Al Gore CTIA Keynote Liveblog

Global warming is BS. Gore is such a hypocrite.
Sigh. Only 3 5/8 more years left of Obama :/.

Algore has championed the greatest hoax in the history of mankind, and the Commies in his party are about to jam Americans with the largest (Carbon) tax increase ever levied in association with this sham.

^Gotta luv these unsustainable haters. Talk about a hoax!

ask yourself if you have any ” real ” knowledge to the contrary or are you just writing to see your words on screen ? in any warming trend of a planet like earth variations will occur. not to mention that historically any warming climate is immediately met with cooling periods right before an ice age occur !!! so yes , global warming can cause an immediate ice age. and btw , how many nobel peace prizes have you won ?

When properly referred to as global climate change, vs the misnomer of “global warming”, the mouth-breathing Neanderthals have less to say and even less to back their thinly-veiled Pro-Consumerism agenda. No scientific authority disputes that a factor which is unprecedented is changing local/regional climates in ways which the world has never seen. It is natural for the scientific body to examine and research the likely causative -whys-, as that is the nature of science. with the highest of probabilities [p=>95], it is man’s industrial contriution over the past 100 years which has lead to the snowball effect we are experiencing today. More extremes are the norm. Regional ‘seasons’ becoming more irregular. Arid climates going to war over water rights because their citizens are dying without it and because water has become the new ‘gold’ to gain control over enemies. Turn a blind-eye if you are so self-absorbed in your ‘burbed-mentality where your greatest concern is who has the most expensive mailbox, but the world is not what you learned it is in natural science classes or in geopolitical studies.

No one, except possibly the motley crew formerly known as Project For A New American Century [also known as the GWB 'think-tank' ] that gave us the likes of geniuses such as Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Condie Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, et al denied today’s scientifically proven basis for action. ‘Wisdom’ such as theirs can be had from your friendly, neighborhood palm-reader. Only difference is that it will only cost you $10 [vs $3+Trillion] and nobody has to die.

@backbeat
So while the nature of science is to examine and research the whys, you seem to be pretty sure that industry implies impending doom. What are you or any of your so called scientific authorities basing that on?

It is CO2, whose levels have been much higher in antiquity when the planet was much greener?
Perhaps it’s H20, so named as a greenhouse gas.

The fact of the matter is that the Earth’s ecology is a multiple input, multiple output system. To jump to conclusions like ‘industry will destroy the world’ or whatever you eco-Nazi’s say is simply infantile.

Another fact of this matter is that Al Gore has made a lot of money talking about how we should be green, yet fails to do as he would have others do.

It is also worth pointing out how much American industry has cleaned itself up in the past 70 or so years, and that other “developing” nations (you know, China, India, etc, the one’s who were excluded from the Kyoto Protocol) have very dirty industries. And further, the by far cleanest form of energy known to man, Nuclear power, was shot down by the very voices who are telling us to mind our carbon footprints.

Find me a pulpit who will debate those who challenge him, or one who doesn’t label his ideological adversaries facists (I’m lookin at you Al Gore and Robert Kennedy, actually I’m looking at just about every liberal aren’t I?) and then I’ll listen.

Of course, if you’re too self absorbed in your Tofu eating, not-flushing-when-you-pee mentality, you can just go ahead and turn a blind eye to logic.

@notadumbass who said: “So while the nature of science is to examine and research the whys, you seem to be pretty sure that industry implies impending doom. What are you or any of your so called scientific authorities basing that on?”

Completely false premise. Get real if a discussion is within you.

“It is CO2, whose levels have been much higher in antiquity when the planet was much greener?”

Are you asking a question or trying to make a point which lacks foundation?

“To jump to conclusions like ‘industry will destroy the world’ or whatever you eco-Nazi’s say is simply infantile.”

Name-calling is productive. Is it not? And yet again, your false-premise [or flat-out mischaracterization aka a lie] is duly noted.

“Another fact of this matter is that Al Gore has made a lot of money talking about how we should be green, yet fails to do as he would have others do.”

