James and I watched An Inconvenient Truth a week or so ago, and the film was so fantastic and so compelling, that it motivated us to take action. We want to do our part to lessen our burden on the environment, and we are doing so, one step at a time. If you want to help the earth, please go to this website, and see what you can do; because even the small stuff can make a difference.
I am definitely going to write more about the movie, but I have been distracted lately, and haven’t had it in me. The film deserves so much more than a distracted thought process, so I want to do it justice. If you haven’t seen it, see it… and if you don’t believe in global warming and climate change, you MUST see it, because science can change your mind… or at least, I hope it can.
Our first steps towards changing our energy consumption, were to change out all of our incandescent bulbs for new, energy efficient compact fluorescent ones. Now, I know you make think that these bulbs are more expensive (because they are), but the energy you save by using them more than makes up for the price difference. Also, as a motivation to get them, if you go to a wholesale warehouse place (like Sams or Costco), you can get a 10 pack of the bulbs for only $10… that is a savings of over $6 per bulb. I am glad that we have taken this first step, and I know that we are only getting started in trying to make positive impacts on the environment, rather than negative ones. Go out and get your new bulbs today!!! Seriously, they are a hell of a lot brighter!!
Again, more to come about An Inconvenient Truth… Hope everyone is having a great weekend!! Go Green!
I went through the Big Light Bulb Change a few months ago… I figure that I swapped about 30 bulbs in all, and that about 80% of the bulbs in my house, including nearly all the ones that are most used, are now CFLs…the remaining 20% that are still standard bulbs are lights that are on dimmers or see short on/off cycles (bathrooms, garage door opener, etc.)
Hey, I loved that movie. I heard somewhere this week that Gore is up for a Nobel Peace Prize for his work on the documentary and the issue of global warming in general.
We’ve changed out the bulbs also. Big cost up front but not only do they help save energy - they last longer. It’s so windy here that Peggy wants to get a wind turbin and produce our own energy - she is in the research mode right now but I’ll let you know what she finds. We could put 5-10 in the back yard and have enough energy for everyone…hey, this might be the winning lottery ticket I’ve been looking for??!!
Yes, but they are so UGLY! You can get the ones that look more like regular bulbs but not at the price you got yours for. Actually, for $10/10 I can live with ugly. Thanks for the tip.
My landlord just came through and changed all our bulbs. Now, thanks to you, I’ll have to keep it up.
I did that when I moved in to our new house and I’ve super happy. I bought the weird looking ones for the out of the way places and the “normal” looking ones for the visible bulbs. It appears to have made a big difference in our bill.
Yep, Gore with all his private jet flights around the world is up for a Nobel Prize…
Wendy… that would be awesome!!! So many people say that they hate the look of those windmills, but I think they are kind of cool. Also, I would definitely like the look of them better than the bill I get from the power company every month!!! Let me know how that turns out!
As for the regular vs the “ugly” bulbs everyone is talking about… I kinda like the swirly looking ones… I guess growing up my whole life seeing incandescent bulbs, it is cool to see something different! I will definitely stick with those.
And dave, always the cynic, eh? You know that he flies around the world telling people about global warming and climate change, in order to inform people that they can make a difference. I think that he is WAY more proactive than most people are with their causes, and he just happens to have the resources to do that… good for him.
So…all of you with this Gore fetish drive hybrids, right? I mean, if you believed one word of this movie, there’s no way you’d think it’s not your fault.
This just in: the temperature of the sun is rising and Mars is also experiencing global warming. But just ignore these as the inconventient truths that they are.
I drive a hybrid and love it!! I try to do my part as much as I can and encourage others to change.
“I drive a hybrid and love it!!”
Do you smoke? Do you fart? One way or another, I’m determined to trace this global crisis back to your personal behavior. I think it’s all your fault. Shame on you.
You know Bugboy, it is my fault - and yours - but with that attitude of yours - you increase the global crisis more than I do - your anger has to make your body temp rise therefore contributing more heat.
And no, I don’t smoke - but come over and I’ll be glad to fart since it is human nature.
What anger? You just didn’t like being disagreed with.
