Have you heard the new myth?

Question

Al Gore didn't get elected because of his Global Warming stance.

After listening to how he's a hoser because he did not mention it during the elections for the past two years this is rich!

Not that I give a hoot about Gore, but is it because Bush has flip-flopped (again)? Or is it like that Ice Age prediction in the 70's business?

Answer 1

no it is not real all those graphs he shows you in that video are 100 times bigger then the originals

Answer 2

so global warming isn't real?

Answer 3

It was in the news that Al Gore was made to be a dummy.  But after seeing the movie he made, he is a very smart man.  And I'm Republican, but all the candid. seem idiotic to me. Clinton was great with economy, not Bush.  I don't think that is the reason.  He won the popular vote, but the votes were rigged for Bush.

Answer 4

Manmade global warming is a hoax!

Al Gore was a loser as VP, he lost the Presidential election, and has continued on to become a parody of himself.

there was a greater increase in the temperature of the world in the 1800's to the early 1900's than there has been between the early 1900's and the 2000's.  This contradicts the concept that increased CO2 causes increased temperatures.  The global production of CO2 skyrocketed in the 1920's compared to any previous century, but the temp has not increased, actually it decreased for the better part of the 1900's and currently is not up to previous high levels (the range for the change is less than 2 degrees C...miniscule! and hardly noticable.

the data that appears to show 'global warming' is not the most accurate data available.  It is skewed in a few ways.  

#1 it is gathered using land based thermometers.  (warming would occur in the atmosphere 1st and satellite measurements of atmospheric temperatures show no statistically significant changes since the satellites have been in orbit (the 1980s)  --the earth's land surface is only about 25% of the entire surface area of the earth);  

#2 the land based thermometers used are almost entirely located at airports. (when the thermometers were placed, the airports were generally located some distance from the city centers, as time has passed the cities have grown outward and often around the airports. cities retain heat due to all the dense surfaces, large amounts of surface areas exposed to the sun, and limited air direction movement (as compared to rural areas). Or simply put the way we use land around the thermometers had changed in a way that increases the local temperature and thus does not provide an accurate climatological temperature.);

#3 the data is often cropped at the beginning and end in order to show people the 'hockey stick' progression, but if they showed all the data, you would be able to see a wide fluctuation before the start of the 'stick' and a drop where they would have you believe the 'stick' is continuing to grow upward.)

#4 the air today is cleaner than it was in 1970, despite the fear and scare tactics used by the 'eco-friendly' crowd. (airborne lead has decreased by 93%, CO by 50%, Ground level ozone by 25%, sulfer oxides by 70%)

#5 computer models (GCMs) are often used to support predictions of Global Warming, BUT these models, when given the actual data from the past 25 years, cannot accurately predict the climate for the next year (ie: if we entered the data for 1970-1995 the model would provide wildly inaccurate data for 1996. study done by International Journal of Climatology Dec 2007 issue) Both the current and past president of the American Association of State Climatologists have made statements denigrating the accuracy and usefulness of current GCMs)

From January 2004 through February 2007 there were 528 papers published on climate change.  There were 7% that explicitly endorsed humanity as the cause of global warming, there were 6% that explicitly denied humanity as a cause, 48% remained entirely neutral in their findings, the remainder did not address humanity at all in their conclusions/summary, and out of the original 528 papers only 1 made any reference to 'catastrophic' climate change being possible.

The UN Global Warming/Climate Change 2007 IPCC statement has been panned by professionals (ie: Dr. Pielke Director of Environmental Studies at University of Colorado, Dr. Gray Professor of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University, Dr Lindzen Professor of Meteorology at MIT - all of these schools require individual to be doing original research into their areas of professorship in order to remain on staff) as being untrue, politically motivated, containing errors, using data selectively, and not based on observational evidence.

After all of the above, i do believe that we need to take care of our planet, through using efficient means of energy production (nuclear currently leads the way), by recycling (individuals recycling really does not make much of a difference, but business' recycling can make a HUGE difference...the waste created in 1 small to medium business in a single day is more than a family of 5 will create in a month), planting trees/flowers/etc to beautify the scenery as well as for the environmental benefits, consuming home-grown produce (saves transportation costs x3 -from farm to distrib, from distrib to store, from store to home) and many other 'common' sense and not overly invasive lifestyle changes.

Answer 5

what's a hoser dear?

on second thoughts maybe i dont want to know...

i understood he has been making trouble about the danger of climate change since he was vice president, it got a bit sidelined due to the economy (hmm.....am i spotting a pattern here, or is that just my monkey brain seeing patterns everywhere??)

oh always b.... i looked it up;

"it originally referred to farmers of the Canadian prairies, who would siphon gas from farming vehicles with a hose during the Great Depression of the 1930s"

oh dear, that's me too......carrying the butts back to site is the bummer.....

Answer 6

yea u lost me too!!!

im sorry!!

Answer 7

Babe, a hoser is a Canadian.  Stop insulting Canucks.

Answer 8

reading his book "earth in the balance" stopped me from voting for him when he ran for president.

because I actually researched some of the supposed "data" he used, that's the bad thing about printed books, the data written in them cant be changed or denied later.

Answer 9

Global warming is nonsense.....

If you remember in the early 90's when 'scientists' made it clear to everyone that where living in a global cooling..

we went to the north and south poles and covers ice in suet to melt some of the ice.

one thing about scientist is that they are always wrong in the past..

just do what the government is doing and calm down listen to NASA they recently took huge metal thermometer's down to the poles and found that the overall temp. has decreased 1 degree.

yes their has been some weather. and its probally all because of sunspots which mess up are ocean currents.

and yes you've seen iceburgs fall apart and that is also due to ocean currents.

Answer 10

you lost me AFTER 'have you heard the new myth'? part

Answer 11

changing the subject...did you hear that Mr.Rogers was an ex-marine sniper?