Completely false. but given that you will take a shit on any evidence to the contrary of your lie … we’ll call this a draw. [As if it matters. Gore isn't pretending to be Jesus. That claim is solely the work of GWBush]

“It is also worth pointing out how much American industry has cleaned itself up in the past 70 or so years, and that other “developing” nations (you know, China, India, etc, the one’s who were excluded from the Kyoto Protocol) have very dirty industries. And further, the by far cleanest form of energy known to man, Nuclear power, was shot down by the very voices who are telling us to mind our carbon footprints.”

Good thing that the 9/11 hijackers weren’t targeting nuclear power facilities. They flew over 3. Good show! I’m sure your children won’t mind growing up with the waste as a nextdoor neighbor.

“Find me a pulpit who will debate those who challenge him, or one who doesn’t label his ideological adversaries facists (I’m lookin at you Al Gore and Robert Kennedy, actually I’m looking at just about every liberal aren’t I?) and then I’ll listen.”

Unfortunately for you and your false-premise, the world’s scientific communities have come to fundamental agreement about man’s ‘contribution’ to global climate change. Until new overwhelming evidence presents itself to override the world’s scientific leadership, you can bark into the wind all you like. Feel free.

“Of course, if you’re too self absorbed in your Tofu eating, not-flushing-when-you-pee mentality, you can just go ahead and turn a blind eye to logic”

Being healthy and conservative is against your laws of nature. Got it!

@backbeat
Funny how you were able to skip virtually every serious point I made and focus on the irony and humor as if I was being serious, when I was really just trying to entertain people with a sense of humor.

My question which you straw man’d out of existence was “‘What are you or any of your so called scientific authorities basing that on?’” Where the ‘that’ is man’s contribution to global warming. Of course, merely saying that my statement regarding CO2 and plant life is “without foundation” makes it so does it not?

Excuse me, by the way, if I don’t take my scientific gospel (ever hear that phrase, or ones like it?) from the group of Politicians known as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Moving right along:
When o when did George Bush ever say anything remotely of that nature? You must be confusing him with all the hype about our current President.

When exactly did the world’s scientific communities come to any kind of consensus? It’s funny how you seem to hear about scientists saying global warming is a hoax, etc every so often, and yet the discussion is closed, because judgment has already been wrought. Hmm, that doesn’t sound very scientific.

R/e nuclear power, so little waste is generated (especially vs coal) that my children won’t have to live next to it at all, and if nuclear power had continued to develop as it ought to have, we might just have better ways to deal with it by now. But don’t mind me, I wouldn’t want to get in the way of any false premises that you need to win your content-less pathos based arguments.

To be fair, I wasn’t fully justified in calling you in eco-Nazi. The point however remains that when disagreement is squelched you end up with poor decision making, like a lot of those “green” policies. Also I should clarify; I wasn’t simply name calling, I was identifying. Suppression of dissent is a big part of that term.

By the way, I never called anyone here an idiot.

My final statement regarding your mentality was meant to be just as ignorant and accusatory as yours was to the poster before me. Did it work?

Tofu is not really all that healthy. Eating a balanced diet and getting the right kind of exercise is. It has, though, been shown to increase estrogen levels in both genders. Is that working on you?

Being serious, one ought to kind in mind that there is basically no way that overwhelming evidence will “come along”. Science doesn’t work that way :p It’s of course easy to shut down debate and exclude those who disagree, but then that’s not really science is it? (that’s right, I went there)

I’m not saying we shouldn’t conserve resources, clean up our act, and all that. I am saying we should not completely bomb our way of life and economy to do it (like Kyoto would have done). Acting rashly leads to stupid decisions.

@dumbass who said: “Funny how you were able to skip virtually every serious point I made and focus on the irony and humor as if I was being serious, when I was really just trying to entertain people with a sense of humor.”

Thanks for providing all the justification for determining that you’re simply a joke without a punchline. But, a joke, nonetheless.

Even on the interwebs … Idiotic duplicity can’t have it both ways.

Cheers!