True, I hate being disagreed with - just like yourself. But I am able to admit my short comings and work towards change - and you?
What makes you think I don’t like disagreement? I actually like it. This would be boring, otherwise.
As for admitting your shortcomings, you totally ignored the facts I mentioned earlier about Mars and the Sun and how those facts might relate to the true cause of global warming.
Though I would love a world filled with hybrids (or non-petrol-based cars) under any circumstances I don’t think the gw crowd should be able to get by with their true anti-capitalist agenda without some solid proof. They try and present the whole thing as an open-and-shut case and it simply isn’t. I am very suspicious of these people, and their intellectual dishonesty is blatant. The liberal media going along with it and trying to cast political aspersions is the icing on the cake of mistrust (hehe I made that up…).
Back to my original statements, if you really believed what the gw crowd says, then why are you even driving a hybrid as opposed to something that is 99% clean?
If anyone is angry it’s Al Gore for losing in 2000 (and not being able to steal the election). I think his anger is so obvious that no one would deny he is a very embittered. I believe this to be true of Jimmuh Cahtuh too. This seems to happen to old liberals and I don’t know why.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this era of global warming “is unlikely to be entirely natural in origin” and “the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence of the global climate.”
Lessee…..should we believe the majority of the world’s scientists who have studied global climate change OR Bugboy? Y’all decide.
dpb, are you suggesting that Al Gore’s air travel cancels out the positive impact of his efforts to save the planet from global climate change? Rather than criticizing him, how about following his lead and try to reduce your impact on the environment while making appropriate donations to become carbon neutral.
“Lessee…..should we believe the majority of the world’s scientists who have studied global climate change OR Bugboy? Y’all decide.”
So you drive a hybrid?
The quotes you presented were very ambiguous and could mean many things. For example, what % are caused by unnatural origin.
And you make no account of all the scientists who disagree.
Nor do you account for my previous statements about mars or the sun.
Lessee…..should we believe the majority of the world’s scientists who have studied global climate change OR Bugboy? Y’all decide.
I’ll just stick with that.
“I’ll just stick with that.”
Fine, stick with a losing argument that proved nothing with the presumption being that YOU should be believed, instead, for proving nothing. I, on the other hand, raised some very interesting issues that your sources ignore as an inconvenient truth; hence, their intellectual dishonesty.
Oh, and Michael, what type of hybrid do you drive?
http://www.ipcc.ch/
Our government here is Australia has just passed a ruling to change the standards for light bulbs. Old fashioned incandescent bulbs will not meet the standard and will be phased out, compact flouro bulbs will be the only kind you can buy here in a few years. I recently got a free box of 8 assorted compact flouro bulbs for free as part of a local government initiative. Score.
Michael:
And where is the link to an article showing all of these scientists driving around in their hybrids? They have about as many hybrids as you do. If they truly believed what they are saying, then what kind of hypocrites would they be to drive regular cars? The hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty on this issue is phenomenal yet people buy their BS without question. This is why I am sceptical. Yes cleaning up air, driving hybrids, all these things are positive, but how can you pursue any political agenda built on hypocrisy and dishonesty?
On the political side, most of the Greens came from the ranks of former communists, so they have an anti-capitalist inclination anyway.
That’s great, Andrew. A few big retailers here have taken it upon themselves to encourage the same behavior, pricing compact fluorescent bulbs so that they are more comparable to incandescent. Your government mandating it, though, will make a huge impact.
When the scientific consensus is that these changes are real and occurring at least in part due to human influences, I think it’s our responsibility to make the changes we can instead of waiting around doing nothing in case they are wrong.
I have a few of the “green” bulbs in my place.
I know they save money and energy, but is it just me or do they make everything actually look a little, well, green? In the rooms where I have the fourecent bulbs things look a little greenish, but in the ones with incadecant bulbs things look normal.
Michael, gotta side with BugBoy on this one. Yes the global temperature is rising. I just don’t buy that humans are the direct cause.
