Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny

In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.

If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.

A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated as a means of building support for a desired political position.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article

No votes yet

The Practical Implications of Global Warming

I am 59 years old, I have no children, but I do have nieces and nephews. Most of the dire effects predicted are 50-60 years out at the earliest. Since I will be dead then I don

Old South End Broadway

Al Gore: "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science."

Bull crap Filter on Al Gore: "We must stop tolerating [free thought] the rejection [of our theology] and distortion of science [of our beliefs in unconfirmed research]. [We must give some sort of retribution those who reject our idea's. All hail Gaia.]

Want to be heard? Leave a voicemail at Toledo Unplugged: (419) 464-7952
We'll put your voice in a podcast every Monday and Thursday

First the guy who wrote the article

My problem is people like Gore have preached to us about global warming and that we should change our lives to prevent it.

The reality is people like Gore could do more if instead of writing books, which ironically use up more trees, they could instead try to find ways to make more environment friendly products affordable to the average american.

The average person will not spend thousands of dollars to be more eco-friendly. They will however be more apt to buy an eco-friendly product if it is sold at a competitive rate as that of the uneco-friendly product.

Most people are not going to change their lives unless they see a direct benefit to themselves. Instead of making movies and writing books the global warming leaders should be trying to make the eco-friendly products more pocketbook friendly.

MikeyA

MikeyA

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=nation_world&id=5072659

Research charged Monday that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president's 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours.........

The Center claims that Nashville Electric Services records show the Gores in 2006 averaged a monthly electricity bill of $1,359 for using 18,414 kilowatt-hours, and $1,461 per month for using 16,200 kilowatt-hours in 2005. During that time, Nashville Gas Company billed the family an average of $536 a month for the main house and $544 for the pool house in 2006, and $640 for the main house and $525 for the pool house in 2005. That averages out to be $29,268 in gas and electric bills for the Gores in 2006, $31,512 in 2005.........

Nothing. Individuals can make good choices, but it will be outweighed by those who don

Old South End Broadway

The government has dealt with the issue of eco-friendly vs practical.

In the mid to late 90's they decided to convert most of the military's vehicles that weren't combat neccessary to run on clean natural gas.

It was both practical and eco-friendly.

However about 3 years ago the military converted back to petroleum gas. The reason being is the CNG price rose drastically and despite high petroleum prices was so high it's use wasn't practical.

Currently the military is still using petroleum but the CNG vehicles are still available in case they ever decide to switch back.

MikeyA

MikeyA

It could be a full time job smaking down all the right wing talking points everyone wants to keep using over and over...

That's true Sensor. I've tried in the past...but it appears when it comes to assaulting reason, some people just prefer to stay the course.

http://nookularoption.blogspot.com/

"In the end Al Gore is a global warming evangelist. He is about educating the masses and raising the level of debate. He choosing to do this through books and movies. He's making a buck or two in the process as well; which last time I checked as ok here in America. "

Please, don't compare education with evangelism. Evangelism is indoctrination. At least there is some science behind global warming research (much of which I find suspect by the way, but at least it's science and not faith. Although most global warming indoctrinates remind me of the faithful - faithful meaning belieiving without fact).

If I refuse to believe the things you have to take on blind faith to believe everything Gore evangelizes on Global warming, does that make me a G W Athiest?

For those of us who are critical of Mr. Gore brassmonkey made our points when he said

"Perhaps Gore does something positive for the masses like lower junk mail, get rid of parent proof packaging for new toys, time traffic lights so cars don't idle, and ban empty TARTA buses from driving on the streets."

This is what I mean by practical. And it is more solidified in reason then what he's actually doing.

As I pointed out earlier with publication of e-books it would have zero impact on the environment. His printing of even recycled books have an impact on the environment as others pointed out previously.

If Gore decided to go the e-book route I would believe his sincerity. However until he does that I will believe him to just be evangelizing in order to keep his name in the public spotlight because that is the only affect that is fulfilled.

His time as a Senator and VP gave him more than enough power to enforce controls that would impact the environment but due to political plays he did not. He has no one to blame but himself for not fighting either harder or smarter.

MikeyA

MikeyA

Evangelism to Al Gore. I mean really - we have to draw the line somewhere.

But seriously - he is on a zealous campaign to educate (some use the word indoctrinate) and there is no denying that. This means one of two things, he either passionately believes in this crusade - or there's a boatload of money to made to explain the huge effort.

Time will tell.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

It's all Al Gore's fault? He shouldn't be talking and writing about global warming he should be inventing cars that run on water, that can be sold for under 100 dollars?

