Al Gore is at it again??????

It's remarkably easy to trash a documentary movie you haven't seen and science that you don't understand.

 

Gore was/is right.

When and where? Editorial, article, review or letter to the editor? Its reporting is good but its editorials are strongly slanted and often less than fact-based.

Date, page number, author? Citation or link?

It's hard to make out here what the WSJ is saying and what NCPA is - you lost track of your quotation marks somewhere along the way.

NPCA is a political organization - three of its major sponsors are Exxon Mobile, El Paso Energy and ChryslerDaimer Corp. Fund(linkie) - not scientific.

On the contrary, Gore is known as a "boyscout" on account of his straightforwardness. He has proven himself whereas I know very little about you. Your presenting an organization dedicated to "aggressively marketing its products" as a reliable source of independent information says quite a bit about your discernment.

Are you sure that "factiousness" means what you think it does? Because it doesn't fit.

One "huge volcanic eruption" would have the opposite effect. You don't seem to understand much of what you're writing about.

"Leading climatologists and meteorologists"? What is Singer's qualifications?

"... S. Fred Singer, acknowledged during a 1994 appearance on the television program Nightline that he had received funding from Exxon, Shell, Unocal and ARCO. He did not deny receiving funding on a number of occasions from the Rev. Sun Myung Moon." (linkie)

This one political activist in the pay of Big Oil contradicts several leading academies of science...and you find the paid shill more credible than independent academies? Again, this says quite a bit about your discernment.

Two days, eh? Did you just make that number up? There is local weather and global weather patterns; you don't seem to be able to discern the difference.

<snip>

What you need to do is get your info from more than one source, consider the funding and credentials and possibly learn something about science.

 

I will believe the environmental wackos when they believe their own rhetoric enough to take all the steps they want to force on us upon themselves...

Don't force me... Lead the way... Then I'll believe.

If it isn't dire enough for you to make the sacrifices yourself... Then shut up!

Let *them* renounce Freon, first.

Let *them* renounce SUV's first.

let *them* renounce Private Jets first...

SMM

 

What makes you think they have not?

 

Just watch any motorcade they arrive in...

 

Most "environmental wackos" don't arrive in motorcades. When was the last time you actually saw one?

 

I consider Al Gore an environmental wacko...

And, would you like to take a poll of those that live in hot areas of the country and have sworn off the use of Freon based A/C?

I don't see them leading the way. All I hear is a shrill cry of panic from wild eyed fanatics trying to force a rope down the road.

If they were really leading the way I am sure I would hear more stories of how x numbers of environmentalists are moving to communes to be more efficient and reduce emmisions.

And, just because the media doesn't publish the contrary science doesn't mean that good hard contrary scientific evidence doesn't exist...

SMM

 

I believe that freon-based air conditioning is outlawed by federal mandate. Other refrigerants that are more eco-friendly are required.

As for motorcades, when he was VP, that is more of a security issue than anything else.

 

Also, Gore is dead on target re: global warming. The antarctic ice cap is shrinking, parts of the Arctic Ocean that once were frozen over are now open sea in the winter.

No sane person can deny global warming. The question becomes is it mankind's work or natural cycles? Either way, there are impacts to the world.

 

You know if he believed in the environment as much as he says then why didnt he do something about it while he was in office?

For instance most Americans live near major cities so why didnt Clinton / Gore try to pass laws to favor manufacturing of electric cars?

Simple they are just like every other politicians and like pandering to those with money and that includes the oil lobby.

 

jereome10, perhaps you don't understand how our government works - the Congress passes laws not the Executive branch.

 

Gore is a loser, a fool, and a poor negotiator. That is, if you consider yourself pro American.
It's hard to take him seriously.

 

Daisy, Perhaps you are confusing the way our gov't is supposed to work with the way it actually does.

Congress does not make environmental law. It gives a mandate to the EPA that then creates policies and law according to the mandate but much more according to the philosophy of the President.

Bush is more business friendly and so you get streamlining and what most people would probably consider common sense changes to EPA policy. For instance, companies can now take an overall limit to their emissions. This allows them to install and operate equipment without alot of red tape so long as they don't exceed their limit. The limit is generally a baseline amount. IOW's, they use a particular period and set the max based on annual averages. The company must stay below that level even if they want to increase output. Good common sense rule.

Previously, companies had to permit each and every installation of new equipment. New equipment was subject to much tighter limits than old equipment. This created a negative incentive. It was very often more economical to repair or modify old equipment that polluted more rather than attempt to meet new equipment standards.

The Bush policy both helped industry and protected the environment. Companies under this policy can buy new equipment that will allow them to produce more with the same or lower pollution... a net plus for both the economy and environment. Many environmental whackos were/are against this policy change... more or less because they consider Republicans and industry the enemy so anything good for them is necessarily bad.

 

In this nation we don't want the government to be in the business of trying to choose winners and losers among businesses. That didn't work so well in the Soviet Union.

 

They did. Clinton signed numerous executive orders and some concerning the environment... to take effect after he left office. He didn't want to disturb the economy on his watch but owed some debts. It was a political ploy to make Bush look bad for reversing policies supposedly intended to help the environment.

 

Electric cars, not to be confused with hybrids, only move the polluting elements from the tailpipe to the power plant.

 

That is true MP unless we find more hydroelectric, solar, or wind resources. I wonder if we could actually erect enough windmills to effect the global climate? Could we build enough solar panels to change the global temperature?

 

Good questions, Scott. With the good old Mr. Sun giving us more energy than we will ever need, we should be looking at ways to tap that free energy to power our needs.