Comments

  1. Christian says

    Sorry to be disagreeable… but Gore is an idiot. One day we’ll all look back and wonder why we fell for his crap. Go awawy Al, just go away.

  2. Andy F says

    Good, good… but you might want to double check who gets to advertise on Towleroad. Just above Al Gore’s slideshow news we see a banner for Ben Stein’s new propaganda movie regarding Intelligent Design. Really? Really? I like Ben Stein, but Really? Let’s have some oversight here…

  3. Jimmyboyo says

    Christian

    Give reasons why you think Al Gore is an idiot as vs the Nobel Peace prize comittee’s opinion of him.

    Also please state your qualifications for being considered superior to the Nobel peace prize comittee.

    Thanks

  4. crispy says

    Christian,
    You are so right! Just the other day I was commenting to my friend about how funny it was when we thought the earth was flat. And if you sailed far enough, you’d fall right over the edge!

  5. Jerry in RI says

    Christian, History will judge Al Gore…not we who live in 2008.

    I agree with putting a “cost on carbon” as we need to hit lazy American’s where it hurts…the wallet. The underlying fact on Al’s speech is that we cannot effect change without putting money in the equation. Sad but true, but money motivates and not good will and green logos and sexy eco advertising.

  6. Christian says

    Jimboyo:

    The Nobel Committee gave Gore the Peace Prize, not an award for scientific achievement. Their choices have been dubious on more than one occasion. Yasser Arafat received the prize too, but that doesn’t mean he was not a terrorist and thief (and as I recall, a closet homo who killed many gays in “Palestine”).
    My problem with Gore is not that I don’t believe in climate change. Climate change is a fact… the problem is that he and others have linked it exclusively to human causes. Really? Odd, considering that there has never been a time when the climate wasn’t changing. I believe in protecting the environment from excessive litter, species extinction, clean water and air, and deforestation. Gore has gone too far. in just the past week, scientists have confirmed that the global temp is actually dropping and has been for a decade. Gore’s response: Attack the messenger. Nice.

  7. FizziekruntNT says

    Oh really, Christian?

    “[sic]in just the past week, scientists have confirmed that the global temp is actually dropping and has been for a decade.”

    How fascinating! And who might these illuminati be and why hasn’t the world press caught onto this amazing news? To think, the polar ice caps have been melting because the global temp is actually dropping! This turns everything I ever learned in geophysics and climatology on its proverbial ear! Well done, sir. Well done. I await your next revelation with bated breath. And now, I will go enjoy the melting ice within my mint tea as it cools the glass I am holding.

  8. Jimmyboyo says

    Christian

    Hmmmmm

    99.99999999999999% of WORLD scientists have all confirmed global warming and with 90% certitude that it is caused by human activity.

    I would be very intrested in knowing who exactly the scientists are that you are refering to. They wouldn’t happen to be paid staff of Exxon Mobile? Oh wait a minute…..Exxon Mobile itself admited finaly that global warming was real and human activity is the culprit.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16593606

    When exxon mobile says it is time to curb green house gases, then you know it is really time to get started!

  9. Christian says

    Geez guys… calm down. I seriously didn’t mean to offend. My only point is that Al Gore treats global warming as if it’s as solid a theory as Newton’s Laws of Physics or The Theory of Relativity. It may turn out to be true, 80% true, or just 30% true. Scientific theories are not put to bed because of a Nobel Peace Prize or a headline in the NY Times. No one argues against temp changes, warming, cooling etc… the arguments in scientific circles center around causes.
    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597

  10. Jimmyboyo says

    Christian

    Lets take a look at the links you posted

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html

    An interview with 1 scientist employed by Melbourne based Institute of Public affairs. IPA is conservative, so much so that its president has to constantly publicly state it isn’t right wing because nobody believes it. :-) Its biggest financers are Western Mining, BHP Billiton just one of the largets mining companies in the world, and the tobacco industry. Its purpose is the promotion of deruegulation, privatization of all buisness, derregulating workplaces of protections for worker safety, limited government, and climate change skepticism = Big Buisness paid for group to promote big buisness propaganda and goals to make more money.