Alright, I have been in Oscar land, but I am back…
Bugboy, when you say this:
Are you denying that there is scientific data that proves an inordinate increase in global warming over the last few decades? Because there is scientific data that proves that the rate at which the ice is melting is faster than ever recorded (which is based on the scientific data on global warming). That leads one with reason to believe that it does have something to do with us… since, like I said, the GW we are experiencing now, is not normal, as opposed to the warming and cooling trends that have occurred in the last few billion years on earth. Yes, there are warming trends and cooling trends, ice ages, and whatnot, but it is clear (based on scientific proof) that it is happening way more rapidly right now, and one must surmise that it has something to do with how we are treating the environment. I believe the earth will right itself, as it always has, but it will do so by going to the extreme, and some of that we are seeing now, with stronger storms, and crazier nature patterns; perhaps more will come with rising ocean levels, and regions experiencing ice ages.
I also don’t see how Gore’s plan for saving the environment is anti-capitalist. It is anti-emissions, and anti-fossil fuels, yes, but it isn’t anti-capitalist. In fact, it would CREATE jobs if we were to work towards implementing better strategies in transportation, consumption, and production. Gore points out in his documentary, that you don’t have to stop living and thriving to be green… that the little changes make a big difference if done on a global level. He also talks about how using new technologies to clean up the way we live will actually create jobs for Americans, as opposed to continuing to pay for foreign oil.
Also, when you responded to Michael by saying:
As for the sun and Mars, you have to realize that the sun and mars are not the earth, first of all, second of all, mars is closer to the sun and doesn’t have the same atmosphere or environment as the earth. Also, the sun is warming over time because it is going to explode in a few billion years, and thank God we aren’t going to be around for that! The point of the argument Gore and the global warming experts are making, is that even though global warming happens naturally, the rate at which it is happening right now is not normal, and that is at least partly a result of what we are doing to the environment. That’s what his argument is… not that we are the sole cause of GW, but that the way we are living right now, is causing it to speed up. The earth is a delicate experiment, and if you throw too many variables on one side of that experiment, the experiment will right itself by upping the other side; in other words, if GW continues to increase at the rate in which it has over the last few decades, we are looking at melting of the remaining icecaps, which will result in a shutdown of the ocean’s currents, leading to an ice age in Europe, and disastrous effects on the rest of the world (rising water and whatnot).
As for the scientists that disagree, those that have done scientific research on GW, and have published scientific papers on GW, all agree that GW is happening, and that it does have something to do with our way of life. What I think you are referring to as those that disagree (and I could be wrong, as I have not read everything about GW in existence), are those that are basing their stance on opinion or politics, and not on hard research. (at least, that is what I gathered from my research around the documentary, and what it was saying about those that do GW research… which I could be wrong, and so be it).
I understand your skepticism, but I don’t understand how you deny that we have some impact on the rapid rates of increasing GW, when the hard evidence is there, and has been presented. That’s where I get confused.
dave, when you say:
I want to know: you really think that industrialization, burning fossil fuels, and rapidly increasing overall carbon dioxide emissions (which, coupled with deforestation means the CO2 isn’t going anywhere) have no effect on the environment? Because everything I mentioned is something that we have done in the last century, and they all have had (and continue to have) a major effect on GW and climate change. These are just a few things that we have increased and increased and increased up through today, and as a result, we have a rapid rate of increasing GW. I don’t see how the two are not related. If you see the documentary, and look at the science behind what Gore is saying, you will realize that the delicate balance that keeps things in check on earth is being upset by our actions, and while we may not be the one cause that leads to the one end, we have set in motion and continue to push along things that cause a chain reaction… leading to more and more GW, and other consequences.
What you are saying, is like saying that if you increase the heat on the stove, and the water boils, they are two independent acts that occur without interaction from one another. That doesn’t make sense to me, dave.
What I’m wondering is what some of you know that all the leading scientists don’t.
They recently collected an ice core sample that goes back 800,000 years, more than long enough to take into account “normal” fluctuations. That is a massive amount of time, people, even in the lifespan of the earth. What they found was that not only is the atmospheric level of CO2 higher than it’s EVER been, the amount of increase we’ve seen in the last 30 year period has never previously been seen in even a 1,000 year period.
