It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Al Gore's OSCAR award, TAKEN BACK ??? cause climategate (AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH)

page: 3
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by fumanchu
He thinks he invented the internet, perhaps he thinks he won the oscar too too. What you're doing seems to be a pathetic attempt at splitting hairs.


It's the blogger claimming "Al Gore's Oscar should be taken back", not Gore. Gore knows full well that he's never won an Oscar.


What this is... is a pathetic attempt at straw man logic to keep mindless partisan hatred flying (and probably to keep people distracted from a story of acutal importance). If partisan hatred is your thing, then by all means have at it. Just don't make yourself look like a fool in the process by crying about some non-existant Oscar needing to be given back.

This is a non-story. The fact of the matter is that Al Gore never won an Oscar; so the whole argument of if he should be required to "give it back" is absolutely ridiculous.



[edit on 12/4/09 by redmage]




posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by fumanchu
 


i know seriously they are trying to change the topic to some random #. but i like Mr gore i mean after all he created and killed man bear big. LFMAO(A reference to south park, if u missed that episode watch it. they totally make gore look like a doutch.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaskade
reply to post by fumanchu
 


i know seriously they are trying to change the topic to some random #. but i like Mr gore i mean after all he created and killed man bear big. LFMAO(A reference to south park, if u missed that episode watch it. they totally make gore look like a doutch.


Perhaps, if you're going to call someone you disagree with a "doutch", you should learn to spell it properly (as well as correct your grammar) lest you look like one yourself.

Is it so hard to have a discussion on these boards anymore without most of the posts simply degrading into ad hominems against the OP or focus of the article?

[edit on 12/4/2009 by VneZonyDostupa]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Although I would like for Al Gore to be brought up on charges for his bleedingly alarmist PR Campaign in regards to AGW, and the profits he has made off of something which still remains unproven, I dare say that there is nothing truly to convict him of, at least not on the surface.

However, if there were to be a sort of "Gore-Gate" exposure of correspondences between him and some of the scientists in question at the CRU (as well as other locations), and such documents somehow displayed a blatant understanding on his part that he was to cover-up or unjustifiably state an argument which he knew went against findings, THEN I do believe that there might exist a genuine court case against him (Civil, Criminal, or otherwise).



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by kaskade
 


My mistake. For some funny reason I thought the topic of the thread was "Al Gore's OSCAR award, TAKEN BACK ???".

Certainly with such a misleading title you can understand how I didn't realize the thread is actually about him "creating the internet", his sham of a nobel peace prize, and his "creating and killing manbearpig".


Nice touch making the accusation that to actually try to discuss what's in the thread's title is now somehow "trying to change the topic to some random #".




[edit on 12/4/09 by redmage]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by kaskade
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


not really, like you said we have had enough time to study the emails and documents. thus letting us know how they where fixing data, getting rid of all other scientists who disputed mr Gore and his BS and so on. we are acting rationally. trillions of dollars lost because of this.


Who is this "WE" you refer to? Have you yourself read all the emails and studied them with a team of experts who have the ability to make since of all the data or are you just believing what you wish to believe - who made these reports that you believe? - point to them. name names., show credentials and background history on the report writers who have studied these things and what agenda do they have? Could they be a plant to disguise even more disinformation? What do you REALLY know about these people?

You cannot name any of that because all everyone is doing is believing what they hear in the media. None of you have any close ties or inside information on any of this. Again, i'm not saying it isn't real, but you have presented no factual evidence that shows THE WHOLE PICTURE.

Here is a story that gives a great example of what I am talking about and why we need more information and study of all of this:Climategate Investigator Is Member Of Vehemently Pro-Man Made Global Warming Organization - www.infowars.com...

Ever stop to think perhaps they got tired of everyone fighting against them and decided to fake the info and tell everyone Global Warming is a Hoax so the oil companies can say,
" See, no global warming, so there is no reason for us to use alternate energy, We can continue using Oil" - So they sacrifice a few people - so what.. it's all been done before!

Oh and I said we DIDN'T have enough time to study the emails.



[edit on 4-12-2009 by JohnPhoenix]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 


You know what we should do to really punish him ... take his election win away from him!

Wait ...



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 


No straw man. You are splitting hairs because it doesn't matter who one the oscar. The film is attributed to Gore, so he technically won it by proxy. Regardless of who won it, it should go back, as should every other accolade, and the $49 million in revenue should be given to a charity that actually deserves it.

Well maybe the music one can stay.

You speak of partisanship, yet you cannot get any more partisan than An Inconvenient Truth.


[edit on 5-12-2009 by fumanchu]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
I think we should arrest Al Gore, every pro-Global Warming Scientist and every politician that supports any form of Carbon Tax and pubicly execute them live and show it on every tv station in the world simultaneously. Just to set an example, of course. We could call it "They lied and tried to screw us - A real inconvenient truth!"


[edit on 5-12-2009 by HotSauce]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


He never was elected. It is just another lie he loves to run around telling everyone so that his fragile ego isn't shattered. To win the Presidential election in the USA you must get the majority of Electoral College votes. Which he did not!



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by fumanchu
 


It's is a textbook example of a straw man argument. How can you possibly say he "technically won it by proxy" when technically he didn't win an Oscar? Do you understand the definition of the word "technically"?

If you have a problem with Davis Guggenheim winning the Oscar, then by all means take up that issue. Beyond that, there's plenty of valid reasons to dislike Al Gore without the need to stoop to making up imaginary ones; all this does is make Gore's detractors look desperate, ignorant, and foolish when they mindlessly jump on this "take Gore's Oscar back" bandwagon.


[edit on 12/5/09 by redmage]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 


Pfff Oscar, Nobel ...


I say compromise and take his Country Music Award!

[edit on 5 Dec 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Thanks Prime. I am in total agreement with you. Gore is a dangerous idiot. So is his wife, Tipper.






posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 





I say compromise and take his Country Music Award!


Or subject him to the irrecoverable ignominy of receiving a Grammy. That would teach him.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by TheAssociate]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 


More hair splitting, semantics, and a spot of grammar nazi. The oscar was for best documentary. The essence of a documentary is that it be factual. An Inconvenient Truth is not factual, therefor the award should be returned as it was obtained by fraudulent means. What you are doing is defending fraud and deception, bad you, go stand in a corner.

An Inconvenient Truth is the Milli Vanilli of the documentary world.

Care to split any more hairs?



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by fumanchu
Care to split any more hairs?


Yes, let's.

Creative Treatment of Actuality is the accepted definition of 'documentary'.

The Earth is getting warmer. That is the Actuality.

The Creative part was attributing it to Humans.

Also, Gore didn't win an Oscar.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
The Nobel needs to be taken back. What a fraud.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by HankMcCoy

Originally posted by fumanchu
Care to split any more hairs?


Yes, let's.


Ok


Creative Treatment of Actuality is the accepted definition of 'documentary'.


Noun
S: (n) documentary, docudrama, documentary film, infotainment (a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event)


Earth is getting warmer. That is the Actuality


Fallacy


The Creative part was attributing it to Humans.


In other words, they lied.


Also, Gore didn't win an Oscar.


The film did, and that is the real issue here.

The only straw man argument here is that Gore didn't actually win the award himself.


[edit on 5-12-2009 by fumanchu]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by fumanchu
reply to post by redmage
 


More hair splitting, semantics, and a spot of grammar nazi. The oscar was for best documentary. The essence of a documentary is that it be factual. An Inconvenient Truth is not factual, therefor the award should be returned as it was obtained by fraudulent means. What you are doing is defending fraud and deception, bad you, go stand in a corner.

An Inconvenient Truth is the Milli Vanilli of the documentary world.

Care to split any more hairs?


Very well said Fu. These fools who have worshiped at the Church of Climatology will naturally be freaking out, it's sad but understandable.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by fumanchu

Originally posted by HankMcCoy

Originally posted by fumanchu
Care to split any more hairs?


Yes, let's.


Ok


Creative Treatment of Actuality is the accepted definition of 'documentary'.


Noun
S: (n) documentary, docudrama, documentary film, infotainment (a film or TV program presenting the facts about a person or event)


Earth is getting warmer. That is the Actuality


Fallacy


The Creative part was attributing it to Humans.


In other words, they lied.


Also, Gore didn't win an Oscar.


The film did, and that is the real issue here.

The only straw man argument here is that Gore didn't actually win the award himself.



You need to read what the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has to say about what a documentary is, considering they are the ones that give the awards, not dictionary.com.

The -Fact- that the world is getting warmer is real. If you can't see that, you're silly. We are hotter than we were twenty years ago, but about the same as we were in the 80's. It's cyclical.

They didn't lie, they used creative license as ALL DOCUMENTARY FILM MAKERS DO TO CONVEY THEIR OPINIONS.

Al Gore didn't win an Oscar.

The Oscar was won because it was the best documentary of the year. More importantly than whether or not the information was accurate is the idea that the film EFFECTIVELY conveyed it's message, be it the glory of war or the pollution of a planet.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by HankMcCoy]



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join