Is Al a problem?

Question

I know you americans love a celebrity, but is Al getting in the way of moving the environmental agenda, or is he just an easy target for 'deniers'.

Is there no other popular source of info around environmental isues other than Al, talk about putting all your eggs into one basket. How many strands of environmentalism don't feel happy about his monopoly of environmental issues, I wouldn't want him speaking for me.

Answer 1

Al Gore invented the enviroment

Answer 2

Al Gore won an Oscar not for his celebrity but for the effective, accurate presentation of a well-researched study.  Like the prejudicial effects of smoking back in the 1960s, this is not a controversial subject, although those who profit from exacerbating the problem spend a lot of money trying to make it seem controversial.

If you believe that ANY presentation of the problem contrary to the corporatist (still passing as "conservative") party line is "liberal" and therefore invalid, then you cannot inform yourself and your mind will remain closed, just as will the minds of those who turn thumbs down below.

Answer 3

Al and the IPCC should be forced to take a lie detector test, because they certainly know how to massage scientific data to their own end.

Answer 4

I didn't care for the tone or content of parts of his movie, and he is slammed as a distraction away from the topic at hand, but if it wasn't him the special interests were singling out, they'd just focus on someone else.

Frankly I don't think that climate change is an "environmental issue" in the traditional political sense of the phrase.  It's not like it's going to only kill liberals.  In fact, people that struggle with survival on a daily basis won't notice much change, they'll still be struggling.  The developed countries on the other hand have economies that may not be able to take massive crop failures.  If your food production grinds to a halt and/or your currency fails, the issue boils down to one of survival, not the environment.  

In that respect having a rich guy like Al make it look like environmentalism, something that trendy rich people might engage in to heat their pools and feel good about it, may well be one of the biggest issues facing those trying to get the message out that this is something that applies to all.

Answer 5

He is both in the way and an easy target.

His science is way off base:

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harr...

And as far as being in the way, many who are skeptical of the whole anthropogenic global warming scare believe that it is purely a political power play. Having a politician ballyhooing the cause - especially one with a poor reputation for being accurate or truthful -  only exacerbates that thinking.

Answer 6

I'm an American, and I think celebrities are one of the largest problems we have. With all the celebration over so many spoiled rotten, over payed, under worked, whacked philosophy, treated like deity, mere humans, it certainly can't be a very good thing.

So what are you trying to say ?

Answer 7

follow the money trail

an excerpt from a post by Jack H

The most recent attempt to imply there was an overwhelming scientific "consensus" in favor of man-made global warming fears came in December 2007 during the UN climate conference in Bali. A letter signed by only 215 scientists urged the UN to mandate deep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. But absent from the letter were the signatures of these alleged "thousands" of scientists. (See AP article: - LINK )

UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri urged the world at the December 2007 UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia to "Please listen to the voice of science."

The science has continued to grow loud and clear in 2007. In addition to the growing number of scientists expressing skepticism, an abundance of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast considerable doubt about man-made global warming fears. A November 3, 2007 peer-reviewed study found that "solar changes significantly alter climate." (LINK) A December 2007 peer-reviewed study recalculated and halved the global average surface temperature trend between 1980 - 2002. (LINK) Another new study found the Medieval Warm Period "0.3C warmer than 20th century" (LINK)

A peer-reviewed study by a team of scientists found that "warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence." (LINK) - Another November 2007 peer-reviewed study in the journal Physical Geography found "Long-term climate change is driven by solar insolation changes." (LINK ) These recent studies were in addition to the abundance of peer-reviewed studies earlier in 2007. - See "New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears" (LINK )

With this new report of profiling 400 skeptical scientists, the world can finally hear the voices of the "silent majority" of scientists."

So there you have it.

Answer 8

Yeah, Al is definitely a target for deniers. I know I am one. He really strips credibility from the AGW agenda because many people see him as a politician and a businessman first. If I see a program on global warming and it has him in it I automatically discount his information because he exaggerated previously. I think he may be using AGW to further his business venture Generation Investment Management which sells carbon credits; or perhaps he is using it to run for the big chair again in 2012 or 2016.

Answer 9

I presume you mean Al Gore.  He is increasingly irrelevant in U.S. politics.

Answer 10

I don't see any problem with Al Gore. I think he did a great service to the whole world by bringing awareness of AGW for which he got the Nobel Prize which was shared by 3000 plus prominent scientists internationally. I think the problem lies with large oil corporations who are deliberately employing unqualified people to deny AGW so that man's dependentcy on their oil will continue.

Answer 11

Al Gore is an idoit. Global warming does not exist!!!!

Answer 12

I want to punch him in the face

Answer 13

Al is mentally challenged but he is not my problem.

Answer 14

I challenge you to do your climate change research using scientific sources (such as, but not limited to the ones below) instead of FoxNews “JunkScience”, opinion sections of newspapers, and industry-funded “Think Tanks” such as the Heritage Institute, Friends of Science, the Science and Public Policy Institute, and the Science & Environmental Policy Project

Also try using http://scholar.google.com/ to find your own articles that are more likely to have accurate information AND be peer-reviewed. Don’t check just one source, check several.

NASA:

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/

EPA:

http://epa.gov/climatechange/index.html

NOAA on Global Warming:

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/glob...

NOAA on Paleoclimatology:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/paleo.htm...

The National Center for Atmospheric Research:

http://www.ncar.ucar.edu/research/climat...

Journal of Nature, On-line version:

http://www.nature.com/climate/index.html