northern or Midwester n "snow belt" area. It's in the South.


House #2 Designed by an architecture professor at a
leading national university. This house incorporates every
"green" feature current home construction can provide. The house is
4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a high prairie in
the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal
heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the
ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F. ) heats the house in the
winter and cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as
oil or natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a
conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is
collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater
from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then
into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land
surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area
enable the property to blend into the surrounding rural landscape.

~~~~~
HOUSE #1 is outside of Nashville, Tennessee; it is the abode of
the "environmentalist" Al Gore.

HOUSE #2 is on a ranch near Crawford,
Texas; it is the residence of the President of the United States,
George W. Bush.

An "inconvenient truth".

You can check it out here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

 

[CDNBear]

But Curio...???

GW is an a Nazi GHG spewing "A" hole...AlBore is a peace loving pro AGW shill...

However could this be true???

 

[Curiosity]

Bear - if I knew the answer ....

I will write something which some may take issue with.

It comes down to the bare fact of life:

Bush already had money - will have money - still has money and has time to make more money - he is still a relatively youthful man.

Gore is a youthful man but is not accomplished in working at a real job - his life has been politics - and he inherited the same desires as his father before him, but he doesn't have the money - didn't have the money - has to earn more money - and to support his lifestyle will take on a cause in order
to make more money.

I am sorry but Green and GW is all about money - sick isn't it?

The only way we can adjust our thinking on this important topic is to take responsibility for our own contributions or as the media write: carbon footprint - and do the best we can within reason along with insisting corporate manufacturing and future invention respect that necessity or they will be
out of business.

 

[CDNBear]

Who could take issue with that?

Common sense, rational, reasonable...

oh ya the left.

 

[talloola]

Sure it is ieasy to point the finger, so, it seems that, Gore was not suppose to speak up for anything
at all, just fade into the background.
It doesn't matter what his lifestyle is, but with time, and all of us paying attention to the condition of
our earth, we can all learn how to look after it 'better', instead of taking issue of Gore, or anyone.

If George Bush suddenly spoke up with 'concrete' plans to improve our earth environmentally, I would
have to give him credit, even though I 'hate' his guts for all of his other terrible moves.

I just can't disagree with everyone who isn't with me, 'politically', or people who have accumulated lots
of money over the years, as it is those people who also have the ability to do something positive with
their wealth, eg. Gates.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

Gore beats the hell out of Bush who's only real objective in life seems to be to get as much oil into production at the highest price possible.

Bush and buddies are literally making a killing while Gore is travelling the world and doing his best to bring awareness of the effect of our activities. And looking Presidential in a way Bush never has in the process.

 

[Extrafire]

Gore beats the hell out of Bush who's only real objective in life seems to be to get as much oil into production at the highest price possible.

Bush and buddies are literally making a killing while Gore is travelling the world and doing his best to bring awareness of the effect of our activities. And looking Presidential in a way Bush never has in the process.

:lol:Gore is conning a lot of suckers who totally ignore his hypocracy. If he really believed what he preaches he would practice it. Instead he travels the world, massively increasing his personal emissions, telling middle class and poor people they have to cut back, but he doesn't! And he's making a bundle at it, soon to be a billionaire.

And who was it that was in power when Kyoto was signed? Oh yeah, Clinton and Gore, and Gore is on film stating firmly that the US would not ratify unless all nations had to do the same. Completely different tune then.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

:lol:Gore is conning a lot of suckers who totally ignore his hypocracy. If he really believed what he preaches he would practice it. Instead he travels the world, massively increasing his personal emissions, telling middle class and poor people they have to cut back, but he doesn't! And he's making a bundle at it, soon to be a billionaire.

And who was it that was in power when Kyoto was signed? Oh yeah, Clinton and Gore, and Gore is on film stating firmly that the US would not ratify unless all nations had to do the same. Completely different tune then.

We'd probably have broken our dependency on fossil fuels if people had listened to Gore decades ago, he's not new to this fight and he's hardly insincere. he just gets painted that way by those whos wealth he threatens. The same nonsense to discredit him that was going on then is still going on now.

Gore was the driving force behind raising the CO2 limits in Kyoto from 7% to 15% below 1992 levels. And what he said was Congress would never ratify the treaty because of the strength of the oil industry lobby, the same people who are making $billions from the product causing the problem.

I don't hear anyone here complaining about that, just attacking the man most responsible for fighting to limit their effect.

 

[Walter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51L6kvaxMBk&eurl=http://www.junkscience.com/

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

So Gore has a plane.

The man the US Supreme Court appointed to take his place as President in 2000 has an entire airforce in operation in Iraq and other places fighting to aquire one of the largest oil reserves in the world and burning emmense amounts of fossil fuel in the process.

This is just a continuation of the corporate hackjob that's been done on Gore for years to discredit him because of his stand for the environment.

He's not perfect but he's worlds better than the power-hungry cliche that illegally replaced him.

 

[talloola]

We'd probably have broken our dependency on fossil fuels if people had listened to Gore decades ago, he's not new to this fight and he's hardly insincere. he just gets painted that way by those whos wealth he threatens. The same nonsense to discredit him that was going on then is still going on now.

