Friday, December 4, 2009

There is "Big Al" Gore and there is the Truth.

There is "Big Al" Gore and there is the Truth.

Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:44:20 -0500
R269908
3 years ago
GWHunta

On Wednesday the 21st of March, 2007; Al Gore will testify before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on the impact of atmospheric CO2 on climate at the invitation of committee chair, California’s Barbara Boxer.

Sometimes no Peace,

Post Modified: 03/18/07 13:49:28

R270152
3 years ago
GWHunta


R270153
3 years ago
GWHunta

.......and then there’s the Truth.


R270170
3 years ago
Snark

Al is not a climate scientist. Al is a popularizer and a communicator. Why do you persist in attacking him, rather than addressing the literature you refuse to read?


R270172
3 years ago
athena

Which one takes less time and effort?


R270173
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

Fact:

GW is obsessed with Al Gore.


R270175
3 years ago
athena

That’s one of those facts that’s not opinion isn’t that? What are those called?


R270176
3 years ago
Number5Toad

Which one takes less time and effort?


R270177
3 years ago
athena

Oh yeah, a fact.


R270195
3 years ago
GWHunta

Why do you persist in attacking him, rather than addressing the literature you refuse to read?

Why do persist in trying to convince others that I haven’t read the literature, Snark?

You know less about me and what I have or haven’t read than you know about global warming.

And that ain’t much.

Keep reading. And stop trying to lead.

It creeps me out.

Sometimes no Peace,

Post Modified: 03/20/07 23:36:57

R270197
3 years ago
GWHunta

GW is obsessed with Al Gore.

No, I’m fairly certain it’s the other way round, but you know how it really works. Whatever greases your wheels.

Bow to the power of CO2.

.007(%)


R270215
3 years ago
cowboyhippie

Have you ever thought that the sun is doing this get the facts http://www.freewebs.com/cowboyhippie/


R270379
3 years ago
GWHunta

“Mr Gore’s extraordinary reinvention as a cultural icon is likely to be sustained by a series of prominent engagements in the next few months, including his app­earance as the sole witness next month in Senate and House of Representative committee hearings on global warming.”

“Dubbed by some as the Goracle, Mr Gore is likely to attract national ratings when he testifies, say climate change lobbyists.”

“If you look at where the American public stands on global warming there has been a tremendous shift in the last year which coincides with the popularity of Al Gore’s movie,” says Emily Frigdor at the Public Interest Research Group.”


R270429
3 years ago
athena

“No, I’m fairly certain it’s the other way round,”

I kinda doubt he knows you exist.


R270430
3 years ago
Snark

Why do persist in trying to convince others that I haven’t the literature, Snark?

Because you haven’t. It’s transparently obvious. Shit, you didn’t know who Roger Pielke was until weeks after you started making noise about your “novel theory.” You still haven’t mentioned any of the other researchers doing research on the topic of climate and land use change. And you display an appalling ignorance of the standard language and conventions of scientific discourse. So it’s clear to me that you’re unfamiliar with the literature. Res ipsa loquitor, bitches.

Post Modified: 03/20/07 17:39:42

R270432
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

You know less about me and what I have or haven’t read than you know about global warming

I love personal attacks.


R270436
3 years ago
Snark

I love personal attacks.

Me too. Makes the Truth that much more believable.

Post Modified: 03/20/07 17:40:37

R270453
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

almost as I love you, Hunta.


R270528
3 years ago
GWHunta

As for Al Gore’s obsession with GW as an acronym for “global warming”,
Res ipsa loquitor,

Snark,

You’ve shown me little but attitude. I’ve helped you see the shortcomings of your myopic perspective on this issue and at least you were thinking.

So again you’d rather snipe than discuss. Have at it.

Keep doing the same thing, it’ll yield for you the same result.

As for “novel” the use is correct in the context within which it is used, GNN.

As is most of what and how I write here.

As you’ve so skillfully pointed out, I generally don’t even proofread my own posts, let alone footnote or reference what I’ve to say. You should be able to get past that and see the reality of what I’m saying, since the word Truth seems to hold a negative connotation for you unless “Big Al” is using it.

Deny the message, attack the messenger. All is fair?

Bottom line is this:

I’m telling you the Truth.

Gore will be before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and will testify to the danger to the climate from the .007% increase in atmospheric CO2, spreading his “trace gas hysteria” on Capitol Hill.

I hope they swear him in.

Peace,


R270533
3 years ago
Snark

So again you’d rather snipe than discuss.

When you’d rather browbeat and blow hot air than discuss, yes.


R270594
3 years ago
GWHunta

Gore takes his warming warnings to Congress

He’s an all that rage, “Big Al” the sage.

Pay careful attention to his message to the managers of the trillions of dollars currently tied up pension funds.

Sometimes no Peace,

Post Modified: 03/21/07 09:24:32

R270644
3 years ago
GWHunta

Watch “Big Al” spin the truth on C-Span 2:30 pm EST.

Sometimes no Peace,

Post Modified: 03/21/07 17:06:51

R270674
3 years ago
GWHunta

Al Gore Continues to Demand Special Treatment

March 20, 2007

Update: At 9:29AM ET Wednesday — after the issue was raised by Fox News Channel — former Vice President Gore’s testimony was received by the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee. Gore’s testimony was given to Committee members just one minute before his scheduled House appearance and mere hours before his scheduled Senate appearance.

Posted By Marc Morano – 8:08 PM ET – Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov

From behind the scenes on Capitol Hill: Former Vice President Al Gore, despite being given major preferential treatment, has violated the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee’s (EPW) hearing rules.

Gore first demanded to be granted an unprecedented 30 minute opening statement to the Senate EPW Committee for Wednesday’s (March 21) global warming hearing scheduled for 2:30 pm ET.

(See “FULL COMMITTEE: Vice President Al Gore’s Perspective on Global Warming” )

The GOP minority on the EPW committee agreed to the 30 minute opening statement.

But then Gore demanded a waiver of the EPW committee’s 48 hour rule that requires all witnesses before EPW to submit their testimony in advance. The GOP minority on the EPW committee then agreed to waive the 48 hour rule in favor of allowing Gore to submit his testimony 24 hours before the hearing.

But in a breaking news development on Capitol Hill — the former Vice President has violated the new 24 hour deadline extension by failing to submit his testimony – even with the new time extension granted to Gore.

As of 8pm ET Tuesday evening, the testimony still has not been received by EPW, a clear violation of committee rules.

The word on Capitol Hill says not to expect Gore’s testimony to the Senate EPW committee until Wednesday (March 21) — the day of the hearing.

It appears that Gore does not believe the same rules apply to him that apply to every other Senate EPW witness.

The question looms on Capitol Hill: Is Gore delaying the submission of his testimony until the very last moment because he fears it will give members of the EPW committee time to scrutinize it for accuracy?

This was taken from the Senate EPW Minority page:

Minority (Republicans) The Bad Cops. Sun and sunspots likely culprit.

Majority (Democrats) The Good Cops. Anthropogenic increases in GHG’s.