    The 1 scientist interviewed from the IPA paid staff (actualy a senior fellow at the group)out of the entire world of scientists is Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist. A biologist. Hmmmmmmmm Her expertise is biology and nothing what so ever!!!!!!!!!!! to do with being a climate scientist. That is like relying on a computer technician to diagnose the problems with your car’s engine.

    The non climate scientists misquotes other people continualy throughout her interview. Totaly not surprising since a trained biologist instead of working in her actual field is pimping for a big biz propaganda think tank.

    The next link

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597

    Is an oped

    an opinion piece

    try

    http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate_change/climate-consensus.html

    Become informed.

    Peace be with you

  11. peterparker says

    CHRISTIAN,

    Whenever someone derides the theory that human activity is causing global warming and ridicules those who encourage fewer carbon emissions, all I can think is: “So what if it turns out they ARE wrong. It won’t hurt anyone/anything if we pump less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and instead turn to cleaner, renewable energy.”

    It seems to me that people who support policies that would reduce carbon emissions are cautious and are acting in a way that absolutely cannot harm the environment, while those who fight against any restrictions are carelessly acting in a way that DOES have the potential to harm the environment. Considering that we have but one Earth, isn’t it a better idea to err on the side of caution?

    xo,
    peterparker

  12. jason says

    As a gay man, I find Al Gore offensive. His global warming propaganda is designed for one thing and one thing alone – to fill up his bank account. Wake up, my fellow gays.

  13. Jimmyboyo says

    Jason

    Please detail your reasons and qualifications for saying what you have said vs the Nobel peace prize comittee and the majority of the world’s climatoligists

    American Meteorological Society:

    “Indeed, strong observational evidence and results from modeling studies indicate that, at least over the last 50 years, human activities are a major contributor to climate change.” (February 2007)

    American Geophysical Union

    “The Earth’s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.” (Adopted December 2003, Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007)

    American Association for the Advancement of Science

    “The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.” (December 2006)

    U.S. National Academy of Sciences:

    “The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.” (2005)

    I am intrested in knowing your qualifications

  14. AdamN says

    As a gay man, I find Jason offensive. His comment is designed for one thing, to propagate a notion that gay men are only politically conscious when it concerns their rights directly as opposed to taking an interest in affairs that concern ALL of humanity.
    Wake up Jason.
    Also anyone who thinks global warming isn’t real, really needs to pull there head out of Dick Cheney’s ass.

  15. Tom says

    “99.99999999999999% of WORLD scientists have all confirmed global warming and with 90% certitude that it is caused by human activity.”

    You might as well say, “Algore said it and I believe it and that settles it.”

  16. anon says

    Man-Bear-Pig!

    What an egomaniac!

    There’s a democracy problem?? Is this because AG is not in charge? Would he say that if he were in charge?

    People talk about Kyoto as if it were one thing, all properly laid out, but it is not. It is just a framework, and there are several versions. Some versions are vastly more expensive than other versions. None will have much impact on global warming. Kyoto is what you might call a foot-in-the-door. It is simply an irreversible agreement to control CO2 politically, by whatever means. This in itself is not going to do anything.

    The real burden is properly placed on alternative energy suppliers to provide those alternatives at a price competitive with fossil fuels. Otherwise we not only burden ourselves, but also the third world that right now can’t even afford fossil fuels, which are the cheapest around. The third world doesn’t have enough food to eat, so I doubt their top concern is global warming. There is a Chinese expression: “Empty belly? have one problem. Full belly? have many problems.” I don’t think we quite have the right to starve the third world to save polar bears or Innuit huts on the north slope.

  17. jason says

    Al is an offensive prick who plies the public with half-truths and distortions on global warming. He is not a credible source as far as I’m concerned. As for global warming, the Earth has experienced periods of warming and cooling over many millions of years when no cars existed, when no factories existed, and when no other forms of industrial emissions existed. This means that climate change happens independently of the type of activity associated with modern-day humans.

  18. says

    i am a huge Al Gore fan, and a devout carnivore …however I acknowledge Al Gore’s absolute avoidance of the methane problem created by cattle production for our meat culture.
    That’s our inconvenient truth.

  19. says

    Is this the same Jason who thinks gays are “dumb” for supporting “pandering” Democrats like David Paterson? I’m sensing a pattern . . . and it isn’t an intelligent design.

  20. Rik says

    Here is a list of inaccuracies in Gore’s movie as found by a UK court…

    The inaccuracies are:

    * The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
    * The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
    * The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
    * The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
    * The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
    * The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
    * The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
    * The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
    * The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
    * The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
    * The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

  21. paulusW says

    JIMMYBOYO:
    I’ve followed the thread and I thought I’d chime in on this one (normally I don’t). My suggestion is that you put down your copy of “Marxism for the 21st Century” and use your spare time to google something other than the latest in twink-porn. When you do, you’ll find any number of independent minded websites that offer alternative explanations to climate change. You will also notice that every climate historian will point out that the only constant with respect to climate change IS climate changes. (You’ve heard of the Ice Age and the Little Ice Age, no doubt?) The problem with Gore is that he wants to blame the current registered changes on man. No one has proven it. NO ONE. That’s why it’s called a t-h-e-o-r-y… look it up.

    If you’re too busy to read the other side of the argument (something Gore himself never does, by the way), then you can always call 1.800.KOOLAID. The good folks who work there can certainly help you with the deprogramming. That is all.

  22. paulusW says

    Jimmyboyo:
    And therein lies the point, sir… I’m not a scientist, and I doubt you are either (might be wrong, but who cares). You and others approach this issue with a fervor that has moved from purely religious to beyond fanatical. You treat those of us who simply believe that more info and research is needed as heretics. Just because AlGore declares the debate over doesn’t mean it is. All of you are starting to look like monks hunting for witches in the 14th century. Fine. Doesn’t change my lifestyle any.

    And just for giggles, I thought you’d enjoy knowing that my new car is a rather sizable SUV… not that I needed one, I just like knowing that it pisses off all the Prius drivers I run into at the pump, which is a feeling that is probably similar to how Al and Tipper feel when they board their prvt jets while the true-believers suck down another zoloft to soften the guilt of not paying enough indulgences, uh, I mean “carbon offsets.” (I make good money, so the 4 dollar gas doesn’t bother me… capitalism rules!)

    So you run along and play, sing songs, hold hands, and practice your rosary. Just leave the grown ups alone… we’re busy with life in the real world.

  23. Jimmyboyo says

    paulsw child

    Take it up with

    – IPCC Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change
    – American Meteriological Society
    -American Geophysical Union
    -American association for the advancment of Science
    -Geological society of america
    -US Academy of Sciences
    etc

    The world is not flat

    There is no sky fairy in the clouds

    The moon is not made of cheese

    Scientists around the world have spoken.

    The myth that it is up for debate is dealt with here

    http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

    You can debate till you turn blue, but in the end

    The world is round

    The earth orbits the sun

    you are the result of evolution

    and the vast majority of the world scientists have stated that it is a proven fact and caused by man.

    Hell kid, even exxon Mobile finaly admited last january

    Catch up with the 21st century.

    Now go pray your fairytale rosary, debate till you turn blue, and didle yourself all you want.

    Facts are facts

    deal with it

  24. paulW says

    Heh. Your passion is almost cute… if it weren’t so silly and misguided. Here’s some bedtime reading for you (assuming Mommy let’s you stay up after you finish making the cupcakes for homeroom). The point is simply to demonstrate that science is still very confused about what’s happening and why. You can’t (as Al Gore has done) just classify anyone who agrees with the man-causing theories as “legitimate” and then reclassify those who are still questioning and researching as “illegitimate”. Rules don’t work that way.

    Every week research emerges that confirms Gore’s theories, but just as much emerges that says “wait, this doesn’t fit; we need to rethink this again.” That’s not scepticism… it’s call science. I’m content to sit back and let them work it out. But I’m not going to let Al and his new company guilt me into buying indulgences just because I like the temp in my house set at 68 in the summer and 78 in the winter.

    http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88520025

    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=2964

    http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/5/7/Solar_Cycles_24_and_25_and_Predicted_Climate_Response_22nd_October.pdf

Leave A Reply