Debate mode

Scientists respond to Gore’s warnings of climate catastrophe — Can we agree on anything? Well, I guess we can agree that Gore is making money on this movie of his.

Gore’s point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. “It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records,” he says. “The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual.”

Carter does not pull his punches about Gore’s activism, “The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.”

found by Jeff Mele



  1. Smith says:

    Al Gore is a damn-fool idiot when it comes to science — read his “Earth in a Balance” if you want proof.

    And for all you shills who condemn any conclusion that undermines your belief in the Global Warming God of Destruction, I say look at the data yourself and try asking a few questions. USE YOUR OWN DAMN BRAIN!

    Here is the graph that is used as “Exhibit A” as proof of global warming: http://tinyurl.com/jjxfc

    The alarmists refer to the last 10 years or so as proof of catastrophic man-caused global warming. Yet doing an “eyeball” linear regression by slapping a ruler down on the period from 1900 through 1950, I conclude that current temperatures are right on target for whatever phenomena is responsible for the current global warming cycle.

    Now I’m not a climatologist, (my degree is in mathematics) so I can’t explain the cooling from 1950 through 1970. And certainly my “proof” is anything but. However, my approach is every bit as valid as what I have seen posted by “scientists” that claim we are destroying the planet. (And considerably more valid than that two-year study that “proves” the ice caps are melting at alarming rates. After all, I cherry-picked 50 years worth of data to make my point, they used only two.)

    Provide me with data if you wish to convince me of your point-of-view. Name-calling ain’t a gonna do it.

  2. Mike Drips says:

    “An Inconvenient Truth”

    Go see the movie and read the book.

    This is very real and quite scary. Things need to change or we will all die in an unexpectedly short amount of time.

    Although their website is not up, Nature’s Future is probably the best environmental group in the world for contributing your time and money to in an effort to fight global warming and to support and repair bio-diversity.

  3. wayne says:

    One of the first things man did was put crap in the air. He found it made good heat.

  4. Gregory says:

    Climate Change is happening, that much is true. Can out actions have an effect on the world? I think so, based on what I’ve read.

    However, to Gore: He has said that the slideshow he presents (since the 80’s, it wasn’t his idea to make it into a film either) his “slightly alarmist, to counter the rediculous claims of the other side, and to act as a wake up call.” (I’m paraphrasing).

    However he presents it though, the science is still accurate. The data he uses is accurate, and the conclusions he reaches are reasonable.

  5. Mike Voice says:

    Provide me with data if you wish to convince me of your point-of-view. Name-calling ain’t a gonna do it.

    I enjoyed listening to NPR’s “Fresh Air” interview with Andrew Revkin, yesterday.

    http://tinyurl.com/ojfkj

    When asked about Gore’s movie, Andrew said there are broad indicators that global warming is occurring – but he was uncomfortable with Gore’s assertion that specific “data points” are directly assignable to human activity.

    Andrew preferred the view of the scientists he was reporting on – collecting years of data in an attempt to determine what is a “squiggle” on the graph -vs- what is a long-term trend.

  6. gquaglia says:

    If we really want to stop global warning check this out 😉

    http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=2166

    I bet Al Gore is going to be jumping!

  7. anders says:

    Whether or no gore presents his argument in a fair way. The world is going in the wrong direction. If any of you have a feeling inside that something is wrong i propose reading ISHMAEL. Something needs to be changed and what al gore has done is got people talking.

  8. natefrog says:

    John, how could you post this? I’m disappointed in you; this pathetic article is nothing more than a glorified press release by the oil industry.

  9. TKane says:

    We were talking about global cooling in the 70’s, caused by the same things we blaming global warming on. My concern is that when the planet starts cooling again within the next 15 years or so, we’ll ignore the pollution issue yet again. The problem is what dirty energy is doing to human health. We need to go nuclear and electric, do away with “fossil” fuels for transportation, bring back trains, and generally just slow down a bit. Oh, and we need more fiber to the premises while we’re at it!

  10. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    We were talking about global cooling in the 70’s, caused by the same things we blaming global warming on.

    Sorry, wrong history. That is called “revisionist history”, something AB CD and gq along with a few others excel in. Just check out their posts above.

