Gore's Gory Untruths - another myth explodes

[fastpat]

More facts revealed about AGore's weird movie.

Gore's Gory Untruths
Posted by Donald Miller at 12:39 PM

Joel Kauffman (author of Malignant Medical Myths) has brought to Lew's and my attention another book (published Feb 12, 2007) that reveals in gory detail the untruths in Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." It is The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism by Christopher C. Horner.

Kauffman writes, "With plenty of humor and yet academic referencing, the omissions and commissions of serious errors by Gore are aired [in Horner's book] far better than I could. Just a single example: carbon dioxide is supposed to be the compound in the air that absorbs infrared radiation from the surface of the Earth. Never mind that water vapor is 3 times as likely to do it. Air should have warmed up, then it could transfer some of that warmth to the Earth's surface. In fact, weather balloons for 50 years and weather satellites for 30 years agree with each other that the air is NOT heating up. Greenhouse hypothesis dead." Thanks to Joel for this link.

[Nathans_Dad]

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.

[ckissick]

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.

[David]

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.

[nota]

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

[fastpat]

Originally posted by nota
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.

[lendaddy]

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.

[Dueller]

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

To paraphrase the old Hemmingway/Fitzgerald conversation:

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

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Dueller
I was stunned at the reports of his home heating bill...$30,000+/year

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?

[stevepaa]

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

[nota]

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

[legion]

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.

[red-beard]

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

[stevepaa]

let's see earth's temp




sunspots



CO2

[thrown_hammer]

[Jim Richards]

Shawn's nailed it. We need more pirates.

[stevepaa]

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.

[hytem]

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.

[legion]

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!"

[stevepaa]

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.