Al Gore on his Prius & earth issues

Ya know what's funny, Al Gore is concerned about this planet, makes a movie about it, spreading the word that global climate change is here and now, backs it up with real science, facts, numbers, suggests we can do something about it...and repeats it as often as needed.

The loser of the 2000 election has gone on to say his best accomplishment as president-select..."that big ol' fish I caught last week."

Sad, but wow, funny.

We would be so far ahead of the pollution and climate change game right now with Gore leading us...maybe 2008 we will all wake up and vote democrat.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(geologyrox @ May 27 2006, 07:23 AM) [snapback]261722[/snapback]</div>

Geo,
Just ignore Dr.Rocket, he's a frickin troll. Use the ignore settings on this site.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr Rocket @ May 22 2006, 10:38 PM) [snapback]259541[/snapback]</div>

In what way is Crichton an authority on Global Warming?

Brookings Institute.

Read the entire PDF. Here's the kicker:

"Indeed Crichton should hold himself to a higher standard with regard to all the arguments in his book. He is plainly a very bright guy and, famously, a Harvard Medical School graduate. A millionaire many times over, he doesn't need to be seeking grants. If he has something serious to say on the science of climate change, he should say so in a work of nonfiction and submit his work for peer review. The result could be instructive--for him and for us all." -- David B. Sandalow is an environment scholar at The Brookings Institution.

Some more of his "credentials":

"Crichton cites what he contends are misconceptions about DDT, second-hand smoke and global warming as examples (however these examples are heavily disputed in the scientific community)."
Wikipedia

"Michael has had many psychic and spiritual experiences: he has seen auras, bent spoons and was exorcised in 1986."
Authors on the Web

"His 2004 novel State of Fear questioned the scientific validity of global warming, giving Crichton a reputation as a climate change skeptic; in 2005 he testified before a Senate committee and had a private visit with President George W. Bush to discuss the issue."
Answers.com

Crichton speeches

For authority, I think I'll defer to the Royal Society.

Royal Society

"This document examines twelve misleading arguments (presented in bold typeface) put forward by the opponents of urgent action on climate change and highlights the scientific evidence that exposes their flaws. It has been prepared by a group led by Sir David Wallace FRS, Treasurer of the Royal Society, and Sir John Houghton FRS, former chair of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This document has been endorsed by the Council of the Royal Society, and draws primarily on scientific papers published in leading peer-reviewed journals and the work of authoritative scientific organisations, such as the IPCC and the United States National Academy of Sciences."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nerfer @ May 25 2006, 08:11 AM) [snapback]260888[/snapback]</div>

Here is the quote:

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

Read more here:

http://www.sethf.com/gore/

His insight was recognizing the potential and getting Congress to fund it (at that time for the military and universities). Glad he made some money off it with Google stock. He deserves it.

Now he has his sights on global warming. Hope Congress listens to him again.

George




<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ May 24 2006, 03:42 PM) [snapback]260570[/snapback]</div>

One of the cheapest shots around. Don't respond to the message, just try to discredit the messenger.

George

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jun 12 2006, 09:05 PM) [snapback]270256[/snapback]</div>

I didn't realize that he could bend spoons. I guess I'll take him seriously now! :lol: :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(larkinmj @ Jun 12 2006, 09:02 PM) [snapback]270286[/snapback]</div>

Perhaps, now that he's been exorcised AND met GW we should consider him an authority on anything he wants.

Remember...we must not question authority.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dr Rocket @ May 22 2006, 11:38 PM) [snapback]259541[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hold on hold on... I'm sure Stephen King wrote about global warming. I'd better quote him!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Soylent @ Jun 14 2006, 09:01 AM) [snapback]271043[/snapback]</div>

Are you suggesting that we should actually listen to SCIENTISTS, rather than basing our opinions about a climatological phenomenon on a work of fiction? You must be crazy! :lol:

 

Poor Al is getting pwn3d big time by many scientists and Canada Free Press. I especially like the part debunking a cause-and-effect link between CO2 levels and global warming from past ice ages.

"The man (Gore) is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

Poor Al's "junk" science. Hahahaha!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(McShemp @ Jun 14 2006, 11:42 AM) [snapback]271169[/snapback]</div>

A big conspiracy to suppress scientific findings perpetrated by the tri-liberal commission, funded by the Clintons. That’s it! I knew it all along but was too afraid to speak up. Thank you!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SomervillePrius @ May 17 2006, 03:10 AM) [snapback]256413[/snapback]</div>

I'll take boring over incompetent any day.

 

Canada free press is a conservative mouthpiece... news, but mostly political commentary.

-------

Black Soot and Snow:
A Warmer Combination

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/dec/H...black_soot.html

These are the guys with the satellites who have the best and most accurate look at ice/glaciers.

" With global warming, many snow- and ice-covered areas are already melting."