Technically correct, but emphasis on CO2 as stated by Gore incorrect and wildly exagerated. Water vapor is a GHG and anthropogenic water vapor is the cause of global warming.

Both parties are wrong and the solutions they are considering will do nothing for the climate, but will fundamentally change the way this economy works for all of us.

That means opportunity for some and danger for others.

If you know your current socio-economic standing, it shouldn’t be too difficult to determine how these changes will impact you. Just check your credit score.

Post Modified: 03/21/07 17:18:54

R270681
3 years ago
GWHunta

Well “Big Al” is on.

1. Immediate freeze, in CO2 emissions.

2. No more employment (income) tax. CO2 taxes. (fossil fuel or breathing?)

3. Cap and Trade. Kyoto is dead, but we should do defacto compliance while we negociate a tougher treaty to be implemented by 2010.

Post Modified: 03/21/07 17:08:16

R270682
3 years ago
GWHunta

4. No new coal fired plants without carbon capture. (to be stored where?)

5. Ban incandescent lights.

6. Electronet.

7. Raise CAFE standards.

8. Carbon neutral mortgages.

9. Require CO2 disclosure of industries.

10. Green energy mandated on utilities.

Post Modified: 03/21/07 14:38:00

R270688
3 years ago
GWHunta

“Trace gas hysteria” the impetus for the the “next greatest generation.”

Sometimes no Peace,


R270722
3 years ago
GWHunta

Two symbols:

Danger and opportunity.

Billionaires for Bush and Gore.

If they’ll believe there’s danger for them, there’ll be opportunity for U.S.

Sometimes no Peace.

Post Modified: 03/21/07 17:23:23

R270991
3 years ago
GWHunta

Maybe it’s the money?

Hate to give it up for the baby boom to meet retirement expenses, when we’ve got their grandchildren to “save.”

Large investors back CO2 emission curbs

Pension funds, Merrill Lynch urge Bush, Congress to act.

Post Modified: 03/22/07 18:47:23

R270994
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

obviously corporations are completely incapable of caring about the future of their businesses and how the planet affect’s them. There must clearly be a hidden agenda behind Pension funds thinking it might be a good idea to have CO2 regulation like in other countries.


R271002
3 years ago
GWHunta

Mandatory programs for carbon reduction forces people to spend their assets in ways the may or not benefit the environment and will certainly provide profits for others, whether most actually benefit or not.

I’m not actually opposed to some of the energy and economic ideas and have a few of my own to add to the list.

But energy and economic changes to society should be done because they make sense and will be implemented voluntarily if possible and fairly if mandatory.

We’ve all heard the new standard of fair. It’s fair so long as you are carbon neutral.

So if I invest in a big wind power project, my private jet getting 2 miles to the gallon flying 250,000 miles a year doesn’t impact the climate cause I’m selling the wind to poor people mandated to pay extra for “green” electricity.

That’s what they’re excited about.

And that’s the “bull” Merrill Lynch and the boys are about to run with.

Sometimes no Peace.


R271003
3 years ago
GWHunta

Don’t even get me started on the reasons for or the possibilities of the “Electronet.”

Peace,

Post Modified: 03/31/07 07:48:25

R282318
3 years ago
GWHunta

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”
~Voltaire


R282340
3 years ago
Watson

Surely Al Gore is a Red Herring? I know next to nothing about climate science, but I believe we had better stop relying on oil and coal because they are going to run out. We had better not rely on nuclear power for a number of good reasons, like for instance that uranium is a finite resource.

No brains, just intuition tells me we should invest in solar, wind, geothermal, permaculture. We need to stop cutting down rainforests to make room for biofuel production, rather than food for the local people.

Carbon trading looks like a trick to make us think the governments are doing something. Sorry, just got carried away.


R282351
3 years ago
GWHunta

Your observations are spot on.

As for the Red Herring; the Goracle and his followers are gearing up for the next media blitz promoting 07.07.07 and further politicization of the science.

The pressure is on to build a consensus to do something.

Be they right, or be they wrong.

We need to utilize the remaining coal and oil reserves more effectively and efficiently to build the infrastructure for a direct solar based future.

Improved technology exists to replace the conventional coal fired electrical generation power plant, but the political will to aid in the finance and enforce this transition is curiously absent.

New conventional coal fired plants are springing up not just in China, but here in the U.S. as well.

Much of the current biofuel boom in America is now dependent upon increased conventional coal burning as the energy base for the ethanol production process.

This isn’t just environmentally unfriendly, it is ridiculous.

Peace


R282352
3 years ago
dikweed

Carbon trading looks like a trick to make us think the governments are doing something.

Uh huh

New conventional coal fired plants are springing up not just in China, but here in the U.S. as well.

And, Europe.


R293730
3 years ago
GWHunta

“...the scientific data is in. There is no more debate.”
~“Big Al” Gore

Post Modified: 07/16/07 11:10:24

R293731
3 years ago
GWHunta

The Goracle

Post Modified: 07/16/07 12:01:29

R293735
3 years ago
Snark


R293737
3 years ago
GWHunta

Like “Big Al” says, “There is no more debate.”

(I knew I could count on you Snark)

I’ve been meaning to ask you, “how do you juggle your busy schedule working full time? as in intern for the EPA, and maintaining your presence trolling GNN?”

Peace,


R293754
3 years ago
Snark

Oh, look, GW has been reduced to calling me a troll.

I think I’m permanently done taking you seriously.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 12:45:17

R293760
3 years ago
tango

Snark – I think I’m permanently done taking you seriously.

You took him seriously?


R293762
3 years ago
Snark

Before his treatment of global warming devolved into Gore-obsession, ranting, and relentlessly bumping his own blogs for no discernible reason, I kind of did. There are a few kernels of interesting science buried in his bullshit, but I’m tired of picking them out.

Whatever his agenda is – and there is one, I have no doubt – I have no interest in indulging it further.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 13:27:17

R293765
3 years ago
Faxanadu

You guys are weird.

If you can’t stand GW stop frequenting his threads.

Its almost as though you’re obsessed.


R293766
3 years ago
tango

Bodo – Its almost as though you’re obsessed.

I was just joking around with Snark for a sec, but seriously – we both think that scientific accuracy in a discussion of issues such as climate change is quite important, as is intellectual honesty. I suppose we could avoid climate change threads, as I have been lately, but then highly credulous individual such as yourself may be misled by someone with an unhealthy obsession with Al Gore and a perplexing agenda. So we do what we can to interject a little honesty into the debate. I’m not sure why you find that offensive, but I apologize if you expect inaccurate statements of a scientific nature to go unchallenged by myself or Snark.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 13:49:41

R293772
3 years ago
Snark

If you can’t stand GW stop frequenting his threads. – Fax

If this were a discussion of, say, Al Gore’s facial hair grooming habits, I might be entirely willing to do just that. The problem is that he’s deliberately misrepresenting scientific information that has broad implications for policy and environmental protection, and he champions a point of view that deflates any sense of urgency about the topic and seems to espouse inaction and avoidance as a sensible response to the issue. Frankly, I don’t want to see the issue confused and obfuscated by nattering over questionably relevant details and personal attacks against a popularizer, or to let scientific inaccuracy go unchallenged.

