And every time he is exposed for the hypocrite that he is, I will report it here.
then why not report the entire story - or is that YOUR agenda??? true he uses up more than the average bear, but his crib is bigger than the average bear and he also funds carbon replenishing. Please point out who isn't a hypocrite on any issue. Is GWB a hypocrite cuz he supports the death penalty and not abortion?
y'know, for as many lawyers and legalese flying around this post, y'all are a bunch of dumb muthafuckaz:
the article compares a MANSION with the AVERAGE AMERICAN HOME!!!
The average american home has what, 3 bedrooms and a two car garage? And Al Gore's mansion has probably 10 times that?
And do they account for him possibly being busier after "Inconvenient Truth" came out, so he's working longer hours?
Not defending him, but articles like this always leave out the context of the numbers. Kinda like toothpaste commercials saying "cleans %25 better!" better than what? brushing your teeth with butterscotch?
The Average American's home is between 10 and 50 years old, has between four and six living-purpose rooms, grew up within 50 miles of his or her current home, has a kitchen, a clothes washer, a clothes dryer, an automatic dishwasher, at least one full bathroom, brushes teeth daily, visits the dentist annually, showers daily, has a Christmas tree every year, has a credit card, ATM card, and household credit-card debt.
yea, and just don't expose Al Gore, you should track down all the scientists who were mentioned in the film. i bet some of them have really high electric bills. the world could benefit from such an investigation.
because seriously, who cares about global warming, we all just want to know whether unsubstantiated information can possibly show that people who are trying to support a good cause are not infallible.
And every time he is exposed for the hypocrite that he is, I will report it here.
then why not report the entire story - or is that YOUR agenda??? true he uses up more than the average bear, but his crib is bigger than the average bear and he also funds carbon replenishing. Please point out who isn't a hypocrite on any issue. Is GWB a hypocrite cuz he supports the death penalty and not abortion?
That explains everything, Gore uses more electricity because he lives in a giant house which logically needs more energy. However, it actually uses less energy than a similarly giant house owned by someone less concerned with the environment than he. If you had read the whole story you would have seen that he even instructed his manservant to install solar panels.
End of story.
P.S. I love how the stock market can hit record highs week after week, but everytime there is a sell-off CNN puts it up on their front page like its the end of the world.
y'know, for as many lawyers and legalese flying around this post, y'all are a bunch of dumb muthafuckaz:
the article compares a MANSION with the AVERAGE AMERICAN HOME!!!
The average american home has what, 3 bedrooms and a two car garage? And Al Gore's mansion has probably 10 times that?
And do they account for him possibly being busier after "Inconvenient Truth" came out, so he's working longer hours?
Not defending him, but articles like this always leave out the context of the numbers. Kinda like toothpaste commercials saying "cleans %25 better!" better than what? brushing your teeth with butterscotch?
The Average American's home is between 10 and 50 years old, has between four and six living-purpose rooms, grew up within 50 miles of his or her current home, has a kitchen, a clothes washer, a clothes dryer, an automatic dishwasher, at least one full bathroom, brushes teeth daily, visits the dentist annually, showers daily, has a Christmas tree every year, has a credit card, ATM card, and household credit-card debt.
Dun worry people. I'm not saying a word after this. But, lets remember that Al Gore is probably one guy that isn't even home much. I'm betting that he's in a car or on a plane more than he's at home.
In any case. I'm going tree planting this spring if anyone wants to come up and join me. I did this after high school and it was great.
And every time he is exposed for the hypocrite that he is, I will report it here.
then why not report the entire story - or is that YOUR agenda??? true he uses up more than the average bear, but his crib is bigger than the average bear and he also funds carbon replenishing. Please point out who isn't a hypocrite on any issue. Is GWB a hypocrite cuz he supports the death penalty and not abortion?
Why can't ANY of you comprehend that it's not how much energy he's used, it's that while tellin us to decrease usage he has actually INCREASED at the same home, same size, etc.
Haven't read through all the posts, but, consumption aside, does anyone know if dude is using some energy saving bulbs & fixtures? I'd be curious to see this house!
Haven't read through all the posts, but, consumption aside, does anyone know if dude is using some energy saving bulbs & fixtures? I'd be curious to see this house!
as someone who lives in his nabe, his shit is , but I can't tell if he's rocking ES bulbs and whatnot.