And just for the sheer entertainment factor …

_________________________________________________
Journalist Arnon Regular wrote, in the June 26 edition of Ha’aretz (Israel’s most reputable newspaper), that he has minutes of a meeting among top-level Palestinian leaders, including Prime Minister Mahmoud Abas. The minutes are apparently quite detailed, because Regular wrote a long article recounting very specific conversations. The last paragraph of the article reads:

“According to Abbas, Bush said: ‘God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.’”
__________________________________________________

Who’s -really- got the messiah-complex?

“look at the big brain on brad”

Conratulations backbeat, your an asshole.

^Truth’s a bitch.

Buddy.

@ backbeat

See dude, what you’re doing here is proving my point exactly. Simply ducking my arguments and saying “haha you’re a joke” won’t win you anything, it will just show everyone else here what I already knew, that you have no argument and but are sure that you are right about everything. In short, you’re a douchebag. Rude about it too.

See what I was doing was being funny, while still making a point. You however have no points; you just say “YOU ARE WRONG”. If anything, you’re the SETUP without a punchline. See, a joke includes both a setup and a punchline; what you ought to have said was that I’m half a joke or something like that. Diction is difficult to grasp with your head up your ass eh?

Since I can’t resist a good one-two; are you really basing your opinion of a President of The United States, leader of the most powerful nation in the world, on a political adversary with ulterior motives?
I think not. In fact I think you don’t know a damn thing about George Walker Bush, but you’re gonna talk about it as if you do. You believe what you wanna believe pal, just don’t expect people who think for themselves to agree with you.

I’ll tell you what buddy, grow a brain, then try to debate people. Otherwise you just sound like (and are) a sniveling, sniping little prick.

Someone on a forum once said: ‘sometimes the cost of having ridiculous opinions is to be ridiculed or ignored’

Sounds strangely appropriate.

Crackbeat is right. Backbeat is an asshole.
Cheers

You provide nothing which can be supported nor defended, chump. Though, naturally, you gather your anecdotal thoughts together [sometimes] to form an unsubstantiated ‘opinion’ in the form of diminishing intellectual returns. End of story.

When you provide a peer-reviewed, internationally accepted premise which corroborates the false-claims you portend to accept as gospel, there may be something worthy of discussion. Until then, your only modus operandi is to make it personal. Fuck you -and- any forthcoming generations for your cancerous lack of dignity.

Quote: “You believe what you wanna believe pal”

Look familiar? Borrow a mirror -and- the operations manual that comes with it. Use liberally. Repeat.

Ouch kiddo.
You’re telling me I’m making it personal, yet damning my future generations in the same breath? Classy.

You made it personal with the other posters way before I got here. What’s a matter, you can dish it out but not take it?

Argumentation is much more fun than ad hominem attacks. But I guess, since you don’t seem to be able to recognize a rational argument when presented with one, you can’t appreciate that.

And no, saying ‘I’m right and this entire [anonymous] community agrees with me so shut the hell up’ is not an argument.

I want to again reiterate the virtues of conservation, and point out that I never denied the climate is changing, only questioned man’s contribution to it. I also want to point out that while I’m coming from position of gathering information (never denied, only questioned remember) you seem to be vehemently opposed to hear your opinions questioned.

I ask this, a question to provoke thought:
Who among us really has a chip on his/her shoulder?

Also, a word of advice. Get nasty, and you will turn people off, despite the merits of your position. The only reason I commented here in the first place is that you were being flippant and rude to the other posters.

@dumbass who said: “You however have no points; you just say “YOU ARE WRONG””

Sort of like your generic response to anything Gore has/had to say here. Thanks for the clarity.

PS: -STILL- no scientific body of internationally-accepted, peer-reviewed work to support your [lack of] a position, eh?

Buddy.

@dumbass who said: “I ask this, a question to provoke thought:
Who among us really has a chip on his/her shoulder?

The only reason I commented here in the first place is that you were being flippant and rude to the other posters.”

__________________________________________________
Thanks for answering your own question. -You-, however, lack the ethical spine to examine the causative factors involved. -That- is the very definition of a Coward. When your judicial merit carries any more weight than thin air, someone will formally alert you. In the meantime, fuck you -and- your blind, childish insolence.

Buddy.