An Inconvenient Truth
- Thread starter Very Veronica
- Start date
I was disturbed after I saw the movie as well. After reading some of the views and attitudes here on this thread, disturbance has turned into depression. I think we as a human race is doomed. Like agent Smith said in The Matrix, we have no natural predator. All we do is multiply, expand and use up resources. And when the resources are used up, we move somewhere else and start the same process all over again. Whomever created us gave us a brain for a reason, please use it.
I don't know how many of you actually bothered to watch the movie. But in it, Gore basically ridiculed the American auto industry or rather the policy on emissions and fuel consumption. By 2009, China (that quasi communist country you all love to loathe) will have much better emission and fuel consumption standards than the US of A.
It is obvious that not all of us believe in Global Warming. But even the non-believers when pressed will say that something needs to be done about the environment. Thats the silver lining but I just hope it won't be too late.
.
I don't know how many of you actually bothered to watch the movie. But in it, Gore basically ridiculed the American auto industry or rather the policy on emissions and fuel consumption. By 2009, China (that quasi communist country you all love to loathe) will have much better emission and fuel consumption standards than the US of A.
It is obvious that not all of us believe in Global Warming. But even the non-believers when pressed will say that something needs to be done about the environment. Thats the silver lining but I just hope it won't be too late.
.
Last edited:
Wilde we are from a different generation.wilde said:
When I first read your tag line, I though he can't be much of a hockey fan, he mispelled Hewitt (as in Foster Hewitt). A google search showed me a Canadien player named Huet.
Bio-Fuels not the answer?
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004049.html
ran into this article today. maybe bio-fuel is not the solution.
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004049.html
ran into this article today. maybe bio-fuel is not the solution.
The Deniers
A series of articles profiling scientists from the other side of the argument.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=22003a0d-37cc-4399-8bcc-39cd20bed2f6&k=0
In the global warming debate, there are essentially two broad camps. One believes that the science is settled, that global warming is serious and man-made, and that urgent action must be taken to mitigate or prevent a future calamity. The other believes that the science is far from settled, that precious little is known about global warming or its likely effects, and that prudence dictates more research and caution before intervening massively in the economy.
The "science is settled" camp, much the larger of the two, includes many eminent scientists with impressive credentials. But just who are the global warming skeptics who question the studies from the great majority of climate scientists and what are their motives?
Many in the "science is settled" camp claim that the skeptics are untrustworthy -- that they are either cranks or otherwise at the periphery of their profession, or that they are in the pockets of Exxon or other corporate interests. The skeptics are increasingly being called Deniers, a term used by analogy to the Holocaust, to convey the catastrophe that could befall mankind if action is not taken. Increasingly, too, the press is taking up the Denier theme, convincing the public that the global-warming debate is over.
... more
A series of articles profiling scientists from the other side of the argument.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=22003a0d-37cc-4399-8bcc-39cd20bed2f6&k=0
In the global warming debate, there are essentially two broad camps. One believes that the science is settled, that global warming is serious and man-made, and that urgent action must be taken to mitigate or prevent a future calamity. The other believes that the science is far from settled, that precious little is known about global warming or its likely effects, and that prudence dictates more research and caution before intervening massively in the economy.
The "science is settled" camp, much the larger of the two, includes many eminent scientists with impressive credentials. But just who are the global warming skeptics who question the studies from the great majority of climate scientists and what are their motives?
Many in the "science is settled" camp claim that the skeptics are untrustworthy -- that they are either cranks or otherwise at the periphery of their profession, or that they are in the pockets of Exxon or other corporate interests. The skeptics are increasingly being called Deniers, a term used by analogy to the Holocaust, to convey the catastrophe that could befall mankind if action is not taken. Increasingly, too, the press is taking up the Denier theme, convincing the public that the global-warming debate is over.
... more
Al Gore Is a Greenhouse Gasbag!!!
Al Gore - Congressman, then senator from a political dynasty in Tennessee. Vice president for the eight years of the Clinton administration. President-elect of the United States for about 10 minutes, before being waylaid by the dangling chad. Since his bitter, disputed loss to George W. Bush, Gore has gone through some changes. He tried sporting a beard, reinvented himself as a media entrepreneur, hosted Saturday Night Live, gained a lot of weight. Then, last May, he burst back into the public eye as the star of a surprisingly successful documentary on global warming called An Inconvenient Truth. In a way that sometimes happens in America, Al Gore has come to personify an issue that until recently, most of us didn’t know we needed to know or care about. Oprah calls him “our Noah.” But if she’s going to get all ancient on us, Cassandra might be the better comparison.
There’s no way to watch An Inconvenient Truth without getting worried — at least a little worried.
Al Gore’s documentary is a political statement timed to present him as a presidential candidate in 2008.