Why can't ANY of you comprehend that it's not how much energy he's used, it's that while tellin us to decrease usage he has actually INCREASED at the same home, same size, etc.
maybe the byproduct of not having a washington VP's office anymore....
Haven't read through all the posts, but, consumption aside, does anyone know if dude is using some energy saving bulbs & fixtures? I'd be curious to see this house!
as someone who lives in his nabe, his shit is , but I can't tell if he's rocking ES bulbs and whatnot.
I thought I heard that a state, California maybe, was going to ban the sale of the old, non-es bulbs. That's something big. At work, we've seen significant savings since making the change to es bulbls. There have been similar regulations on plumbing materials & which are good for the environment. There is a lot that can be done for new construction to build "Green" buildings. Hopefully, this trend will continue.
I just can't see why we wouldn't want to reduce waste/energy consumption in or day-to-day lives.
I mean, I know there is an argument to be made about gov't regulation vs. free enterprise/robust economy.
But on the household level, is anyone arguing against more fuel efficiency?
Mostly he just throws money around to purchase credits to offset his consumption.
...and somewhere in a wealthy Nashville suburb a dry-cleaning business is racking that Gore money while its customers get shafted with sub-par cleaning and starch-less dress shirts.
i agree that al gore is a hypocrite because his own house is not a model of energy efficiency. i resent that it's used to jump-off a global warming discussion anywhere. i do not understand the issue enough to suggest policy. but at home i was concerned about my very high electric bills. i chose to use less. i live in virginia. it's not that cold and i have a fireplace. i live five minutes from my work. that helps a lot. recommended.
The article talks about the adverse effects that the minimum wage can have. These effects being typically felt most keenly by the poorest in society.
1. Increased prices are obviously more significant the less money you have
2. You dont make a mans labour worth A by making it illegal to pay him less than A. If an individuals skills are so low as to make the value of his labour $6 an hour then by setting the wage floor at $7 an hour youve essentially outlawed his employment. So the minimum wage is not only a flagrant breach of the constitution it also harms the most vulnerable in society. Still, as long as it make people feel good about themselves for advocating it.
These reasons are so idiotic and you people keep parroting them as if you care about anyone but yourselves. Everyone knows the poorer you are, the more of your income you spend. If all of the sudden you have a swelling of people with an extra 100 bucks in their pockets a week, they're going to go out and spend almost all of it it at area establishments. Completely dispersing their money back into the market, and offsetting the costs employers would incur. The only difference being, now maybe someone's kid can eat three meals, and maybe see their parents for more than 20 minutes a day. There are states in this country that have had a $7+ minumum wage for years now, and none of them are on the verge of collapsing into chaos. You free markettiers need to give your precious market more credit, it can handle more than you may think.
Frankly if it took Al Gore to wake up, it's sad anyway. Who's that fat pig?? He couldn't even do a documentary on how Bush fucked him raw in the azz by cheating and tricking the election. Let's debate democracy too...This fool made a move for his banking account(s). He could care less about energy saving. All these pigs are the less ecological people you can find on Earth. They got private jets, cars with tanks bigger than a swimming pool, etc...Al Gore did a Michael Moore move. He's part of the problem, he's not part of the solution. The solution is in everyone's behavior. And as far as i know, laws modify behaviors. (Not that it's a good thing but) Movies don't. Even Bruce Lee used to make me punch the shit out of any garbage cans, but it faded away. I'm not a Jeet Kune Do master. And After Gore's video, people won't become more respectful for the environment. You might think so, but they won't. Real talk.
With that said, that's a LOW attempt to make Democrats looks ridiculous...ANY Republican is not allowed to even talk about the subject. Sell your petroleum and shut the fuck up. But do not be moralistic just because it's election time. Republicans ar the reason why the World is a mess. Today's republicans was yesterday slave's owners. And past time Christians head-chopper. And tomorrow's eugenic scientists. They cannot give any life's lessons to anyone. Just go to the Church and listen to Paul Wolfowitz.arrrrrrgh.