Gore was the driving force behind raising the CO2 limits in Kyoto from 7% to 15% below 1992 levels. And what he said was Congress would never ratify the treaty because of the strength of the oil industry lobby, the same people who are making $billions from the product causing the problem.

I don't hear anyone here complaining about that, just attacking the man most responsible for fighting to limit their effect.

I'm thankful for some common sense, facts, and fairness.
All of the horrible things Bush has done, it s unbelievable to me, that anyone would spend so much time and energy trying to discredit Gore, who has shown helpful input for the environment, while Bush is spending all of the U.S. money on the killing of thousands and thousands of innocent people, in a war that was totally illegitmate to begin with.

 

[Extrafire]

We'd probably have broken our dependency on fossil fuels if people had listened to Gore decades ago, he's not new to this fight and he's hardly insincere. he just gets painted that way by those whos wealth he threatens. The same nonsense to discredit him that was going on then is still going on now.

Al Gore is an opportunist. He used to speak in support of the NRA, but when he decided to run for prez he told them that he was switching sides because it would help his bid to be for gun control. His 1993 book Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit (for which he was described as a nut) was part of that preparation for the presidential run. (He re-issued it just before the 2000 election in a blatant attempt to curry the enviro vote) And speaking of wealth, check this out:

Media Ignore Al Gore’s Financial Ties to Global Warming

By Noel Sheppard | March 2, 2007 - 10:58 ET
As NewsBusters reported here, here, and here, there are huge dollars to be made from global warming alarmism. However, conceivably no one is better positioned to financially benefit from this scam than Dr. Global Warming himself, former Vice President Al Gore, a fact that the media will surely not share with Americans any time soon.

Yet, if America’s press would take some time out of their busy schedules covering the earth-shattering details surrounding Anna Nicole Smith’s demise, they might find a deliciously inconvenient truth about the soon-to-be-Dr. Gore that is significantly more fascinating and diabolical than anything likely to emerge from that courtroom in Broward County, Florida.

As reported by Dan Riehl (emphasis mine throughout):

Former Vice President Al Gore has built a Green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms. And the US portion is headed up by a former Gore staffer and fund raiser who previously ran afoul of both the FEC and the DOJ, before Janet Reno jumped in and shut down an investigation during the Clinton years.
.
.
So, as Dr. Global Warming travels the world in his private jet while spending 20 times the average American on energy for his home, all the time telling us its okay because he’s buying carbon offsets, he’s actually purchasing these investments from himself.
Furthermore, and maybe more important, Gore stands to benefit financially in a potentially huge way if more and more people buy into this junk science.
LINK FOR REST OF ARTICLE

Gore was the driving force behind raising the CO2 limits in Kyoto from 7% to 15% below 1992 levels.

15% below 1992 levels???8O Where do you get this stuff? For someone so concerned I would think you'd at least know what the accord was about.

It's 5% below 1990 levels (except for Canada which is 6% below 1990 levels because Cretien insisted that we had to do more than the US). Why 1990 levels? Why not just say "We have to lower emissions to 10% before todays levels"? (The accord was agreed to in 1997. Why did they choose 1990 as the benchmark? Quite simple really, it wasn't about global warming:

Margaret Wallstrom now the EU vice president of EU communications, said with utmost clarity, "Kyoto was about hobbling America's economy, to give socialist Europe a fighting chance".

There were a lot of changes around 1990 that made it quite easy (they thought) for most European nations to make their reductions. England was in the process of converting much of their power plants from coal to gas. Germany re-united and shut down the awful, inefficient, polluting East German industry, much of Russia's inefficient industry shut down, France was in the process of converting most of their power generation from coal to nuclear (now around 80%) etc. They had a head start if they used 1990 as a benchmark. If they'd used 1997 when many of their emissions had already been reduced, they'd have just as much trouble as the US and Canada in meeting their targets. It was all politics and economics.

And what he said was Congress would never ratify the treaty because of the strength of the oil industry lobby, the same people who are making $billions from the product causing the problem.

What he said was:

We will not submit this for ratification until there's meaningful participation by key developing nations.

Watch him say it on video (3:54 min/sec in) - Al Gore, 1997

I don't hear anyone here complaining about that, just attacking the man most responsible for fighting to limit their effect.

Gore is making mega-bucks on this panic. He's demanding that you and I reduce our lifestyle significantly to "save the world" yet he refuses to do the same himself. Do you really think if he believed what he preaches he wouldn't do all he could personally?

“There are hundreds of thousands of people who adore you and would follow your example by reducing their energy usage if you did. Don’t give us the run-around on carbon offsets or the gimmicks the wealthy do,” Senator Inhofe told Gore.

“Are you willing to make a commitment here today by taking this pledge to consume no more energy for use in your residence than the average American household by one year from today?” Senator Inhofe asked.

Senator Inhofe then presented Vice President Gore with the following "Personal Energy Ethics Pledge:

As a believer:
· that human-caused global warming is a moral, ethical, and spiritual issue affecting our survival;

· that home energy use is a key component of overall energy use;

· that reducing my fossil fuel-based home energy usage will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions; and

· that leaders on moral issues should lead by example;

I pledge to consume no more energy for use in my residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008.”


Gore refused to take the pledge. US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

 

[Locutus]

The point is, this definitive mediahoar is a hypocrite.