Gore's Gory Untruths - another myth explodes
 

More facts revealed about AGore's weird movie.

Gore is apparently taking heat for his mansion which costs a ton to heat and cool....wonder how big his personal carbon footprint is?

I had to chuckle at the Oscar's when Leonardo di Caprio was talking about how the Oscar's had "gone green" for the first time. So, I would assume then that:

None of the stars arrived in Limos. They all either rode bicycles or took public transportation. Limos get HORRIBLE gas mileage.

None of the stars took private jets to Hollywood. They all flew coach on Southwest or took Greyhound.

I also expect di Caprio to announce any day that he is selling his multimillion dollar mansion to buy a small, no A/C bungalow on the beach.

I've read many times that atmospheric temps have not been going up, based on measurements taken by weather balloons and the like. I've also read that these data are innacurate, and others are measuring rising atmospheric temps. Once again, there is a lack of agreement.

These "sky is falling" "CO2 will destroy the world" folks fail to mention (or maybe they don't know) that a slight change in humidity has a much greater effect than any CO2 we could produce.

H2O falls out of the air, thats called rain
if H2O built up over time to ever higher amounts
in the air like CO2 DOES that would be a PROBLEM
it does NOT and is not the problem

CO2 takes about 500 years to be removed from the air
water a few days, and really high H2O amounts are called clouds
clouds block the sun and cool the earth esp when rain falls
CO2 just builds up with no such control to limit its % in air
other then trees and other plants fixing it
but total plant mass in not going up as we add ever more CO2 to the air

Nota, there is huge quantities of H2O in the air, that's what makes clouds, and there's invisible water vapor in the air as well.

It does not matter if the water in the atmosphere is being cycled at any particular rate, the point is the concentration has a huge effect. Much more so than CO2.

I was stunned at the reports of his home heating bill...$30,000+/year:eek:

To paraphrase the old Hemmingway/Fitzgerald conversation:

"The rich are different from you and I."
"Yes...they have money."

Hmmm,. wonder why his home heating bill is public information. Being paid by tax money and as such reportable to government, perhaps?

I think nota's point is being missed. Although water vapor ranges from 1 to 4%, it cannot exceed that value as it then falls out of the air. There is no such end function for CO2.

The increase in CO2 is a real issue.
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/NOAA_Says_CO2_Buildup_Starting_To_Threaten_Marine_ Life_999.html

pluss water and CO2 add in effect
we allway have had and will have water vapor in the air
CO2 is the variable that is going up NOW
and adding to the total effect
and is NOT self limiting like the rain is

Yes, it must be CO2. The fact that the correlation between climate change and atmospheric CO2 is very low while the correlation between solar output and climate change is very high is of no consequence.

http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml

The Maunder Minimum
Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715 (38 kb JPEG image). Although the observations were not as extensive as in later years, the Sun was in fact well observed during this time and this lack of sunspots is well documented. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past. The connection between solar activity and terrestrial climate is an area of on-going research.

Yep. Those darn NASA scientists

let's see earth's temp


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172776544.jpg

sunspots
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172776432.jpg


CO2http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172776713.jpg

Shawn's nailed it. We need more pirates.

So it must be the sails on the pirate's ships which suck energy out of the wind to keep the earth cool.

Yes, I think you have found the answer.

I saw Gore the other night on the Oscar show. As boring as he is, it had to be a highlight. After all, he had Dicaprio next to him, one of the bright lights out there.

You have to hand it to Gore. He should be President right now, were it not for the partisan Supreme Court decision. He should have won by a landslide against Bush, as is evident now, but he's boring as hell, a lousy campaigner, and didn't run strongly enough on Clinton's coattails. He should have made that impeachment an issue, which appalled most people except for the Clinton haters, who orchestrated the whole thing anyways.

Gore has done himself well taking the leadership on Global Warming that other politicians in Washington have avoided. He has gotten the corporate establishment behind the issue, and they are now busy trying to figure out how to make a profit from it. That's reflected in the stock price rise for some companies, such as DuPont.

You have to contrast ex-Presidents or Vice Presidents like Carter and Gore with Nixon and Ford, who didn't do much after leaving office. Ford played golf in Palm Springs. Nixon wrote books. Bush,Sr and Clinton have done some good together. They seem to be friends. Bush, Jr doesn't hold a candle to his dad.

Gore is an attention whore. He has taken an issue, which he may or may not actually believe in, and has used it to keep himself in the spotlight.

Companies like DuPont are riding a fad. Profitability through fear of a dying Earth.

Before I die, this whole CO2/human-cause global warming myth will be debunked and will be looked at much like we look at the belief in witchcraft: an entertaining but thoroughly wrong dogma.

Meanwhile, the Al Gore's, and Leo Di's of the world will continue to chant: "Burn the witch!"

I don't think it wil be debunked or certainly not as easily as the correlation proposed between solar output and the global temp.

In my business if we did not have people watching trends and alerting us to them, we could not avoid catastrophic failures.

Even when something is not quite proven, the perceived risk forces us to perform corrective action, all the while perfoming other investigations to find true root cause and effect. Any other path is negligent.

So you're suggesting we should hand our eye patches and parrots?

I've started looking at the GW issue as I do the race issue: it's a worthy cause to be concerned about no matter who is causing/perpetuating it.

The problem, as I see it, is that the extremists involved on both sides, who insult our intelligence with stupid data/statistics/comments. We all have to tolerate the cheneys and gores or else nothing will get done.

So I've decided to ignore the crap and make up my own mind which issues are important to me and the environment is one of them.

Jack

Are you really this stupid, I hope you don't miss a payment at the Buy Here - Pay Here lot on your SC, hat to see you taking the bus. Gore never won, there is no evidence that he did, just the opposite, we found out he lost by more than we thought is no leader, Carter has done more to hurt this country since he was voted out (who thought he could screw the USA up More than he did when in office). gore the bore is only doing this to get attention from the MW crowd who aren't smart enough to know that Mother Earth has been going through these cycles since she was first formed.

I think the glaring issue is the hypocrisy involved. Gore stands up before a national audience and proclaims that "there is something that we all can do" to reduce pollution while paying over $1300 a month to heat and cool one of his houses. Same thing as di Caprio saying that we all should go green as he steps onto his private jet.

Second, I did hear an interesting climatologist (from Princeton I think...could be wrong there) on the radio a couple weeks back and his theory was that temperatures certainly were going up, but he thought that CO2 levels rose in response to a rise in temperature, not the other way around.

He also said that with how much China and India are polluting, we could drop the US emissions by 50% and still not make a bit of difference in the end as we will be dwarfed by those two countries in the near future.

...6000 years ago, right?

I'm not sure, I must have been drinking when the Earth was formed.

What utter garbage. You're just as bad as the neocons out here, which isn't surprising since they're another form of sociofascist.

Gore is an ignorant, statist, eco-religionist fool.

Anyone hear about Bush's ranch house?

I kept waiting for the punch line....waiting...waiting....waiting....and then it hit me.

You were serious!!! :eek:

Dude, that's the most hilarious thing I've heard in a long, long time. :D

Randy

That's why I consider Gore, and hytem based on his message, eco-religionists. They have virtually no basis for their so-called "facts" so the accolytes must take what Gore is preaching on faith.

There's a great new book out on GW that lays it all out, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism), sales ranked #44 on Amazon today, and a best seller since it's release February 12, 2007.

Global warming is the new Killer Bee.

Now the last time I brought that up someone pointed out that Killer Bees do actually kill people. I want everyone here to know know that they are “KILLER” Bees. They are not “WHISPERING” Bees or “JUGGLING” Bess, they are “KILLER” Bees. So the possibility exists that a “KILLER“ Bee may kill you. Just not in the epidemic numbers the media led us to believe.

To me this is the typical rich (really rich) person response. In essence he is saying, "I can use as much energy as I want because I can PAY someone else to conserve for me."

The problem with this is that he is actually placing MORE of a burden on the poor individual who does not have enough money to pay their way out of personal inconvenience.

The other thing it highlights is that it is not about the actually environment at all. It is about making themselves FEEL good about their own excesses.

A liberal with guilt issues? Never...

And I thought Global Warming is more like Santa Claus:

If you believe, really truly believe with your whole heart and being as hard as you can, then it exists.

here's your santa claus

again

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172853027.jpg

And once again here are the Pirates.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172857306.jpg

Gee, Shawn. So I show a graph of the earth's temperature clearly showing an anomalous behavior. I show no cause and yet you think this graph of pirates has some correlation to the discussion.

The first step would be to show any physical basis for something that pirates do that can affect the earth's temperature.

As you fail to do that, you might as well show a picture of this as cause for global warming.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1172860363.jpg


It has the same relevance to the issue as your post.

So you have proof that CO2 is causing global warming? Isn't that the actual debate? Whether GW is causing increased CO2 or if increased CO2 is causing GW?

Similarly we must debate whether a warming earth is killing pirates or if the loss of pirates is heating the earth:D

Actually my graph supports your graph. I believe perhaps the serphipalous equation is fairly benign, but for the most part the increase in atmospheric CO2 has led to a decline in Pirates. It seems that perhaps you have erroneously assumed the inversion of the outcome.