All Posts Tagged With: "Al Gore"
American Physical Society opens AGW debate
There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.
That statement from APS is a breath of fresh air. While they’re not changing their beliefs in AGW (anthropogenic global warming), they at least see the need for continued debate. They at least recognize the CO2 haters might not be right.
There’s not just a presence….there’s a “CONSIDERABLE” presence within the scientific community that do not agree. Mainstream Media, IPCC, Al Gore, NASA’s James Hansen have tried to make us believe there’s just a “fringe” of “non-believers” out there….the science is settled….ALL the reputable scientists are in our consensus….we’re all doomed….CO2 is a pollutant…
The APS newsletter contains two articles representing opposing views on AGW. Christopher Monckton authored one of the articles, and said it best:
Even if temperature had risen above natural variability, the recent solar Grand Maximum may have been chiefly responsible. Even if the sun were not chiefly to blame for the past half-century’s warming, the IPCC has not demonstrated that, since CO2 occupies only one-ten-thousandth part more of the atmosphere that it did in 1750, it has contributed more than a small fraction of the warming. Even if carbon dioxide were chiefly responsible for the warming that ceased in 1998 and may not resume until 2015, the distinctive, projected fingerprint of anthropogenic “greenhouse-gas” warming is entirely absent from the observed record. Even if the fingerprint were present, computer models are long proven to be inherently incapable of providing projections of the future state of the climate that are sound enough for policymaking. Even if per impossibilethe models could ever become reliable, the present paper demonstrates that it is not at all likely that the world will warm as much as the IPCC imagines. Even if the world were to warm that much, the overwhelming majority of the scientific, peer-reviewed literature does not predict that catastrophe would ensue. Even if catastrophe might ensue, even the most drastic proposals to mitigate future climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would make very little difference to the climate. Even if mitigation were likely to be effective, it would do more harm than good: already millions face starvation as the dash for biofuels takes agricultural land out of essential food production: a warning that taking precautions, “just in case”, can do untold harm unless there is a sound, scientific basis for them. Finally, even if mitigation might do more good than harm, adaptation as (and if) necessary would be far more cost-effective and less likely to be harmful.
King Carbon and Life at the Top
Al Gore says, “I don’t claim to be perfect”. I claim he’s a Hypocrite!
Al Gore has responded to his 10% jump in electricity usage from 2006 to 2007. And, it’s classic…..
“I don’t claim to be perfect, and all of us who care about this issue are, are trying to do our part, but I, I will say this. We buy green energy. The issue is carbon. The issue is carbon, and we have, essentially, a carbon-free home.”
So the rich folks can continue to live their life however they want…as long as they pay a premium for green electricity, and buy carbon credits from their own company? This guy is no leader. If he were, he wouldn’t have to hide behind the carbon credit scheme.
In 2006, Gore’s Tennesse home used enough electricity for 20 average American homes…and $15k in natural gas. (He also owns a 4,000 sf home in VA, and a third home in Carthage, Tenn. so his total consumption isn’t known)
Gore receives $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operates a zinc concession on his property. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.
In 2007, after extensive “green” remodeling, Gore’s home usage INCREASED by 10%!!!!!
In 2007, Al’s son, Al Gore III, was busted for driving 100 mph (in a Prius, lol). So, Al’s daughter went to pick him up from jail…..in a Maserati that gets 11 mpg…
The Carbon offsets he buys are FROM HIS OWN COMPANY!!!
He flies in a private charter jet to speeches, and investments, around the world (to the tune of $98 Million in income over the last 8 years).
This is the best part….earlier this week, Gore challenged America to generate 100% of electricity by carbon-free methods within 10 years. How did he get to the conference? Hybrid? No way. Walk? Naw. Bike? Hell naw. He had 2 Lincolns and an SUV. One of the Lincolns was left running the whole time so the AC would be nice and chilly for Tipper when the event was over.
This guy is the definition of Horse’s Ass, and I’d like to make a nomination as such.
p.s. CO2 is not causing global warming.
The Bureaucratic Thermostat
An editorial in the SF Gate has lit my fire this morning. In it, the anonymous author asserts that placing our eggs in the CO2 basket will halt climate change on earth. Give me a break. (John Stossel won’t sue me for that will he?)
Global warming can’t be solved by California alone, and mistakes here could set back efforts immeasurably.
Wow…the ego of the warming alarmist is staggering. Global warming can’t be solved by California because it’s not a problem humans can solve (or create). Just because we have recorded temperature fluctuations in the last century (that have also occurred for millions, dare I say, BILLIONS of years) it must be our fault. After all, isn’t everything our fault?
How can it be reasonable to think humans can keep the earth’s climate in a static state. It’s insane, it’s unrealistic, it’s impossible. Humans can’t create thunderstorms, stop tornadoes, relieve droughts, make it snow, change course of cyclones, cause earthquakes, or even predict any of these climatic events with much accuracy. Yet, I’m being told that a cap-and-trade program will save us all. WHAT?!?!? Bureaucracy is the new thermostat? I’m calling BS on that.
For consumers and business the biggest concern may be cost. Nichols, who was put in charge of the climate change issue by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, begged off predicting financial impacts for now.….Among the biggest boosters of the climate-change package are Silicon Valley financiers, who believe the field is ripe for growth.
