35 lies from Algores movie

202typical

Long Time Member
Messages
3,123
It is a freaking shame that a blatant liar, documented liar, can recieve such acolades from our scociety, let alone the Nobel Prise. Below I have listed the 35 lies told in Algores Inconvenient Truth as documented by Science and public Policy Institute, SPPI's Christopher Monckton:

1. Sea to rise 20 feet
Gore says that a sea-level rise of up to 6 m (20 ft) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland. Though Gore does not say that the sea-level rise will occur in the near future, in the context, it was clear that this is what he had meant, since he showed expensive graphical representations of the effect of his imagined 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise on existing populations, and he quantified the numbers who would be displaced by the sea-level rise.

The IPCC says sea-level increases up to 7 m (23 ft) above today?s levels have happened naturally in the past climate, and would only be likely to happen again after several millennia. In the next 100 years, according to calculations based on figures in the IPCC?s 2007 report, these two ice sheets between them will add a little over 6 cm (2.5 inches) to sea level, not 6 m (this figure of 6 cm is 15% of the IPCC?s total central estimate of a 43 cm or 1 ft 5 in sea-level rise over the next century). Gore has accordingly exaggerated the official sea-level estimate by approaching 10,000 per cent.

2.Pacific islands drowning
Gore says low-lying inhabited Pacific coral atolls are already being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming, leading to the evacuation of several island populations to New Zealand. However, the atolls are not being inundated, except where dynamiting of reefs or over-extraction of fresh water by local populations has caused damage.

Furthermore, corals can grow at ten times the predicted rate of increase in sea level. It is not by some accident or coincidence that so many atolls reach just a few feet above the ocean surface.

There have been no mass evacuations of populations of islanders as suggested by Gore, though some residents of Tuvalu have asked to be moved to New Zealand, even though the tide-gauges maintained until recently by the National Tidal Facility of Australia show a mean annual sea-level rise over the past half-century equivalent to the thickness of a human hair. The problem with the Carteret Islands, arose not because of rising sea levels but because of imprudent dynamiting of the reefs by local fishermen.

3. Thermohaline circulation "stopping"
Gore says ?global warming? may shut down the thermohaline circulation in the oceans, which he calls the ?ocean conveyor,? plunging Europe into an ice age. It will not. A paper published in 2006 says: ?Analyses of ocean observations and model simulations suggest that changes in the thermohaline circulation during the last century are likely the result of natural multidecadal climate variability. Indications of a sustained thermohaline circulation weakening are not seen during the last few decades. Instead, a strengthening since the 1980s is observed.?

?multiple scientists? have claimed that we cannot exclude the possibility of the disruption or shutdown of the Conveyor. Disruption, perhaps: shutdown, no. It is now near-universally accepted that the thermohaline circulation cannot be and will not be shut down by ?global warming,? and the film should have been corrected to reflect the consensus.

4. CO2 "driving temperature"
Gore says that in each of the last four interglacial warm periods it was changes in carbon dioxide concentration that caused changes in temperature. It was the other way about. Changes in temperature preceded changes in CO2 concentration by between 800 and 2800 years, as scientific papers including the paper on which Gore?s film had relied had made clear.

5. Snows of Kilimanjaro "melting"
Gore says ?global warming? has been melting the snows of Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa. It is not.

The melting of the Furtwangler Glacier at the summit of the mountain began 125 years ago. More of the glacier had melted before Hemingway wrote The Snows of Kilimanjaro in 1936 than afterward.

Temperature at the summit never rises above freezing and is at an average of ?7 Celsius. The cause of the melting is long-term climate shifts exacerbated by imprudent regional deforestation, and has nothing to do with ?global warming.?

6. Lake Chad "drying up"
Gore says ?global warming? dried up Lake Chad in Africa. It did not. Over-extraction of water and changing agricultural patterns dried the lake, which was also dry in 8500BC, 5500BC, 1000BC and 100BC. ?There are multiple stresses upon Lake Chad.? However, the scientific consensus is that at present those ?stresses? do not include ?global warming.?

7. Hurricane Katrina "man made"
Gore says Hurricane Katrina, that devastated New Orleans in 2005, was caused by ?global warming.? It was not. It was caused by the failure of Gore?s party, in the administration of New Orleans, to heed 30 years of warnings by the Corps of Engineers that the levees ? dams that kept New Orleans dry ? could not stand a direct hit by a hurricane. Katrina was only Category 3 when it struck the levees. They failed, as the Engineers had said they would. Gore?s party, not ?global warming,? was to blame for the consequent death and destruction.

