Wednesday, March 21, 2007
|
|
Gore's Lack of Self-Awareness More Imminent Threat Than Global Warming
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
3:34 PM
|
|
What a hopeless dork: I'm watching the hearings on Global Warming on C-SPAN and The Goracle is testifying. He just compared what people leading the global warming crusade to what the Spartans did in the movie "300" to save democracy !
Allah's covering the Inhofe-Goracle face-off. I'm sure Inhofe is at his grumpy best. Another melodramatic Gore-quote: "People will look back and wonder, 'How did they find the moral courage to rise above politics and save the cause of American democracy?'"
If only he were talking about something useful, like Social Security reform instead of CO2-capping, economy-crippling government intervention. Update: More from the Gore hearings that you won't hear in the media: The usual rule is that witnesses must submit their prepared remarks
48 hours before the hearing, so that the committee members may prepare
questions. They suspended that rule for Gore, allowing him to submit his opening remarks 24 hours in advance.
Did he make that deadline?
Of course not. He submitted his remarks one entire minute before the hearings began.
Hmmm, that makes it much harder to rebut his assertions, doesn't it? What a phony. More phony, again from Allah: “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…
Gore refused to take the pledge.
|
|
Your points are 2 -fold
A) Global warming is non-sense.
and
B) The solutions would kill our economy.
I gave a response suggesting a response that has merit regardless of the global warming issue. Your only response was to project its failure. Again, why the defeatist attitude? Did the Manhattan Project fail. Did the Apollo Project fail?
Is a technology boom that leads to energy independence and more individual freedom from multinational corporations and Middle East Oil not a noble goal in and of itself?
Again all you did was predict failure. This is something that will HAVE to happen as the Earths oil supply is not endless and certainly no amount of drilling up our beautiful country would ever return us to oil independence.
The biggest reason not to fund a Manhattan like energy project is if you are an Oil company sitting on trillions of dollars of profit with out lifting a finger. Do you think the oil companies really don't care if high efficiency capacitor driven cars are successfully created? Do you think the coal lobby like these ideas?
You fear people like me wanting to supposedly set up an all controlling government. I want nothing of the sort and I'd suggest the kind of control you fear already exist in the names of companies like Exxon Mobile and Haliburton ect...
So again why the defeatist attitude? Why the complacency of your dependency on Exxon and Arabs? |
|
Great propoganda piece. There is no reason to believe that a political/legislative response to climate change would bring about any of the results you claim. Paint a picture that people will identify with and approve of (i.e., you hypothesized technological boom), get them to support candidates who promote the pretty picture, and when it fails, claim that it was due either to (a) insufficient funding or (b) the intellectual deficits of those who disagree with you.
There are no proposals that have been offered in relation to climate change that would lead to independence from Mideast oil. Moreover, the goal of energy independence is a worthy goal in and of itself. It need not be tied to climate change. The political movement that has been inspired by the issue of climate change is like a giant velcro ball that picks up everything in its path and links it in some obtuse way to climate change. As a result, the climate change collection of talking points grows and grows and grows. Again, if you desire energy independence, why not argue the merits of that goal on its own? Ditto for most of the other items on your list. |
|
Hard Thought writes:
Global Warming
Three Things:
1. All computer models that predict global warming and have man as the cause require a steady output from the Sun. The output is not steaddy and has been proven so with our space based telescopes.
2. The earth has periodically gone into ice ages and then warmed out of them before man developed agriculture. How did the warming occur if there was no industrialization to blame?
3. Global warming on Mars is in a 1:1 relationsahip with how much the earth has warmed. Who is driving the SUV's there to cause it or building the coal fired plants that should be blamed?
Regarding
1. That's a false statement. You don't know anything about models.
2. No one claims that there is no such thing as natural variability. However, the overwhelming evidence suggest that the Earth is warming faster then it ever did during the reign of civilized man and will be warmer then it has been in over 100,000 years...a period arguably longer then the evolutionary emergence of Homo sapiens sapiens....Yes the world is older then 6,000 years and yes you are of the Homo genus.
3. You made that up. We have no details or significant understanding of the climate of Mars.
|
|
Darby writes, (err shall we say...sets up the standard straw man.)
"When asked to explain the political significance of global warming, eco-politicians always advocate increased taxes and an expansion of federal power. "
Darby for about what we spend in Iraq in 2-3 months we could likely fund a massive program for alternative energy.
Likely outcomes:
High capacity storage energy devices that will charge in minutes and run a car hundreds of miles.
Similar units for the home.
Advantages;
1) Huge technology boom just like the government created when it brought forth the atomic bomb, the Apollo project,computers and the internet.
2) Massive secondary economic expansion resulting in the new technology.
3) Non centralized power sources freeing people to make their own energy independent of multinational corporations and Muslim countries harboring resentful terrorist.
4) Cleaner air
5) Minimized impacts from climate change
6) Independence of Middle Eastern Oil.
7) ANWR untouched for thousands more years
8) Prosperity to third world countries now able to generate electricity efficiently.
Draby your solution risks our future and keeps us subservient to multinational corporations and Middle Eastern energy sources.
