Al Gore is wrong on global warming

Hello america this is the rest of the world calling. There are three developed countries that have not signed the kyoto protocol which the majority of nations have. Australia, US,china have not because of selfish reasons. Yes totally selfish. The majority of world experts...the US has a laughable group of cooperate experts....agree..do something now or spend the next centuries paying for it. Wake up and be RESPONSIBLE!!!!

You know whats sad?

The USA makes a political issue out of something that potentially affects the whole planet, because a large chunk of the population there dislikes Al Gore.

I always ask the same question on this issue.

You may dislike the man - thats your perogative. You may dislike his methods - fine. All he is really suggesting is that we live cleaner and greener. Whats so wrong about that?

After looking at the numbers, I find it hard to believe that humans have anything to do with global warming.

I found quite a few sites that all give roughly the same numbers. Most say that human activity has caused about 0.3% of the greenhouse effect. I can't find any sites that give good data that show humans are having a large impact on global warming. Feel free to share if there is one.

This site says humans have nothing to with global warming. It has references as well.
mysite.verizon.net...

The entire Global Warming issue is so overblown. I do not mean that the Earth is not changing climatically, but so much empahsis is placed upon CO2 and Man as the sole culprit, that the bigger picture is being totally missed.

The Earth as we know it went through a small Ice Age in the 1600-1700 time frame. Before this time Greenland was as green as its name suggests. There were numerous native tribes which thrived on this island before that period in time. However, beginning in the 1600's the Earth's climate took a Polar Nose-Dive and began to enter a cooling period. Many of the Native Greenland Tribes who thrived within the interior of the island died off as the land became inundated with glacial ice. This took away their food sources, and left them facing a climate that they were not used to. Thus, the die off.

Now all of the sudden we have these same Ice Sheets beginning to retreat and melt all over Greenland. Is the Earth changing for the worse? or is it simply awakening out of an Ice Age which began nearly 400 years ago?

Meteorlogical records have only been kept for a relatively short amount of time, and as far as the Earth's Climate is concerned, it has fluctuated MANY times in the past.

On top of all of this information, has everyone failed to make notice of our Solar System in general? Mars has its Polar Ice Sheets melting and retreating as well. This is what I meant when I stated above that by concentrating solely on Mankind and CO2 as the culprits for Earth's "Global Warming", the entirely LARGER picture might be overlooked.

Just to look outside the US consider antarctica. Under 'normal" climate change variation is slow but in the antarctic conditions that normally take 12 000 years to vary do so in 20 years. just use google there are tens of examples where "normal" change has been accelerated by atmospheric pollution

There has always been change.In the devonian or carboniferous ages the CO2 level may be 40 times that of today but earth conditions overall were very different Plant and animal life were vastly different and changes were over hundreds of million years. We must look at "now' and the speed of changes that are not normal for the parameters given

Please look it up. More than one article but all under the same heading which is my area of research. Antarctica climate change........those three words look them up in google.....no tricks.

As a Cree (don't you DARE call me "Native American"!) I've always wanted to bring this up in the Al Gore Retardathon on Global Warming.

Before Europeans came to North America and brought all these farting cows, sheep, pigs, and horses:

What blackened the plains by sheer numbers for miles from horizon to horizon?
Whose skulls and carcasses were piled 3 stories high for miles along railroad tracks?

If you guessed prairie chickens, you are an embicile.

The correct answer is MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS of farting BISON!

Therefore, anyone citing cowfarts is letting loose with more than just gas (check your pants).

Here in Iowa, there are MORE TREES than there were Pre-European settlement. Even 50 years ago Iowa was more or less open prairie. Here is your "carbon offset" you trendy liberal tree-hugger!

I wish the mainstream establishment would quit trying to cram Global Warming down our throats. Its all for the benefit of their own agendas. Anyone that truly wants to learn about the subject and is willing to tackle it with an open mind can see that its bunk.

reply to post by neformore


Call him up while he flies around on his private jet and ask him why he doesn't practice what he preaches. You might be able to reach him at his mansion.