The Earth has been warming for about 20,000 years. We’ve only been collecting data on that trend for about 200 years. For most of Earth's history, the globe has been warmer than it has been for the last 200 years. It has only rarely been cooler. Those cooler periods have meant things like two miles of ice piled over much of what is now North America. Nothing to be nostalgic for.
more here:
http://phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag
Al Gore - Congressman, then senator from a political dynasty in Tennessee. Vice president for the eight years of the Clinton administration. President-elect of the United States for about 10 minutes, before being waylaid by the dangling chad. Since his bitter, disputed loss to George W. Bush, Gore has gone through some changes. He tried sporting a beard, reinvented himself as a media entrepreneur, hosted Saturday Night Live, gained a lot of weight. Then, last May, he burst back into the public eye as the star of a surprisingly successful documentary on global warming called An Inconvenient Truth. In a way that sometimes happens in America, Al Gore has come to personify an issue that until recently, most of us didn’t know we needed to know or care about. Oprah calls him “our Noah.” But if she’s going to get all ancient on us, Cassandra might be the better comparison.
There’s no way to watch An Inconvenient Truth without getting worried — at least a little worried.
Al Gore’s documentary is a political statement timed to present him as a presidential candidate in 2008.
The Earth has been warming for about 20,000 years. We’ve only been collecting data on that trend for about 200 years. For most of Earth's history, the globe has been warmer than it has been for the last 200 years. It has only rarely been cooler. Those cooler periods have meant things like two miles of ice piled over much of what is now North America. Nothing to be nostalgic for.
more here:
http://phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag
As for Al Gore "raising awareness", the Earth has been warming since the last ice age, - most people are aware of that by the age of 6 or 7.
What caused that warming period??? No one was driving, flying around in jets or or burning coal. I'm still waiting for the 'experts" to explain that one, because the warming was ahell of alot more than one or two degrees, and there must be a reason that things went from widespread arctic conditions to a temperate climate in many huge areas of the world.
We should all be very thankful that the massive glaciers receeded for whatever reason, because many of us probably wouldn't be here if the planet had remained cold.
What caused that warming period??? No one was driving, flying around in jets or or burning coal. I'm still waiting for the 'experts" to explain that one, because the warming was ahell of alot more than one or two degrees, and there must be a reason that things went from widespread arctic conditions to a temperate climate in many huge areas of the world.
We should all be very thankful that the massive glaciers receeded for whatever reason, because many of us probably wouldn't be here if the planet had remained cold.
This report is a consensus of about 600+ scientists. There is a very long, detailed version of this report available that explains why their conclusions are valid.
This is a summary:
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
Since the amount that human activity is likely driving climate change varies depending on what one is measuring its better to look at this summary report. Its only 18 pages mostly nice diagrams (its for politicians). The ice core data is particularly damning IMO.
One really good thing about this report is that they now have maps with what's probably going to happen by the end of this century under a number of different scenarios.
Remember we are talking about probabilities here. The last I'd want is anyone injuring themselves walking back from the grocery store because they got paranoid and walked there.
This is a summary:
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
Since the amount that human activity is likely driving climate change varies depending on what one is measuring its better to look at this summary report. Its only 18 pages mostly nice diagrams (its for politicians). The ice core data is particularly damning IMO.
One really good thing about this report is that they now have maps with what's probably going to happen by the end of this century under a number of different scenarios.
Remember we are talking about probabilities here. The last I'd want is anyone injuring themselves walking back from the grocery store because they got paranoid and walked there.
john23 said:
C'mon, ya can't expect corporate stooges to do anything but dump all over accepted facts from science, when there's money to be made, do ya?
Next you'll tell us the earth ain't flat, you're one of them leeberal science earth rounder types, aren't ya?
All they have to do is delay long enough before it's unfixable & then they can throw all environmental controls out the window. Who needs clean air, water, climate?
I just thought of something. Why don't you just ask a climatologist? I remember when I was first starting school in the US and over a series of lectures there were a number of things that my professor was stating that were fairly controversial. I didn't know how to verify what he was saying so I decided to email my questions to various professors in that field. I sent emails to Berkeley, San Jose State, Stanford, even all the way to Harvard among others. I think all but two or three of the professors answered my inquiries.Rod Steel said:
sexxxygirl said:
I saw it and it was more of a Powerpoint presentation than a movie. Like I said before its part of Gore's next shot at the presidency.
I hear Al Gore has been nominated for a Nobel prize for his global warming "work".
That's one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. he hasn't done a damn thing to change the climate. He does travel the world in private aircratf while lecturing the rest of us, and trying to make us feel guilty about driving our SUV's, but he hasn't changed a thing.
I guess making a movie (or appearing in, and pretending to make a movie while other people really do the work) and writing a book is considered "work". If it had any real impact on anything, it may be a valid argument, but Al Gore has not reduced emissions in any substantial way.
Al's greenhouse footprint is larger than most of us will ever even begin to create. He's a hypocrite who's cashing in on this issue, while burning more fossil fuels than 100 average citizens combined. he has no room whatsoever to talk.
And another thing. I'm sick and tired of being demonized about having an SUV. I have a Toyota 4Runner with 3.4 litre engine(one of the best engines ever made IMO), which has plenty of power to pull a small boat and do what I need to do.
There are millions of cars and light trucks with the same exact engine, yet because they aren't SUV's, they'r somehow okay. The only real difference is body style, and the entire drive train is identical. Some have short tail transmissions and some have long tail, depending on the wheel base, but that's the only real difference.
