AlBore's Inconvenient Lies

[Tonington]

You're right of course Curio. I thought once upon a time it would be great to have more relevance placed on this issue. Sadly as it has come to the forefront the message has been lost in a sea of one-upmanship, polemic and heavy handed tacticians spinning their webs.

I've seen it brought up in here, I've brought this up as well, it's pollution. Whethor we can stop the trend completely (not likely) is irrelevant. The issue is the matter by which we are managing our house. Do we continue to treat it like crap and leave a mess for our progeny? What a legacy....

 

[I think not]

When scientists turn science into politics, who do the people go to for science?

 

[Curiosity]

There are both bad and good scientists as there are in all walks of life

The scientific community's goal should not be financial - and if they are suffering for lack of funding for their research in the area of the future of this planet, they should be relieved of that burden.

It is imperative all people learn personal responsibility, manufacturers learn eco-friendly packaging,
growers re-learn what we have forgotten in the name of commercial enterprise...

We can all demand in our own personal arenas the use of non-toxic products and construction and transportation methods - personal planning in the use of the family auto, many ways are already
being used.

Davis, CA has housing build around green space and walkways and parks where the automobile is a sometime method of transportation rather than a necessity the way many people live now. The little town has been doing some great research in pollution mitigation...

It is up to the people to view personal change as a step forward than a cause of 'deprivation' which most view ecology and pollution mitigation as some kind of punishment.

If corporations stand firm and refuse to change their manufacturing habits...the public has a powerful voice in passing over their products. The public might be surprised at the power they do have once they give it a combined voice. Not in protest, but in silent denial or purchase.

And the last biggie... alternative fuel energy sources. The big one. We can do it. It might even be fun to break the walls of that prison we are in down for good!!

 

[Curiosity]

ITN

Scientific success depends upon loads of funding and serendipity of discovery.

Corporations often create weaknesses out of the scientific community and we have to find ways to counter these influences so that the scientists and researchers are free of coercion.

These people should be our heros - not the folk who parade around making speeches to get their names in print and their faces on camera yet once again because they must keep advertising themselves.

AlBore winning and Oscar is a prime example of what the 'whoring adulation' has become. The once proud Nobel Prize has sunk into the morass of political and commercial influence.

Considering populations of informed people - these gasbags are a blip on the screen of numbers - and if the public as a majority want to change things - they might want to start soon - getting their own information from reliable sources - not the Snake Oil Circus which we follow - ineptly titled a Global Warming Movement...when the only hot air being created is from the celebrity activists.

 

[#juan]

ITN

Scientific success depends upon loads of funding and serendipity of discovery.

Corporations often create weaknesses out of the scientific community and we have to find ways to counter these influences so that the scientists and researchers are free of coercion.

These people should be our heros - not the folk who parade around making speeches to get their names in print and their faces on camera yet once again because they must keep advertising themselves.

AlBore winning and Oscar is a prime example of what the 'whoring adulation' has become. The once proud Nobel Prize has sunk into the morass of political and commercial influence.

Considering populations of informed people - these gasbags are a blip on the screen of numbers - and if the public as a majority want to change things - they might want to start soon - getting their own information from reliable sources - not the Snake Oil Circus which we follow - ineptly titled a Global Warming Movement...when the only hot air being created is from the celebrity activists.

The IPCC scientists are hardly "snake oil" salesmen. As an engineer I can follow the science of the IPCC and I find nothing wrong with it.. There is also nothing wrong with the science of Al Gore's presentations. The only question is, "how much of global warming is caused by man's handiwork", and how much is caused by some other, yet to be named process. There is no doubt that climate change is happening. Can we ignore the fact that that the increase in the millions upon millions of tons of CO2 that we are pumping into the atmosphere, kind of lines up with the increase in global temperatures? Until someone comes up with a better story, this is what we have.

 

[tracy]

Solution to what problem?

Environmental issues in general. People pay lip service to alternative energy sources while they advocate drilling in Alaska to get more oil. People may be able to deny global warming, but they certainly can't deny the harm using all this oil causes us. But the neither side of the political spectrum will really tackle that issue cause oil = money. Maybe I'm just extremely naive, but I find it hard to believe all the amazing scientists we have in the western world couldn't come up with a better way to run a car. If we invested the resources into that goal that we do into other things, I believe we'd have a solution pronto. But we won't, will we? Nevermind the benefits it would bring, better to focus on the politics involved.

 

[tracy]

Nobody wants Global Warming - nobody wants the environment where one will have to wear face masks in order to venture outside a fully air conditioned home so breathing can continue to live.

We all want healthy lives. This is not an argument and not even much of a debate.
.

I think that's absolutely true. I just think most politicians don't care enough to do enough about it. California probably leads the nation in environmental concern. I've read about some great things here like you pointed out. I just want more. I want to be able to drive into LA in some sort of futuristic environmentally sound car without seeing any smog .