I’m a scientist; to step aside and let reactionary backlash, personal ad hominem, misrepresentation, and a questionable agenda dictate the discourse on climate change around here would be irresponsible of me.

but then highly credulous individual such as yourself – tango

Uh, T, that was Faxanadu, not Bodo – I don’t think he’s established himself as being particularly credulous about this issue, just interested.


R293776
3 years ago
tango

Snark – _Uh, T, that was Faxanadu, not Bodo

Fax is Bodo’s sock, and yes, I find Bodo to be rather credulous.

Edit: I’m also permanently pissed-off due to work lately, so I’m probably being more of a dick than I care to think about.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 14:23:36

R293777
3 years ago
Snark

Fax is Bodo’s sock, and yes, I find Bodo to be rather credulous.

No shit? Well, righto, then.


R293779
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

credulous is such a good word, I need to use it more often.


R293780
3 years ago
Faxanadu

Your argument might make some sense if it weren’t for the fact that 90% of everything you guys post in response to GW is ad hominem garbage.

then highly credulous individual such as yourself

Shiver me timbers, somebody’s ego feels threatened. This is a good example of how you personalize many of your attacks, which is ironic coming from somebody who rides such a high horse in regards to the scientific standard. If you stuck to the issues I wouldn’t have anything to say about you or your comments, but you don’t. So much of what you say, on GW threads at least, is salacious, which I find enlightening as to your actual character. Oh, and don’t forget to Cite Plz.

misled by someone with an unhealthy obsession

Shit, on top of being the epitome of scientific objectivity you are also clairvoyant. Not even I knew I was “misled”. How you did considering I’ve never stated my beliefs on the subject one way or another blows my mind. Up until now I thought my issue was just your poor handling of the discussion and lack of intellectual professionalism. Oh, and Cite Plz.

I’m not sure why you find that offensive

I wasn’t offended until very recently. Actually, where I come from being called weird is sortof a bonus.

I apologize if you expect inaccurate statements of a scientific nature to go unchallenged by myself or Snark.

By all means, challenge the statements. What is it again that you disagree with? Been so long I can’t remember. I do recall Snark changing his tune on the role of evapotranspiration in Anthropogenic climate change, oh, but that was because his friend told him about it, had nothing to do with GW.

The human ego is a beautiful thing.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 14:25:30

R293781
3 years ago
Faxanadu

P.S. Fax and bodo are two very close individuals that share the same computer.

On Edit: Share the same 2 computers actually.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 14:24:06

R293782
3 years ago
tango

Yeah fax or bodo, or whatever you want to call yourself – I’m sure I haven’t displayed rigorous professionalism lately when dealing with climate change. I used to, but have since become quite aggravated about having to repeat myself when dealing with the same half-cocked climate change conspiracy bullshit that is ever-prevalent on this site.

And while I’ve thought that both fax and bodo display a dearth of critical thinking on this issue, that’s no excuse for me to be as much of a dick as I have been lately.

So, I guess I’ll catch you guys later – It’s really not healthy to care this much about what some wanker on the internet thinks about climate change.

Post Modified: 07/16/07 14:33:19

R293784
3 years ago
Faxanadu

I probably overreacted somewhat, and for that I do apologize. I do feel bad if I’ve come on too strong. I don’t always deal well with snobbery.

As for mine and bodo’s dearth of knowledge related to climate change —
yeah, you’re right. Its not something either of us have put much time into researching, which is why we’ve never formed a cogent opinion either way.

But again, I wasn’t addressing the argument, I was addressing the lack thereof.

No hard feelings from me.


R293801
3 years ago
Snark

I do recall Snark changing his tune on the role of evapotranspiration in Anthropogenic climate change, oh, but that was because his friend told him about it, had nothing to do with GW.

Not so much a friend; a professor at the university I work at and his research. GW only had anything to do with it insofar as he spurred me to see if there was actually any research that backed up that portion of his claims. As for my tune – well, I’ll readily admit that evaporation has been shown to play a role in regional and local climate variability and that it has the potential to affect aspects of global climate. That’s all you can really draw from the aforementioned professor’s research, and that’s as far as I’ll go on the GW train. His claims that CO2 is negligible, that Gore (excuse me, Goracle) is a NWO shill, and that most global change science is just “trace gas hysteria” are entirely his own, and on those assertions I haven’t changed my tune a note.


R293814
3 years ago
GWHunta

I simply reposted a Gore quote I came across on a GW article earlier today on my own blog. I haven’t been reduced or diminished in any way by this, just noting Gore’s arrogance in this humble record.

As for referring to Snark’s not so original post here today as trolling, I think spamming another’s blog with a photo was somewhat appropriate (and expected) in that it demonstrates the degree of polarization and lack of serious thought on this issue, one which Gore has publicly declared debate to be complete, an irrational act of pure political dominance.

Defining what Snark was doing in terms of making a single comment (or spamming a photo) is quite different from defining or characterizing Snark or his activities on GNN as a whole.

But if the shoe fits…

My point (or agenda) about Gore is simply exposing the fact that the global warming and anthropogenic climate influence debate is far from over; Gore is a politician through and through, not a climate scientist, with an agenda of his own choosing to pursue furthering the interests of those that have supported him for decades.

The power elite in this country (and if you don’t consider “Big Al” a member of this somewhat exclusive minority you need to rethink more than global warming) and your own interests may not be one and the same.

Peace,


R293818
3 years ago
GWHunta

Beyond that, I do not recommend, urge or endorse inaction on the matter.

Immediate efforts to mitigate anthropogenic impacts should be undertaken in a socially just and comprehensive manner as quickly as they can be formulated, financed and implemented.

But real and cost effective mitigation depends first upon properly identifying the full ramifications of all anthropogenic influence and addressing land and water use issues.

This problem is bigger than phasing out incandescent lighting and capping (taxing and trading) our CO2 emissions.

Peace,

Post Modified: 07/16/07 18:11:32

R293859
3 years ago
HackMkUltra

tango, did you ever watch that doc I was talkinga bout…I never heard from you?

Post Modified: 07/16/07 23:07:07

R293861
3 years ago
HEMPforVICTORY

Until Big Al champions the repeal of the prohibition of hemp, he cannot be considered credible OR worthy on the issue of Global Warming.

Perhaps he should be referred to as the Champion of Global WARNING.

Personally, the guy makes my eyebrows twitch and creates a detectable rise of anxiety emanating from “My Gut”


R293863
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

Just look up the scientists who are interviewed in the doc:

Dr. David Legates
Associate Professor in Climatology, George Marshall Institute

Dr. Sallie Baliunas
serves as Senior Scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute

Dr. John Christy
a series of subsequent reports identified flaws in Christy and Spencer’s calculations, as Media Matters noted. One such study, published in 2003, reanalyzed the data using the corrected methodology and found more pronounced warming in the troposphere.

Dr. Nils-Axel Morner
Is at least a regular speaker at the George C. Marshall Institute

George C. Marshall Institute
has received $630,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Sound like really unbiased sources!