“Are you denying that there is scientific data that proves an inordinate increase in global warming over the last few decades”
Not denying gw, just not so sure of the cause.
“I also don’t see how Gore’s plan for saving the environment is anti-capitalist.”
I wasn’t referring to his agenda so much as the Greens. Gore has socialistic tendencies, but I never thought they were too much to worry about.
As for the scientists, I’m not saying they are wrong, but that they have obviously not proven their case but they act like they do.
As for Mars, if the sun is heating up, and Mars and Earth both have GW at the same time, isn’t that something you would suspect is more than coincidence? It needs to be looked into.
What more do you need for them to prove their case? As Michael mentioned the ice core samples, which have been measured over many years, as well as the discovery of that determine atmospheric conditions up to 800,000 years ago until now, both show a definite difference in our rate of GW over the last 30 years or so. It also correlates directly with data that shows our consumption and output of CO2, and our levels of deforestation over that time; a correlation that is very apparent, and one that has been cited as the “proof of the pudding”. If these scientific findings don’t count as proof that we have some stake in GW, then what will convince you? Again, I understand skepticism, but in this case, the correlation is compelling enough for even the biggest cynic to see at least how it is related.
I wouldn’t think that it is coincidence, because as I said in my comments in response to your skepticism, GW happens naturally, but the point that I, and Gore, am making, is that we have rapidly accelerated the issue, and as a result, we are looking at some pretty serious consequences if we don’t start making changes now. GW on Mars should not, and cannot, be equated in any way with our planet, because it does not posses the same atmosphere, and bio-conditions as our planet does. Everything on our planet works together, and when one thing is upset in the balance, it tips, and causes problems… we just happen to be upsetting the balance more rapidly than it would have occurred naturally, given we didn’t do what we have been doing for the last century.
I’m not sure about just how big the human impact is on global warming. I mean, even the world’s best scientists can’t agree. But it seems obvious to me that it’s better to conserve energy where we can. The levels of inefficiency and waste are sickening, and why would we choose to remain dependent on OPEC when with just a little effort we can be self-sufficient? If we can have cleaner air and water and a healthier environment in the process everybody wins.
“we are looking at some pretty serious consequences if we don’t start making changes now”
Then you, Michael, and all those scientists are all driving hybrids, right? There is also a lot of peer pressure in the scientific community to go along with the gw arguments.
What you cited as proof are largely coincidental facts. No direct connection has been made.
As for Mars, if the temperature of the sun is increasing at the same time as gw here and gw on mars, then would those two “coincidental” facts be worthy of the same status as those others you cited?
Here are some thoughts that I found:
* The United Nations is anti-American and anti-Capitalist. In short .. I don’t trust them. Not a bit. The UN would eagerly engage in any enterprise that would weaken capitalist economies around the world.
* Because after the fall of the Soviet Union and worldwide Communism many in the anti-capitalist movement moved to the environmental movement to continue pursuing their anti-free enterprise goals. Many of the loudest proponents of man-made global warming today are confirmed anti-capitalists.
* Because the sun is warmer .. and all of these scientists don’t seem to be willing to credit a warmer sun with any of the blame for global warming.
* The polar ice caps on Mars are melting. How did our CO2 emissions get all the way to Mars?
* It was warmer in the 1930s across the globe than it is right now.
* It wasn’t all that long ago that these very same scientists were warning us about “global cooling” and another approaching ice age?
* How much has the earth warmed up in the last 100 years? One degree. Now that’s frightening.
* Because that famous “hockey stick” graph that purports to show a sudden warming of the earth in the last few decades is a fraud. It ignored previous warming periods … left them off the graph altogether.
* The infamous Kyoto accords exempt some of the world’s biggest CO2 polluters, including China and India.
* The Kyoto accords can easily be seen as nothing less than an attempt to hamstring the world’s dominant capitalist economies.
* Because many of these scientists who are sounding the global warming scare depend on grant money for their livelihood, and they know the grant money dries up when they stop preaching the global warming sermon.
* Because global warming “activists” and scientists seek to punish those who have different viewpoints. If you are sure of your science you have no need to shout down or seek to punish those who disagree.
* What happened to the Medieval Warm Period? In 1996 the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a chart showing climatic change over a period of 1000 years. This graph showed a Medieval warming period in which global temperatures were higher than they are today. In 2001 the IPCC issued another 1000 year graph in which the Medieval warming period was missing. Why?
* Why has one scientist promoting the cause of man-made global warming been quoted as saying “we have to get rid of the medieval warming period?”
* Why is the ice cap on the Antarctic getting thicker if the earth is getting warmer?
* In the United State, the one country with the most accurate temperature measuring and reporting records, temperatures have risen by 0.3 degrees centigrade over the past 100 years. The UN estimate is twice that.
* There are about 160,000 glaciers around the world. Most have never been visited or measured by man. The great majority of these glaciers are growing, not melting.
* Side-looking radar interferometry shows that the ise mass in the West Antarctic is growing at a rate of over 26 gigatons a year. This reverses a melting trend that had persisted for the previous 6,000 years.
* Rising sea levels? The sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended. That was 12,000 years ago. Estimates are that in that time the sea level has risen by over 300 feet. The rise in our sea levels has been going on long before man started creating anything but natural CO2 emissions.
* Like Antarctica, the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass.
* Over the past 3,000 years there have been five different extended periods when the earth was measurably warmer than it is today.
* During the last 20 years — a period of the highest carbon dioxide levels — global temperatures have actually decreased. That’s right … decreased.
* Why did a reporter from National Public Radio refuse to interview David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma studying global warming, after his testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unless Deming would state that global warming was being caused by man?
* Why are global warming proponents insisting that the matter is settled and that no further scientific research is needed? Why are they afraid of additional information?
* On July 24, 1974 Time Magazine published an article entitled “Another Ice Age?” Here’s the first paragraph:
“As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.”
Bugboy, first of all, let me start by asking you, do you really think that hybrid cars are the only solution to global warming? Because you seem to throw that out every time you try to discredit someone by saying that they are a hypocrite because they don’t drive a hyrbid. That’s silly, because there are MANY other ways you can do positive things in the environment, not just your ability to afford and drive a hyrbid car.
Now, I would also like to address some of the things from you most recent comment.
While I may not agree with everything the UN does, I thought the point of the organization was to give everyone a voice as to what happens in the world. I don’t understand why so many people see capitalism as the American way; because that just isn’t true. America was founded on the principle of freedom for everyone, and capitalism actually feeds off of those at the bottom to make more money for those at the top. If being against that “taking advantage of people for my own personal gain” is anti-American, well, then I don’t necessarily see that as a bad thing, because America has become way to obsessed with personal wealth, and less about community and societal health and well being (both in our own country, and in our relationship with the rest of the world). It is true that no one is “owed” anything, but seriously, how many billions of dollars do you need to live comfortably, when there are people starving and living on the street? That seems more un-American to me.
The suns rays do cause global warming. They do so, because they can’t escape the atmosphere, because of the CO2 being released into it. As a result of that warming, the ice caps ARE melting. As a result, they don’t reflect as much of the sun’s rays, and as a result, there is more warming. It is a delicate process that once the balance has shifted, it snowballs out of control. I have said that more than once, yet you don’t seem to be hearing it. That can account for the similar situations occurring on Mars, even though, again, Mars doesn’t have the same atmosphere, and it is pretty much like comparing apples and slugs. Also, Mars is closer to the sun; perhaps that has something to do with it?
100% inaccurate. The 10 hottest years on record (as recorded world-wide) have been within the last 15. The hottest being 2005.
While I don’t know what graph you are referring to, the graph that Gore uses in his documentary, shows not only the warming and cooling patterns as far back as 800k years, it proves that the current warming trend isn’t normal. It definitely accounts for all warming and cooling trends; which strengthens the argument that what is happening right isn’t normal.
I don’t know where you got this idea, but I personally don’t think that people who are willing to fudge data because of funding issues are scientists, and should never be compared to scientists.
According to this graph, it seems as though that time period’s increase in temperature is represented; it shows that ours is higher, though. Also, realize that when people do research, and new information comes along (like those ice core samples we talked about earlier), they integrate that into their models in order to show the most accurate representation available. Perhaps that could account for some of that change.
Additionally, with:
How come the word of one can cancel out the word of many?
Please show me the data that authenticates this claim. The reason I ask, is because all of the data and evidence I have seen shows the exact opposite. In fact, the continental shelf of Antarctica is breaking of at increasingly rapid rate.
Perhaps that is because they are measuring the temperature in the US. Climate change and increase of temperature occurs differently in different parts of the world. The effect of 1 degree temperature change in somewhere like the equator, can be as much as a 10 degree difference effectively, at the poles. Just because it is only 0.3 degrees warmer here, doesn’t mean that it isn’t much warmer elsewhere.
Many of the glaciers that have been visited by man are melting, or in the case of many major ones, are completely gone. I can’t speak for the ones we supposedly haven’t seen, because, if we haven’t seen them, how do we know what is happening with them? We obviously can’t prove if they are melting or growing.
As far as the radar interferometry, it is the opposite of what the core drilling/ice sampling says, and from what I have seen and heard about ice sampling, it is a pretty precise science. Melting trends change with weather patterns; remember there used to be an ice sheet that covered Canada and much of the US, and it melted during one of the warming trends. No warming trend got hot enough to melt enough of the icecaps to cause a rise in the oceans and a change of the trans-Atlantic current, but that is changing. Antarctica is doing the same thing as the North American ice sheet did; melting.
Again, this is not about us “starting” anything, it is about us accelerating it. This process of warming and cooling is natural, but because of our strain on the environment, it is increasing quicker than it normally would.
That is incorrect. There have been a steady and rapid increase in ice flows in Greenland, causing the ice that is over land to be broken off, and shifted into the sea. While this process is still going slowly, at the current rate, it could completely melt in the next 50 years. It is definitely not gaining any ice mass. The ice is thinning.
I would like to see where you got this data, because according the data that I have seen, while there have been periods of time where there were comparable warming periods to what is occurring now, the hottest, and most rapidly growing, warming trend we have seen is occurring now (even if it is currently only slightly higher).
Then why have the hottest 10 years on record occurred within that same time frame? Something isn’t adding up here.
I am unsure as to what you are basing this assumption on, because there is active research into the subject, and new data is incorporated into what we already know about global warming. New data is just making the case for GW more succinct and valid.
The point I am making here, and that I have been making from the beginning, is that Global warming is part of a process. It has happened before, but never so rapidly. That leads us to believe that what we are doing to the environment MUST have SOME effect. Any changes that we make can only benefit the environment, and we must act before it goes on too long. Ice caps are melting, not increasing, and the increase of cold water will certainly affect the trans-Atlantic current, which will drastically affect weather and storms across the world. Deny it if you want, but it is still going to happen whether you believe it or not.
“do you really think that hybrid cars are the only solution…That’s silly,”
No, it’s not silly. Anyone who truly believes the gw rhetoric should not drive a fossil based car. No, they aren’t the only solutoin but they are a big part of the problem. Like I’ve been saying, there is a lot of hypocrisy and dishonesty from the gw crowd.
“capitalism actually feeds off of those at the bottom to make more money for those at the top”
No one is forced, darling. No one has to take that job at the bottom. In our system they can start their own business. But they CHOOSE to work for someone else. It’s all about choice and individual responsibility. To the risk taker go the rewards. That is why we are the richest nation in history. Even our poor live better than the middle class in Europe.
“Also, Mars is closer to the sun; perhaps that has something to do with it”
It’s warmING, not warMER (than earth).
“100% inaccurate”
I don’t think so. Might depend on whose measurements you believe.
“Then why have the hottest 10 years on record occurred within that same time frame”
Well, the sun is getting hotter now.
“It is definitely not gaining any ice mass. The ice is thinning.”
http://www.physorg.com/news4180.html
“That leads us to believe that what we are doing to the environment MUST have SOME effect.”
Is this what Gore’s film says?? Or does it outright blame us?
“How come the word of one can cancel out the word of many?”
