The Al Gore discussion, split from GOP/DEM

[kapkomet]

I know that this is a little "disjointed" but in some areas, this was a good discussion. Except Tex and his "F the GOP" ...

 

Just kidding.

 

Anyway, where I get a little ruffled is when I have these people telling me everything I do is "bad" for the environment, and yet, they do the same things and even on a much larger scale. What I choose to do is different then me standing up on stages all over the world telling people what they shouldn't be doing.

[southsider2k5]

So f*** the environment because AL Gore does? I love the GOP

 

Who exactly has said anything close to that?

[Soxy]

Addressing most of the claims (spurred from the USA Today editorial).

 

I appreciate Al Gore's message and the dedication he has consistantly shown to the environment throughout his life. I actually SAW the movie, and it really wasn't that political (except when talking about his run in 2000). Al Gore's no saint or a hypocrit, but he is someone I look up to as trying to be the best steward of the earth as possible.

 

Denounce the messanger all you want, but in 50 years ask your kids about how right the message was.

[Texsox]

I know that this is a little "disjointed" but in some areas, this was a good discussion. Except Tex and his "F the GOP" ...

 

Just kidding.

 

Anyway, where I get a little ruffled is when I have these people telling me everything I do is "bad" for the environment, and yet, they do the same things and even on a much larger scale. What I choose to do is different then me standing up on stages all over the world telling people what they shouldn't be doing.

 

It would be great if every messenger was Gandhi, Reagan*, God, or Mother Theresa. But, that isn't and will never be the case. My points are threefold.

 

1. We all need to do just a little bit and we make a huge impact. We're not going to get Bill Gates to live in a yurt and ride a bicycle to work. Take your existing life style and help a little. That's realistic and doable. Not doing anything because Al Gore uses more, is silly and hurts us all. Be proud that you are further towards a greener lifestyle than Al, don't try to use as much as him.

 

2. Don't reject the message because the messenger isn't 100% in line or agree with a message because someone appears to be. Just because someone is a vegan, living in a debris hut, and eating berries doesn't make their environmental message scientifically valid.

 

3. Rotary has a four step decision tree that makes a lot of sense to me:

• Is it the Truth?
• Is it Fair to All Concerned?
• Will it Build Good Will and Better Friendships?
• Will it Be Beneficial to All Concerned?

*just for Kap as an I'm sorry.

 

 

Who exactly has said anything close to that?

 

It was in the Dem thread, and he knows.

[Rex Kickass]

I know that this is a little "disjointed" but in some areas, this was a good discussion. Except Tex and his "F the GOP" ...

 

Just kidding.

 

Anyway, where I get a little ruffled is when I have these people telling me everything I do is "bad" for the environment, and yet, they do the same things and even on a much larger scale. What I choose to do is different then me standing up on stages all over the world telling people what they shouldn't be doing.

 

 

Actually, when has Al Gore said "everything you do in your life is bad for the environment" Kap? I'm assuming that your hobbies don't include emptying cans of aerosol hair spray directly up into the air and cutting down rainforest "for fun," he isn't. I'd wager that you haven't seen Al Gore's movie either and neither have most people here are so quick to cut down the film too.

 

And another thing that really saddens me about this Kap, is how quick you are to jump on this bandwagon because this is politics of the worst kind, the sleaziest kind. He isn't running for anything for anymore - he's just being an advocate of a message that deserves repeating... and because his message involves some form of self sacrifice, stupid political hacks who are funded by companies like ExxonMobil are doing anything they can to discredit the message by attacking a messenger. When this stuff happens in a campaign, you're so quick to jump on the candidate launching the attack as a sleazy s***bag who doesn't deserve a single vote but when it happens about an issue that might not be that important to you - you're on it like a horsefly on a cow patty.

 

The last time I checked Al Gore's monthly electric bill had very little to do with global climate change. Just because he isn't powering his toaster with a stationary bike like Ed Begley, Jr does, doesn't mean his message isn't worth listening to.

[kapkomet]

You see, though, no where in here do you see what *I* am doing to try to help the environment, yet, to Al Gore and the liberals, it's "not enough" because I drive an SUV.

 

I recycle (my recycle bin is chuck full every single week), I use those new little lights as my old ones burn out, I take care of my vehicles to make sure they are as efficient as possible. I don't take private jets everywhere, I jump on the big bus in the sky when I need to get somewhere. Is it enough? I'm not judging anyone else, like Al Gore is by telling us "An Inconveinient Truth".

