Re: Busted again


"Joe" <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:slrngi7agk.qpm.joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 2008-11-18, Paul M. Cook <pmcook@xxxxxxx> wrote:

I think it is the deliberate misstatement of what it is Gore does. He is
an
international spokesperson. He is very effective at it. He did not
start
this whole thing since the sham election in 2000. He wrote an entire
book
on the subject back in 1992. Another fact is that the GW debate has been
ongoing for almost 40 years now. Gore is doing a wonderful job of
bringing
the crisis to the masses as witnessed by the fact that at least now
people
know about it whether or not they agree with it.

He's been accepted by the scientific community to speak on their behalf.

You're leaving out quite a few things, Paul.

Me? No way.


Most important, the Global Warming debate has not been raging for 40
years. 40 Years ago, the crisis was global cooling. Sometime in the
70's, this slowly changed from global cooling to global warming. Now,
to avoid the embarassment they previously experienced, they have
changed it to "climate change".

Uh no, it was 1969.

Then, on to Gore. I could give a rat's ass about his decision to be a
spokesperson. I am more concerned with the money trail and the
company he keeps. Gore jets around the world doing his damnedest to
convince us all of the horrors of global warming, and the more people
that buy it, the more money he makes from his company, GIM. I am
always a skeptic of someone who's main interest appears to be
profit-oriented. It just looks like a conflict to me. If it turns
out (as many believe) that climate change is not much affected by
human made factors, Gore loses money. So, he uses his considerable
clout to do and say whatever it takes to convince everyone that what
he says is true. As the left likes to say: Follow the money...

He has no need for the money. He was rich before he even was first elected
to Congress.

Also, he has not been affected by "the scientific community" to speak
on their behalf. He has been accepted by a certain sector of that
community. The scientific community is not in lockstep agreement that
Climate Change is man-made (as has already been discussed). There are
plenty of scientists with other theories, though the fact that they
are not man-mad issues severely limits the amount of money that gets
funnelled to them.

Yeah they always gove Nobel prizes to just anyone.

Bottom line: I don't see any reason [for nearly anyone] to hate Gore.
He seems like a nice enough guy. I would be skeptical of him, though,
as people's propensity for the truth always declines as more and more
money becomes available to them, especially if the truth is something
that could hinder that cash flow. I also do not KNOW exactly what
causes global climate change. I'd imagine that there is likely some
human component, but it is so small as to be a near non-factor.
Increases in Solar activity, increases in geological activity, and
whatever else there might be out there, are all likely to hold some
piece of the puzzle. Sadly, the popular "climatologists" seem to try
to ignore, and sweep under the rug, pretty much everything that
doesn't agree with their hypothesis. That's just not good science.

The only naysayers I see are 5th grade school kids, some lawyers,
professional skeptics and TV screenwriters and oil industry paid
consultants. As far as any hard hitters in the ostrich head in the sand
club - there are fewer every year.

Paul


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Correcting The Myths on Global Warming
    ... Al Dershowitz and Al Gore need to pull their heads out and realize not everyone is buying their alarmist bullshit. ... Al Gore's new book and movie, both titled An Inconvenient Truth, have been hailed by environmentalists--despite being filled with false or misleading claims about the science of global warming and related issues. ... Misleading links between weather events and climate change: Climate is the average of weather conditions over long time periods; because the climate system is inherently variable, individual weather events are not indicative of trends. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Generating electricity?
    ... Al Gore got his stupid Nobel prize winning it for his bogus movie, 'An inconvenient truth' which is by now, fairly panned for it's lack of veracity on more than a few levels, ... Stung by criticism of his worthiness for the honor and horrified that climate change questioners occasionally manage to get their voices heard, Gore testily told "The Today Show" that the media is paying too much attention to global warming skeptics — and compared them to people who still believe the earth is flat. ... Well tell that to one of his co winners from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who managed to insert his balanced conclusion. ... Awarding the Nobel Prize for such flawed science is a disgrace." ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: Gore sees spiritual crisis in warming
    ... battle to control the effects global warming will have on the planet. ... Nations' International Panel on Climate Change that concluded cutting ... percent of economic growth each year.Among the solutions Gore ... The Captain is not asking ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Its All About Green...
    ... roasted on the global warming spit have some great ideas on how to ... to pay for the weapons against climate change. ... follow the money trail to get an idea of what it's all ... A tax on carbon, at $50 a ton, released from burning coal, petroleum ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: Its All About Green...
    ... to pay for the weapons against climate change. ... follow the money trail to get an idea of what it's all ... The AP notes that a carbon tax would boost the cost of ... living off huge grants to study global warming. ...
    (alt.politics.bush)