Page 1 of 2
Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:32 pmby Harijan
Now that A.G. has completely raped and destroyed one of the most sacred awards on the planet, I expect that any day he will throw his hat in the presidential ring. Lets pause for a moment and take a look at Big Al.
1. Despite being the "environmental champion", the Gore mansion in Tennessee uses as much power as 10 average homes each year. Big Al claims that he offsets this by buying energy credits. However, he buys the energy credits from a company that he owns.
2. Al Gore recently declared Global Warming a "settled science". It is nice that the laws of physics are still being questioned; evolution is not widely accepted; even gravity is still a theory, but we know for sure that global warming is for sure, 100% a closed issue.
3. A recent book "Cool It" was written calling into question the impact of global warming and whether or not the world should spend trillions of dollars to stop carbon emissions. The author of Cool It has been scheduled to debate Big Al 3 times. All 3 times Big Al has backed out of the debate.
4. The errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvient Truth" have been well documented.
5. Big Al suggested that thousands of scientist got together at the U.N. and decided that Global Warming is, in fact, happening. When was the last time a 1,000 scientist agreed on anything? The actual vote that was taken on the Global Warming issue included 12 people, some of which are not actually scientist, but politicians.
6. But hey, he did invent the internet.
Don't be duped. Global warming is an issue, but no one knows just how big of an issue it is, how bad it is going to get, or even whether or not this warming trend is a historical anomoly. Big Al is just playing on world environmental sympathy for when he throws his hat in the ring this time around.
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:36 pmby Anarkistsdream
You know... I know this will cause a lot of people to get pissed, but hear me out.
First off, I'm unbiased... I don't like or dislike Gore.
HOWEVER, some of the worlds most profoundly intelligently and highly educated scientists agree with him. Quite a few, in fact.
You are right, harijan, we have no idea how big the prob is, but we do know that it is a problem, and for Gore to try and make a difference is a good thing, regardless of what his intentions are.
If he helps sway people to use less petroleum and other fossil fuels, then regardless of WHY he did it, it was a good thing.
Also, I am going to believe the scientists and other professionals that have more knowledge than ANYONE in this forum. If they agree with him, than so do I. maybe not blindly 100%, but trust nonetheless.
I still wouldn't vote for him, though, unless he was against Quail or Cheney or someone.
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:38 pmby Coleman
I'd vote anyone over Guiliani. But that's a bit off topic.
I know we managed to make someone who posted number 1 on your list before look like the world's dumbest person, but I forget what evidence was used and I'm too lazy to look it up.
The rest is relatively valid points though for sure.
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:16 pmby Titanic
Harijan wrote:Now that A.G. has completely raped and destroyed one of the most sacred awards on the planet, I expect that any day he will throw his hat in the presidential ring. Lets pause for a moment and take a look at Big Al.
1. Despite being the "environmental champion", the Gore mansion in Tennessee uses as much power as 10 average homes each year. Big Al claims that he offsets this by buying energy credits. However, he buys the energy credits from a company that he owns.
2. Al Gore recently declared Global Warming a "settled science". It is nice that the laws of physics are still being questioned; evolution is not widely accepted; even gravity is still a theory, but we know for sure that global warming is for sure, 100% a closed issue.
3. A recent book "Cool It" was written calling into question the impact of global warming and whether or not the world should spend trillions of dollars to stop carbon emissions. The author of Cool It has been scheduled to debate Big Al 3 times. All 3 times Big Al has backed out of the debate.
4. The errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvient Truth" have been well documented.
5. Big Al suggested that thousands of scientist got together at the U.N. and decided that Global Warming is, in fact, happening. When was the last time a 1,000 scientist agreed on anything? The actual vote that was taken on the Global Warming issue included 12 people, some of which are not actually scientist, but politicians.
6. But hey, he did invent the internet.
Don't be duped. Global warming is an issue, but no one knows just how big of an issue it is, how bad it is going to get, or even whether or not this warming trend is a historical anomoly. Big Al is just playing on world environmental sympathy for when he throws his hat in the ring this time around.