R293864
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

Axel-Morner and the NRSP
Listed as an “allied expert” for a Canadian group called the “Natural Resource Stewardship Project,” (NRSP) a lobby organization that refuses to disclose it’s funding sources. The NRSP is led by executive director Tom Harris and Dr. Tim Ball. An Oct. 16, 2006 CanWest Global news article on who funds the NRSP, it states that “a confidentiality agreement doesn’t allow him [Tom Harris] to say whether energy companies are funding his group.”

DeSmog uncovered information that two of the three Directors on the board of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project are registered energy industry lobbyists and senior executives of the High Park Advocacy Group, a Toronto based lobby firm that specializes in “energy, environment and ethics.”


R293866
3 years ago
GWHunta

So what you’re saying here is that there is the appearance of a conflict of interest and evidence of a possible conspiracy to conceal it within this group, so that proves the credibility of the alternative argument?

Cite plz.

Kidding.

Peace,


R293871
3 years ago
GWHunta

This reminds me somewhat of the whole if Al Gore had prevailed in 2000, would the U.S. have invaded Iraq question.

Proving George Bush lied about WMD’s in Iraq, doesn’t lend any credibility to Al Gore, and his choice of running mate for the White House was Joe Lieberman, one of the most hawkish members in the U.S. Senate in terms of his unwaivering support for the war in Iraq as well as pressing for preemptive action against Teheran’s nuclear program.

Leopards don’t change their spots.

Peace,

Post Modified: 07/17/07 01:13:04

R293875
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

so that proves the credibility of the alternative argument

no lolzhunta, global warming is an evil scam being secretly controlled by al gore at his evil headquarters in Tennessee, only you and your “paper” that you “published” on GNN have teh sekrit trooth.

This reminds me somewhat of the whole if Al Gore had prevailed in 2000


R293915
3 years ago
Snark

Dr. Sallie Baliunas

Sallie got her shit ruled a few years ago. She’s probably just bitter that her shitty paper got refuted.


R293916
3 years ago
Snark

So what you’re saying here is that there is the appearance of a conflict of interest and evidence of a possible conspiracy to conceal it within this group, so that proves the credibility of the alternative argument?

The established conflict of interest – taking money from industrial sources and think tanks – demolishes the group’s credibility. It doesn’t say anything about the consensus position, but it automatically makes anything they say suspect. And rightly so – given the history of extraordinarily poor scholarship exhibited by those on that list. Sallie Baliunas’ papers have repeatedly been shown to draw conclusions not supported by the data, or to use bad data to support conclusions, for example.

This reminds me somewhat of the whole if Al Gore had prevailed in 2000

Fuck Al Gore. We’re discussing the science, not the popularizer, and I’d like to ask you to please lay aside your irrational mad-dogging of Gore. It’s not productive and it’s a distraction from a discussion of the actual concepts at work. I know you’re obsessed with him and think he’s an NWO shill and everything else, but can it.

Post Modified: 07/17/07 09:55:49

R293920
3 years ago
GWHunta

This is a “Big Al” blog Snark.

Who funds the IPCC “consensus”?

Exercise the same logic you use to incriminate the energy industry hacks because of their funding sources.

Truth be told, most governments are controlled or at least heavily influenced by corporate concerns and lobbies as well, and the research funding isn’t coming down as pennies from heaven.

There simply isn’t any truly clean money out there and even your highly touted IPCC is influenced by the financial consensus and concerns that are heavily vested and have a dire need for a socially acceptable means of maintaining the global economic status quo.

I’m no more obsessed with Al Gore than George Bush or any of the other talking heads that are leading the people of this country over the cliff like lemmings.

What I’m truly obsessed with is trying to point out how implausible it is that Al Gore has remade himself and is now a sincere and humble public servant trying to save mankind and the planet.

Gore’s explanation of global warming is simplistic and incomplete.

He asserts with papal infallibility that the historical correlation between global temperature and atmospheric CO2 levels is cause and effect, with atmospheric CO2 being the driving force causing the current warming and that this unproved and unfounded theory can be used to reliably extrapolate and predict how much warming can be expected in the future according to various anticipated CO2 levels.

Not only is this factually flawed, but Gore then takes it a step further and declares the debate is over, the facts are in.

There is no need for any further discussion or explanation on the matter, it is time to drastically reduce our CO2 emissions now as we are at a “climate tipping point” another popular myth espoused by the Goracle, when no such “tipping point” exists in reality.

This planet has been both warmer and cooler in the past few thousand years, absent any heavily industrialized anthropogenic influence.

A .007% increase in atmospheric CO2 over the course of the past five decades is nothing to lose our heads over.

Peace,

Post Modified: 07/17/07 10:49:06

R293945
3 years ago
Snark

Who funds the IPCC “consensus”?

Out of curiosity, are you aware in any way of how the IPCC process actually works? Participants aren’t paid for their involvement; they merely have expenses paid when they attend conferences. No research is performed or funded by the IPCC; the participants merely gather to collate, interpret, and summarize research performed worldwide. Nobody besides administrative staff gets paid a salary or a bonus for their participation.

Exercise the same logic you use to incriminate the energy industry hacks because of their funding sources

Public funding does not carry a connotation of conflict of interest to me. Private funding does.

Truth be told, most governments are controlled or at least heavily influenced by corporate concerns and lobbies as well, and the research funding isn’t coming down as pennies from heaven.

Your logic doesn’t follow. If corporate concerns truly affected the results of publicly funded research, then you would expect that research to minimize global warming. It does not.

There simply isn’t any truly clean money out there and even your highly touted IPCC is influenced by the financial consensus and concerns that are heavily vested and have a dire need for a socially acceptable means of maintaining the global economic status quo.

So clarify for me, please, how research that implies that we’ve got to radically cut back on our energy usage, localize production, limit CO2 emissions, cut back on economic growth, transition to sustainable and renewable energy, and invest in long-term ecological-economic engineering serves the status quo. Because I simply don’t fucking see it, dogg.

He asserts with papal infallibility that the historical correlation between global temperature and atmospheric CO2 levels is cause and effect, with atmospheric CO2 being the driving force causing the current warming and that this unproved and unfounded theory can be used to reliably extrapolate and predict how much warming can be expected in the future according to various anticipated CO2 levels.

Past CO2 levels are not used to extrapolate predictions of future temperature based on CO2 addition. Your ignorance of the literature demonstrates itself once again.

Gore’s explanation of global warming is simplistic and incomplete.

So is yours.

There is no need for any further discussion or explanation on the matter, it is time to drastically reduce our CO2 emissions now as we are at a “climate tipping point” another popular myth espoused by the Goracle, when no such “tipping point” exists in reality.

So we should just say yaaay, not worry, and keep burning hydrocarbons because it’s having no real impact? For someone who paints himself as hella radical and shit, the substance of your arguments seems to echo that of industry shills and other slaves of the status quo almost to a T.

This planet has been both warmer and cooler in the past few thousand years, absent any heavily industrialized anthropogenic influence.

Are you attempting now to minimize the entire fact of global warming? That’s a new one, you’ve never denied it before.