Does your knowledge of the history of science tell you that? When I think of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Darwin, Springsteen, well, maybe not Bruce, but the others, I don’t see how you could say that.
Without addressing every point you made, don’t you think there is at least a little doubt in what you believe? I am at least admitting the gw crowd *could* be right, but they are dishonest, have ulterior motives, and haven’t proven their case.
I still don’t see how you are a hypocrite if you don’t drive a hybrid car. There are many ways to conserve energy, and while it is a major one, I don’t think that it takes away all of the good that you may do for the environment. It isn’t realistic for everyone to drive a hyrbid, but if legislation were passed and stricter emissions laws were passed, things could change. That is the main point most of the global warming people are making; small changes can make a big impact.
At the risk of being insulting, this is the type of statement someone that has never had to worry about their position in society would make; or even worse, someone that isn’t willing to see that different people face different challenges in life, based on where, and to whom they are born. If you truly believe that everyone has the same exact shot at the same exact things in our society, there is no need to get into the debate, because there is no way you will ever see it from my perspective; which happens to be based on anthropological science. It is ignorant to say that all people have the same chance to succeed in life, and if you want to say that they aren’t forced, well, tell me what else they would do. But like I said… I don’t see a point of getting into that if you truly think what I believe you do. (based on your comment)
So you mean, if you look at a picture of a glacier from 10 years ago, and sit it next to a picture of the same site today, where the glacier has almost completely melted away, that there is room for different interpretation, other than it melted? That doesn’t make sense.
He doesn’t blame anyone, he says what I have been saying; we can make changes, because what we are currently doing is hurting the environment. You don’t have to blame anyone to start making changes.
Those men may have initiated or drawn attention to their discoveries, but many, many people had to agree with them, research them, and substantially prove them for them to be widely held as true. As soon as the handful of naysayers have hundreds of years of people agreeing with them, with evidence to back them up, I will definitely take another look at it.
I don’t have doubt, because I have seen too much evidence to prove global warming is related to what we are doing in the world. I also don’t think that all of the global warming crowd is as crooked as you say, there are many people that truly want to see positive changes occur in the world, so that our children won’t inherit a shitstorm of problems… I happen to be one of them.
“but if legislation were passed and stricter emissions laws were passed, things could change.”
This completely short-circuits individual responsibility.
“If you truly believe that everyone has the same exact shot at the same exact things in our society…”
Not as an absolute rule, but as a general rule. Opportunity is equal.
“if you look at a picture of a glacier from 10 years ago…”
I was never arguing about individual glaciers.
“As soon as the handful of naysayers have hundreds of years of people agreeing with them, with evidence to back them up, I will definitely take another look at it.”
Dahling…the side you are arguing FOR doesn’t have all of those things.
Lots of interesting information and disinformation.
#1 NASSA has discovered an error in their temp data due to a y2K problem. The warmest times are now in the 1930’s
#2 As a former archaeologist I know it was far warmer 1000 years ago than it is currently.
#3 If you look at the output of the sun and global temps there is a correlation.
for the information of one of the posters Mars is beyond the Earth from the Sun not between the Earth and the Sun
This not to say humans do not interfere with the environment but lets look to the actual causes not speculation.
The worrisome word that keeps getting tossed around is “consensus” that word has no place in science and throws a dark shadow on anything connected to it.
Hi,
The film is very impactful, and like you I was shocked by the message. But, I was also lucky enough to listen to a collegue who urged me to dig behind his claims in the film.
The good news is that his message is incorrect on many many key items. It turns out that:
-There is not a concensus of all scientists as he claims. I have read many papers and articles disagreeing with him.
-CO2 rises in the atmosphere do not cause global warming. It’s the other way around! The proof of this is that CO2 rises are caused by Global warming. They lag temperatue rises and falls by about 800 years.
-The graph of the sharp rise in temp recently is based on unsound and hightly critisied work from a scientist (Michael Mann) who is funded by climate change funding (and so has a vested interest in keeping th esubject alive).
The is a lot more, and better written than I can manage onthe web, just do your own research before you assume Gore is correct. You’ll be surprised.
http://sitewave.net/news/s49p1835.htm
Acol.