People should learn about what they're talking about before pointing fingers and making fools of themselves to those of us who actually know the inner workings of internal combustion engines and other mechanical things.
My 4Runner is more fuel efficient and less harmful to the envoronment than millions other vehicles on the roads, yet others who only know how to gas up a vehicle and press the accelerator, while having no clue as to why an engine even works are judging me, and others like me.
They're another group of ignorant hypocrites that have jumped on the latest trendy bandwgon, so that they can appear to "care" about the environment, yet have no problem heating giant homes, jetting around the country, and burning more fuel than I ever will. They think that recycling their beer cans and wine bottles entitles them to judge myself and others. These type of people also seem to be constantly preaching "tolerance", yet don't really tolerate anyone who disagrees with them.
I found one article about Al's greenhouse footprint. This is the first one that came up, but I'm sure there are plenty more. It's from USAToday, and not some right wing source.
Al is also the same guy (along with his family) who used to grow tobacco and made lots of money doing it, yet lectures people on the evils of smoking. Hypocrites like him destroy their credibility through their own actions and subsequent selective memory loss.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm
C-lover you may find some information relevant to your query here:citylover said:
https://perb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=62345&highlight=mars
Its all on here Mr C. You can rub my nose in it if Gore doesn't run for the nomination. You can be sure I'll point out the error of your ways with the traditional "I told you so", if he does seek the nomination.
BTW, which of my gases do you not agree with? Please also read a good book on the subject:
BTW, which of my gases do you not agree with? Please also read a good book on the subject:
just a nomination Randy... oh look, seems Rush Limbaugh received one as well - for his "nearly two decades of tireless efforts to promote liberty, equality and opportunity for all humankind, regardless of race, creed, economic stratum or national origin."... do ya like Limpball's nomination just a little better Randy?Randy Whorewald said:
Randy, Randy... do you understand what an op-ed piece is? Perhaps check out the author of that article... "not some right wing source". That's a good one Randy - LOL!Randy Whorewald said:
blah, blah - this is soooo old news Randy. The actual case has Gore stopping the growing of tobacco after his sister died of lung cancer... and ultimately extending that to become a vocal opponent of the tobacco industry.Randy Whorewald said:
OTBn your abrasiveness is...
Peter Schweizer is a conservative author and a research fellow at the Hoover Institute. His book Do as I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy received praise from conservative political pundits including Bill O'Reilly.
Schweizer's book Reagan's War was the basis of the documentary film In the Face of Evil which recounts Ronald Reagan's decades-long struggle against Communism and his part in ultimately defeating it.
From Wikipedia
I got a question for you OTBn:
Have you ever read any of Schweizer's writing?
I read the following:
Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism, 2002
I found his writing to be based in verifiable facts & defy anyone to refute the basis of his writing.
I don't think any sane mind will deny the fact that Reagan stood toe to toe with the USSR & did achieve success WITHOUT war!
Reagan knew the US economy could withstand the arms race & that was a HELL of a lot better than going to WAR!
The USSR could not keep up economically with the US military spending & GNP. - Reagan literally bankrupt them & like a game of chess out played the war hawks of the Russian military while at the same time making a lifelong friend with Gorbachev.
Unfortunately the Dems & Libs could not grasp this concept, too focused on the little things back home to realise the BIG picture.
Was Reagan perfect NO!
Did he do the right thing in the case with USSR - Your DAMN right he did!!!
Or would you have preferred mutual destruction?
It is always interesting when people who cannot see the big picture ague as if they are an authority on the world stage.
The ocean could be filled with the information that you & I are NOT privy to!
History is the proclaimer of who made the right & wrong choices.
.
... matched only by your negativity.OTBn said:
Peter Schweizer is a conservative author and a research fellow at the Hoover Institute. His book Do as I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy received praise from conservative political pundits including Bill O'Reilly.
Schweizer's book Reagan's War was the basis of the documentary film In the Face of Evil which recounts Ronald Reagan's decades-long struggle against Communism and his part in ultimately defeating it.
From Wikipedia
I got a question for you OTBn:
Have you ever read any of Schweizer's writing?
I read the following:
Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism, 2002
I found his writing to be based in verifiable facts & defy anyone to refute the basis of his writing.
I don't think any sane mind will deny the fact that Reagan stood toe to toe with the USSR & did achieve success WITHOUT war!
Reagan knew the US economy could withstand the arms race & that was a HELL of a lot better than going to WAR!
The USSR could not keep up economically with the US military spending & GNP. - Reagan literally bankrupt them & like a game of chess out played the war hawks of the Russian military while at the same time making a lifelong friend with Gorbachev.
Unfortunately the Dems & Libs could not grasp this concept, too focused on the little things back home to realise the BIG picture.
Was Reagan perfect NO!
Did he do the right thing in the case with USSR - Your DAMN right he did!!!
Or would you have preferred mutual destruction?
It is always interesting when people who cannot see the big picture ague as if they are an authority on the world stage.
The ocean could be filled with the information that you & I are NOT privy to!
History is the proclaimer of who made the right & wrong choices.
.