"Hansen cautioned, although the role of soot in altering global climate is substantial, it does not alter the fact greenhouse gases are the primary cause of climate warming during the past century. Such gases are expected to be the largest climate forcing for the rest of this century."

-----------------
So much for the climate impact naysayers notion that the ice on earth is growing!

Recent Warming of Arctic May Affect Worldwide Climate

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/...3102316085.html

 

For more information that debunks McShemp's and other global warming naysayers's misconceptions, please refer to the global warming threads in the Environmental discussion forum of PC.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(geologyrox @ May 27 2006, 04:23 AM) [snapback]261722[/snapback]</div>

I can both feel and identify with your frustration. How many times have I had people (who have never even been NEAR an EV) try to convince me that EVs suck - that they're too inconvenient to be used in place of a "real" car. Sigh. Like telling a brain surgeon how to operate, "because I read somewhere how to do it."

I do find it mildly disturbing how many folks will lend credence to the side of the argument to which they're already predisposed for no other reason than, "I read somewhere that the other guy is full if crap."

Spice of life, I guess.

 

My wife and I went to see the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" last evening. If anything remotely like what he says is true, we are all in deep trouble. At its worst, we could be facing the end of our way of life as we know it.
The most powerful statistic for me was the assertion that Science magazine did a survey of 928 studies in the scientific literature to determine what percent felt there was some doubt about whether global warming was caused by human activity. The study's result: none of the 928 expressed any doubt. On the other hand, 53% of the popular press articles reviewed, asserted that there was some doubt about this.
A truly objective observer would want to hear the counter arguments, if there are any. The discussion would be highly technical, however. I have read several counter arguments on the internet, but none of them were persuasive to me. In fact, one of the counter arguments was that the film focusses on carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, whereas other greenhouse gases such as methane are far more dangerous. That scared me even more.
It makes me proud to be a Prius owner, and to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem. However, even the Prius emits a lot of carbon dioxide.
The article at http://www.theclimategroup.org/index.php?pid=718 states:
[/i]Driving a new Prius saves roughly 1 tonne of CO2 per year as compared to a diesel vehicle or 1.9 tonnes compared to petrol vehicles, based on average driving patterns. Global sales of the new Prius totalled 132,703 in 2004; considering that one tree absorbs around 14kg of CO2 each year, Prius drivers in 2004 alone did the job of some 9,478,800 trees.
But each gallon of gasoline consumed by the Prius results in an emission of over 24 pounds of carbon dioxide. So there is still a long way to go.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny @ May 16 2006, 01:27 PM) [snapback]256372[/snapback]</div>

Al Gore NOW decides he needs to do something about Global Warming? Wasn't this joker a US Senator for almost a decade before he became Vice-President of the United States. Notice is is the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Wasn't George W. Bush the Governor of Texas in 1997? Way to go Al...still trying to find a way to take down old George.

I am not a George W fan on most points but Gore is pathetic in my book. A sitting Vice President runs with a booming economy and relative peace in the world and loses. All he had to do was win his home state and he would have become President. :lol: The guy is a joke and will end up turning the whole issue of global warming and the environment in general even more political than it already is. :angry:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Leo @ Jun 16 2006, 10:24 PM) [snapback]272529[/snapback]</div>

You are correct when you say that methane is more "dangerous", in that it is a much more effective (about 20 times) greenhouse gas than CO2. However, methane is a much smaller constituent of the atmosphere, so its actual contribution to global warming is less. Nevertheless, the concentration of methane in the atmosphere is increasing much faster than CO2, and most methane in the atmosphere is from anthropogenic sources (I include "cow farts" in that category, because animal agriculture is a human activity. A huge source of methane is the "lagoons" where animal wastes are stored. Other sources are coal mines and landfills. The primary non-anthropogenic source of atmospheric methane is the decay of organic material in swamps and wetlands. As the atmosphere gets warmer, more methane will be produced from wetlands. As with many of the processes that contribute to global warming, this is an example of a positive feedback loop.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ May 23 2006, 12:28 PM) [snapback]259856[/snapback]</div>

Interesting. Anybody else ever heard of Halliburton and no-bid contracts? Boy, this IS fun--fairy tales at bedtime! OOPS--can't say "fairy" can we--someone might think I am pushing that nasty liberal gay agenda...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 16 2006, 08:05 PM) [snapback]272554[/snapback]</div>

Al Gore has spoken about global warming for most of his career, has held hearings, has introduced legislation as a senator, has written books and articles on the topic, etc. (If you had seen the movie or read a brief biography of the man, you'd know this.)

You are entitled to your opinion of him as a politician and a person, and are entitled to your opinion of his effectiveness. However, as to the FACTUAL issue of whether or not Al Gore has just "NOW" decided to do something about Global Warming, you are WRONG.

- Bob R.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus @ May 24 2006, 07:42 PM) [snapback]260570[/snapback]</div>

CEI is largely funded by Exxon-Mobil. See http://www.exxonsecrets.org for more on that.

Take care,

Steve