Frankly if it took Al Gore to wake up, it's sad anyway. Who's that fat pig?? He couldn't even do a documentary on how Bush fucked him raw in the azz by cheating and tricking the election. Let's debate democracy too...This fool made a move for his banking account(s). He could care less about energy saving. All these pigs are the less ecological people you can find on Earth. They got private jets, cars with tanks bigger than a swimming pool, etc...Al Gore did a Michael Moore move. He's part of the problem, he's not part of the solution. The solution is in everyone's behavior. And as far as i know, laws modify behaviors. (Not that it's a good thing but) Movies don't. Even Bruce Lee used to make me punch the shit out of any garbage cans, but it faded away. I'm not a Jeet Kune Do master. And After Gore's video, people won't become more respectful for the environment. You might think so, but they won't. Real talk.
With that said, that's a LOW attempt to make Democrats looks ridiculous...ANY Republican is not allowed to even talk about the subject. Sell your petroleum and shut th fuck up. But do not be moralistic just because it's election time. Republicans ar the reason why the World is a mess. Today's republicans was yesterday slave's owners. And past time Chiristians head-chopper. And tomorrow's eugenic scientists. They cannot give any life's lessons to anyone. Just go to the Church and listen to Paul Wolfowitz.arrrrrrgh.
I'm not debating if global warming is real or not... By definition alone on this subject he is a hypocrite.
hyp??o??crite
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs. 2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
If this was a republican, most of you wouldn't give him an ounce of credibility. Even if the dude was talking from the heart.
One More Time, just for Dor...
Your ignoring the question though, you say he's not leading by example, but how do you know? Because he's got a big house and fly's in private jets? Even if he didnt, there would always be something. My guess, and guesses are all anyones expressed in this thread, is he does what he can, just like any of us can. To call him a figurehead, just to tear him down as a hypocrite is intellectually dishonest. What are you doing posting on a message board when you could be out saving baby seals? Who are you, or anyone to judge. His actions prompted this discussion.
Hypocrite...
Did you respond to anything I said or just resort to name calling? Fine, we're all just partisan, and Gore's a hypocrite. So again, what are you basing this on? Bill Gates speaks out against poverty and lives in a 200 million dollar house. Do you just dislike Gore that much that you'll jump on some supposed "fact?" Despite your apparent environmental 'credentials,' I still have no idea what you're basing your opinion that Gore's a hypocrite on?
I don't think using Bill is a good choice. Since the dude does lead by example. His foundation alone has put aside almost 30 billion for global health and learning. Damn, the dude put up $28 million just the other day to go along with Canada's $111 million to work on a Canadian HIV Vaccine Initiative.
And yes, I dislike Gore. There are so many reasons not to trust the guy. But that's not just the reason. There are a ton of people out there who would be a wayyyy better pick IMO to be putting your support and trust behind on the subject of environmental issues. Being Canadian, I would ride all day long for someone like David Suzuki. Who has spent most of his life speaking on the cause and living by example.
But whatever, if you want to put your faith into someone who is telling you how imperative it is to do something now and that drastic measures must be taken. And that doesn't do it himself and is in fact increasing his usage. Then hey, by all means...
COTDAMN!!!!!!
You must be a politician the way your dodging my questions. HOW DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIS CONSUMPTION?????
I am personally not sold on global warming, I just think its absolutely ridiculous to take his electric bill out of context as the sole basis for calling him a hypocrite. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HE DOES OR DOES NOT DO. Ok, his consumption went up, maybe he added a new office to advocate for energy consumption. No one knows really. Sierra club cuts down hundreds of trees to make mailings about saving the environment. And the amount of mailing they do may have gone up, using more trees. What a bunch of hypocrites right?
And yes, I dislike Gore.
Thats your real point right?
[sarcasm] Gore should've let this suzuki guy make the movie, he sounds like he probably has a similarly high profile and access to financial backing as Gore. Gore's not credible because his electric bill is so high, and i heard it went up cause he left the lights on once, after he told us to turn them off!! What a hypocrite, his opinion is completely invalid because of that. If it was someone i liked better maybe, but theres so many unspecific and vague reasons not to trust the guy. [/sarcasm]
The article talks about the adverse effects that the minimum wage can have. These effects being typically felt most keenly by the poorest in society.
1. Increased prices are obviously more significant the less money you have
2. You dont make a mans labour worth A by making it illegal to pay him less than A. If an individuals skills are so low as to make the value of his labour $6 an hour then by setting the wage floor at $7 an hour youve essentially outlawed his employment. So the minimum wage is not only a flagrant breach of the constitution it also harms the most vulnerable in society. Still, as long as it make people feel good about themselves for advocating it.
These reasons are so idiotic and you people keep parroting them as if you care about anyone but yourselves. Everyone knows the poorer you are, the more of your income you spend. If all of the sudden you have a swelling of people with an extra 100 bucks in their pockets a week, they're going to go out and spend almost all of it it at area establishments. Completely dispersing their money back into the market, and offsetting the costs employers would incur. The only difference being, now maybe someone's kid can eat three meals, and maybe see their parents for more than 20 minutes a day. There are states in this country that have had a $7+ minumum wage for years now, and none of them are on the verge of collapsing into chaos. You free markettiers need to give your precious market more credit, it can handle more than you may think.
Im going to just ignore your curious supposition that pay increases are magically self financing because a) it doesnt really have anything to do with what I was talking about and b) it's just nonsense. Let me try and restate the two points I made even more simply than I did previously:
1. Poorer people are more sensitive to price increases than richer people. Anything at all controversial about that remark?
2. I didnt make my hypothetical minimum wage $7 because I feel that figure is some kind of tipping point. It would be entirely possible to raise the minimum wage far higher than it is without any "collapse into chaos". However it must be seen that the higher the minimum then the greater the amount of low skilled people will tend to be ruled out of the job market altogether. If you look at the countries with significantly higher minimum wages than the US they all have double digit unemployment figures.
The fallacy youve commited is know by us smart people as circumstantial ad hominem.
No True Scotsman points out possible logical fallacies after having posited so many into the ???discussion??? himself. Right, Dolo?
Oh, and catostrophic global warming is a myth propogated by socialists.
Get your comprehension game up. Saying your argument is wrong because youre gay is an example circumstantial ad hominem. I didnt offer the observation that global warming is a myth to attempt to discredit it. I did so because that is what it is.
If you look past politics and agenda, then the fact is that we are currently in a warm phase of the current ice age. Many people feel that we are on the cusp of (or already in) the next cold phase. It's predicted that global temperatures will actually decrease in the next decades. This is consistent with climate change dating back hundreds of years.
The sun should not be dismissed in this discussion. It's a key factor in understanding how Earth temperatures fluctuate.
Why were there climate conditions identical (and even far warmer, if you want to get into it) to the current one, when there wasn't any fossil fuel being burned?
There is a lot of misinformation abound regarding the issue. Data reduction, scare tactics, etc... In my opinion this is not the way to properly address and/or approach the issue. Fossil fuel burning is only one factor of pollution. It's not the be all and end all.
For instance, if growth erosion wasn't such an issue, a lot of the CO2 would never go into the air. From a biological point of view, CO2 actually benefits plants.
Now, in regards to the often mentioned but-scientists-all-over-the-world-agree argument. Just because a group of individuals believe something to be true, does not mean it is true. And let's face it, in the context of science history, the percieved notion of a given time is often incorrect.
Remember when almost every knowledgable individual on Earth was convinced that Earth was the center of the universe. Or that it was flat? Or when the Wright brothers were ridiculed for even suggesting "heavier than air flight?"
You can see where I'm going with this.
All I ask is that people take the current consensus with a grain of salt.
And to close, I'm an environmentalist myself so please don't take the content of this as anti-environmental. I personally feel there are far greater issues that need addressing rather than CO2 emissions. The scare tacticts currently being spouted are NOT the way to address environmental issues. There needs to be a healthy discussion, not just some blatant indoctrination of "facts".
shit, i hope you're right or were all fucked. al gore too.
Get your comprehension game up. Saying your argument is wrong because youre gay is an example circumstantial ad hominem. I didnt offer the observation that global warming is a myth to attempt to discredit it. I did so because that is what it is.
Perhaps your comprehension game is lacking. If you wanted to call me out for something, I would even concede that the ???No True Scotsman??? fallacy (a version of the fallacy of the undistributed middle - don???t worry you???ll get into that sophomore year) might not be completely applicable here, but since I was pointing out that an individual with a penchant for logical fallacies calling out another person for committing one is comedy.
As far as quoting ???catostrophic global warming is a myth propogated by socialists??? In 2004, the Pentagon provided a report to the current administration on the 'possibilities' of global climate change and the 'possible' national security problems that may result. It was cosigned by such ???socialists??? as Bob Watson, head of the World Bank. Parse the words ???climate change??? and 'global warming' if you like, but know that the terms ???myth??? and ???socialist??? keep your arguments wide open to the same criticisims.
So, perhaps when your game is sufficiently stepped up, I???ll look for your informed opinion on the matter. Until then, keep reading that digicam manual and get them pictures posted to win Rockadelic???s prize.
You must be a politician the way your dodging my questions. HOW DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIS CONSUMPTION?????
I am personally not sold on global warming, I just think its absolutely ridiculous to take his electric bill out of context as the sole basis for calling him a hypocrite. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HE DOES OR DOES NOT DO. Ok, his consumption went up, maybe he added a new office to advocate for energy consumption. No one knows really. Sierra club cuts down hundreds of trees to make mailings about saving the environment. And the amount of mailing they do may have gone up, using more trees. What a bunch of hypocrites right?
And yes, I dislike Gore.
Thats your real point right?
[sarcasm] Gore should've let this suzuki guy make the movie, he sounds like he probably has a similarly high profile and access to financial backing as Gore. Gore's not credible because his electric bill is so high, and i heard it went up cause he left the lights on once, after he told us to turn them off!! What a hypocrite, his opinion is completely invalid because of that. If it was someone i liked better maybe, but theres so many unspecific and vague reasons not to trust the guy. [/sarcasm]
I'm not going to get into it with you. Cause, you seem to not be able to step outside your "I must put my faith into the all mighty and powerful Al to save us".
I'm not even debating anything on global warming or the environment with anyone.
And I don't know why you put ur sarcasm meter so high with using David Suzuki. The guy probably did more for the environment in a couple of years of his life, than ur man did in his whole 8 years in office. As one of the most powerful men on the planet.
But whatever man... I give up.
My intelligence is absolutley no match for your stupidity.
The piece failed to mention his "house" is a 9,000 square foot house and the guest house is about half that, and I think he can't physically change to solar heating cuz of the landmark status of his crib. but don't give all the facts....
and yes - he's being a hypocrite, but his crib is far from what the average household is living in.
Sums things up quite nicely.
Now, in regards to the often mentioned but-scientists-all-over-the-world-agree argument. Just because a group of individuals believe something to be true, does not mean it is true. And let's face it, in the context of science history, the percieved notion of a given time is often incorrect.
Most recently the "starkest warning" (Guardian news story) of climate change was given by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), a UN-founded agency. The findings of the first part of the report, published recently.
The Working Group I report was published on February 2, 2007[7]. Its key conclusions were that[8]:
* Warming of the climate system is unequivocal * Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (greater than 90% likely) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (human) greenhouse gas concentrations * Hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries" no matter how much humans control their pollution.[9], although the likely amount of temperature and sea level rise varies greatly depending on the fossil intensity of human activity during the next century (pages 13 and 18)[10] * The probability that this is caused by natural climatic processes alone is less than 5% * World temperatures could rise from anywhere between 1.1 and 6.4??C (1.98 to 11.52??F) during the 21st century (table 3) and that: o Sea levels will probably rise by 18 to 59cm (7.08 to 23.22in) [table 3] o It is more than 90% certain that there will be frequent warm spells, heat waves and heavy rainfall o It is more than 66% certain that there will be an increase in droughts, tropical cyclones and extreme high tides. * Both past and future anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions will continue to contribute to warming and sea level rise for more than a millennium. * Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have increased markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values over the last 650,000 years. (Wikipedia)
Regarding the reliability of the report:
The report was produced by around 600 authors from 40 countries, and reviewed by over 620 experts and governments. Before being accepted, the summary was reviewed line-by-line by representatives from 113 governments during the 10th Session of Working Group I,[3] which took place in Paris, France, between 29 January and 1 February 2007. (Wikipedia)
Edited to add that I do not fully agree with either arguments for or against global warming. I think there's still work to be done to fully understand the changes that are happening and I do not think that it's just global warming or just a natural phenomenon as with ice ages and such. But fuck it, this thread is about Al Gore.
Since the below is from an Australian Newspaper I have no clue as to how partisan the article or group is or isn't. This is obviously the other end of the spectrum from Gore's views and while the truth is most likely somewhere in the middle, it's an interesting read nonetheless. I'm not going to argue or defend this article so save your attacks. This is certainly nothing you'd ever get to read in Rolling Stone or see on the ABC News and I think it's important to listen to ALL the views on the topic. The part of the article I do agree with 100% is the perceived sense of moral superiority that some humans tend to foster. _________________________________________________________________________________
Greenhouse sceptics to congregate Email Print Normal font Large font Katharine Murphy and Brendan Nicholson, Canberra and Richard Baker February 28, 2007
Latest related coverage After hot, dry Sizzler, prepare for the Drizzler Act now on climate change, says diplomat Advertisement AdvertisementHARD-CORE global warming sceptics will descend on Canberra today for the release of a book claiming environmentalism is the new religion.
Former mining executive Arvi Parbo will launch Ray Evans' new publication, Nine Facts About Climate Change, at a function at Parliament House.
The book claims climate change is nothing new and declares Howard Government investments in solar power and in cleaning up coal a "complete waste of taxpayers' money".
"Environmentalism has largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the upper classes in Europe and to a lesser extent in the United States," Mr Evans says in the publication.
"It is a form of religious belief which fosters a sense of moral superiority in the believer, but which places no importance on telling the truth," he says.
"The global warming scam has been, arguably, the most extraordinary example of scientific fraud in the postwar period."[/b]
The function is organised by the Lavoisier Group, founded in 2000 by Ray Evans and former mining executive Hugh Morgan to test claims that global warming is the result of human activity.
Mr Evans is a longstanding friend and colleague of Mr Morgan and a committed activist on issues such as workplace reform through the HR Nicholls Society, which he founded with federal Treasurer Peter Costello.
Former Labor minister Peter Walsh also will attend today's function, and the group will hold a dinner to be addressed by climate-change sceptic Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor in the School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science at Auckland University.
Liberal MP Dennis Jensen has organised the function on behalf of the Lavoisier Group and expects about 50 people to attend the dinner.
Dr Jensen, a nuclear physicist, has said he is not convinced that human activity is responsible for global warming.
In an interview with The Age last month, Mr Evans acknowledged that last September's visit by former US vice-president Al Gore to promote his Oscar-winning global-warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth had helped generate a lot of publicity on climate change.
But he described Mr Gore's film as "bullshit from beginning to end".[/b]
"The science from the anthropology point of view has collapsed. The carbon-dioxide link is increasingly recognised as irrelevant,"[/b] Mr Evans said.
"But the Government's frightened.
"Cabinet, from what I understand, is by and large still sceptical of climate change, but it is scared of the drought and worried about how Labor will make use of it."
i read an article that likened global warming to a religion also, the reliance on faith and the need for a doomsday gospel and it was pretty interesting.
Comments
then why not report the entire story - or is that YOUR agenda??? true he uses up more than the average bear, but his crib is bigger than the average bear and he also funds carbon replenishing. Please point out who isn't a hypocrite on any issue. Is GWB a hypocrite cuz he supports the death penalty and not abortion?
the article compares a MANSION with the AVERAGE AMERICAN HOME!!!
The average american home has what, 3 bedrooms and a two car garage? And Al Gore's mansion has probably 10 times that?
And do they account for him possibly being busier after "Inconvenient Truth" came out, so he's working longer hours?
Not defending him, but articles like this always leave out the context of the numbers. Kinda like toothpaste commercials saying "cleans %25 better!" better than what? brushing your teeth with butterscotch?
the above taken from: http://www.marthastewart.com/page.jhtml?type=content&id=stv520001&layout=martha
because seriously, who cares about global warming, we all just want to know whether unsubstantiated information can possibly show that people who are trying to support a good cause are not infallible.
That explains everything, Gore uses more electricity because he lives in a giant house which logically needs more energy. However, it actually uses less energy than a similarly giant house owned by someone less concerned with the environment than he. If you had read the whole story you would have seen that he even instructed his manservant to install solar panels.
End of story.
P.S. I love how the stock market can hit record highs week after week, but everytime there is a sell-off CNN puts it up on their front page like its the end of the world.
No True Scotsman points out possible logical fallacies after having posited so many into the ???discussion??? himself. Right, Dolo?