For point 5, wtf are you on about. Read about the IPCC, I think its their 6th report thats the most recent and important one. Its approved by over 100 governments and hundreds of scientists.
As to point 6, you Americans will never get over the internet being a British invention will you?
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:50 pmby sully800
Harijan wrote:4. The errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvient Truth" have been well documented.
No, the errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" have
not been well documented.
Do you like the support I have provided for my argument?
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:55 pmby Carebian Knight
It's a fact that Al Gore has a lot of stock in the oil business. Why would you tell people that oil is bad, then buy stock which would be supporting it? Either he's lying or he's one of the stupidest people in the world.
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:58 pmby Titanic
What I dont get it why he won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:06 pmby silvanricky
I've noticed lately that the people who kept saying there's Global Warming are now slowly transitioning to the phrase Global Climate Change.
I don't keep up on this issue as much as I should. Does anyone know why the term 'climate change' is being substituted for 'warming'?
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:24 pmby Titanic
silvanricky wrote:I've noticed lately that the people who kept saying there's Global Warming are now slowly transitioning to the phrase Global Climate Change.
I don't keep up on this issue as much as I should. Does anyone know why the term 'climate change' is being substituted for 'warming'?
I've never heard the term Global Climate Change, but Global Warming and Climate Change are generally replaceable with each other because they refer to the same thing.
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:27 pmby Hitman079
Harijan wrote:1. Despite being the "environmental champion", the Gore mansion in Tennessee uses as much power as 10 average homes each year. Big Al claims that he offsets this by buying energy credits. However, he buys the energy credits from a company that he owns.
let us elaborate.
[quote=wikipedia]In 2007, Gore came under criticism from the conservative think tank Tennessee Center for Policy Research.The organization issued a report which said that during August 2006 Gore's household consumed 22,619 kilowatt-hours — more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year.[/quote]
so, with math, he uses as much as 24 american homes a year?
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:35 pmby xtratabasco
what does this all mean????
it means more taxes.
there was a bill put forth last week to raise gas by 50 cents a gallon and people with houses over 3800 square feet cannot deduct their house payment off their taxes each year, about 3,000 a year for most folks.
This is supposed to be the money to fight global warning.
get ready folks, more taxes are coming and the fear mongering has just begun.
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:21 pmby Harijan
Titanic wrote:silvanricky wrote:I've noticed lately that the people who kept saying there's Global Warming are now slowly transitioning to the phrase Global Climate Change.
I don't keep up on this issue as much as I should. Does anyone know why the term 'climate change' is being substituted for 'warming'?
I've never heard the term Global Climate Change, but Global Warming and Climate Change are generally replaceable with each other because they refer to the same thing.
Close, the real problem is that while global warming is anticipated to raise average temperatures worldwide by approximately 4 degrees F. This is not a universal 4 degree temperature increase. There are different models that suggest different warming patterns. The one I am most familiar with suggest that the farther you move from the equater the more temperature increase will be observed. So hypothetically the Arctic will warm up 16 degrees while the equater will not see observable temperature increases.
In addition, different regions will experience different climate changes. Some areas will actually get more rainfall and lower average temperatures due to the changing weather patterns that are a side effect of global warming.
Climate Change is just a much more accurate phrase.
Source for Sully cause he is keeping me honest:
Cool It Chapter 1.
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:24 pmby Harijan
sully800 wrote:Harijan wrote:4. The errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvient Truth" have been well documented.
No, the errors and flaws in Big Al's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" have
not been well documented.
Do you like the support I have provided for my argument?