8. Polar bear "dying"
Gore says a scientific study shows that polar bears are being killed swimming long distances to find ice that has melted away because of ?global warming.? They are not. The study, by Monnett & Gleason (2005), mentioned just four dead bears. They had died in an exceptional storm, with high winds and waves in the Beaufort Sea. The amount of sea ice in the Beaufort Sea has grown over the past 30 years. A report for the World Wide Fund for Nature shows that polar bears, which are warm-blooded, have grown in numbers where temperature has increased, and have become fewer where temperature has fallen. Polar bears evolved from brown bears 200,000 years ago, and survived the last interglacial period, when global temperature was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present and there was probably no Arctic ice-cap at all. The real threat to polar bears is not ?global warming? but hunting. In 1940, there were just 5,000 polar bears worldwide. Now that hunting is controlled, there are 25,000.

9. Coral reefs "bleaching"
Gore says coral reefs are ?bleaching? because of ?global warming.? They are not. There was some bleaching in 1998, but this was caused by the exceptional El Nino Southern Oscillation that year. Two similarly severe El Ninos over the past 250 years also caused extensive bleaching. ?Global warming? was nothing to do with it.

10. 100 ppmv of CO2 "melting mile-thick ice"
Gore implies that the difference of just 100 parts per million by volume in CO2 concentration between an interglacial temperature maximum and an ice-age temperature minimum causes ?the difference between a nice day and having a mile of ice above your head.? It does not. Gore?s implication has the effect of overstating the mainstream consensus estimate of the effect of CO2 on temperature at least tenfold.

Temperature changes by up to 12 degrees C between glacial minima and interglacial maxima, but CO2 concentration changes by no more than 100 ppmv. Gore is accordingly implying that 100 ppmv can cause a temperature increase of up to 12 degrees C. However, the consensus as expressed by the IPCC is that 100 ppmv of increased CO2 concentration, from 180 to 280 ppmv, would increase radiant energy flux in the atmosphere by 2.33 watts per square meter, or less than 1.2 degrees Celsius including the effect of temperature feedbacks.

11. Hurricane Caterina "manmade"
Gore says that Hurricane Caterina, the only hurricane ever to strike the coast of Brazil, was caused by ?global warming.? It was not. In 2004, Brazil?s summer sea surface temperatures were cooler than normal, not warmer. But air temperatures were the coldest in 25 years. The air was so much colder than the water that it caused a heat flux from the water to the air similar to that which fuels hurricanes in warm seas.

12. Japanese typhoons "a new record"
Gore says that 2004 set a new record for the number of typhoons striking Japan. It did not. The trend in the number of typhoons, and of tropical cyclones, has fallen throughout the past 50 years. The trend in rainfall from cyclones has also fallen, and there has been no trend in monsoon rainfall.

13. Hurricanes "getting stronger"
Gore says scientists had been giving warnings that hurricanes will get stronger because of ?global warming.? They will not. Over the past 60 years there has been no change in the strength of hurricanes, even though hydrocarbon use went up six-fold in the same period. Research by Dr. Kerry Emanuel, cited by Ms. Kreider, has been discredited by more recent findings that wind-shear effects tend to nullify the amplification of hurricane strength which he had suggested, and, of course, by the observed failure of hurricanes to gain strength during the past 60 years of ?global warming.?

14. Big storm insurances losses "increasing"
Gore says insurance losses arising from large storms and other extreme-weather events are increasing, by implication because of ?global warming.? They are not. Insured losses, as a percentage of the population of coastal areas in the path of hurricanes, were lower even in 2005 than they had been in 1925. In 2006, a very quiet hurricane season, Lloyds of London posted their biggest-ever profit: ?3.6 billion

15. Mumbai "flooding"
Gore says flooding in Mumbai is increasing, by implication because of ?global warming.? It is not. Rainfall trends at the two major weather stations in Mumbai show no increase in heavy rainfall over the past 48 years.

16. Severe tornadoes "more frequent"
Gore says that 2004 set an all-time record for tornadoes in the US. More tornadoes are being reported because detection systems are better than they were. But the number of severe tornadoes has been falling for more than 50 years.

17. The sun "heats the Arctic ocean"
Gore says that ice-melt allows the Sun to heat the Arctic Ocean, and a diagram shows the Sun?s rays heating it directly. It does not. The ocean emits radiant energy at the moment of absorption, and would freeze if there were no atmosphere. It is the atmosphere, not the Sun that warms the ocean. Also, Gore?s diagram confuses the tropopause with the ionosphere, and he makes a number of other errors indicating that he does not understand the elementary physics of radiative transfer.

18. Arctic "warming fastest"
Gore says the Arctic has been warming faster than the rest of the planet. It is not. While it is in general true that during periods of warming (whether natural or anthropogenic) the Arctic will warm faster than other regions, Gore does not mention that the Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the spring of 2007, but few newspapers reported this. The newspapers reported that the North-West Passage was free of ice in 2007, and said that this was for the first time since records began: but the records, taken by satellites, had only begun 29 years previously. The North-West Passage had also been open for shipping in 1945, and, in 1903, the great Norwegian explorer Amundsen had passed through it in a sailing ship.