Dun worry people. I'm not saying a word after this. But, lets remember that Al Gore is probably one guy that isn't even home much. I'm betting that he's in a car or on a plane more than he's at home.
In any case. I'm going tree planting this spring if anyone wants to come up and join me. I did this after high school and it was great.
Why can't ANY of you comprehend that it's not how much energy he's used, it's that while tellin us to decrease usage he has actually INCREASED at the same home, same size, etc.
RIF.
I just can't see why we wouldn't want to reduce waste/energy consumption in or day-to-day lives.
I mean, I know there is an argument to be made about gov't regulation vs. free enterprise/robust economy.
But on the household level, is anyone arguing against more fuel efficiency?
as someone who lives in his nabe, his shit is
maybe the byproduct of not having a washington VP's office anymore....
Mostly he just throws money around to purchase credits to offset his consumption.
I thought I heard that a state, California maybe, was going to ban the sale of the old, non-es bulbs. That's something big. At work, we've seen significant savings since making the change to es bulbls. There have been similar regulations on plumbing materials & which are good for the environment. There is a lot that can be done for new construction to build "Green" buildings. Hopefully, this trend will continue.
...and somewhere in a wealthy Nashville suburb a dry-cleaning business is racking that Gore money while its customers get shafted with sub-par cleaning and starch-less dress shirts.
These reasons are so idiotic and you people keep parroting them as if you care about anyone but yourselves. Everyone knows the poorer you are, the more of your income you spend. If all of the sudden you have a swelling of people with an extra 100 bucks in their pockets a week, they're going to go out and spend almost all of it it at area establishments. Completely dispersing their money back into the market, and offsetting the costs employers would incur. The only difference being, now maybe someone's kid can eat three meals, and maybe see their parents for more than 20 minutes a day. There are states in this country that have had a $7+ minumum wage for years now, and none of them are on the verge of collapsing into chaos. You free markettiers need to give your precious market more credit, it can handle more than you may think.
With that said, that's a LOW attempt to make Democrats looks ridiculous...ANY Republican is not allowed to even talk about the subject. Sell your petroleum and shut the fuck up. But do not be moralistic just because it's election time. Republicans ar the reason why the World is a mess. Today's republicans was yesterday slave's owners. And past time Christians head-chopper. And tomorrow's eugenic scientists. They cannot give any life's lessons to anyone. Just go to the Church and listen to Paul Wolfowitz.arrrrrrgh.
location motherlode!
COTDAMN!!!!!!
You must be a politician the way your dodging my questions. HOW DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIS CONSUMPTION?????
I am personally not sold on global warming, I just think its absolutely ridiculous to take his electric bill out of context as the sole basis for calling him a hypocrite. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT HE DOES OR DOES NOT DO. Ok, his consumption went up, maybe he added a new office to advocate for energy consumption. No one knows really. Sierra club cuts down hundreds of trees to make mailings about saving the environment. And the amount of mailing they do may have gone up, using more trees. What a bunch of hypocrites right?
Thats your real point right?
[sarcasm] Gore should've let this suzuki guy make the movie, he sounds like he probably has a similarly high profile and access to financial backing as Gore. Gore's not credible because his electric bill is so high, and i heard it went up cause he left the lights on once, after he told us to turn them off!! What a hypocrite, his opinion is completely invalid because of that. If it was someone i liked better maybe, but theres so many unspecific and vague reasons not to trust the guy. [/sarcasm]
Im going to just ignore your curious supposition that pay increases are magically self financing because a) it doesnt really have anything to do with what I was talking about and b) it's just nonsense. Let me try and restate the two points I made even more simply than I did previously:
1. Poorer people are more sensitive to price increases than richer people. Anything at all controversial about that remark?
2. I didnt make my hypothetical minimum wage $7 because I feel that figure is some kind of tipping point. It would be entirely possible to raise the minimum wage far higher than it is without any "collapse into chaos". However it must be seen that the higher the minimum then the greater the amount of low skilled people will tend to be ruled out of the job market altogether. If you look at the countries with significantly higher minimum wages than the US they all have double digit unemployment figures.
Get your comprehension game up. Saying your argument is wrong because youre gay is an example circumstantial ad hominem. I didnt offer the observation that global warming is a myth to attempt to discredit it. I did so because that is what it is.
shit, i hope you're right or were all fucked. al gore too.