In the end Al Gore is a global warming evangelist. He is about educating the masses and raising the level of debate. He choosing to do this through books and movies. He's making a buck or two in the process as well; which last time I checked as ok here in America.

BTW there are a lot of small thinks that you can do to save energy around your house, which is what Gore is really avocating. He's not asking us to spend thousands each, he's asking us to make small changes (light bulbs, recycling, etc) that can have huge impact when enacted by thousands if not millions of people.

It could be a full time job smaking down all the right wing talking points everyone wants to keep using over and over...

Group analyzes Al Gore's energy use at his Nashville home
http://www.wbir.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=42745

Gore purchased 108 blocks of "green power" for each of the past three months, according to a summary of the bills.

That's a total of $432 a month Gore paid extra for solar or other renewable energy sources.

The green power Gore purchased in those three months is equivalent to recycling 2.48 million aluminum cans or 286,092 pounds of newspaper, according to comparison figures on NES' Web site.
...

"Every family has a different carbon footprint," said Kalee Krider, a spokeswoman for Gore. The Gores' 10,000-square-foot house on Lynnwood Boulevard has a large one.

The Green Power Switch program isn't all that Gore and his wife, Tipper, are doing, Krider said.

They use compact fluorescent light bulbs and are in the midst of a renovation project that includes having solar panels installed on their home to reduce fossil fuel consumption, she said.

Their car? A Lexis hybrid SUV.

"They, of course, also do the carbon emissions offset," she said.

That means figuring out how much carbon is emitted from home power use, and vehicle and plane travel, then paying for projects that will offset that with use of renewable energy, such as solar power.

Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe, she said.

Love of god people read and think for yourselves...

Perhaps Gore does something positive for the masses like lower junk mail, get rid of parent proof packaging for new toys, time traffic lights so cars don't idle, and ban empty TARTA buses from driving on the streets.

...that the way people are approaching global warming is the same way evangelists approach their faith...some have even observed that the actions of both types of people are very similar...

:)

My point was they could spend their time making global warming preventative measures more practical.

I don't care who you are the average american won't change unless they know it's in their benefit. Gore's evangelizing won't convert enough to make a difference. His work and money could be better used making the products more practical.

But don't argue with me. I watched his movie and now I'm a believer. In an effort to save energy I removed all the batteries from my fire alarms!

MikeyA

MikeyA

???

why did it take gore so long to participate in the green power switch program? the program has been around for years and gore only started his participation in 12/06. the tva, i believe, supplies the green power to nes. it is one of the older green power in the country.

i'd think gore would have been all over this from day one. for whatever reason, he was only a few years late on the green power. better late than never, huh?

also, gore was holding conferences on environmental issues when he was a junior congressman (late 70's). you'd think his solar cell renovation would have been completed by now.

Mike - because you asked... No trees were harmed; Gore used recycled paper.

http://www.honorearth.org/whatsnew/nativeenergy.htm

WITH its flowcharts and glossy photos of wilderness and industrial blight, the companion volume to Al Gore's environmental documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," is basically a Power Point presentation on paper. Appleton Green Power Utopia 80# Matte, to be precise, a recycled paper with a sanctimonious name befitting a book that also says it's

I understand but I doubt it'll console my family while they're on fire.

Practicality should always remain #1.

MikeyA

MikeyA

No trees were harmed; Gore used recycled paper.

Um, even recycled paper is 50% virgin stock. That means that they still had to cut down trees to make his book.

BTW: Here a quote from Wikipedia:

However, most paper produced in the western world is made from trees specifically grown for papermaking. A tree harvested for papermaking is soon replaced by another, so the cycle continues. "We are not talking about the rainforest or old growth in the Pacific Northwest," says Champion Paper

Want to be heard? Leave a voicemail at Toledo Unplugged: (419) 464-7952
We'll put your voice in a podcast every Monday and Thursday

I found this link rather interesting:

http://esa21.kennesaw.edu/modules/biogeochem/exercise1/8-4.htm

One of the things I would have to keep in mind is that a live tree (even one grown to produce pulp for paper) removes a certain amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (depending on the species). An amount cited in the article above is 45%, I believe, of the mass of the tree is sequestered carbon. And a tree actually removes more than its weight of carbon dioxide, returning oxygen to the atmosphere.

We all use paper. And recycling, while admirable, doesn't keep the carbon sequestered unless that paper is recycled as paper, Using the paper for mulch just returns the carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. And the process of turning the paper back into something useful also produces carbon dioxide.

There are no easy answers, and a "paperless" world is so far away as to be a joke. But with continuing population growth, and a rising standard of living we will be living with the carbon dioxide generated (and increasing) for a long time. We may yet have a world climate that dinosaurs would have found familiar.

Old South End Broadway

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.