[NorthSideSox72]

You see, though, no where in here do you see what *I* am doing to try to help the environment, yet, to Al Gore and the liberals, it's "not enough" because I drive an SUV.

 

I recycle (my recycle bin is chuck full every single week), I use those new little lights as my old ones burn out, I take care of my vehicles to make sure they are as efficient as possible. I don't take private jets everywhere, I jump on the big bus in the sky when I need to get somewhere. Is it enough? I'm not judging anyone else, like Al Gore is by telling us "An Inconveinient Truth".

Having seen the movie and read some of his stuff, I would say its less judging and more promoting. Seriously, have you seen the movie? Its not fear-mongering, or ordering people to do things. Its quite literally (at the end) a list of things you CAN do to reduce your footprint. Why on earth is this being made out as evil?

[Texsox]

Having seen the movie and read some of his stuff, I would say its less judging and more promoting. Seriously, have you seen the movie? Its not fear-mongering, or ordering people to do things. Its quite literally (at the end) a list of things you CAN do to reduce your footprint. Why on earth is this being made out as evil?

 

Duh, because Al is a Democrat same way some Dems would reject a GOP leader. It's the new America.

[Rex Kickass]

You see, though, no where in here do you see what *I* am doing to try to help the environment, yet, to Al Gore and the liberals, it's "not enough" because I drive an SUV.

 

I recycle (my recycle bin is chuck full every single week), I use those new little lights as my old ones burn out, I take care of my vehicles to make sure they are as efficient as possible. I don't take private jets everywhere, I jump on the big bus in the sky when I need to get somewhere. Is it enough? I'm not judging anyone else, like Al Gore is by telling us "An Inconveinient Truth".

 

That's great that you're doing things to reduce your carbon footprint. Again, exactly when did Al Gore tell you everything you're doing is wrong again?

[southsider2k5]

Addressing most of the claims (spurred from the USA Today editorial).

 

I appreciate Al Gore's message and the dedication he has consistantly shown to the environment throughout his life. I actually SAW the movie, and it really wasn't that political (except when talking about his run in 2000). Al Gore's no saint or a hypocrit, but he is someone I look up to as trying to be the best steward of the earth as possible.

 

Denounce the messanger all you want, but in 50 years ask your kids about how right the message was.

 

I'll bet you could write the exact same article about pretty much every Catholic priest who molested a child over the last 50 years. As far as I have ever seen or read, they do a ton of good works outside of their nasty little habit which just happens to be against everything that they have ever taught. No one seems to be out writing up rebuttal op-ed pieces for these guys, why is that? No one seemed to have a problem with the "liberal media machine" picking up the story and running with it. Why were their no replies about how many soup kitchens they served in, or how they tithed, or the marriage couseling they did, or the comfort they brought to people who lost loved ones, or how they were crippling churches by taking these priests away etc, etc? I guess the "conservative media machine" must have really dropped the ball on protecting the "religious right" or they still have some lessons to learn...

 

It just really drives me nuts that this kind of thing is OK in one instance, but it isn't in this case. I read tons of editorials just tearing the Catholic Church and organized religion apart for this kind of thing, yet when it happens here, we shouldn't worry about that, just worry about the message. Enviornmentalism is like a cult as I see it anymore. Everyone must assimilate or get destroyed by it. If you question this, there is something wrong with you, and the entire media machine crucifies you. People lose their jobs for questioning the envornmental machine. If people do reseach on this that contradicts the accepted facts, it is dimissed summariliy as "junk science" or worse, and the media machine kicks into high gear. Its not that the message gets ignored, its that you ignore the messenger or get ran over by him. I can't wait until Al Gore shows up at my door in his Borg outfit with his laser pointed in my eye, for questioning his authority.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll bet you could write the exact same article about pretty much every Catholic priest who molested a child over the last 50 years. As far as I have ever seen or read, they do a ton of good works outside of their nasty little habit which just happens to be against everything that they have ever taught. No one seems to be out writing up rebuttal op-ed pieces for these guys, why is that? No one seemed to have a problem with the "liberal media machine" picking up the story and running with it. Why were their no replies about how many soup kitchens they served in, or how they tithed, or the marriage couseling they did, or the comfort they brought to people who lost loved ones, or how they were crippling churches by taking these priests away etc, etc? I guess the "conservative media machine" must have really dropped the ball on protecting the "religious right" or they still have some lessons to learn...

 

It just really drives me nuts that this kind of thing is OK in one instance, but it isn't in this case. I read tons of editorials just tearing the Catholic Church and organized religion apart for this kind of thing, yet when it happens here, we shouldn't worry about that, just worry about the message. Enviornmentalism is like a cult as I see it anymore. Everyone must assimilate or get destroyed by it. If you question this, there is something wrong with you, and the entire media machine crucifies you. People lose their jobs for questioning the envornmental machine. If people do reseach on this that contradicts the accepted facts, it is dimissed summariliy as "junk science" or worse, and the media machine kicks into high gear. Its not that the message gets ignored, its that you ignore the messenger or get ran over by him. I can't wait until Al Gore shows up at my door in his Borg outfit with his laser pointed in my eye, for questioning his authority.

Did you really just compare Al Gore's electric bill to molesting a child?

 

And environmentalism is a cult?!

 

You know, I enjoy our discussions on this board, but I can't see having any sort of logical discussion on the topic if you seriously believe those things.

 

I'm out.

[southsider2k5]

Did you really just compare Al Gore's electric bill to molesting a child?

 

And environmentalism is a cult?!

 

You know, I enjoy our discussions on this board, but I can't see having any sort of logical discussion on the topic if you seriously believe those things.

 

I'm out.

 

Oh but you aren't paying attention to my message.

 

Yes, I am quite serious in the comparision here. Personally I think the destruction of all human kind would be worse than child molesting, but I digress. And actually if you really look at my message, I am talking about the underlying hypocracy behind each action, and not the merits of each action. But don't let me stop you from going after the messenger

[Soxy]

I'll bet you could write the exact same article about pretty much every Catholic priest who molested a child over the last 50 years. As far as I have ever seen or read, they do a ton of good works outside of their nasty little habit which just happens to be against everything that they have ever taught. No one seems to be out writing up rebuttal op-ed pieces for these guys, why is that? No one seemed to have a problem with the "liberal media machine" picking up the story and running with it. Why were their no replies about how many soup kitchens they served in, or how they tithed, or the marriage couseling they did, or the comfort they brought to people who lost loved ones, or how they were crippling churches by taking these priests away etc, etc? I guess the "conservative media machine" must have really dropped the ball on protecting the "religious right" or they still have some lessons to learn...

 

It just really drives me nuts that this kind of thing is OK in one instance, but it isn't in this case. I read tons of editorials just tearing the Catholic Church and organized religion apart for this kind of thing, yet when it happens here, we shouldn't worry about that, just worry about the message. Enviornmentalism is like a cult as I see it anymore. Everyone must assimilate or get destroyed by it. If you question this, there is something wrong with you, and the entire media machine crucifies you. People lose their jobs for questioning the envornmental machine. If people do reseach on this that contradicts the accepted facts, it is dimissed summariliy as "junk science" or worse, and the media machine kicks into high gear. Its not that the message gets ignored, its that you ignore the messenger or get ran over by him. I can't wait until Al Gore shows up at my door in his Borg outfit with his laser pointed in my eye, for questioning his authority.

 

Actually, I would argue you have it backwards about the science. The Media makes a big deal about the ONE experiment that doesn't support the global warming hypothesis. Why? Because those uncommon studies are what is noteworthy.

 

I'm also not clear of the analogy between Al Gore and a pedaphilic priest is. So, a priest who does good things but molests children is the same as Al Gore who isn't the most energy efficient person on the planet, but who preaches the importance of environmentalism.

 

And Kap, HAVE you seen the movie? Honestly, the only time there was really a focus on changing behavior was a montage played at the end of the film with the credits. Most of it was, really, just Global Warming 101 and more about the science than do this or die. Seriously, if you are so offended by the movie, I would try watching it AND then slamming it.

[southsider2k5]

The messages are the same from both groups. I know what is best for you, and you should live your life this way. The actions of both groups are the same as well... Do as I say, not as I do. Why are they treated so differently?

 

I know no one will get what I am talking about, and I didn't expect anyone would. Its different, its always different.

[Soxy]

The messages are the same from both groups. I know what is best for you, and you should live your life this way. The actions of both groups are the same as well... Do as I say, not as I do. Why are they treated so differently?