19. Greenland ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says ?global warming? is making the Greenland ice sheet unstable. It is not. Greenland ice grows 2in a year. The Greenland ice sheet survived each of the previous three interglacial periods, each of which was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present. It survived atmospheric CO2 concentrations of up to 1000 ppmv (compared with today?s 400 ppmv). It last melted 850,000 years ago, when humankind did not exist and could not have caused the melting. There is a close correlation between variations in Solar activity and temperature anomalies in Greenland, but there is no correlation between variations in CO2 concentration and temperature changes in Greenland. The IPCC (2001) says that to melt even half the Greenland ice sheet would require temperature to rise by 5.5 degrees C and remain that high for several thousand years.

20. Himalayan glacial melt waters "failing
Gore says 40% of the world?s population get their water supply from Himalayan glacial melt waters that are failing because of ?global warming.? They don't and they are not. The water comes almost entirely from snow-melt, not from ice-melt. Over the past 40 years there has been no decline in the amount of snow-melt in Eurasia.

21. Peruvian glaciers "disappearing"
Gore says that a Peruvian glacier is less extensive now than it was in the 1940s, implying that ?global warming? is the cause. It is not. Except for the very highest peaks, the normal state of the Peruvian cordilleras has been ice-free throughout most of the past 10,000 years

22. Mountain glaciers worldwide "disappearing"
Gore says that ?the ice has a story to tell, and it is worldwide.? He shows several before-and-after pictures of glaciers disappearing. However, the glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and ?global warming? had nothing to do with that.

23. Sahara desert "drying"
Gore says terrible tragedies are occurring in the southern Sahara because of drought which he blames on ?global warming.? There is no drought caused by ?global warming.? In 2007 there were record rains across the whole of the southern Sahara. In the past 25 years the Sahara has shrunk by some 300,000 square kilometers because of additional rainfall. Some scientists think ?global warming? may actually mitigate pre-existing droughts because there will be more water vapor in the atmosphere. Before 1200 AD there were frequent, prolonged and severe droughts in the Great Plains. Since 1200 AD, there has been more rainfall. Likewise, the US has had more rainfall since the 1950s than it had in the earlier part of the 20th Century, when the great droughts which were then common were described by John Steinbeck in The Grapes of Wrath. South African rainfall was also more stable in the second half of the 20th Century, when human effect on climate is said to have become significant, than in the first half.

24. West Antarctic ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says disturbing changes have been measured under the West Antarctic ice sheet, implicitly because of ?global warming.? Yet most of the recession in this ice sheet over the past 10,000 years has occurred in the absence of any sea-level or temperature forcing. In most of Antarctica, the ice is in fact growing thicker. Mean Antarctic temperature has actually fallen throughout the past half-century. In some Antarctic glens, environmental damage has been caused by temperature decreases of up to 2 degrees Celsius. Antarctic sea-ice spread to a 30-year record extent in late 2007.

25. Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves "breaking up"
Gore says half a dozen ice shelves each ?larger than Rhode Island? have broken up and vanished from the Antarctic Peninsula recently, implicitly because of ?global warming.? Global warming is unlikely to have been the cause. Gore does not explain that the ice shelves have melted before, as studies of seabed sediments have shown. The Antarctic Peninsula accounts for about 2% of the continent, in most of which the ice is growing thicker. All the recently-melted shelves, added together, amount to an area less than one-fifty-fifth the size of Texas.

26. Larsen B Ice Shelf "broke up because of 'global warming'
Gore focuses on the Larsen B ice shelf, saying that it completely disappeared in 35 days. Yet there has been extensive ice-shelf break-up throughout the past 10,000 years, and the maximum ice-shelf extent may have been in the Little Ice Age in the late 15th century.

27. Mosquitoes "climbing to higher altitudes"
Gore says that, because of ?global warming?, mosquitoes are climbing to higher altitudes. They are not. Most recent outbreaks have been at lower levels than those of a century and more ago. He says that Nairobi was founded 1000 m above sea level so as to be above the mosquito line. It was not. In the period before anthropogenic warming could have had any significant effect, there were ten malaria outbreaks in Nairobi, one of which reached as far up as Eldoret, almost 3000 m above sea level. Malaria is not a tropical disease. Mosquitoes do not need tropical temperatures: they need no more than 15 degrees Celsius to breed. The largest malaria outbreak of modern times was in Siberia in the 1920s and 1930s, when 13 million were infected, 600,000 died and 30,000 died as far north as Arkhangelsk, on the Arctic Circle. There is no reason to suppose that malaria will spread even if the climate continues to become warmer.