This fact is perfectly obvious and acknowledged by all concerned, in context. The planet goes through natural climate variations. This climate variation has been shown to not be natural. Your past commentary on the subject acknowledges that anthropogenic influence – whether by land-use change or fossil fuel use or both – is responsible for global warming – so why are you now employing badly contextualized denials of anthropogenicity? What argument are you trying to make, here?

What is your agenda?

A .007% increase in atmospheric CO2 over the course of the past five decades is nothing to lose our heads over.

Merely trumpeting the insignificant “.007%” figure is simplistic, incomplete, and devoid of context. Pot, meet kettle.

Post Modified: 07/17/07 11:18:54

R293951
3 years ago
Snark

But real and cost effective mitigation depends first upon properly identifying the full ramifications of all anthropogenic influence and addressing land and water use issues.

So how does one address land and water use issues – which you have indicated lie primarily with irrigation and damming – in a “socially just” manner? Sounds like a great prescription for throwing up your hands and doing fuck-all to me. “Well, we can’t reduce irrigation and damming without reducing water and food supplies, so guess we’re stuck with it. But at least we can still have our incandescent bulbs and SUV’s, because they’re not doing shit!”

I’m so glad you’re the minority.

Post Modified: 07/17/07 11:31:04

R293994
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

watching lolzhunta make an ass of himself has become almost a daily occurance here. But how long can teh lolz possibly last, pray tell?


R294011
3 years ago
GWHunta

I am aware of the workings of the IPCC process, though largely through study of the criticisms of those who were active participants in the process in former reports and have more recently either been excluded from the process or declined to participate out of their concerns over the politicization of the process.

Your still not addressing the issue of public funding being directed primarily towards the study of the atmospheric CO2 aspect of the issue and land and water use aspects being given secondary priority or left either totally or inadequately funded.

I do not deny anthropogenic influence on the environment nor on the climate, regionally or globally and have endeavored to explain previously ignored (on GNN) aspects of anthropogenic climatic impact.

Since the vast majority of the surface water that is held from the sea is utilized for irrigation and more than 60% of this water is wasted and isn’t utilized by the crops as intended, social justice and effective mitigation in this realm would begin by a moratorium on large dam construction and focus these huge capital expenditures on increasing the efficiency of use of the current system of water delivery and of the irrigation systems that are already in place, rather than simply increasing or shifting acreages and total water supply by damming more major rivers and their tributaries.

Most of the poorest of the poor are without adequate safe potable water for drinking and sanitary purposes, while vast quantities of water are being used and most wasted for the production of cash crops grown for export markets in the “first world.”

Increasing the efficiency of the existing irrigation systems would yield water savings sufficient to provide safe potable water to all of humanity.

This would be a significant step towards increasing social justice and making clean safe potable water available to all is a compatible theme on which to base the process of building environmental understanding and promoting environmental stewardship in the poverty stricken “third world.”

Ending slash and burn farming techniques, poaching, illegal logging and unsanitary waste disposal practices in the “third world” and “developing” countries are an absolute necessity for species preservation and protection of the biosphere generally and the provision of adequate nutrition along with clean safe potable water could provide the economic incentive and basics of life necessary to build up these local economies into economic systems capable of developing and harnessing the human and material capital necessary to end the aforementioned ecologically damaging practices.

The replacement of cotton with other plant fibers that are less dependent upon both chemical fertilizers and pesticides as well as intensive irrigation would be a relatively cost effective and simple step to reducing both environmental pollution and water use globally.

Ending the industrialization of the agricultural production of year round fresh vegetables in North America’s desert southwest would likewise yield huge savings in water use and reduce shipping costs by re-instituting regionally grown crops in season produced with natural occurring precipitation.

Peak oil is here and the high energy cost environment is here to stay, even the most optimistic predictions of the expansion of crude oil supply estimate global growth in production at about 1% annually, while global demand is projected to grow at 2.2%.

Increasing the efficiency with which we use fossil fuels should have been given a top priority for the past thirty years and I’ve for decades been an advocate of both higher government mandated fleet fuel mileage standards, increasing residential and business energy efficiency and additional taxes on gasoline and other liquid motor fuels collected for the purpose of subsidizing the development and investment of renewable energy and energy conservation systems.

Switching to geothermal heat pump systems for residential and commercial heating and cooling has the potential to save trillions of cubic feet of natural gas annually and would greatly reduce overall CO2 emissions.

Again I’ve been an advocate of these changes for decades..

I’m so glad you’re the minority.

As for incandescent bulbs, I switched to all fluorescent high efficiency lighting when I began renting this house over 20 years ago.

I now own it and my mortgage will be paid off in less than two years and since buying it I’ve thrown out the functioning natural gas heating system and heat my home primarily with biomass, use no air conditioning, commuted to work on a motorcycle everyday 6 months a year in a northern climate rain or shine (many days had to sweep the snow from the seat prior to driving home) when I was fortunate enough to be healthy enough to go to work, even though very few were then (mid-90’s) too worried about global warming nor CO2 levels and gas was as cheap as its ever been. (indexed for inflation)

I haven’t flown commercial since 1977.

I live in a water abundant environment and still recycle the gray water from our home to the fruit trees we’ve got growing out back.

If every home in America were as efficient as mine currently is without a lot of the capital investments I’d happily make were my financial situation not what it is this country would be in far better shape environmentally and economically than it currently is, and were my economic situation even modestly improved, I’ve proven technology ideas on the board and planned to make my home a net energy producer by virtue of renewable energy systems sufficient to provide for our transportation needs as well.

Compare that to your hero Gore who expends more energy heating his pool than my family uses for shelter and rethink whom you’re truly glad is the minority.

Peace,

Post Modified: 07/17/07 16:39:20

R294030
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

Compare that to your hero Gore

Lolzhunta is so dumb he’s incapable of differing between message and messenger.


R294034
3 years ago
VigilantGuardian

Hmmmm, that sounds familiar….

“Ward Churchill lied about his Indian heritage!!!!!111!11”


R294035
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

yeah guys, I don’t knwo what aaron is mumbling about either.


R294036
3 years ago
VigilantGuardian

I’m saying attacking the messenger is all you do.


R294038
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

pointing out when someone lies is bad, huh?

I thought you were going to stay out of global warming discussions aaron? Time for bed?


R294041
3 years ago
VigilantGuardian

I am staying out of the GW discussion (not that I remember pledging to).
If I wasn’t I would have written…

“Al Gore once arranged to have 4 billion gallons of water released from a dam during a drought so he could have a photo-op in a canoe”

...but I didn’t.
And whats with the time for bed thing? Its 11:25am here.


R294083
3 years ago
GWHunta

incapable of differing between message and messenger.

That’s why I’m making sensible recommendations for environmental improvements and bolstering humane conditions and you’re posting clown pictures.

Gore’s message is as flawed and condescending as his character and his lifestyle.

Are you truly so naive as to believe that because one side is lying that the other is necessarily telling the truth?

Gore knwos better and tells it like it ain’t cause his version is now PC and is selling.