    During the 1970s, the worry was the amount of solid suspended particles in the air blocking the amount of sunlight hitting the earth’s surface. Pollution controls have significantly reduced the amount of solids particles emitted. This has helped clean the air and in turn helped a lot of people breathe much better. Evidence of the ramifications may be seen in the aftermath of Krakatoa and Mt St. Helens where global temperatures dipped.

  11. Mark T. says:

    An excellent read. Thanks for the link, John D.!

    Global warming always kicks off a lively debate here – Conservatives using logic and the liberals using emotion. This debate will continue to rage for years to come. No one here is going to be swayed by the other sides arguments because left brain and right brain people will never agree on any emotional/logical topic.

    To me, the mere fact that Al Gore is pushing this movie in an election year makes the whole topic suspect. He is running for president, folks, plain and simple. And anyone running for president has to have a crisis to run on. Obviously, the economy is good and siding with terrorist isn’t going to work either. Climate change is tailor made to push Al Gore to the Democratic presidential nomination, especially with Hillary sinking in the polls.

    Al Gore is a one topic candidate right now. Are the Dems willing to put all of their 2008 eggs into his one basket? They have been worked into a frenzy over global warming and I think it is very likely they will. At that point, they will be praying for more bad weather. If the weather turns nice over the next two years, they will have to create a new crisis and fast.

  12. joshua says:

    I’m one of those *Conservatives* that believes the planet is warming. I also believe that man has trashed this world and accellerated the process by which species die off. But I honestly don’t think we caused or have more than a miniscule effect on the planetary warming.

    Cleaning up our act will help the world and all it’s species, but won’t have much effect on global warming one way or the other. Even the most ardent supporters of human influenced global warming admit that we almost certainly CAN’T stop the process. To me, that means we need to be thinking about how we are going to adjust to the new realities and survive as a species. Instead of argueing about if it’s warming up, we better get down to business and find ways to make life livable in the new world.

    And Al Gore is running for President and is still an idiot.

  13. Roc Rizzo says:

    Please refrain from these articles of research that are funded by the corporations that stand the most to lose, should we implement alternative strategies. They are only motivated by profits. Oil Corporations could give a rat’s testicle as to the state of the environment.

    There’s even one that is touting that carbon dioxide is a GOOD thing, and we need more of it. What a bunch if crap.

    Gore isn’t running. He said so. He said that he is much happier, and less stressed doing this. He has been an environmental advocate for quite some time now. If you read his book, and look through the footnotes, you can see that it is well researched. On contrast to the opposing side’s books, which have no footnotes, so one must presume that there is no real research done.

  14. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    #46, Roc, The article’s sources were well researched. In fact, all you have to do is check out the memo from Exxon’s Public Relations department for all the reference material.

  15. Smith says:

    #46. “Please refrain from these articles of research that are funded by the corporations that stand the most to lose, should we implement alternative strategies.”

    Hmm, since when did corporate sponship invalidate science? And has it ever occured to you that the reason some scientists turn to corporations for funding is because their views are contrary to those that control the purse strings for government funding and private donations? Two weeks ago, I read about an environmental group that was demanding the firing of a scientist in the huricane center because he refused to blame last years huricanes on global warming.

    Voicing opinions contrary to the man-caused global warming theory is seriously career limiting to a climatologist. “Consensus Through Fear and Intimidation” is not a what I call a serious scientific debate.

  16. god says:

    Smith — anything in addition to the usual “I believe it so it must be true” — to back up your blather about unemployed climatologists?

    I ask — because the main climatologist I do battle with on this question is making a pretty decent salary. His opinions [on this issue] haven’t impaired his value to folks who invest in science.

    Of course, that’s subjective and apocrypha, too.

  17. BgScryAnml says:

    Have a look at John Stossel’s new book “Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity” and see what he has to say on the subject. Stossel is a Libertarian and that may offend the ideology of Democrats and Repubicans alike. If you are tired of status quo government explore the Libertarian Party. http://www.lp.org/

  18. John says:

    Global warming is nothing but comic book fantasy, that some scientist came up with. There are no two seasons has ever been a like . Green house effect is another fantasy of scientist.. When scientist can’t find a answer to something ,they make up one.

  19. JohnE says:

    i like how research for global warming has a hundred times the funding that research anti global warming. i also love how the oil company is the one that has contributed the most to pro global warming studies.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5362 access attempts in the last 7 days.