The proper name for Al Gore is "HYPOCRITE".

reply to post by neformore


Yep. And it's sad that any potential for a good discussion turns into and Al Gore bashing fest, where all the valid points get drowned in stupid partisan debates.

Please just don't let emotion and preconceived ideas colour your ideas on this very important subject. do as much as you can to get a balanced idea on what is happening. Carbon dioxide is not the only gas involved, temperature readings are not going to show drastic change. The weather patterns are beginning to change and people and countries are not prepared for food shortages and migration of people. Please try to find out as many facts as possible

Yes, naturally occuring phenomenon do contribute much more than humans to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere, but...

There has always been balance. It takes only one gram to tip a balance holding equally heavy weights on both sides, even if they weigh tons.

Likewise, the "small" emissions caused by humans may tip the equilibrium of nature, the consequences of which we cannot foresee...

It does not matter how much lipstick you put on a pig - it is STILL a pig. Now of course there are many so-called "scientists" who want to deny and refuse and resist the Theory of Global Warming MADE BY MAN, which is pretty much logical, since the corporate lobbies of biggest companies in the world, who make money by destroying our planet, bought them to say so. Now of course they do not want to see people waking up and stop using cars to go to work. And they do now want to see people to stop living this way of life, which is designed to rape our planet for the good of corporate world. Look at it once again; most of the world population has no REAL money - they all work all their life to pay off their house or a car or an educataion for their children and then they have little something left to buy themselves an averege tombstone on the local graveyard. They will not spend billions of dollars on cruiser ships with helicopter pads and two submarines. But some people actually have this kind of money. And they do not want anyone to belive a certain theory of manmade global warming. Cutting the trees does not matter! CO2 does not matter! Drilling oil does not matter! Killing the oceans does not matter! Eating genetically modified food does not matter! Throwing thousands of nuclear-test bombs in few decades does not matter! These people are just liberal-treehuggers who want you to stop driving your car and eating junkfood and basicly make you a hippy! NOW YOU DO NOT WANT THAT! REFUSE! RESIST!!! DENY!!!!!

Originally posted by scientist
for a conspiracy based website, im surprised there arent more people skeptical of this global warming myth. I mean, when there is something being debated that 95% of all politicians agree on, and that they are spending money to research... it's a safe bet to assume it's based on lies and extremism.

Just picked one post at random to quote - this seemed as good as any.

I think it is telling, that the post with the most stars (at time of this post) is the one using arrogant and obnoxious sarcasm to challenge the OP. How stupid we are for even considering the main stream media driven frenzy on Global Warming is not 100% correct. No evidence, no facts, no links, just sarcasm. Wow, give that man a star.

Then we have the "so what if it's all a lie - if it helps us clean up our act, then let's all agree to lie". NO NO NO. That's exactly how you give everyone who wants one, a great excuse to NOT take responsibility for the utter mess we are currently making of Earth.

"CO2 causes global warming, everyone knows that dummy". Well no actually, the jury is still out in some intelligent free thinking circles. Does CO2 lead or lag warming. We just don't know for sure.

That's the point. We really don't know.

However, we do know that dumping toxic waste into our water system is killing our ecosystem, over fishing is risking our future food supply, pumping Sulphates and Nitrates into the air ends up destroying our forests etc, deforestation causes top soil erosion, chemical fertilizers and pesticides poison our bodies and destroy crop yeild over time, etc etc.

Pick one of those or some other to champion. There are many worthy ways to help clean up our lives, without having to lie and manipulate people through fear.

There's enough fear and ignorance on this planet already. We need love and warmth and a deep caring for our little rock. Inventing some future doomsday, cataclysmic scenario out of questionable science is IMHO not the way to go when there are so many real and current issues.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by RogerT]

Originally posted by RogerT
"CO2 causes global warming, everyone knows that dummy". Well no actually, the jury is still out in some intelligent free thinking circles. Does CO2 lead or lag warming. We just don't know for sure.