Ya don’t say. You mean that the financiers who will profit greatly from a cap and trade scheme are in favor of it? Didn’t see that coming. How much has Al Gore made preaching his alarmism? That helps him afford his electric and natural gas bills that continue to climb.
Moving on…
There’s next to no doubt about global warming and its changes to weather, farming, health and habitation.
The author got this point right, but is on the wrong side of the fence. Earth’s climate has ALWAYS changed, and always will, regardless of how powerful the St of CA believes itself to be. The first half of the last century saw a temperature decrease. Many scientists were preaching doom and gloom of another Ice Age. Then there were a few decades of temperature increase…then a decade again of cooling….now predictions that the cooling will last another 20 years. This all happened while CO2 levels continue to rise. At least the plants are loving it.
GOOD NEWS! Or bad news?
Most media outlets have widely reported the discovery by Petroleo Brasileiro SA, also known as Petrobras, the state controlled Brazilian oil company, of a new oil field 155 miles off shore and close to the Tupi oil field found two years ago. The Tupi field was the largest “find” since 1976 in the world
I wonder if they will develop the fields, extract oil, deliver it to downstream users and refiners etc etc? I wonder if they will make a lot of money doing that? Will they gain political power along the way?
In CNN reports this morning there was excitement over the find because it holds the prospect to help in the supply and demand balance currently out of whack from our price perspective only, due to massive increases in oil use in Asia with insufficient corresponding increases in production and because Brazil is closer to the US and more politically stable than the Middle East.
Hundreds of millions of once poor people overseas are now enjoying capitalism and are spending it on cars, gas and so on. Why couldn’t they just be happy remaining poor?
How is it, that “we” are happy when foreign countries find and exploit very profitable polluting energy sources that would be called BIG BAD OIL if it were a US company, owned by shareholders?
It is interesting that these “finds” are the result of aggressive “looking” for oil sources that was unknown to the world before the “find.”
The US, on land and offshore, ostensibly in the interests of environmentalism, has put vast amounts of old energy “finds” off limits which discourages US bases BIG BAD OIL from “looking” for new sources. That forces them to try to negotiate with Foreign Governments to replace waning oil fields and to access new sources for their legitimate business.
How would you like to negotiate to drill for oil in Venezuela, Russia, Iran or other state monopoly circumstances? Think these Capitalist Countries have any conflicts of interests in the deal? Think they meld foreign policy into the deal. They have too much power and US based publicly owned shareholder oil companies enjoy no such advantage although the anti oilers make it sound like US based oil companies are the devil.
Seems we would rather continue to compromise energy security and Hypocritically applaud and continue to use oil found and exploited by foreign governments who will use that oil as a weapon to get what they want.
I am an environmentalist and I thing politically partisan environmentalist deserve all the disdain I hope is heaped on them as our voters, hopefully wake up.
Recently I met a very liberal Canadian who complained that under NAFTA Canada is obligated to delivery a certain amount of oil to the US while they have to buy some from foreign countries. He blamed it on the Bush Administration! Another reason to impeach him.
Were it true I would help pay for the filing of impeachment papers. We need to “impeach” those who force the US to pursue a suicidal oil avoidance policy.
So, is it good new or bad news?
Is Al Gore a hypocrite if he uses Petrobas oil to continue his disproportionate use of energy? Yes, and he should be retroactvely impeached for doing nothing about energy security as a powerful VP in the Clinton Administration,. Nothing except prepare to get rich enough to use egregious amounts of polluting energy which is enriching our enemies.
“Unendangered” Polar Bears Threat for Eskimo Food Source
Polar bear populations have increased by five times since the 1950s and 1960s leaving many “confused” by the U.S. Department of Interior’s decision to list polar bears as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act,. Polar bear numbers have dramatically increased to at lest 25,000 bears now from an estimated 5,000 then. There are so many polar bears in some areas their hunting is depleting seals a main food source from native Eskimos.
The decision to do so appears to be based entirely on “unproven computer models.” William P. Horn, former assistant secretary of the Interior for Fish, Wildlife and Parks in 1985-1988 (responsible for the ESA program) said, “It would be a mistake to list the presently healthy and sustainable polar bear populations as a threatened species under the ESA.”
In His so-called documentary Al Gore shows a polar bear struggling to stay afloaton an ice cube sized iceberg but, the scene was later to be proved it was contrived just as the use of another movie’s Styrofoam glaciers calving off icebergs to “prove” his claims which was completely false.
Karoly Versus Chapman and Carter Versus Gore and Global Warming
Geophysicist Chapman’s assertions on global warming provoked a sharp response from Dr. David Karoly of the University of Melborne published in the Australian April 29th saying Chapman is wrong in his assumptions and that global warming is correct, and will continue into the 21st century despite fluctuations like Chapman cites.
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia has previously said, “Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.” Carter’s assessment is notwithstanding the hyperbolic most scientists agree “there is (i) absolutely no consensus on the degree of risk from human warming, and (ii) no direct evidence that CO2 is producing dangerous warming.”
Scientific debate can be lusty particularly when it is extracted for political purposes or hired out for other reasons as has been the allegations in global warming. “Produced facts,” otherwise known as fiction, like the styrofoam icebergs and staged polar bear scenes in Gore’s “documentary” An Inconvenient Truth raises the volume but doesn’t provide facts.