Peak oil is the real carbon based issue, but in the face of shortages of energy, the masses become egalitarian and demand rationing, meaning restricting access to supply universally.

Gore’s preference for caps, taxes and “carbon neutrality” means those wealthy enough to pay higher prices don’t suffer any cutbacks in energy consumption whatsoever, while the poor get squeezed out of access to energy and the middle class are both limited and paying through the nose.

Buy into a belief in this message if you like, I prefer to think for myself.

Peace,

Post Modified: 07/17/07 23:16:09

R294088
3 years ago
a_pretty_rainbow

I prefer to think for myself


R294102
3 years ago
HEMPforVICTORY

Gore’s preference for ... “carbon neutralitymeans those wealthy enough to pay higher prices don’t suffer any cutbacks in energy consumption whatsoever ...

Not only is this statement 100% correct, IMV, I find it to be one of the strongest points of argument for moving to a hemp based economy, and just one more reason to ignore Big Al.

Al Gore is not The Messiah.

The notion of carbon credits has revealed itself to be flawed, at least to this point, as the moving index for said credits are moving lower nearly every day.

If they begin to sell futures for the credits, all the (wealthy) players will further enrich themselves by playing both sides. It’s a rigged system from jump street.

Al’s a snake oil salesman.

Hemp for Victory !!!

Post Modified: 07/18/07 03:51:09

R294103
3 years ago
HEMPforVICTORY

Oh …

Carbon Neutrality, is Status Quo.

Last I heard, Status Quo does not equal Progressive.

Al’s a snake oil salesman.”


R294126
3 years ago
GWHunta

a_pretty_rainbow,

Your posts speak volumes in terms of the total lack of substance of your position or any valid criticism of my arguments against the mainstream and the points I’m making.

Try to relax and comprehend the fact that you’re reacting emotionally to an issue in which you hold a belief and don’t truly understand. Once you’ve your emotions in check then try to think.

Peace,


R306493
2 years ago
GWHunta

A Nobel Candidate?

Thousands of activists are hoping to convince Al Gore to run for president.

Could a Nobel Peace Prize give the reluctant candidate a push?

Post Modified: 10/08/07 12:08:48

R306786
2 years ago
GWHunta

One such group in Michigan, for instance, is trying to collect the roughly 12,000 signatures required to get him on the ballot before an Oct. 23 deadline. But before placement on the ballot becomes official, Mr. Gore must sign a required affidavit.

Bob Alexander, a co-chairman of the Michigan group, said he believed Mr. Gore just might do it, especially if he won the Nobel Prize.

“Hopefully,” Mr. Alexander said, “the euphoria of winning the Nobel Peace Prize, plus all this other positive stuff, will be enough for him to say: ‘O.K., this thing is taking off. We’re ready to run.’”


R306929
2 years ago
GWHunta

R306930
2 years ago
GWHunta

OLBERMANN: What do you think of the “draft Gore” stories, and do you think that, even after all this time, you will wind up facing him in the primaries, still?

CLINTON: Well, Keith, I am so hoping that he wins the Nobel Prize. There isn’t anybody who deserves it more, for the work he’s done for the last 20 years or more on behalf of sounding the alarms in the world concerning global warming. So I’m waiting to hear the announcement from the Nobel committee, and I hope that they give that well-deserved honor to Vice President Gore.

You know, I think we’ve got great candidates running. We have a wonderful field. We don’t have to be against anybody. All you have to do is to find who you’re for. And I’m just going to keep doing the best job I can to earn the support of as many voters as I can reach.


R306931
2 years ago
GWHunta

Gore/Clinton?

Post Modified: 10/12/07 23:50:50

R307062
2 years ago
GWHunta


R307063
2 years ago
GWHunta

Remember this.

Knowing George Bush lied, doesn’t insure that Al Gore is telling the Truth.

Peace,


R307068
2 years ago
Haggis

To be fair Al(la) Gore(ical) ‘won’ the igNoble Peace Prize jointly with a bunch of gravy-train snake-oil-selling wogs from the UN – so he only accounts for 50% of the farce.

Critics said Mr Gore’s campaign to tackle climate change was a recipe for poverty and conflict.

Gore’s Nobel Prize film criticised- Press Association, Friday October 12, 2007 5:03 PM.

Al Gore’s climate change campaign which has led to him being awarded the Nobel Prize has been criticised as one-sided sentimental mush which could lead to global instability, not peace.

The former vice president’s Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth attracted criticism from a High Court judge who pointed out its “nine scientific errors” and “one-sided” view of the issues.

And critics said Mr Gore’s campaign to tackle climate change was a recipe for poverty and conflict.

On Wednesday, Mr Justice Barton sitting at London’s High Court said some of the errors in Mr Gore’s work had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration” to support the former US vice-president’s thesis on global warming.

The judge said that before the film could be shown in UK schools, it might be necessary for the Department of Children, Schools and Families to make clear to teaching staff that some of Mr Gore’s views were not supported or promoted by the Government, and there was “a view to the contrary”.

The judge set out nine alleged errors in the film in which statements were made that were not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus.

Mr Gore said he was “gratified” by the court’s ruling and added that the “nine scientific errors” highlighted by the judge were only a “handful” amid “thousands of other facts in the film”.

Asked what he thought of Mr Gore’s Nobel prize, Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told CNN: “I was not surprised but I was also displeased.

“I don’t think that Al Gore’s policies, which the Nobel committee celebrated and mentioned as one of the reason for giving him the award lead to peace. Rather I think those policies lead to global instability and political strife, within nations and between nations.

“Basically what Al Gore and the global warming crusade want to do is put an energy starved planet on a diet and this is a recipe for poverty. And poverty does not lead to peace. It leads to conflict.”


R307101
2 years ago
GWHunta

“Basically what Al Gore and the global warming crusade want to do is put an energy starved planet on a diet and this is a recipe for poverty. And poverty does not lead to peace. It leads to conflict.”

Word.

Worth remembering that Gore’s choice for VP in 2000 was:

“Smoke’Mmm” Joe Lieberman.

Sometimes no Peace

Post Modified: 10/29/07 11:32:26

R307102
2 years ago
misanthropic

Nice Job, Snark.


R309219
2 years ago
GWHunta


R309225
2 years ago
Truthcansuk

Reborn To Run?

Didn’t he say he wasn’t?


R309267
2 years ago
Chickenma1

If it’s a choice among Al Gore, Hillary, or Barack Obama, I think I’ll cross my fingers (as opposed to hold my nose) and go with Obama.


R309269
2 years ago
Truthcansuk

The choice between voting for Hillary or Obama is shaping up to be the choice between a potential war with Iran or a potential war with Pakistan…

Strange little old world…


R309273
2 years ago
GWHunta

The only good thing thus far about the upcoming presidential election is that whomever wins will replace George Bush.

I’ve personally very little enthusiasm for any of the current front runners.

What’s Al Sharpton up to these days anyway?

Peace,


R309359
2 years ago
GWHunta

Bottom line is that increased atmospheric CO2, though certainly an anthropogenic impact upon the environment, is not the primary or principal cause of global warming, but is simply energy and economic policy, cloaked in a “green” shroud.