I think it's generally accepted that there is lag in the historical record for ice-age cycles. The extent of this lag is more questionable. Some think it's about 100 years, others, up to 800 or more. A few think the lag can be shown to be non-existent.

But either way, it doesn't show that CO2 is not a GHG. The evidence it is comes from it's physical properties. The very simple physics of spectroscopy.

The lag issue is a red-herring. It really doesn't mean anything of note for current warming. Indeed, there are historical periods where GHGs are seen to lead warming (e.g., PETM).

In fact, if CO2 was shown to lead warming during ice-age cycles, this would be more problematic than the current explanation. Which simply goes, an external factor such as orbital variation initiates internal changes in the earth's systems. This causes warming. The increased warming causes the emission of GHGs (CO2 and CH4), as GHGs, these cause further warming. So, the GHGs essentially act within a positive feedback.

If we find CO2 led ice-age warming, we would need to understand how GHGs can appear in the atmosphere in a cyclic fashion. The PETM-like events are suggested to be rare and catastrophic, maybe due to massive volcanic or comet impacts, or both.

Originally posted by CreeWolf
Call him up while he flies around on his private jet and ask him why he doesn't practice what he preaches. You might be able to reach him at his mansion.

The proper name for Al Gore is "HYPOCRITE".

See. Theres my point. You are blinded by the man.

I don't give a toss what Al Gore does, how he travels or where he lives.

I do, however, think that if we all lived a bit cleaner, and greener, the world would be a better place.

Is that point lost on you? Should we just totally screw up the planet because Al Gore chooses to live a certain way?

Its NOT about the man, its about the message. You are shooting the messenger.

there is no way Al is wrong on this, did you see his film? he clearly has evidence to prove this. from core samples etc. he won the noble prize, so he cant be wrong. besides, democrats are never wrong

The trouble is that I am not talking about a future dooms day,it is problem leading to a disaster now The drought in australia is crippling the food supply,prices up, people starving in the streets because they don't have ahome. Bushfires further destroying the land. Major rivers dried up,cities being forced to use recycled drinking water. This is the human face of global warming. Changed wearther patterns are due to global warming.Again I remind people of the impact on antarctica, it is happening now. It's that boiled frog

I think we can all agree at least that it is very difficult conclusively to prove that humans are the fundamental CAUSE of global warming. I think it would be very hard to argue against the idea that they are contributing - and probably significantly.

I don't know that there's much point in arguing the toss over the definitions of cause and contribution. I think that clouds the real issue, anyway. The reason that global warming has increasingly dominated the political agenda (outside the US, where it hasn't until very recently featured at all prominently) is not that the earth - or polar bears, or plantlife, or whatever you choose to exemplify the earth - is being adversely affected. It's because HUMANS are being adversely affected.

The reason people (outside the US) are motivated to be concerned about the use of fossil fuels is because their petrol costs more.

The reason I am concerned about pollution in the atmosphere is because it makes me cough on the way to work in the morning.

The reason I worry about overfishing European waters is because I like to eat fish, and they're increasingly expensive because of the economics of supply and demand.

Point being, it's local level concerns that make people worried, not polar bears or the thought that we might actually be guility of the whole thing in the first place. And it's local level concerns that make politicians (except in the US) think about it, because that's where the votes are.

And at a local level, I can prove without question that humans are ruining my environment. Whether it's a local projection of a global issue or not is kind of irrelevant - if everyone's local level problems were sorted there wouldn't BE a global problem.

LW

Here is a quick question:

IF this is a natural cycle of "LIFE" and periods of warm and cold eras or ages, and we all know that POLAR BEARS are the survivors of almost all of these ages, since they are the biggest bears and they do live in polar areas - so, how come They Are Drowning As Ice Shelfs Melt for the first time in their history? There never was a single polar bear found on the bottom of ocean, because they DROWNED. One more sign, of how this animal called Man is killing the enviroment he does also live in. It is kind of, like sawing off the tree branch on which you sit on:

STUPID!