Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth is must see

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Have you seen An Inconvenient Truth?

Yes!
5
25%
No, but I plan to
11
55%
No, and I don't plan to
4
20%
 
Total votes: 20

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:24 am

Sorry, Jason. I didn't realize "need" would be bossy. I thought "go see this movie or you hate America" would be bossy. Or just " Go see this movie." But I guess I can see where it might be construed as bossy.

Allow me to restate:
I recommend and hope people see this movie.

Is that better or too uppity?

And, the movie is not really polarizing. The debate was polarized before and this movie has highlighted the polarization. But the side that wants action on global warming is pushiong back against the slef-interested disinformation campaign from industry and ideologues.

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:25 am

Chuck_Schick wrote:
jjoyce wrote:Democrats NEED to stop telling people what to do.

You tell 'em, JJ!

Heh.

Heh heh heh.

I get it!! But i did what Jason told me to do! D'ow!!

hee hee

bmasel
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 6:06 pm
Contact:

Postby bmasel » Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:31 am

Al Gore could improve his scientific credibility by acknowledging his error in mimicing the Bush "fuzzy math" attacks. Study up Al, and use your bully pulpit to educate .

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 11:49 am

Shpiker wrote:So how does one account for the fact that these changes began happening at a greater rate prior to industrialization and therefore a man-made infusion of higher quantities of the so-called greenhouse gasses??

I don't accept that as fact. Got a source?

Shpiker wrote:I got your back on this one:
Humans can only claim responsibility, if that's the word, for abut 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually, the rest of it is all natural

Your links don't support your conclusions. From the Woods Hole graphic, sea and land sources emit and absorb around 100 petragrams per year. In other words, it's pretty much in balance.

Fossil fuel combustion contributes 6.5 PG and deforestation 1-2 PG. Add it up, and the net contribution to increased CO2 levels is all due to hman activity, at 7.5 to 8.5 petragrams per year. (Note: I don't pretend to know what a petragram is. Megaconverter doesn't know, either.)

Thanks for playing.

Shpiker wrote:Got some help for you here too from Junk Science

He goes on to a long rant using talking points from this Junk Science web site with no sense of caution given the site name (who pays for Junk Science?).

Well, the models have actually been pretty well vindicated. And, they also include negative feedbacks such as more clouds reflecting some energy.

But even without the models, the science is strong. We all agree the greenhouse effect exists. We agree that more CO2 and other greenhouse gases increases the greenhouse effect. Many of the impacts; increased warming at the poles, changes in local climate, increased pests, drier lands in mid-continent regions, etc are expected.

We don't need models to know that gobal warming is happening. Some people want to trust our future to wishful thinking, others (me) want us to take actions now that will be beneficial anyway to the economy, public health, the environment and national security.

Shpiker wrote:Well fine, then the only ones talking about global warming are the lefties who are engaging in the same fear-mongering that they do when ANY environmental issue is considered. There- I can generalize just as good as you.

Well, thing is, you're wrong. Just ask Sen McCain, or CEOs of many multinational corporations.

jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby jjoyce » Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:11 pm

Andy Olsen wrote:I didn't realize "need" would be bossy.


Of course you didn't.

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:01 pm

jjoyce wrote:
Andy Olsen wrote:I didn't realize "need" would be bossy.


Of course you didn't.

OK, all BS aside, my words were not bossy. It's not even in the active voice or what an English teacher would interpret as a command.

People are urged by other people to do various things all the time and there's nothing wrong with that. "Send a letter to your Congressman!" "Join our cause." "Donate now." Do you bristle at that, too? Kind of hard for anyone to get elected when that can't say "Vote for Jones" for fear of offending Joyce. :roll:

Of all the things you can pick to discuss in this area, this is a weird one. Loks like more personal animus than anything. You're just grinding an old axe that's pretty worn. Time to bury the hatchet, Joyce and move on.

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:13 pm

Here's an interview with Al Gore on Keith Olbermann's show:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/20.html#a8790

Andy Olsen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 601
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 1:28 pm
Location: East side Madison
Contact:

Postby Andy Olsen » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:22 pm

And.... before I disapear into the remains of work day, The Onion...

[quote]Critics Blast Al Gore's Documentary As 'Realistic'

May 31, 2006 | Issue 42�22

NEW YORKââ?‰?Â

jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby jjoyce » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:39 pm

Al Gore was Vice President for 8 years. Most of the times I saw him on TV, he was desperately trying to convince us that he wasn't wooden. Maybe he should have used his bully pulpit to get something accomplished that would have reduced emmissions or something, instead of positioning himself to be elected in 2000.

Like I said, I'm sure the powerpoint thing is compelling as hell and good for him for knowing all that stuff. But Al Gore is, and always has been, chiefly in the business of promoting Al Gore.

Billy Shears
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:23 pm

Postby Billy Shears » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:46 pm

I agree. His motives can be questioned, therefore we need to ignore this movie.

jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby jjoyce » Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:55 pm

Let's just not think, as many do, that seeing this movie has anything to do with environmental activism. If you care about global warming, then donate to a cause that addresses it. Or lobby. Or plant a tree. But the image of all these liberals sitting around Barriques drinking a Chilean red talking about how great Al Gore makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

When an American corporation comes forward and says it has dramatically changed its operation due to seeing the light in Al Gore's movie or by being personally influenced by the guy, then slap him on the back. But until then, forgive me if I fail to see the leadership in making a preaching-to-the-choir movie like this one.

Billy Shears
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2145
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:23 pm

Postby Billy Shears » Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:01 pm

jjoyce wrote: But the image of all these liberals sitting around Barriques drinking a Chilean red talking about how great Al Gore makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

I'd really like to know how you got that image. What's a Barrique?

pulsewidth modulation
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2451
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:18 pm

Postby pulsewidth modulation » Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:27 pm

jjoyce wrote:If you care about global warming... plant a tree.


It's that easy. So why spend millions of dollars on entertainment extravaganzas designed to spook people into demanding more government regulation of nature? Besides, trees add value to land.

The above is the easiest advice/solution to conservation I've read on this forum in months.

Oh yea, for all of my forum stalkers looking to paint me with an anti-environment brush, I plant about 1-3 trees/plants/shrubs on my land every year. I know their value; I don�t need a city council to force me to do this while paying them to tell me something I already know. Kind of UN-economical and wasteful isn�t it?

white_rabbit
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7487
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:44 pm

Postby white_rabbit » Tue Jun 20, 2006 9:56 pm

Even if it were known what amount we contribute (which it isn't) we don't know whether the earth is resilient enough to compensate, if it will continue to warm, or turn around and cool.



The earth is resilient and will survive. The big question mark, are humans?

donges
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1536
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2001 1:03 pm
Location: between the lines...
Contact:

Postby donges » Tue Jun 20, 2006 10:23 pm

jjoyce wrote:But the image of all these liberals sitting around Barriques drinking a Chilean red talking about how great Al Gore makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

I agree. A decent Chilean red is NOT correct for such a conversation. A chilled Oregonian Pinot Gris, perhaps.
I mean, really.


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests