Has this man no shame? As noted in another thread, measurements taken over the last five years indicate a slight drop in global ocean temperatures has occurred.

 

Not so, in the parallel world occupied by former Vice President Al Gore, Jr. where the internal combustion engine has long been the greatest threat to mankind.

Al Gore Calls Myanmar Cyclone a 'Consequence' of Global Warming

 

Former vice president tells NPR's 'Fresh Air' cyclone is example of 'consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming.'

 

Using tragedy to advance an agenda has been a strategy for many global warming activists, and it was just a matter of time before someone found a way to tie the recent Myanmar cyclone to global warming.

 

Former Vice President Al Gore in an interview on NPR’s May 6 “Fresh Air” broadcast did just that. He was interviewed by “Fresh Air” host Terry Gross about the release of his book, “The Assault on Reason,” in paperback.

 

“And as we’re talking today, Terry, the death count in Myanmar from the cyclone that hit there yesterday has been rising from 15,000 to way on up there to much higher numbers now being speculated,” Gore said. “And last year a catastrophic storm from last fall hit Bangladesh. The year before, the strongest cyclone in more than 50 years hit China – and we’re seeing consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming.”

 

Gore claimed global warming is forcing ocean temperatures to rise, which is causing storms, including cyclones and hurricanes, to intensify. [emphasis added]

Assault on Reason is a curiously appropriate title for Al Gore's latest book. :lol:

I suppose it could also explain the choices in this year's election!

You're right, he has no shame. I guess he feels he needs a push for his investments in makers of environmentally friendly products.

Al (I invented te I-Net) Gore really has shame...............he is full of it (or at least something).

 

Just another pompass attempt at trying to convince someone that he cares about anything other than himself and that he is quite possibly the most intelligent human being ever created, of course I don't know but he probably believes in evolution as well.

And I call Al Gore an idiot...:lol:

Has this man no shame? As noted in another thread, measurements taken over the last five years indicate a slight drop in global ocean temperatures has occurred.

 

Not so, in the parallel world occupied by former Vice President Al Gore, Jr. where the internal combustion engine has long been the greatest threat to mankind.

Assault on Reason is a curiously appropriate title for Al Gore's latest book. :lol:

 

 

I think the printer of the book got it wrong. I was supposed to be Insult on Reason.

He is such an idiot. I throw up in my mouth every time I'm reminded that he won the nobel prize.

When I was a little boy, I thought fraud was a crime. Apparently I was just naive in my youth.

 

So why the hype? Well, global warming is a growth industry designed to keep Earth and some bank accounts green.

 

Gore himself joined the venture capital group, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers just last September. On May 1, the firm announced a $500 million investment in maturing green technology firms called the Green Growth Fund.

 

The group announced another $700 million to be invested over the next three years in green-tech startup firms. But if the green technology business, uh, cools down, there will be no return on that investment. There would be no need for such investments if global warming wasn't a threat. So Gore just launched, among other things, a $300 million on an ad campaign to convince us it is so. - excerpted from Al Gore And Climate Ka-Ching (emphasis added)

 

No wonder Al Gore is in such a hurry to silence his skeptics. With many experts now predicting a 20 to 30 year global cooling period, Gore needs to bank as much money as he can as fast as he can because this opportunity is not going to last much longer. Gore will die a wealthy laughingstock and people will be asking the question, "Phineas T. who?" Al Gore is the 21st century's P. T. Barnum. :lol:

^My apologies to Mr. Barnum and his descendants. My comments were probably a little bit harsh and I meant no respect to Mr. Barnum, who made his fortune entertaining people at a reasonable price.

^ Until you can prove yourself there is no global warming and spend a bunch of money on research then I don't see how you can judge him on this. To disagree is one thing but to call him a joke for trying to rid pollution and help the environment is a joke in itself.

^ Until you can prove yourself there is no global warming and spend a bunch of money on research then I don't see how you can judge him on this. To disagree is one thing but to call him a joke for trying to rid pollution and help the environment is a joke in itself.

NASA says the oceans have been cooling for at least the past five years. Gore says that the oceans have been warming and are to blame for the Myanmar cyclone. Who do you believe?

 

Al Gore stands to make hundreds of millions - if not billions by convincing people that man is causing global warming. If he is convincing, he will make the money regardless of the facts. That is quite a conflict of interest.

 

Gore is a fear mongering opportunist who deserves far more ridicule than I can possibly heap upon him in one lifetime.

NASA says the oceans have been cooling for at least the past five years. Gore says that the oceans have been warming and are to blame for the Myanmar cyclone. Who do you believe?

 

Al Gore stands to make hundreds of millions - if not billions by convincing people that man is causing global warming. If he is convincing, he will make the money regardless of the facts. That is quite a conflict of interest.

 

Gore is a fear mongering opportunist who deserves far more ridicule than I can possibly heap upon him in one lifetime.

 

Aces, I suggest that you learn to read more carefully. Mr. Gore does not say that the Burma cyclone was caused by global warming. He cites several recent large storms and says they are examples of the types of consequences scientists have said would result from global warming. I think that what he believes is clear, but he only offers it as anecdotal, not as proof in the quotation cited.

 

I've noticed a trend where you denounce the motives of anyone that disagrees with you. That makes me question your motives for the denunciation.

NASA says the oceans have been cooling for at least the past five years. Gore says that the oceans have been warming and are to blame for the Myanmar cyclone. Who do you believe?

 

Al Gore stands to make hundreds of millions - if not billions by convincing people that man is causing global warming. If he is convincing, he will make the money regardless of the facts. That is quite a conflict of interest.

 

Gore is a fear mongering opportunist who deserves far more ridicule than I can possibly heap upon him in one lifetime.

 

NASA was proven wrong by a 13 year old German schoolboy about a month ago, concerning the likelihood of a collision with asteroid Apophis. They are not beyond reproach, it would seem.

Aces, I suggest that you learn to read more carefully. Mr. Gore does not say that the Burma cyclone was caused by global warming. He cites several recent large storms and says they are examples of the types of consequences scientists have said would result from global warming. I think that what he believes is clear, but he only offers it as anecdotal, not as proof in the quotation cited.

 

I've noticed a trend where you denounce the motives of anyone that disagrees with you. That makes me question your motives for the denunciation.

Al Gore says that the oceans are warming, a claim that scientific evidence directly contradicts. What part of his claim do you not understand?

 

Why do liberals not hesitate in seeing conflicts of interest where no evidence exist of such claims, such as the oft repeated conspiracy theories regarding the financial motives of Bush and Cheney going to war with Iraq, yet when faced with clear evidence of real conflicts of interest they defend Al Gore and question the motives of his detractors?

 

I guess one could look at Gore in a more charitable way than I do. He is a conduit through which fools and their money part ways. If Gore was not performing this service, somebody else would be fleecing his flock.

NASA was proven wrong by a 13 year old German schoolboy about a month ago, concerning the likelihood of a collision with asteroid Apophis. They are not beyond reproach, it would seem.

I agree. An example of NASA's fallibility was the discovery of problems with its data a few months ago that gave birth to the infamous "hockey stick" graph shown in Gore's "documentary." When the data were corrected...bye bye hockey stick.

 

So, why do liberals want to selectively believe the data that points to global warming as they ignore evidence to the contrary? Why did some of the same Chicken Littles also embrace the global cooling "crisis" of the 70's?

 

My main reason for not believing the advocates of the man made global warming theory is that many countries and individuals stand to make billions or trillions of dollars if this country takes the kind of ridiculous actions that Gore advocates.

 

Are there good reasons for trusting temperature measurements reported by governments such as China, Russia, Cuba, and Vietnam? Do we really believe that countries that heavily censor the information available to their own citizens are going to contribute accurate temperature data if it contradicts the global warming models?

 

What reason do we have to believe that Al Gore, faced with direct evidence that the theory that he has spent much of his adult life promoting is wrong, would simply acknowledge his mistake and move on?

 

Al Gore is not a scientist and was in fact not even a good science and math student and he is making millions of dollars delivering short speeches to special interest groups. Gore is not demanding that we study potential global warming - he is demanding costly action and ridiculing scientists who present evidence that contradicts the theories he advocates.

 

If the science behind the man made global warming theory is sound, the theory will ultimately be proven by the data. Einstein did not need a $300 media campaign to support his theory of general relativity and Americans should not be stampeded into accepting an unproven theory wrapped in a slick ad campaign.