I look at people like you and I think man what ever happen to Americans holding themselves to a higher standard? What ever happen to the "Can-Do-Attitude" of the Americans? Since when were Americans so comfortable being so dependent on others?
You need to think outside the box girl!! |
|
Three Things:
1. All computer models that predict global warming and have man as the cause require a steady output from the Sun. The output is not steaddy and has been proven so with our space based telescopes.
2. The earth has periodically gone into ice ages and then warmed out of them before man developed agriculture. How did the warming occur if there was no industrialization to blame?
3. Global warming on Mars is in a 1:1 relationsahip with how much the earth has warmed. Who is driving the SUV's there to cause it or building the coal fired plants that should be blamed? |
|
So let me get this right.
You don't want to have to think for yourself and your choice is between your friends and Rush Limbaugh or the IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorology Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. I feel for you dude. It is a hard choice and I commend your loyalty to your friends. They after all know you best and are closer to you. You have chosen wisely. As for myself I like to think for myself but I do understand that there are a great number that rely on others to do their thinking for them. Unlike you they seldom choose wisely and often get taken for a ride.
Have a nice day,
Jon |
|
I had the unfortunate experience of watching "An Inconvenient Truth" last week. Gore's pedantic style reminded me of the kind of professor whose lectures are guaranteed to cure insomnia. The vacuous nature of his arguments reminded me of the "Forrest Gore" (i.e., "Forrest Gump") parodies that were featured on Rush's radio show during the 90s. How could anyone believe those goofy, but artfully crafted, visuals that show the ocean rising to cover the entire state of Florida?
Muirgeo: The degree to which the Earth's climate has changed is only one aspect of the debate. Even if everything that Gore and others say is true, their assertion that the facts of global warming warrant a political response is dubious to say the least. When asked to explain the political significance of global warming, eco-politicians always advocate increased taxes and an expansion of federal power. Thus, the hysteria they are attempting to create looks like nothng more than a pretext for the conventional aims of all left-wing politicians: redistribution of wealth and central planning schemes planned and implemented by an elite corps of politically appointed experts. There is nothing wrong with promoting conservation, reduction of pollutants (insofar as we know what they are), and so on. These are worthy goals. But policies such as the "freeze on carbon emissions" that Gore advocates bear a striking resemblence to the pointless and impracticable projects that the animals in the book "Animal Farm" were assigned to carry out by the leaders of their glorious revolution.
If anyone is looking for a true crisis that is supported by scientific research and really does require political action, consider the changing age demographics of the U.S. and the fact that 50% of people who live past the age of 80 develop Alzheimer's disease. Now there's a real crisis that I don't hear anyone in the political realm talking about. |
|
I thought we were going into another ice age. What happened? I guess I am just 25 years behind. I find it remarkable that this great Earth which has been around since Jesus was a Corporal has the ability to completely reverse itself so completely in such a short amount of time. That kind of agility is more impressive than a Barry Sanders touchdown run. It more likely resembles uber leftwing anti-capitalist propaganda in an attempt to control our lives than actual science.
I, for one, don't believe one word Al Gore says...except maybe when he says, "I gotta take a dump." Even I don't need to witness that amount of greenhouse gas emissions. But being that Al Gore's global warming theory makes about as much sense as a battery powered SUV, I will continue in my zeal to have the highest carbon footprint I can possibly attain. |
|
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1803720/posts
Two days ago I was invited to dinner in one of London’s hotels with some dear friends –and sitting at the table next to us was Mr. Al Gore. One smart friend joked that he would ask for a cigar and exhale the smoke in the direction of the environmentally concerned ex-vice president to see what his reaction would be. My friend was saying this when the former vice-president was sitting right behind him. One of my friends let out a resonant laugh and said, “Don’t put your health at risk”, just as the ex-vice president lit up his own cigar! My friend laughed and said, “This from a man who has just won an Oscar for protecting the environment!”
But if it has, ignore it. |
|
Are we supposed to be impressed by your attempt at sarcasm?
Are we supposed to swallow the Goracle’s utterances and what politically motivated (and pressured) organizations say about hypothesis of AGW?
Learn something about the scientific process and the concept of falsifiability before attempting another pseudo-intellectual left-wing self indulgent guilt-ridden smart-arse commentary.
|
|
All my friends say global warming is a hoax and Al Gore is silly. Rush says so and so does Senator Inhofe ... all I hear in my little world is what a goof Al Gore is and how silly this global warming is. So I'll make fun of him too because peer pressure works on me just like a child. And it's fun.
In my little world I don't know anything about the facts of global warming but since all my friends make fun of Al Gore and global warming believers I will too. The IPCC report and the fact that the National Academy of Sciences, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorology Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have all issued statements stating that climate change is: a) occurring, b) largely caused by humans and c) likely to continue with large negative consequences for natural and human socioeconomic systems doesn't matter to me . Because they're not my friends. And if I don't think just like my friends they won't like me anymore. Plus if I think just like my friends and just like Rush Limbaugh I don't even have to think for myself. So that makes it easier. |
|
|
|