Much easier to explain that there isn’t enough to go round in terms of saving the planet, than to face the grim reality, that there simply isn’t enough to go round.

Anthropogenic alterations to the hydrological cycle are the principal and primary cause of global warming and climate change, the first politician willing to concede this fact publicly is the only one worthy of voter consideration for the highest office of this country.

Peace,

Post Modified: 10/30/07 12:43:33

R309743
2 years ago
GWHunta

R309746
2 years ago
GWHunta

NOW TO THE CRUX OF THE Al Gore argument — the idea that rising carbon dioxide levels are causing an increase in temperature.

To determine temperatures and carbon dioxide levels in the distant past, scientists rely on what they call the “proxy record.” There weren’t thermometers. So researchers drill deep down into the Antarctic ice sheet and the ocean floor and pull up core samples, whose varying chemical elements let them gauge both the CO2 levels and the temperatures of the distant past.

Gieg clicks a button, and three charts come together.

“The peaks and valleys of the Milankovi´c cycles for planetary temperature align well with the ocean-floor estimates, and those match closely the records of carbon dioxide concentrations and temperature indications from ice cores.

So, the professor maintains, these core samples from the polar ice and ocean floor help show that the Earth’s temperature and the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have been in lockstep for tens of thousands of years.

Of course, that was long before anybody was burning fossil fuels.

So Giegengack tells his students they might want to consider that “natural” climatic temperature cycles control carbon dioxide levels, not the other way around.

That’s the crux of his argument with Gore’s view of global warming — he says carbon dioxide doesn’t control global temperature, and certainly not in a direct, linear way.


R309770
2 years ago
Chickenma1

GW, interesting as always. The climate is changing, and I do believe the man-made altering of terrain and habitat affects climate and wildlife – that includes the noxious pollutants as well as mono-cropping, reservoirs, and de-forestation.

But here’s a thought: Since the Bushies have no respect for science, maybe the Gorists are trying to put one over on ‘em, to get the demand for their oil monopoly products to go down instead of up. I personally like that I can make ethanol in my yard, and a lot of people may be working on trash-for-fuel schemes on a neighborhood level. Certainly organic farming has received a big boost. In any case, I think the Gore global warming mythos is hurting the Bushies’ cause for war, too – a good thing.


R309801
2 years ago
GWHunta

I forced to agree that like most clouds, there is a silver lining to be found in the Gore cloud.

People should be concerned with their environmental footprints and few have shoes to fill the size of “Big Al’s.”

A little known fact about Bush. His ranch home / McMansion in Crawford, Texas is a model of energy efficiency, especially when compared with the Gore mansion / office or the residential complex owned and operated by the Edwards family.

I still think you’re giving “Big Al” more credit than he merits, but you’re in good company.

Gore admittedly has a lot of fans these days, but they’re numbered.

(his glory days, not his fans)

Peace,

Post Modified: 11/02/07 23:55:59


R309802
2 years ago
rapejesus

“Gore admittedly has a lot of fans these days, but they©re numbered.”

Have you finally decided to assassinate your arch nemesis?


R309809
2 years ago
GWHunta

Gore’s “glory days“ are numbered.

The “science” surrounding the correlation upon which his predictions are premised is coming apart at the seams.

Soon people will come to understand that the CO2 centric world view of global warming and climate change touted by Gore is simply the environmental wrapping of economic and energy policies demanded by the constraints of “Peak Oil.”

It’ll likely be too late when they do, but Gore will no longer be in the limelight.

Peace,

Post Modified: 11/03/07 00:35:57

R310359
2 years ago
GWHunta

Stronger hurricanes and typhoons represent only one of many new dangers as we begin what someone? has called a nature hike through the Book of Revelation.

As I write, my heart is heavy due to the suffering the people of the Gulf Coast have endured. In Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, and particularly in New Orleans, thousands have experienced losses beyond measure as our nation and the world witnessed scenes many of us thought we would never see in this great country. But unless we act quickly, this suffering will be but a beginning.

The science is extremely clear: Global warming may not affect the frequency of hurricanes, but it makes the average hurricane stronger, magnifying its destructive power.

In the years ahead, there will be more storms like Katrina, unless we change course.
~ Albert Gore

Post Modified: 11/11/07 09:35:23

R310881
2 years ago
GWHunta

Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.
~ Albert Einstein


R311099
2 years ago
GWHunta

Cirrus Disappearance: Warming Might Thin Heat-trapping Clouds

ScienceDaily (Nov. 5, 2007) — The widely accepted (albeit unproven) theory that manmade global warming will accelerate itself by creating more heat-trapping clouds is challenged this month in new research from The University of Alabama in Huntsville…....

There are significant gaps in the scientific understanding of precipitation systems and their interactions with the climate, he said. “At least 80 percent of the Earth’s natural greenhouse effect is due to water vapor and clouds, and those are largely under the control of precipitation systems.

Until we understand how precipitation systems change with warming, I don’t believe we can know how much of our current warming is man made. Without that knowledge, we can’t predict future climate change with any degree of certainty.


R311932
2 years ago
GWHunta


R318483
2 years ago
GWHunta

R318485
2 years ago
GWHunta

Ever Wonder, if maybe the joke isn’t on U.S.?

Sometimes no Peace

Post Modified: 12/15/07 12:46:54

R336650
2 years ago
GWHunta

(his glory days, not his fans)

Incidentally, if “their” plans come together, may have their days numbered as well.

Sometimes no Peace


R391805
6 months ago
GWHunta

“The spiritual sense of our place in nature…
can be traced to the origins of human civilization….
The last vestige of organized goddess worship
was eliminated by Christianity.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391806
6 months ago
GWHunta

“The fate of mankind, as well as of religion, depends upon
the emergence of a new faith in the future.
Armed with such a faith, we might find
it possible to resanctify the earth.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391807
6 months ago
GWHunta

“A total population of 250-300 million people,
a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner,
founder of CNN and major UN donor


R391808
6 months ago
GWHunta

“Our insatiable drive to rummage deep beneath
the surface of the earth is a willful expansion
of our dysfunctional civilization into Nature.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391809
6 months ago
GWHunta

“Adopting a central organizing principle…
means embarking on an all-out effort to use every
policy and program, every law and institution…
to halt the destruction of the environment.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391811
6 months ago
GWHunta

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the
United States. De-development means bringing our
economic system into line with the realities of
ecology and the world resource situation.” – Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies


R391812
6 months ago
GWHunta

Jobless rate rises to 26-year high

U.S. economy shed a larger-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June

Sometimes no Piece

Post Modified: 07/02/09 13:15:25

R391813
6 months ago
GWHunta

“We require a central organizing principle – one agreed to voluntarily.
Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations,
rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change – these are all forms of
appeasement, designed to satisfy the public’s desire to believe that
sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation
of society will not be necessary.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391814
6 months ago
GWHunta

“We are close to a time when all of humankind
will envision a global agenda that encompasses
a kind of Global Marshall Plan to address the
causes of poverty and suffering and
environmental destruction all over the earth.” – Al Gore,
Earth in the Balance


R391816
6 months ago
GWHunta

“... the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence
more than 500 million but less than one billion.” – Club of Rome,
Goals for Mankind


R391817
6 months ago
GWHunta

“Humanity is sitting on a time bomb. If the vast majority of the
world’s scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a
major catastrophe that could send our entire planet’s climate system
into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods,
droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have
ever experienced – a catastrophe of our own making.” – Al Gore,
An Inconvenient Truth


R391818
6 months ago
GWHunta

“The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and
spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest
opportunity to lift Global Consciousness to a higher level.” – Al Gore,
Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech


R391819
6 months ago
GWHunta

“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to
about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure
and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species,
returning throughout the world.”
-Dave Foreman,
co-founder of Earth First!