Richard S. Lindzen, an atmospheric physicist at MIT and anthropogenic global warming skeptic, wrote in a June 26, 2006 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that Gore was using a biased presentation to exploit the fears of the public for his own political gain. [67] Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the Earth System Science Center of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, wrote an open letter to Gore criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film, asserting that the Arctic had a similar temperature in the 1930s before the mass emissions of carbon dioxide began.[68] Former University of Winnipeg geography professor Dr. Timothy F. Ball rejected Gore’s claim that there has been a sharp drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970, stating that the data was taken only from an isolated area of the Arctic and during a specific cooling period.[69]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inconvenient_Truth
For starters. Damn you and your stalking my other posts.
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:29 pmby Harijan
Titanic wrote:For point 5, wtf are you on about. Read about the IPCC, I think its their 6th report thats the most recent and important one. Its approved by over 100 governments and hundreds of scientists.
Cool It Chapter 1 or 2 (loaned out my copy so i can't give a page number)
Written by Bjørn Lomborg
And to be fair, here is a link to Lomborg's critics:
http://www.esquire.com/features/esquire-100/globalwarming1007
Re: Al Gore and the Big Prize
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:34 pmby Titanic
Harijan wrote:Titanic wrote:For point 5, wtf are you on about. Read about the IPCC, I think its their 6th report thats the most recent and important one. Its approved by over 100 governments and hundreds of scientists.
Cool It Chapter 1 or 2 (loaned out my copy so i can't give a page number)
Written by Bjørn Lomborg
And to be fair, here is a link to Lomborg's critics:
http://www.esquire.com/features/esquire-100/globalwarming1007
I dont have that book and dont intend to loan or buy it. Any chance you could tell us what he has to say on the IPCC?
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:39 pmby jay_a2j
Posted:
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:56 pmby xtratabasco
I get my info from
http://www.prisonplanet.com and
http://www.infowars.com and it says the same thing.
but the facts dont matter, more taxes are coming and you and me and everyone knows it.
LOL
bend over...this government is gonna have some ASS TIME with YOU
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:22 amby Neutrino
Just once I would like to see an unbiased page. Just
once.
I really like the way that site sets the importance of the economy above all other considerations. "Make mild cutbacks!? Never! It'll damage the economy!"
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:28 amby Iliad
xtratabasco wrote:I get my info from
http://www.prisonplanet.com and
http://www.infowars.com and it says the same thing.
but the facts dont matter, more taxes are coming and you and me and everyone knows it.
LOL
bend over...this government is gonna have some ASS TIME with YOU
you really need better sources xtra
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:35 amby xtratabasco
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:37 amby Iliad
You need better sources. Non-biased ones.
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:57 amby MeDeFe
Titanic wrote:What I dont get it why he won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Here's why:
nobelprize.org wrote:The Nobel Peace Prize for 2007
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared, in two equal parts, between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.
Indications of changes in the earth's future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness, and with the precautionary principle uppermost in our minds. Extensive climate changes may alter and threaten the living conditions of much of mankind. They may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states.
Through the scientific reports it has issued over the past two decades, the IPCC has created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming. Thousands of scientists and officials from over one hundred countries have collaborated to achieve greater certainty as to the scale of the warming. Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced firmer evidence in its support. In the last few years, the connections have become even clearer and the consequences still more apparent.
Al Gore has for a long time been one of the world's leading environmentalist politicians. He became aware at an early stage of the climatic challenges the world is facing. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted.
By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, the Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
Oslo, 12 October 2007
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:50 amby unriggable
I'm actually excited for global warming. Survival of the fittest will come into play, the world will be in complete anarchy, and everything we ever owned will be swallowed by the sea. Atlantis 2000.
Posted:
Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:17 pmby Titanic
unriggable wrote:I'm actually excited for global warming. Survival of the fittest will come into play, the world will be in complete anarchy, and everything we ever owned will be swallowed by the sea. Atlantis 2000.
Um....lol?
Posted:
Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:51 amby strike wolf
I was highly surprised when I heard the news. I mean, there has to be someone out there who has done more than Al Gore. In fact, I'm certain that there were at least 50 people more deserving.