 

[EagleSmack]

So which politician would be willing to sign a pledge like this? Just curious...

Probably not many but it is Gore that is running about telling the world of the Planetary Emergency. He is exposing himself day after day.

There is a new article out on Zinc Mining that will be happening on Gore's land. As the article goes, Zinc mining releases toxic chemicals into the environment. Gore has had Zinc mined on his land before and the mining company has released tons of toxic chemicals into the ground and water. A new venture wants to start up again and Gore is going to let them. Enviornmentalist have asked Gore to stop this as we all know mining of any sort is not healthy to the environment. But Gore tends to gain $500,000+ for allowing the new mining venture.

Do you think the environment is more important than Gore's bank account? Not a bit.

 

[EagleSmack]

You know, Gore set himself up by doing what he is doing. Now the naysayers want him to jump through their hoops so they can make political points. Gore is right not to play their games. Gore has said he was adding solar panels, and adding insulation, and doing things to make his homes more efficient. Call him a liar if you want, but how many other politicians are willing to sign thes pledge? So what if they do. Gore has done more to raise awareness of GHG and global warming than anyone else in the world. If Gore was a republican, his picture would be on cereal boxes. It might be yet.

But we the unwashed masses must play Gore's game?

I think my next vehicle will be an SUV now. My carbon credit will be when I reseed the lawn this spring.

 

[CDNBear]

Mindless regurgitation of the Bush doctrine Bear

At least partly because of Gore, every country in the world now has a global warming policy or agenda, not to please Gore, or to make Gore rich, but to address a problem that is physically making itself known around this planet by the melting of the polar ice and dramatically warmer weather. The polar ice is melting to an extent that is unknown in our history. Global warming is happening. A majority of meteorological scientists think that the billions of tons of CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere every year has something to do with it.

by CDNBear

And I'm never surprised that you argue on a subject you know nothing about.

Ah the cry of the pro Kyoto club, if you aren't with us, you know nothing. You really aren't that much different from the "If you aren't with us, you agins't us" war on terror crowd juan.

Good to see you're human after all.

I think environmental problems are the right's equivalent to the war in Iraq for the left. They hate the politician so much that they don't really care much about a solution to the problem.

I don't hate Gore, I distrust him, as I do with all politicians. Especially when the man is caught lying through his teeth in his movie, then refuses to sign a document that would more or less force him to pull the same weight he asks his followers too.

Solution to what problem? The problem is that the sun (according to reports in papers last week) has warmed up not only the rest of the planets in the solar system but ours as well?

This warming has increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere since the ocean is the largest source of CO2 and when warmed released more of it. Since the ocean covers 2/3 of the surface of the earth and holds the vast majority of the CO2; can you really still believe that man's influence is any moe than a frictional influence on this warming?

Check out some politically inconvenient science;

http://friendsofscience.org/index.php

Check out the correlation of sunspot activity and temperature anomolies. Compare this with the CO2 levels and judge which two lines foloow each other.

Gore and Suzuki - Prophets for Profit

Hmmm, food for thought. You'll find few are hungry in the pro AGW crowd my friend.

 

[CDNBear]

The IPCC scientists are hardly "snake oil" salesmen. As an engineer I can follow the science of the IPCC and I find nothing wrong with it.. There is also nothing wrong with the science of Al Gore's presentations. The only question is, "how much of global warming is caused by man's handiwork", and how much is caused by some other, yet to be named process. There is no doubt that climate change is happening. Can we ignore the fact that that the increase in the millions upon millions of tons of CO2 that we are pumping into the atmosphere, kind of lines up with the increase in global temperatures? Until someone comes up with a better story, this is what we have.

Yes juan, you are so smart that you find nothing wrong with Gores movie, yet the pretty graph he showed was a lie.

CO2 did not precede the temp increase, the temp increase prededed the CO2.

Please explain how there is nothing wrong with that piece of inaccuracy and then again how because you're an engineer, that somehow makes you so much smarter then those that understand the difference between fact and fiction.

 

[#juan]

Ah the cry of the pro Kyoto club, if you aren't with us, you know nothing. You really aren't that much different from the "If you aren't with us, you agins't us" war on terror crowd juan.

The difference is that time and time again, you, and others of your ilk have been given the chance to tell us what is causing global warming if it is not the increase in CO2/GHG. You've only come up with a few copy and paste pages of the latest denier's dung that has been shot down in flames. If you have any new pertinent information, let's see it.

 

[CDNBear]

The difference is that time and time again, you, and others of your ilk have been given the chance to tell us what is causing global warming if it is not the increase in CO2/GHG. You've only come up with a few copy and paste pages of the latest denier's dung that has been shot down in flames. If you have any new pertinent information, let's see it.

I've posted material from NASA the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, acclaimed climatologists.

Nothing is good enough for those that have no hunger for facts.

Global Warming is real, AGW is not proven. If climatology was a prove, written in stone science, the weather man would never be wrong. But don't let the truth rain on your parade juan.

 

[tracy]

I don't hate Gore, I distrust him, as I do with all politicians. Especially when the man is caught lying through his teeth in his movie, then refuses to sign a document that would more or less force him to pull the same weight he asks his followers to.

I'm sure people on the left say the same thing about Bush:smile: I still think those are petty considerations that distract from the real issue (remember, the environment?). Yeah, Gore sucks. He doesn't live well enough, he's a big old hypocrite... the next part of that is never "but this is what I think we should do to protect the environment:....". That's what I long to hear.

 

[#juan]

I've posted material from NASA the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, acclaimed climatologists.

Nothing is good enough for those that have no hunger for facts.

Global Warming is real, AGW is not proven. If climatology was a prove, written in stone science, the weather man would never be wrong. But don't let the truth rain on your parade juan.

Again, you are confusing climate with weather. IPCC represnt the top climatologists from a hundred and thirty countries. IPCC are the experts.....period.

 

[CDNBear]

I'm sure people on the left say the same thing about Bush:smile: I still think those are petty considerations that distract from the real issue (remember, the environment?). Yeah, Gore sucks. He doesn't live well enough, he's a big old hypocrite... the next part of that is never "but this is what I think we should do to protect the environment:....". That's what I long to hear.

You can say whatever you want about Bush, the man is an asshat.

I've said it tracy, there is a serious issue with the environment, it does not all hinge on the AGW. There are more accute issues that have people at risk at this very moment.

The environment as a whole needs to be addressed, not one aspect, who's detriment is based on a theory.

Again, you are confusing climate with weather. IPCC represnt the top climatologists from a hundred and thirty countries. IPCC are the experts.....period.

So experts that dissagree with the findings and find fault in the IPCC are not experts???

btw, that was a wise crack about he weather juan.

Why did you ignore my remark on Gores inaccurate portrail of the graph he uses in AIT?

Why have scientists threatend legal action to have their names removed from preceding IPCC reports?

Why have scientists approached for data been reluctant to submit it?

Why have some scientists accused the IPCC of manipulating their contributions?

I don't deny GW is real, I just find it hard to swallow the AGW theory, when it is so contensious.

 

[#juan]

Energy MIT experts side with 'Truth'

Al Gore would be pleased to hear that "An Inconvenient Truth," his documentary on global climate change, passed the MIT test. Ernest J. Moniz, director of the MIT Energy Initiative, and Peter H. Stone, professor of climate dynamics at the MIT Center for Global Change Science, declared that Gore did "a fine job framing the problem."





I have seen lots of criticism of Al Gore himself but very little criticism of the science in his movie.

 

[CDNBear]

Energy MIT experts side with 'Truth'

Al Gore would be pleased to hear that "An Inconvenient Truth," his documentary on global climate change, passed the MIT test. Ernest J. Moniz, director of the MIT Energy Initiative, and Peter H. Stone, professor of climate dynamics at the MIT Center for Global Change Science, declared that Gore did "a fine job framing the problem."





I have seen lots of criticism of Al Gore himself but very little criticism of the science in his movie.

I beg to differ, I have attempted to hilte the missinformation many times, just because it serves you better to ignore it and maintain your belief that I must somehow be ignorant to deny the AGW myth, does not mean I haven't attacked his science.

I have asked you twice now, what about the graph that is an outright lie, heat increase precedes CO2 increase, but in the video, he claims it to be in reverse???

Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.​

Explain that comment by Gore. He admits over representing facts.​

I'm not disputing the facts, I'm disputing as I have been for quite sometime, though you continuously fail to grasp, the AGW theory and the motives of the Kyoto protocol.​

 

[#juan]

I have asked you twice now, what about the graph that is an outright lie, heat increase precedes CO2 increase, but in the video, he claims it to be in reverse???

The notion that the climate warms before the CO2 increase is laughable. Where has the 25 trillion tons of CO2 we've emitted gone, ? Sure, some of it is absorbed by oceans and plants, but not all of it. The fact is we've had an almost linear increase in CO2 since the Industrial Revolution.

 

[CDNBear]

The notion that the climate warms before the CO2 increase is laughable. Where has the 25 trillion tons of CO2 we've emitted gone, ? Sure, some of it is absorbed by oceans and plants, but not all of it. The fact is we've had an almost linear increase in CO2 since the Industrial Revolution.

And I agree, but what I am referring to is the graph in Gores video, the historical graph. It has already been proven, his assertion was false.

Paleoclimatologist Professor Ian Clark ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Clark ), proves that the CO2 followed the increase in temperature, from ice core samples, not the opposite as Gore claims.

The increase in CO2 actually came approx. 800 years after the rise in global temps. He also, does not deny the substantial increase in CO2 in the atmosphere, he just debates its effect on climate change. But I guess he's just an oil industry shill too?