Post Modified: 07/02/09 13:29:06

R391820
6 months ago
GWHunta

“The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – Club of Rome,
premier environmental think-tank,
consultants to the United Nations


R391821
6 months ago
GWHunta

“A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society
at the present North American material standard of living
would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard
of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.” – United Nations,
Global Biodiversity Assessment


R391822
6 months ago
GWHunta

“One America burdens the earth much more than
twenty Bangladeshis. This is a terrible thing to say.
In order to stabilize world population,we must eliminate
350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say,
but it’s just as bad not to say it.” – Jacques Cousteau,
UNESCO Courier


R391823
6 months ago
GWHunta

“We simply must do everything we can in our power to
slow down global warming before it is too late.” – Arnold Schwarzenegger,
Governor of California


R391824
6 months ago
GWHunta

“Climate change is real. Not only is it real, it’s here,
and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new
global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster.” – Barack Obama,
US President


R393281
5 months ago
GWHunta

Big Al speaks on climate (and neuroscience) – July 07, 2009

“What luck for the rulers that men do not think.”
~ Adolf Hitler

Sometimes no Peace

Post Modified: 07/17/09 22:58:21

R393967
5 months ago
GWHunta

Most of the earth’s radiation that escapes the atmosphere is in the infrared band between 8 microns and 11 microns.

Source: Earth’s Energy Budget

The fact that carbon dioxide absorbs IR strongly in the wavelength range from 10 to 12 microns is true but misleading.

Water vapor also absorbs in the same wavelength range. The absorption coefficient for water vapor appears to be about half of the carbon dioxide coefficient.

However, the concentration of water vapor at 70 degrees F and 50% relative humidity is approximately 12,300 parts per million.

Therefore, even though carbon dioxide absorbs in that waveband, it can only increase the absorption provided by water vapor by about 3%.

Carbon dioxide does have an absorption band at about 4.2 micrometers (where water does not absorb), but objects whose temperature is about 500 degrees F emit that wavelength.

The surface of the earth rarely, if ever gets that high. (Forest fires?)

This data on water vapor concentration and black body emission temperature came from the “Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 70 ed., Chemical Rubber Company, 1999-1990.

Peace,


R394090
5 months ago
GWHunta

There’s also the issue that not only does carbon dioxide capture IR it subsequently emits this energy as IR.

Kind of like a mirror excepting that the when the energy is emitted it is in totally random direction.

While this may increase the opacity of the atmosphere, it does little to sequester any significant amount of energy.


R403601
1 month ago
GWHunta

As for Gore’s CO2 centric portrayal of climate change and his oil company connections, in An Inconvenient Truth Gore strongly advocates carbon sequestration technologies and in the closing suggestions calling us all to action on fighting global warming, asks that we help end our dependence on foreign oil by helping farmers grow crops for conversion to alcohol.

Carbon capture and sequestration if developed will very useful, as well as profitable for the domestic oil industry, as the injection of CO2 into depleted oil fields for capture and long term storage at the expense of those consuming coal fired electricity will greatly increase the value of those owning currently “depleted” oil fields by wringing the remaining oil out of them and returning them temporarily into back into production.

Alcohol as a substitute for gasoline won’t work. As we’ve now witnessed, driving up the price of corn caused an across the board increase in the price of all grains because of the price pressure on farmers to maximize their output of corn.

The result was higher food prices across the board and coupled with higher oil prices, the global economy was driven into what we are now calling the “great recession.”

Advocating the production of crops for ethanol is support of the continuance of the liquid fuels market. The only interests served are the oil companies as nobody is marketing a purely ethanol fuel and E-85 makes no economic sense for the consumer as it is an inferior fuel when compared to gasoline. The federally mandated removal of MTBE from gasoline and the use ethanol as the replacement guarantees profitability for current ethanol refineries.

BTW, the refinement of ethanol from the sugars of the corn releases one half of the carbon contained in those sugars to the atmosphere as CO2. The other half is released as CO2 when the ethanol/gasoline mix is consumed.

That’s a huge and inescapable inefficiency in the corn/food to ethanol process.

Photosynthesis is far too inefficient a means of processing solar energy to use biomass as an energy carrier. Mankind’s energy needs surpassed the ability of the planet to provide enough biomass in a sustainable and environmentally benign manner in the mid-1800’s.

Nuclear fusion aka solar energy capture technologies are the only hope we have of maintaining global energy production levels in an environmentally sound manner.

Electric vehicles are the most efficient means of personal transport and the nickel-metal-hydride batteries developed over the course of the past few decades are perfectly sufficient and suitable for the job. No need to wait for any lithium ion breakthrough, they’ve got their own set of inherent problems that negate most of their advantages as a vehicle power storage system.

Gore claims in An Inconvenient Truth to have been awakened to understanding environmental issues during his college years and later wrote Earth in the Balance as evidence of his environmental understanding and concern for the planet.

In An Inconvenient Truth Gore called for higher CAFE standards for U.S. automobiles but during the Clinton/Gore presidency and the temporary global oil glut when North Sea oil production was on the upward slope towards peaking in 1999, nothing was done to increase CAFE standards and we witnessed the rise of the SUV as the American family car.

Truth be told, anthropogenic global warming aka climate change is primarily the result of human interference with the natural hydrological cycle, not increased atmospheric CO2 levels as asserted by Gore.

The correlation between global temperature and atmospheric CO2 levels as presented by Gore in An Inconvenient Truth as causation with atmospheric CO2 levels being the primary driver of global temperature is fiction.

Further research and refinement of the ice core evidence has revealed that global temperature increases precede the rise of CO2 levels, indicating that Gore’s assertions on the matter are incorrect.

The carbon cycle increases as the planet comes out of ice ages and peaks as the global temperatures peak and subsequently decline as the planet again cools to re-enter the next “ice age.”

Bottom line is that fossil fuel reserves are finite. Mankind’s future, absent depopulation, depends upon turning towards the Sun for our energy needs, as we exceeding the limits of biomass production long ago.

Farmers need to now focus on learning to grow food in an environmentally sustainable fashion to feed our still growing populations and creating or advocating the illusion that they can provide us with both sustenance and motor-fuel isn’t part of An Inconvenient Truth, it is a straight up lie, from which the oil industry is the only beneficiary.

Peace,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Archived GNN Threads