Perhaps your comprehension game is lacking. If you wanted to call me out for something, I would even concede that the ???No True Scotsman??? fallacy (a version of the fallacy of the undistributed middle - don???t worry you???ll get into that sophomore year) might not be completely applicable here, but since I was pointing out that an individual with a penchant for logical fallacies calling out another person for committing one is comedy.
As far as quoting ???catostrophic global warming is a myth propogated by socialists???
In 2004, the Pentagon provided a report to the current administration on the 'possibilities' of global climate change and the 'possible' national security problems that may result. It was cosigned by such ???socialists??? as Bob Watson, head of the World Bank. Parse the words ???climate change??? and 'global warming' if you like, but know that the terms ???myth??? and ???socialist??? keep your arguments wide open to the same criticisims.
So, perhaps when your game is sufficiently stepped up, I???ll look for your informed opinion on the matter. Until then, keep reading that digicam manual and get them pictures posted to win Rockadelic???s prize.
I'm not going to get into it with you. Cause, you seem to not be able to step outside your "I must put my faith into the all mighty and powerful Al to save us".
I'm not even debating anything on global warming or the environment with anyone.
And I don't know why you put ur sarcasm meter so high with using David Suzuki. The guy probably did more for the environment in a couple of years of his life, than ur man did in his whole 8 years in office. As one of the most powerful men on the planet.
But whatever man... I give up.
My intelligence is absolutley no match for your stupidity.
You win!
I will not bash Mr. Gore again.
Most recently the "starkest warning" (Guardian news story) of climate change was given by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), a UN-founded agency. The findings of the first part of the report, published recently.
Regarding the reliability of the report:
Edited to add that I do not fully agree with either arguments for or against global warming. I think there's still work to be done to fully understand the changes that are happening and I do not think that it's just global warming or just a natural phenomenon as with ice ages and such. But fuck it, this thread is about Al Gore.
The part of the article I do agree with 100% is the perceived sense of moral superiority that some humans tend to foster.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Greenhouse sceptics to congregate
Email Print Normal font Large font Katharine Murphy and Brendan Nicholson, Canberra and Richard Baker
February 28, 2007
Latest related coverage
After hot, dry Sizzler, prepare for the Drizzler
Act now on climate change, says diplomat
Advertisement
AdvertisementHARD-CORE global warming sceptics will descend on Canberra today for the release of a book claiming environmentalism is the new religion.
Former mining executive Arvi Parbo will launch Ray Evans' new publication, Nine Facts About Climate Change, at a function at Parliament House.
The book claims climate change is nothing new and declares Howard Government investments in solar power and in cleaning up coal a "complete waste of taxpayers' money".
"Environmentalism has largely superseded Christianity as the religion of the upper classes in Europe and to a lesser extent in the United States," Mr Evans says in the publication.
"It is a form of religious belief which fosters a sense of moral superiority in the believer, but which places no importance on telling the truth," he says.
"The global warming scam has been, arguably, the most extraordinary example of scientific fraud in the postwar period."[/b]
The function is organised by the Lavoisier Group, founded in 2000 by Ray Evans and former mining executive Hugh Morgan to test claims that global warming is the result of human activity.
Mr Evans is a longstanding friend and colleague of Mr Morgan and a committed activist on issues such as workplace reform through the HR Nicholls Society, which he founded with federal Treasurer Peter Costello.
Former Labor minister Peter Walsh also will attend today's function, and the group will hold a dinner to be addressed by climate-change sceptic Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor in the School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science at Auckland University.
Liberal MP Dennis Jensen has organised the function on behalf of the Lavoisier Group and expects about 50 people to attend the dinner.
Dr Jensen, a nuclear physicist, has said he is not convinced that human activity is responsible for global warming.
In an interview with The Age last month, Mr Evans acknowledged that last September's visit by former US vice-president Al Gore to promote his Oscar-winning global-warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth had helped generate a lot of publicity on climate change.
But he described Mr Gore's film as "bullshit from beginning to end".[/b]
"The science from the anthropology point of view has collapsed. The carbon-dioxide link is increasingly recognised as irrelevant,"[/b] Mr Evans said.
"But the Government's frightened.
"Cabinet, from what I understand, is by and large still sceptical of climate change, but it is scared of the drought and worried about how Labor will make use of it."
don't blashpheme rock.