 

I know no one will get what I am talking about, and I didn't expect anyone would. Its different, its always different.

I understand, your basic premise. BUT where has Al Gore told people to change? Can I please have a source where he lectures about that? Like I said, that is NOT the focus of the movie. In fact, most of the movie centers around the SCIENCE of global warming. At the end of the movie there's a montage about what people can do, most stuff about writing letters and changing your light bulbs and unplugging unused appliances. Seriously, have you seen the movie? Have you seen a single speech Al Gore has given on this topic? Have you read anything of his? Or is this just information from a second hand source?

 

Oh, and I forgot, that all of us democrats were rabid catholic haters. . .Thanks for the reminder though. (One hyperbole for another, fair, right?)

[southsider2k5]

So wait, are you trying to tell me that there was no message behind the movie, lectures, speeches etc? All of that wasn't meant to elicit a change in people's behavior? All of this stuff is what, entertainment?

[Soxy]

So wait, are you trying to tell me that there was no message behind the movie, lectures, speeches etc? All of that wasn't meant to elicit a change in people's behavior? All of this stuff is what, entertainment?

Forget it, I'm with NSS, I'm not having a "discussion" with people who would rather form a knee-jerk opinion about something instead of actually watching the movie or doing some research.

 

Why watch the movie when you can just b**** about it and hate on Al Gore?

[southsider2k5]

Forget it, I'm with NSS, I'm not having a "discussion" with people who would rather form a knee-jerk opinion about something instead of actually watching the movie or doing some research.

 

Why watch the movie when you can just b**** about it and hate on Al Gore?

 

That's exactly what I mean! Why can't I question Al Gore? Why is he all of the sudden some kind of untouchable demi-god??? Why do I have to attend his lecure circuit and pay to see his movie to have some sort of crediblity to ask some questions???? Is reading his speeches on line enough? Is see the experpts of his speeches on CNBC enough? Is watching his appearences on the TV news magazines enough? Is hearing eight years of his speeches as VP enough?

 

Come to think of it why is my credibility on trial, when the whole point back at the beginning was that I wasn't supposed to be questioning Gore's credibility in the first place?!?!?!? That kind of circular logic is EXACTLY what I am talking about when I say it feels like a cult when you question anything to do with the enviornment.

[Texsox]

The messages are the same from both groups. I know what is best for you, and you should live your life this way. The actions of both groups are the same as well... Do as I say, not as I do. Why are they treated so differently?

 

I know no one will get what I am talking about, and I didn't expect anyone would. Its different, its always different.

 

Al Gore is much like a coach. Here is the goal, here is perfection, all of us should be trying to reach this goal.

 

Again, should you follow Al Gore's message or his example?

 

I'm not suggesting he's the very best spokesperson, he's a Dem and the GOP must reject him as should big oil. But some scientist that no one has heard of would not have the same forum to get the message out.

 

Which is better for our environment, a less than perfect spokesperson on a huge stage or a perfect spokesperson on a tiny stage?

 

 

That's exactly what I mean! Why can't I question Al Gore? Why is he all of the sudden some kind of untouchable demi-god??? Why do I have to attend his lecure circuit and pay to see his movie to have some sort of crediblity to ask some questions???? Is reading his speeches on line enough? Is see the experpts of his speeches on CNBC enough? Is watching his appearences on the TV news magazines enough? Is hearing eight years of his speeches as VP enough?

 

Come to think of it why is my credibility on trial, when the whole point back at the beginning was that I wasn't supposed to be questioning Gore's credibility in the first place?!?!?!? That kind of circular logic is EXACTLY what I am talking about when I say it feels like a cult when you question anything to do with the enviornment.

 

Of course, questioning Al Gore is better than questioning his message on the environment. Because it is far more important to try and discredit the messenger than to fix the environment.

 

Who would you rather have as a golf coach? A PGA Champion or the Coach that built his swing? Would you tell Butch Harmon he is a hypocrite because he doesn't play as well as Tiger? Cooper is a hypocrite but Buerhle isn't? Embrace sin because a clergy member did?

 

I am beginning to believe you are just playing dumb. You can't wake someone pretending to be asleep.

[southsider2k5]

Of course I have to be dumb. Thanks for the namecalling. There is no point in talking to you guys about this.

[Texsox]

Of course I have to be dumb. Thanks for the namecalling. There is no point in talking to you guys about this.

 

Playing dumb, you aren't dumb, but bringing pedophiles and cults in isn't your usual logical argument.

[knightni]

The general hypocracy of Sunday night was that they all jumped into their 8 mile-a-gallon limos and sat on the 405 for 5 hours while waiting to go to the airport and jump on their heavy-burning fueled private jets to go home to their electricity burning 50,000 sq. ft. mansions.

[kapkomet]

Al Gore.

 

I'm done.

[Balta1701]

No he's not at all. By purchasing carbon credits all he is doing is reducing the amount available IN AN OPTIONAL PROGRAM. For everyone else who doesn't follow those rules, it doesn't make a damned bit of difference. If they man were actually practicing what he preached he wouldn't own a gigantic energy wasting house. He would bulldose that house, plant a forest preserve, and live in a tiny little place that used as little energy as possible. But hey, he bought Carbon credits so everything is cool, right? Yeah I touched that boy, but hey, I prayed for forgiveness so its all cool. Just like people who rightfully look at people who want to stand up as authority figures on a subject, and preach to people how they should live their lives, people are going to be really interested to see that those people are more than accountable for their actions. Buying your pennance doesn't make a difference. Just because Al was lucky enough to have a grandpa who got rich in the oil business, so he can afford to make movies about things, doesn't mean he can buy his guiltfree sleep. At least not in my eyes.

Ok, so I'm going to chime in here, try to stay out of some of the sniping, totally avoid commenting on the child molester comparison, and just say that the way you present the carbon trading programs is not at all how any of them work. I'm not exactly certain which version of the carbon trading program Mr. Gore is involved in (different countries have different rules), but the key point to make is that it isn't how you present it; an optional program that makes no difference.

 

For the system currently operating in Europe, if you buy some of those credits, you are actually removing carbon from the Earth as a whole. That is because the system in Europe is actually a cap and trade system; there are a specific number of credits allocated to each country. If a country does not use up its credits, by cutting emissions more rapidly than the protocols require through the implementation of greener technology, then they are able to sell those credits. Or, to put it another way; if someone purchases credits that are for sale, then those gases can not be emitted by some other industry. While the U.S. has been unwilling to even acknowledge the existence of these programs, to pretend that they are voluntary when they are in fact becoming mandatory over much of the world is simply wrong.

 

Al Gore is participating in a voluntary way in a mandatory program overseas, according to those press reports. In other words, he is taking an extra step to remove what C his family emits from the system. That is an important step...and in all honesty, you'd think it would be something the free-marketers would support...because if you strongly support the development of renewable energy, one big way to encourage renewable energy would be to buy up carbon credits, and thus pump up the demand for renewable energy overseas (Because there would be less room for carbon emission).

 

And one point I would like to make beyond that. The reality of Global warming is that it is a major problem, but it is not a major problem that is going to kill us tomorrow. The one nice thing is; if we take some steps now, we actually have time. Those of us who beleive it is a major problem that requires a major solution are also usually going to say that the solution doesn't require us to move back to the stone age. It doesn't require us to bulldoze all of America and plant trees, it doesn't require us to kill 5 billion people. What we need most right now is time. We need time for additional technologies to come on line for energy generation and carbon sequestration. Even if we bulldozed all of civilization and planted trees, it still would not be nearly enough to make up for what we have already released (although the drop in emissions would have a major impact). What we need to do is give ourselves more time.

 

We are not asking for people to give up their livelihoods. If you're a millionaire now, global climate change does not mean you can't be one tomorrow (unless your money is tied up in real estate in Florida). What we need to do right now is begin a process of slowing down the release of emissions and increasing the use of renewable energy (which is exactly what purchasing carbon credits do). If we do that, and combine it with a large scale effort on the part of both government and industry to find alternative sources of energy (which is also something strongly encouraged by a carbon trading system), then we can find ourselves the time we need to actually solve this problem.

 

No one, at least no reasonable person, is asking everyone to give up their livelihood, no matter what condition it may be in. That is not needed to solve this problem. All that is needed is the will to make a few small changes. That's it.

[Texsox]

Al Gore.

 

I'm done.

 

It's sad when great ideas get discredited or bad ideas get credited based on who says them. But I guess that is our society, get the best spokes models and you have a winner. Style over sustenance.

 

When I'm watchin' my tv

 

And that man comes on to tell me

 

How white my shirts can be.

 

Well he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke

 

The same cigarrettes as me.