28. Many tropical diseases "spread through 'global warming'"
Gore says that, as well as malaria, ?global warming? is spreading dengue fever, Lyme disease, West Nile virus, arena virus, avian flu, Ebola virus, E. Coli 0157:H7, Hanta virus, legionella, leptospirosis, multi-drug-resistant TB, Nipah virus, SARS and Vibrio Cholerae 0139. It is doing no such thing. Only the first four diseases are insect-borne, but none is tropical. Of the other diseases named by Gore either in his film or in the accompanying book, not one is sensitive to increasing temperature. They are spread not by warmer weather but by rats, chickens, primates, pigs, poor hygiene, ill-maintained air conditioning, or cold weather.

29. West Nile virus in the US "spread through 'global warming'"
Gore says that West Nile virus spread throughout the US in just two years, implicitly because of ?global warming.? It did not. The climate in the US ranges from some of the world?s hottest deserts to some of its iciest tundra. West Nile virus flourishes in any climate. Warming of the climate, however caused, does not affect its incidence or prevalence.

30. Carbon dioxide is "pollution"
Gore describes carbon dioxide as ?global warming pollution.? It is not. It is food for plants and trees. Tests have shown that even at concentrations 30 times those of the present day even the most delicate plants flourish. Well-managed forests, such as those of the United States, are growing at record rates because the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is feeding the trees. Carbon dioxide, in geological timescale, is at a very low concentration at present. Half a billion years ago it was at 7000 parts per million by volume, about 18 times today?s concentration.

31. The European heat wave of 2003 "killed 35,000"
Gore says, ?A couple of years ago in Europe they had that heat wave that killed 35,000.? Though some scientists agree with Gore, the scientific consensus is that extreme warm anomalies more unusual than the 2003 heat wave occur regularly; extreme cold anomalies also occur regularly; El Ni?o and volcanism appear to be of much greater importance than any general warming trend; and there is little evidence that regional heat or cold waves are significantly increasing or decreasing with time. In general, warm is better than cold, which is why the largest number of life-forms are in the tropics and the least number are at the poles. A cold snap in the winter following the European heat wave killed 20,000 in the UK alone. Though the IPCC says 150,000 people a year are being killed worldwide by ?global warming,? it reaches this figure only by deliberately excluding the number of people who are not being killed because there is less cold weather. In the US alone, it has been estimated that 174,000 fewer people are being killed each year because there are fewer episodes of extreme cold.

32. Pied flycatchers "cannot feed their young"
Gore says ?The peak arrival date for migratory birds 25 years ago was April 25. Their chicks hatched on June 3, just at the time when the caterpillars were coming out: Nature?s plan. But 20 years of warming later the caterpillars peaked two weeks earlier. The chicks tried to catch up with it, but they couldn't. So they are in trouble.? Yet adaptation is easy for the flycatchers: they merely fly a few tens of kilometers further north and they will find caterpillars hatching at the appropriate time. Besides, though Gore does not say so, what is bad news for the pied flycatchers is good news for the caterpillars, and for the butterflies they will become.

33. Gore's bogus pictures and film footage
In the book accompanying Gore?s film, the story of the pied flycatchers and the caterpillars is accompanied by a picture of a bird feeding her hungry chicks. However, closer inspection shows that the bird is not a pied flycatcher but a black tern; and that she is not carrying a caterpillar in her beak, but a small fish. Gore similarly misuses spectacular footage of a glacier apparently calving off enormous slabs of ice into the sea ? footage that is often shown on television to accompany stories about ?global warming.? However, the glacier in question is one that is known to be advancing ? and to be doing so more rapidly and more often than previously. It is in southern Argentina, where its snout crosses ? and eventually dams, Lake Argentino. Water builds up behind the ice dam and eventually bursts it, causing the spectacular collapse of ice into the lake that is so misleadingly used as the iconic image of the effect of ?global warming? on glaciers. The breaking of the ice dam used to occur every eight years or so: now, however, it occurs every five years, not because of ?global warming? because of the regional cooling of the southern Atlantic.

34. The Thames Barrier "closing more frequently"
Gore says that rising sea levels are compelling the operators of the Thames Barrier to close it more frequently than when it was first built. They are not. The barrier is indeed closed more frequently than when it was built, but the reason has nothing to do with ?global warming? or rising sea levels. The reason is a change of policy by which the barrier is closed during exceptionally low tides, so as to retain water in the tidal Thames rather than keeping it out. Yet even the present leader of the official Opposition in the UK Parliament recently used a major speech as the opportunity to mention today?s more frequent closing of the Thames Barrier as though it were a matter of grave concern.

35. "No fact...in dispute by anybody."
Gore says that his prediction that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide will rise to more than 600 parts per million by volume as soon as 2050 is ?not controversial in any way or in dispute by anybody.? However, not one of the half-dozen official projections of growth in CO2 concentration made by the IPCC shows as much as 600 parts per million by 2050.

conclusion: As many as 35 serious scientific errors or exaggerations, all pointing towards invention of a threat that does not exist at all, or exaggerations of phenomena that do exist, do not reflect credit on the presenter of the movie or on those who advised him. The movie is unsuitable for showing to children, and provides no basis for taking policy decisions. Schools that have shown the movie to children are urged to ensure that the errors listed in this memorandum are drawn to the children?s attention.




?Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.?
---Theodore Roosevelt,
 
So what? if Gore was running for supreme leader of the world I'd be worried, he's just a polititian shooting his mouth of and he's made some mistakes.

Will wonders never sease?
 
>> So what?
>
>
>Good answer! Very well thought out.
>Makes everything clearer to me.
>

Or this. Albert Gore is a well meaning man. He is thoughtful, caring and considerate. He can not lie as only a person on the right can do such a thing. Now that I'm enlightened I can sleep easier.
Makes me want to puke.


Ransom
 
Typical dude/SP response. As long as a libs intention are 'good', truth and results mean NOTHING. But, reults must be better than expected and no room for ANY error from the right. What a joke.

PRO
 
Many of the " lies" listed here are backed up by much of the scientific community. what makes any of us here so sure a right wing article about Gore is the gospel on the matter?


I don't know, you don't know, nobody is a liar when an unknown is the subject. if your political preference tells you to ignore him that's fine,but Newt Gingrich says global warming is a serious matter we have to investigate. I suppose he's a liar too.
 
It is obvious that Dude did not read a single one of the lies I listed. Most of them are blatant disregards for the truth.

But like pro said the lefties only care about good INTENTIONS and truth be damned.

My personal favorite is number 4

4. CO2 "driving temperature"
Gore says that in each of the last four interglacial warm periods it was changes in carbon dioxide concentration that caused changes in temperature. It was the other way about. Changes in temperature preceded changes in CO2 concentration by between 800 and 2800 years, as scientific papers including the paper on which Gore?s film had relied had made clear.

Thr freaking lefties are infrigginsane!!!!


?Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.?
---Theodore Roosevelt,
 
Dude wrote: "I don't know, you don't know, nobody is a liar when an unknown is the subject. if your political preference tells you to ignore him that's fine,but Newt Gingrich says global warming is a serious matter we have to investigate. I suppose he's a liar too."

So, you ADMIT Bush did NOT lie about WMD's? Wow, what a breakthrough. Oh happy day!

Saying Global Warming is a "serious matter" and saying all the UNFOUNDED claims Gore has made are two different things. I know of no one who says we shouldn't take care of the enviroment and look for ways to improve things, but what Gore is suggesting, while not following his own preaching, is far out there and actually proven to be more harm than good. Look at what the reports are now saying about fuel derived from corn, it is leading to food shortages and hurting the enviro more than COAL. Freakin brilliant!

PRO
 
202 no reason to get excited with Dude's, "the contrarian", response. It is his nature to disagree. If he really does not have a legitimate basis to disagree he will do so anyway by saying something profound like "so what" and then go on to change to subject. He must be contrary, it is who he is.
 
Algore didn't win the election of 2000.
And Dude should not have won the " Who's glad Dude is back" election. I demand a revote on this. And I predict that he will loose the revote.


Ransom
 
"Look at what the reports are now saying about fuel derived from corn, it is leading to food shortages and hurting the enviro more than COAL. Freakin brilliant!"

Pro you know what worse than that? This has driven up the price of the corn I use in my deer feeders down here in TEXAS to bait up the deer. LMAO.

On earth as it is in TEXAS

?Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.?
---Theodore Roosevelt,
 
What a sorry bunch, you don't have a clue what the facts are but you know who's wrong. Brilliant

Am I the only one smart enough to know I'm not smarter than the bulk of the scientific community? they DON'T KNOW yet. Gore has the right to sell his book and you have the right to sell yours, prove him wrong and shut him down. do that and I'll have basis to form an opinion on global warming at that time. until then you're just flipping your lips.


Global warming is a fact, what's causing it is not yet known.
Gore's book may make him look like a wiz kid, or an idiot a few years from now. I'll wait and see because I'm not an expert on climatology like you wizards.
 
DUDE, the "bulk of the scientific community" has NOT agreed on global warming nor the cause of it. The only ones that get news are the ones in compliance with the new leftist religion Global Warming in the Latter Days! They are a breakoff sect of the Ice Age Archangels, that spun off when the world wasn't covered in ice like they predicted.

PRO
 
When we all start paying the "carbon tax" that is comming, either directly or indirectly, then it will matter! And that IS the truth!

Rush had a very good segment on Algore and global warming today. Too bad nobody listens to him.

Eel
 
Global warming is real , the debate on that part of this is over. the debate is why, and can we slow or stop it.

This is interesting, most of Gore's worst critics here are big time free enterprise, free trade, he who makes the most money wins and is intitled to it hard core right wingers. yet Gore is famous and making a buck and he's a evil liar. what do you want to bet 7 years after Bush and Cheney's terms are up niether one of them will approach Gore's level of success? if I didn't know better I'd think this was just a partisan snivel and gripe session going on here.

If you don't like Gore treat him like anyone else, don't buy his stuff and don't worry about it. I haven't seen his movie or read his book and I doubt I will, I'll let more qualified people figure it out and report back. you guys are getting way to cranked up about this, it's not up to Gore or Bush.
 
Dude, you are either in denial or......

First, Bush and Cheney have already made millions, remember? They did it off of the war with kickbacks from Halliburton, where the hell have you been, that is WHY we are in Iraq, did you forget that? ;-)

Gore is making his money the same way as Mikey Moore, another dude role-model; thru lies/propaganda/half-truths/flat-out lies/scare tactics/etc.. Cheney made his money the American way, thru enterprise and brains. I WILL put Cheney and his accomplishments against Gore's anytime, anywhere!

The thing about your weak, pathetic stance about how you will leave it to the 'experts' to figure out, is that global warming is as politized as any issue facing mankind. To assume that 'science' will prevail is nonsensical, right now there are 'scientists' saying the debate is over, you have others saying it has just begun. How do YOU decide whom to believe? I would guess it depends on your political slant and outlook. If one is like me, you see the glass half-full and that things are just going thru the 'normal' cycle that this planet has been going thru for millions of years, not just since Bush took office. If one is like you, you see the glass half-empty and that the end is coming and capitalism is the cause of a 'new' phenomenon and it is the Republicans to blame. This CRAP is being taught as 'fact' to kids, which is irresponsible and a good way for the libs to dumb down future generations, which is the ONLY way the libs get power, typical behavior of socialists, even those who claim to be 'moderates' and hide their true desires behind cloaks of claiming to be 'moderate' and demonizing those who dare disagree with their 'religion'.

PRO
 
Keep talking you're making my point for me. you want to make this into a partisan decision rather than a scientific one.

To be honest I'm 44 years old global warming isn't going to have a major impact in my lifetime. I feel an obligation to leave the planet in as good of condition if not better than it was when I was born, but your plan of make it last as long as my butts alive works too, I can't do much about it.

I'm a firm believer in Darwin and evolution. if the warming is a not man caused then let the chips fall were they may, we know the earth and it's creatures have changed since the planet was formed. those who don't adapt die, we can't stop it and we shouldn't feel the need to. BUT, if we're the cause we should take action to halt our effects today. I , unlike you don't have that answer yet, and my distain for a few people or a political party will not give me a valid one.

I don't go postal on any scientist who argues against global warming and I don't worship one who supports it, I support both and hope they reach a common conclusion soon. logic overrides emotion if you let it.
 
Huntindude,
Well I'm going out on a limb here but, I've been reading these posts and I keep asking myself how a person can be presented with facts and not respond to them. Then turn around and claim their point of view is based on facts without presenting any or very little, so I spent some time and did some reading of your past posts. I sensed a real deep anger and personnel struggle in your posts that seems to be stemming from your heritage. I will not argue the facts are there that the ?white man? came to this country under the guise of a new beginning free of religious persecution only to use those same beliefs to take this land from the Native Americans already here. Right or wrong the facts are there. Whether you admit it or not you see the ?religious right? as the same people who took this land from your forefathers. George Bush is the epitome of this invading ?white man?. You see him as a white man hiding behind his religion as an excuse to invade other lands and cultures.
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-07 AT 01:02AM (MST)[p]dude is going to "sh$t a worm with a bell on it" when he gets the bill for that psychological evaluation.

Some seriously intelligent people think Gore has a solid case. A boatload of other brainiacs think he is over the top. I personally can't stand the guy, but I doubt he cares what I think.

Why should I care if they can grow peaches in Norway?....(I said that before.) I have so little effect on this debate, or the outcome of it, that I have taken the stand; "You can't know how little I care"
 
> Keep talking you're making my
>point for me. you want
>to make this into a
>partisan decision rather than a
>scientific one.
>
> To be honest I'm 44
>years old global warming isn't
>going to have a major
>impact in my lifetime. I
>feel an obligation to leave
>the planet in as good
>of condition if not better
>than it was when I
>was born, but your plan
>of make it last as
>long as my butts alive
>works too, I can't do
>much about it.
>
> I'm a firm believer in
>Darwin and evolution. if the
>warming is a not man
>caused then let the chips
>fall were they may, we
>know the earth and it's
>creatures have changed since the
>planet was formed. those who
>don't adapt die, we can't
>stop it and we shouldn't
>feel the need to. BUT,
>if we're the cause we
>should take action to halt
>our effects today. I ,
>unlike you don't have that
>answer yet, and my distain
>for a few people or
>a political party will not
>give me a valid one.
>
>
> I don't go postal on
>any scientist who argues against
>global warming and I don't
>worship one who supports it,
>I support both and hope
>they reach a common conclusion
>soon. logic overrides emotion if
>you let it.

1. Dude you don't get it. Global warming IS a political issue. Propagated by the left and the Dems. The right is fighting against this political issue. Common freaking scence should tell you the earth is warming and has been for a gozillion years. Yet the left sees this political issue as a way to gain more power our your life. That should bother you.

2. You said you would base your decision on science. OK, fine. Who's science? Please tell us. Maybe the same scientist who told us in the 70's we were heading into an ice age? Or how bout the rest of them that in the 70's and 80's told us about all the things we intake are killing us to only come back in the 90's to tell us..........oh we were wrong, so sorry.

3. You are 44 and I am 44 and if the left gains power in a few short years, unless you die between now and then, global warming will have a huge impact on your life like it or not. The left will cram it down your throat. Get ready to fork over a big pile of your paycheck for a political issue. All the right is trying to say is before we go down this path of huge taxation and huge life style change lets get some kind of agreement.

4. We all want to leave the planet better than we found it.

5. "if the warming is a not man caused then let the chips
fall were they may" That is what the right is saying. But the left sees this as if they can convince enough people that it is man made then there is a gob of power and money to be wielded over Americans. And when I say the left I am not just talking about the American left but the world left. The UN sees this as a huge windfall of tax revenue from Americans and other industrialised nations. Except China of course cause they are not stupid enough to get caught up in the histeria.

6. "I support both and hope they reach a common conclusion
soon. logic overrides emotion if you let it." We all agree with that statement Dude. The problies is only the doom and gloom is winning the hearts and minds. The folks of moderation are not being heard and are being shut out from the main stream media. Remember the vast majority of Americans get their news from the dominant left wing media of ABC, NBC, CBS, New York times ect. Moderates to not get eaqual time with this bunch.


?Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.?
---Theodore Roosevelt,
 
JM,
Intersting take, most people just simplify it and call me a jerk.

Only around here do you need to defend an anti Iraq war, Bush is a loser, open mind on global warming position. Dislike for this administration and the way they've run this county crosses racial and all other boundries, maybe I'm mainstream and you have issues?

Nick, you may have the best post yet.

202, I won't disagree with everything you said, BUT, you assume the debate is over. you know what happens when you assume? the debate is far from over and until it is all you have is an opinion, not facts.
 
Wow, some common ground.

" 202, I won't disagree with everything you said, BUT, you assume the debate is over. you know what happens when you assume? the debate is far from over and until it is all you have is an opinion, not facts."

Now I never said the debate is over. Those words are reserved for Algore. Don't you remember when he was testifying before the Senate he kept saying over and over "The debate is over" That is the point I am trying to make. The Left has their minds set and it is all man's fault.........period. I could not disagree more. All I have ever tried to show is the other side to the Lefts argument.

I say lets open it up to nuke power. Right now today. Get a bunch of Nuke plants online and shut down the coal burners. I also say bring on the wind mills for power. We got a gob of them out in West Texas right now. We need more.

I am still waiting on my 8.3 liter Powernuke F350 :)


?Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.?
---Theodore Roosevelt,
 
> JM,
> Intersting take, most people just
>simplify it and call me
>a jerk.
>
> Only around here do you
>need to defend an anti
>Iraq war, Bush is a
>loser, open mind on global
>warming position. Dislike for this
>administration and the way they've
>run this county crosses racial
>and all other boundries, maybe
>I'm mainstream and you have
>issues?
>
> Nick, you may have the
>best post yet.
>
> 202, I won't disagree with
>everything you said, BUT, you
>assume the debate is over.
>you know what happens when
>you assume? the debate is
>far from over and until
>it is all you have
>is an opinion, not facts.
>


Sit down because this may shock you. I have from the beginning disagreed with going into Iraq. Wait, don't start celebrating because it is not for the same reasons as you. In the beginning war strategists looked at what would happen if we toppled the Sadam regime and who would take over. They stated that the top Iraq leaders that were in line to succeed Sadam were religious fanatics and would possibly align themselves with Iran. We would replace a tyrant with a religious syco bent on killing all infidels (that would be any non Muslim).
Now on to ruffling your feathers. Even though I don't agree with Bush on this matter I respect him more then the majority of the Democrats. In the beginning when Bush was sounding the war trumpet the majority of the Democrats were in alignment with him. Now they are acting like they have been opposed to it from the beginning. I don't know if you have seen the movie Transformers but there is a scene in it where two of the actors get busted for stealing military data. As they are sitting there in the interrogating room one of them is telling the other to not worry and this is all you have to say and they will play games with them but don't worry. As soon as the G-men come in the room he falls apart points his finger at his partner in crime and starts screaming "she did it, she did it". That's the Democrats.
 
Since Bush was feeding the dems the information he wanted them to hear prior to the authorization vote I don't agree with your analogy. there is plenty of evidence that the administation lied and manipulated the intellegence to make a case for war. we don't know what all went on because stonewalling and executive privilege are keeping the door to that shut. Colin Powell said " It will forever be a black mark on my record" when he learned he gave his case for war speech based on biased information, and if you notice he washed his hands of this whole administration as soon as he could.

This is old hat, the American people have spoken, they know Iraq was a mistake and they want out as soon as it can be done without serious complications. that's begun, and will accelerate regaurdless of who's elected .

202, I'm all for modern nuke power plants. we know we're going to be forced into it someday anyhow so why not get started.
 
> Since Bush was feeding the
>dems the information he wanted
>them to hear prior to
>the authorization vote I don't
>agree with your analogy. there
>is plenty of evidence that
>the administation lied and manipulated
>the intellegence to make a
>case for war. we don't
>know what all went on
>because stonewalling and executive privilege
>are keeping the door to
>that shut. Colin Powell
>said " It will forever
>be a black mark on
>my record" when he learned
>he gave his case for
>war speech based on biased
>information, and if you notice
>he washed his hands of
>this whole administration as soon
>as he could.
>
> This is old hat, the
>American people have spoken, they
>know Iraq was a mistake
>and they want out as
>soon as it can be
>done without serious complications. that's
>begun, and will accelerate regaurdless
>of who's elected .
>
> 202, I'm all for modern
>nuke power plants. we know
>we're going to be forced
>into it someday anyhow so
>why not get started.


No way you're not going to try and get them off with the excuse of ignorance are you? Bush brought that up about the WMDs. He was given misinformation. Bunk he knew and the dems knew. Now they are both trying to play the shell game.
 
First off I never said the dems were smart or correct, with weapons inspectors getting access to anywhere they wanted there was no excuse to jump the gun and the dems were idiots to allow it.

The information was NOT all given to congress in a fair and unbiased mannor, that's a fact. if the African uranium debacle was all on the up and up why has Bush refused to cooperate with an investigation? don't tell me there was no crap going on to sell this war, that's ludicris. the dems were fed crap, yes they were dumb enought to eat it but they've since tried to reduce the damage, that's about all that can be done after the horse left the barn.
 
> First off I never said
>the dems were smart or
>correct, with weapons inspectors getting
>access to anywhere they wanted
>there was no excuse to
>jump the gun and the
>dems were idiots to allow
>it.
>
> The information was NOT all
>given to congress in a
>fair and unbiased mannor, that's
>a fact. if the African
>uranium debacle was all on
>the up and up why
>has Bush refused to cooperate
>with an investigation? don't tell
>me there was no crap
>going on to sell this
>war, that's ludicris. the dems
>were fed crap, yes they
>were dumb enought to eat
>it but they've since tried
>to reduce the damage, that's
>about all that can be
>done after the horse left
>the barn.


I almost agree with you 100%. The dems knew a lot more then you think. They all (GOP and Dems) come from the same cess pool.
 
So you're saying they're all incompetent? we have common ground .

To end all I can say as screwed up as our government is it's the best on earth, hope another Teddy Roosevelt comes along someday and it will be great again.
 
> So you're saying they're all
>incompetent? we have common ground
>.
>
> To end all I can
>say as screwed up as
>our government is it's the
>best on earth, hope another
>Teddy Roosevelt comes along someday
>and it will be great
>again.


Now I agree with you 100%.
 
Teddy Roosevelt was the (argueably) last true Patriot to occupy the White House.....might make a case for IKE, but EVERYONE since have been businessmen feathering their own nests.

This trend will continue until .........hell who knows? The perks and profits that professional politicos have showered themselves with inspire them to say and do everything they need to get/stay elected.

They are all corrupt to some degree and we have fed that monster for years. I have no idea how to change it.

We....working class Americans have no real input and the monied people all have stock in big oil, foriegn trade and all the other pork type crap that flows out of DC. Basically, we are just footing the bill. Anybody who dosen't believe this, is living in "Gumbyland".

Both parties are pigs from the same farm in different colored suits. It won't matter at all who gets elected; they are all going to screw somebody's "ox".

I have voted to protect my 2nd Ammendment rights for many years, but there isn't anybody on tap that has a decent chance of forcing that agenda on the Congress we will have for a long time.

I guess I am glad I'm 60 and able to resign myself to seeing my guns get burried out back of the barn.
 
> So you're saying they're all
>incompetent? we have common ground
>.
>
> To end all I can
>say as screwed up as
>our government is it's the
>best on earth, hope another
>Teddy Roosevelt comes along someday
>and it will be great
>again.


Has anyone noticed something odd around here tonight? This can't be happening. Twice in one night I agree with Dude.


Ransom
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom