Today on Blogcritics
Home » Al Gore: Part of the Same Culture He Loathes

Al Gore: Part of the Same Culture He Loathes

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Recently, The Sun — hardly the most erudite or sophisticated of Britain's newspapers, I grant you — published a feature article entitled "Why is TV more keen on Paris Hilton than on saving the planet?" Actually, it's not so much an article as a write-up of an interview with none other than Al Gore.

"Al Gore is a man on a mission to save the planet — and is enraged that everyone else seems more interested in saving Paris Hilton," writes reporter Victoria Newton, who had a talk with the former Vice President.

Now, I'm a little tired of Gore's schtick. He is incapable of even trying to consider that there may be perfectly natural forces contributing to climate change, ones that mankind is powerless to act against. "He believes we have just ten years to begin saving the planet before it is too late," writes Newton. I wonder if Gore has considered a resolution to stop solar flares? Only ten years left, worth a shot! Let's all hope China and India will agree to that because they're certainly not about to reduce their carbon footprint anytime soon.

If Gore is really the environmentalist that he cracks himself up to be, why does he constantly harp on solely about global warming? Why does he never attack manufacturers and distributors alike over wasteful packaging? When was the last time you heard Gore even mention recycling? Why, if the environment is his biggest concern, does he never criticize unchecked mass immigration, encouraging more development and more energy usage such as it does? Can you, even in your wildest dreams, imagine Al Gore encouraging population control? Far too politically incorrect, better leave it off the agenda, even if that would prove to be the most environmentally friendly act of all.

Alas, global warming is scary stuff. And power-hungry people love to spook an electorate that cannot think for themselves.

But, you see, that is the very problem. No-one thinks about the big issues. Look at how the media treated the recent G8 conference in Germany as some rock-star event to make it palatable to the average Joe or Jane, because that's all these schmucks understand. Politics must be groovy or else people turn off and live vicariously through celebrities like Paris Hilton because their own lives are so vacuous and their heads so empty. Better to pretend that George Bush, Tony Blair, Vladimir Putin, Nicolas Sarkozy, et al are performers at Live 8 rather than world leaders discussing agendas as the G8.

Immigration bill? Who cares. Global warming? We'll talk about that later. War on Terror? We've got better things to think about. We just want to see Barry Bonds hit another home run, we want to listen to the latest Nelly Furtado album, we want to read about David and Victoria Beckham's adjustment to life in L.A., we want to watch Survivor, The Apprentice, Big Brother or whatever noxious reality-TV show floats our boat, we want to eat KFC and drink Pepsi and pretend that it's good for us (and subsequently blame our 300-pound butts on anyone but ourselves), we want to pray for poor little Britney Spears and most of all, we've got to rescue Paris Hilton from the indignity of jail. These are the things that matter most to your average person. Sad, but true.

So, Mr. Gore, I very much share your frustration with the fairy-tale priorities that the majority of people seem to have. You're well within your rights to be enraged over that. People daydream between the pages of OK! and People far too much and that is a big reason why the world may never change for the better. I don't blame you one bit for hating the reality of this thoughtless, sound bite-addicted, fast-food culture.

But please also realize that the doomsday scenario that you're peddling us might be a fairy tale too. You may very well find that you yourself have become part of this lazy "culture" who'll vote for the Greens if you say it's hip but are too busy stuffing their faces with "food" in polystyrene take-out containers to care what it all really means.

Powered by

About Nightdragon

  • Jeff

    Read Mr. Gore’s books before you criticize him so thoroughly. Many of your opinions only validate Mr. Gore’s central thesis that 30-second TV clips may not be the best way to “learn” of someone’s true opinions. Mr. Gore frequently reminds concerned citizens that change begins with them by encouraging everyone to recycle, conserve, and cut down on their consumption (of both energy and material goods). He often cites specific examples like using compact fluorescent light bulbs, employing a rain barrel, buying energy star appliances, cutting back on wasteful water usage, and using public transportation whenever possible. These are exactly the kind of small steps we need to accomplish before we, as a planet, take on global warming. For it will be impossible to salvage any vestige of our current climate if the wasteful, greedy, and selfish behavior on which you cling to continues to flourish, unchecked. You are certainly free to criticize Mr. Gore, but do so only when facts warrant the criticism.

  • Clavos

    “You are certainly free to criticize Mr. Gore, but do so only when facts warrant the criticism.”

    OK how’s this for justifiable criticism?

    Gore urges us all, as you said, to cut down on our energy consumption, but lives in a house that consumes as much energy as 20 average middle class houses.

    Yes, he buys “carbon offsets” to ameliorate the damage, but the whole carbon offset idea smacks of a shell game or Ponzi scheme. And, In Gore’s case, he’s buying his offsets from a company he owns!

    In the words of Dana Carvey’s Church Lady, “How conveeeenyunt!”

  • http://www.taureandevi.blogspot.com Danielle

    Stopping the Iraq war is hard. Facing the reality of our collective contribution to the state of our environment and our future is hard. Solving problems, inventing new technologies is hard. Creating the change we wish to see is hard.
    Should we just give up because it is HARD?
    Should we lie down and succumb to the ridiculous realty of the world because it is HARD?
    Should we sit back and say the world is going to hell in a handbasket and I’m saving my seat in the front because any other alternative is too HARD to even imagine let alone achieve?

  • sr

    How simple can this be. Albert Gore is a fucking loser and a nut case. He can take his book’s and shove it up Tipper Gore and Elizabeth Edward’s fat ass. That will stop that cancer. As for global warming keep the Hilldabeast from farting all day. Stinken bitch. MAY GOD BLESS YOUR DAY.

  • zingzing

    clavos, you know as well as everybody that gore’s house is also his office and there are upwards of 20 people working there. you yourself (i believe) have admitted that the big ol house is more bad p.r. than it is a real issue. the buying offsets from his own company has been discussed before. the money is funnelled into other pro-environment endevours.

    if you’re going to criticize gore, you ought to at least bring up points that haven’t been taken apart so easily several times before. it’s just too easy.

  • Dr Dreadful

    In a single succinct comment, sr demonstrates his masterly grasp of logic, politics, publishing, proctology, oncology, envirnonmental science and theology.

    But not punctuation or spelling, unfortunately.

    Way to go, monkey shooter. BTW, how are those suppositories working out for you?

  • sr

    I have invented a PBGF vehicle which should stop global warming.

  • sr

    Dear Doc, never sure If Im playing in our sandbox with you. Sounds like maybe your spending to much time playing in the cat litter box and snacking on to many Toosie Rolls. As for logic, politics, publishing, proctology, oncdogy, envirormental science, theology or dipshitology I dont have a clue nor do I give a dam Scarlett. Punctuation. That I know. Your a punk Doc. Did I get ir WR-G;ATE? In truth Doc your not a punk, just a liberal that makes this conservative laugh. Not at your views. I enjoy reading them. Even when you slam me you do a great job with your sense of humor. No hugs please. Yes I shoot fucking monkeys. Would love to go to Africa and shoot a bunch of those frecking baboons. Ever see the ass on those pricks. Great target. As for suppositories I still have a watermelon up my ass. Did you receive my 50lb pumpkin? Have a great day Doc and as Jet would say: NUKE THE UNBORN GAY BABOONS.

  • Clavos

    “you yourself (i believe) have admitted that the big ol house is more bad p.r. than it is a real issue.”

    Not what I said, zing. I said it was stupid pr, true, but did not say it was not a real issue. Office or no office, the place is using an inordinate amount of energy; far more than would be used by more modest digs plus an office in a business building.

    I also said I have no objection to anyone using all the energy they can afford to pay for, since I don’t believe there’s anything wrong with doing so.

    I DO object to that sanctimonious SOB preaching to all of us that we are using too much and must cut back while he uses as much as twenty families in just one of several houses.

    Carbon offsets save NO energy and keep no carbon out of the atmosphere; they just make big users like gore feel better about being energy hogs.

    Every phony “reason” the gore gang gives to excuse their energy use just emphasizes their hypocrisy.

    “Do as we say, not as we do.”

    I haven’t seen these points taken apart yet.

    meh.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Sigh.

    The Earth has been warming and cooling periodically since before the Industrial Revolution, or even before the earliest “humans” walked the Earth. We’ve had ice ages and warm periods and everything in between on this planet. In fact, the only thing about the global climate that remains the same is that it is constantly changing!

    There was a cooling period between the 1940s and the 1970s. During this time, environmentalists often spoke of nightmare scenarios in which human activity was going to cause another Ice Age and lead to a planetary disaster. But then the Earth began warming for a few decades…and now these same people are telling us it’s “the end of the world” and “we’re all going to die” from “global warming” unless we act, like, right fucking now!

    The theory of “global warming” is based upon the theory of “the greenhouse effect.” And the theory of “the greenhouse effect” is based upon the idea that increased amounts of certain gases in our atmosphere can cause more solar heat to be trapped at the surface, leading to higher temperatures.

    Now, there are many “greenhouse gases.” One of them is Carbon Dioxide, which we hear so much about. And Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere have been increasing, and this increase is probably largely due to human activity. But we don’t hear nearly as much about water vapor, which is about 50-100 times more abundant in the atmosphere as Carbon Dioxide. I mean, you could literally triple the level of CO2 in the atmosphere, and it would still be spit in the bucket compared to H2O and the other “greenhouse gases” that these people rarely bother to mention.

    So, human activity is most likely causing the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. But CO2 is only a very minor “greenhouse gas” in terms of atmospheric concentration. And anyway, remember that temperatures were DECREASING during the 1940s-1970s, despite the fact that human development was increasing exponentially, as was the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere!

    Another point: Al Gore’s Oscar-winning “documentary” about “global warming” cited ice-core samples from Antarctica as supporting evidence. These samples showed a correlation between CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere and temperature, over hundreds of thousands of years. Al Gore called this relationship “complicated,” and then moved on to other propaganda points. Let me try to explain this “complication” to you.

    Al Gore’s unexplained “complication” was that the increases in atmospheric CO2 followed the increases in temperature. In other words, in complete contradiction to the theory of “the greenhouse effect,” it appears from the data that temperature increases caused increases in CO2, and not the other way around!

    (Please repeat after me: Correlation does not mean causation…)

    In order for a theory to be considered valid, it must make logical sense, it must be backed up by hard data, and the presumed consequences must FOLLOW the presumed causes. According to the “complicated” data that Al Gore kinda-sorta cites in his award-winning “documentary,” this theory clearly fails the final test, if not the first and second.

    So, you ask, if it’s not “the greenhouse effect” that’s causing global temperatures to rise over the last few decades, than what is? I don;t know for sure, but I do have an idea.

    You see, there’s this little thing call The Sun. You know, that giant flaming ball in the sky with the constant nuclear fission reactions? The thing that rises in the East every morning and sets in the West every evening? That thing that causes our days to be warmer than our nights, and our summers to be warmer than our winters?

    Yeah, it seems that this thing has been sending more solar radiation to us over the last few decades than it had been in the recent past.

    In fact, Mars is experiencing “global warming,” as well. And so are several other planets and satellites that are within The Sun’s “sphere of influence,” so to speak.

    So, are we to conclude that Martians are driving SUVs? Or is The Sun the culprit? I’ll let you decide…

  • http://www.thechurchofanswers.com Heloise

    Actually Gore is repeating the first chapter of his book, a sentiment he probably got from Heloise about how people are more concerned about the famous or recognize them more often than one of the presidents.

    I pointed out that Gore is the greatest of hypocrites because he does not address a wealth of global situations that don’t fit the jet-set agenda.

    Not only is he part of the set but he is part of the Washington in-crowd! He is by way of high-political connections and in-law connections related to the Kennnedys by way of Jackie Kennedy.

    Her mother remarried a close relative of Gore Vidal who is related to Al Gore. Gore Vidal had a serious crush on JFK because he “has a cute butt” and his auto is full of JFK photos.

    Gore’s dad of course was a sentator. No dearth of politics for this guy. He was weaned in Washington :)

    That is why Bill Clinton, who famously shook JFK’s hand at the White House, chose Gore in the first place. He has Camelot dust on him. Get it? Oh boy.

    Heloise

  • Clavos

    Great comment (#10), RJ:

    Only point you make that I would question at all you refute yourself, without saying so.

    Sources I’ve read (Unstoppable Global Warming, by Singer & Avery, among others) confirm what you said about levels of CO2 historically following the initial rises in temperatures during the warming periods.

    Those same sources say that, (as you mentioned) since the rise in CO2 predates the Industrial Revolution, there is little reason to believe that the current levels of CO2 are attributable to anthropogenic sources to any meaningful degree.

    The most recent warming period, which was during the Middle Ages (the Medieval Warming), triggered a significant spurt in agricultural yields, thus helping to improve diets and longevity. Today’s theory postulates that the rise in temperatures will harm agriculture and reduce crop yields.

  • zingzing

    look. we don’t know whether or not the world is going down the shitter or not. it’s guess work either way. the world’s either going to heat up or it’s not, and if it’s our doing, it’s going to get nasty. what we do have is a choice of whether or not to do something.

    so, if we do something, and the world isn’t heating up because of us, well then we’ve probably run up a bit of a tab for nothing. we lose out on a shitload of money and there’s very likely some economic problems that arise. maybe even a worldwide depression. (of course, we could also find new industries and free ourselves of fossil fuels, which would be cool.)

    if we do nothing, however, and it really is our fault and the climate goes completely out of control… cities disappear, there’s worldwide famine and pandemic diseases, the political structures of the world fall to bits, THE VERY SAME ECONOMIC COLLAPSE (probably worse) occurs, and we’re left wringing our hands at our stupidty and hubris.

    so, we can take a chance, be wrong and pay the economic consequences; or we can sit on our hands and, if we are wrong, watch the world (as we know it) disappear.

    it’s our choice, and those of you that say “nothing to worry about!” may just be the reason that civilization falls to bits.

    i guess you have to ask yourself a couple of questions:

    1. is the probability of a worldwide economic depression scary enough that the possiblity of disease, famine, destruction, war AND economic depression sounds like a risk worth taking?

    2. how lucky do you feel?

  • sr

    SIMPLE LOGIC. SUN COMES UP AND ROOSTER CROWS. FARMERS WIFE HEADS TO HEN HOUSE, PICKS UP EGGS WHILE THE FARMER BLOWS THE HEAD OFF THE FRECKING ROOSTER WITH HIS SHOTGUN FOR WAKEING HIM UP AT 5AM. 9AM FARMER AND WIFE EAT FRIED CHICKEN WITH EGGS OVER EASY. JUST ANOTHER DAY ON THE FARM. MUST GO AND PICK THE CORN AND ONIONS.

  • Dr Dreadful

    OK, reality check, people. What’s more likely:

    1. That extensive industrial activity by humans and resultant emission of billions of tons of pollutants over the past 200 years has produced greenhouse gases and exacerbated global warming;

    2. That extensive industrial activity by humans and resultant emission of billions of tons of pollutants over the past 200 years has had absolutely no effect – none, whatsoever – on global climate trends?

    As a wise man once said, “Sigh.”

  • Clavos

    I’ll take answer #2, Doc, if you’ll allow me to change “no effect” to “no significant effect.”

    So far, there haven’t been any significant changes in global climate trends that haven’t been occurring for many millenia.

    As for the “projections:” The atmosphere and its workings are incredibly complex; even the scientists admit that, in order to construct their computer models, a LOT of assumptions had to be made and plugged into the models.

    I’m just not convinced; and the more dissenting scientists I read, the less convinced I become. I’ve done quite a lot of reading, and have been interested in, and studied, meteorology since I was a kid, which at my advanced age is almost back to the Medieval Warming.

    Too much reliance on “computer models” and not enough on historical data; too many government reps (from a number of governments, all with axes to grind) involved in the presentation of the conclusions; especially in the case of the IPCC Report/projections.

  • troll

    imo we need to view carbon as a crop to be harvested from the atmosphere rather than as a pollutant

  • Clavos

    troll,

    Interesting idea. The oceans already remove enormous amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere (and release it back, as well).

  • Dr Dreadful

    Clav,

    Indeed, it’s hard to say for sure to what degree human activity is affecting the atmosphere as opposed to natural climatic cycles, simply because we only have reliable meteorological records for the last 100-150 years or so (depending on where in the world you’re looking at).

    Of course there are views that dissent from the general scientific consensus, but in considering these you must be careful to remember that they are relying on the same limited data to reach their conclusions. In other words, you cannot be certain that human activity is not largely responsible for the climate changes we are witnessing.

    Also, I trust that you are not reading only dissenting viewpoints. Were that so, your opinions would naturally be colored.

    As for discounting the possibility that human activity is not having a significant effect: a rather reckless conclusion, if I may say so. The trillions of tons of crap that our industrial society has spewed out over the last couple of centuries is not inert. To draw a parallel: we would not be here discussing this if it were not for the profound effect living organisms had on the atmosphere billions of years ago, excreting the oxygen on which all modern animals depend.

  • moonraven

    More than anything else, I believe the tone and frivolity of the comments indicate that you folks are simply envious of Al Gore because after being the victim of what was for all purposes a COUP in 2000, instead of living in this victim story and therefore not making anyone uncomfortable, he chose NOT to live in victimland with you guys and instead, lives on the planet and addresses its problems.

    In short, he has a life and is trying to live it responsibily so you jokers nip at his heels like a pack of jackals in the Negev Desert.

    Get a life.

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    Dr Dreadful: I don’t deny that carbon emissions may likely have had some effect on climate change, and perhaps climate change is accelerating faster than it normally would be without them. But this is something that scientists seem baffled by. No-one can state with any authority that there aren’t other, natural forces, Earthly or solar in origin, that also aren’t contributing to climate change? Scientists seem divided between the natural reasons vs mankind did it! arguments. I don’t know who to trust. So I keep an open mind about this matter and support efforts to cut carbon emissions. I never said I was against such measures. But the earth will likely continue to warm up anyway despite our best efforts. And as for Al Gore, I cannot trust him for the exact same reason Heloise stated: If it’s an issue that doesn’t revolve around his jet-set lifestyle, then Gore conveniently ignores it. Flying around the world to preach the mantra of global warming doom-mongering. That’s our Al Gore!

  • moonraven

    You just made my point!

  • zingzing

    clavos feels very lucky. well, he’s an older man… does he have children? i dunno. still, he feels very, very lucky.

  • Clavos

    I think you looked at the wrong question #2 in my answer, zing.

    I was referring to DD’s comment #15.

  • zingzing

    i know you were. i wasn’t referring back to my comment which you very conveniently ignored.

    still, unless you want to pony up a considered response to my (i think) very logical conclusions, i think you’ve answered my question #2, which pretty much says you’re going to just hope for the best.

    best of luck! i hope you’re right!

  • Clavos

    OK zing, I understand what you’re looking for now.

    You ask:

    “1. is the probability of a worldwide economic depression scary enough that the possibility of disease, famine, destruction, war AND economic depression sounds like a risk worth taking?”

    First, as I’ve said in other comments, I believe the theories of the contrarians more than those of the “99.98%” of the world’s climatologists.

    As such, I don’t characterize my position as “hoping for the best,” because I’m confident that the “.02%” are right.

    Therefore, luck has nothing to do with it, IMO.

  • zingzing

    so you’re willing to risk the future of human civilization on the planet earth because of your BELIEF in the THEORIES of .02% of the earth’s climatologists?

    are you a christian?

    i mean shit… in choice #1, we have a possible economic depression (and a possible economic upsurge that frees us of middle eastern oil). in choice #2, we have the total collapse of civilization.

    and this just for right now… what do you think will happen far into the future if we continue down this path? that the earth will right itself? that our continued choking of our atmosphere won’t have some disastrous effect?

    besides what you consider “scaremongering,” would you support efforts to make our human activities “greener?” i see relatively few downsides.

  • zingzing

    “Therefore, luck has nothing to do with it, IMO.”

    that’s a real selfish attitude to take. and also totally false. YOU DON’T KNOW if your side is right. i don’t know if mine is either. but the risks of your side being wrong FAR OUTWAY the risks of my side being wrong.

    if you’re not totally evil, you are at least easily taken… possible gullible. that last one could be said of me as well, but i certainly don’t take humanity’s future lightly (or for granted).

  • Clavos

    “YOU DON’T KNOW if your side is right”

    That sounds like that old philosophical discussion college sophomores are wont to indulge in: “You can’t KNOW anything.”

    Taken to the nth meaning of the word “know,” you’re right.

    But, I AM convinced by the scientists I side with that they ARE right.

    If that’s “selfish,” then I guess I am (though I fail to see that).

    I don’t think I’m gullible, so in your view, I guess I’m “evil,” though I don’t think I am.

    In short I simply DON”T BELIEVE that humanity’s future is in the balance.

    “are you a christian?”

    No, I’m not religious.

    “besides what you consider “scaremongering,” would you support efforts to make our human activities “greener?””

    In principle, yes, but I would like us to consider each proposal to do so on a case-by-case basis, with a great deal more input from the public than is currently being considered.

    And I support unconditionally (well almost) efforts to wean US off imported oil; I would like nothing better than for US to quit buying oil from the likes of the House of Saud and Hugo Chavez.

  • zingzing

    “But, I AM convinced by the scientists I side with that they ARE right.”

    then you are easily taken. how can you be convinced? i’m not 100% convinced by the scientists who say we’re in trouble…

    i don’t think you’re convinced at all. i just think you’re hopeful. or something.

    “In short I simply DON”T BELIEVE that humanity’s future is in the balance.”

    well, ok then. but that’s a mighty big risk to take.

    there’s a lot of scientists who say that there is no connection between smoking and lung cancer as well. who knows? they might be right. but everyone knows that smoking isn’t good for you. the earth’s the same way. maybe there isn’t a connection between pollution and global warming. but pollution isn’t good for the earth either.

    now, i’m sure you’re all for cutting pollution. who wouldn’t be?

    and how is cutting pollution any different from what the “scaremongering” environmentalists want you to do?

  • Clavos

    “i don’t think you’re convinced at all. i just think you’re hopeful. or something.”

    zing you’re usually a reasonable debater; and I enjoy our discussions, but that remark is just flat-ass presumptuous and arrogant; you cannot possibly “know” what I do or do not think, particularly on the internet.

    I’m dumbfounded and disillusioned…

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    The most recent warming period, which was during the Middle Ages (the Medieval Warming), triggered a significant spurt in agricultural yields, thus helping to improve diets and longevity. Today’s theory postulates that the rise in temperatures will harm agriculture and reduce crop yields.

    Good point, Clavos.

    I encourage all you Gaia-worshipping “Gorons” to take a moment out of your busy day and actually look at a world map. You might notice that a vast portion of the Earth’s land is located in the Northern Hemisphere. And a lot of that land is in the extreme higher latitudes. (Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Scotland, Scandinavia, Russia, etc.)

    Currently, not a whole lot of agricultural activity can take place in these regions, due to the fact that it is really fucking cold up there for a large portion of the year. But if the Earth warms a few degrees, over many decades, this massive landmass could quite likely become the breadbasket of the world.

    And more habitable all around, too. You’ll note that places like Alaska, northern Canada, Greenland, Iceland, Siberia, etc. are rather sparsely populated. There’s a reason for that. It’s fucking cold! But if it wasn’t as cold, more people will be able to live there, thus perhaps helping to mitigate any future population pressures in an overcrowded world.

    Global warming? Bring it on!!!

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    I believe GreenPeace itself admitted that “natural” factors (like volcanoes and forest fires) contribute 30 times more CO2 to the atmosphere than human activity does.

    And CO2 is a relatively minor “greenhouse gas.”

    Oh. And Red China and India are exempt from Kyoto.

    – – –

    Greens are nothing but watermelons. They are “green” on the outside in an effort to appeal to the masses, but they are deep, dark Red on the inside. You’ll note that Green parties (which are international, much like the Comintern) have become much more popular ever since overt Communism fell out of vogue in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

    Greens quite simply seek to restrict and regulate the free market. They want to limit growth and restrain capitalism. That is their goal. And if these scaremongers have to lie and exaggerate and come up with “end-of-the-world” nonsense in order to win support, they will do so. Gleefully. Much like their ideological predecessors did…

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “To draw a parallel: we would not be here discussing this if it were not for the profound effect living organisms had on the atmosphere billions of years ago, excreting the oxygen on which all modern animals depend.”

    That change took literally hundreds of millions of years. And it happened naturally, without human intervention.

    Al Gore would have us believe that humans alone are capable of utterly devastating the planet in as little as ten years, simply by driving SUVs (while he travels on private jets), and living in houses with electricity (while just one of his mansions consumes the energy of 20 average homes).

    And just how many trees were cut down to print his shitty book?

  • STM

    Of course global warming is real, even if The Sun says it is. Normally, The Sun saying something is reall would be good cause to doubt it. Still …

    Doubters should come down this neck of the woods and see for themselves. This sun-baked continent is getting hotter and hotter, with bizarre patterns of weather causing all kinds of problems. The water temperature over winter for the past few years has been close to that of summer. We’ve even had to contend with a hole in the Earth’s ozone layer over the southern hemisphere for the past 20 or so years, which has given us the world’s highest incidence of skin cancer (fluorocarbons, but now diminishing).

    However, whether it all carbon-related is another matter. According to the CSIRO, Australia’s premier scientific research organisation, some of it probably is, but not all – and the doomsday scenario may not be that just yet.

    One day though, if we don’t pay attention, we might well and truly stuff it up for good.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Global warming is happening, and has been happening for a few decades. (And before that, global cooling was occurring for a few decades…)

    The questions are:

    Is human activity causing it? Y/N

    If yes, can humanity prevent it? Y/N

    If yes, just how many of us must live without air conditioning/live without cars/live without 24-7 access to the Internet/move back to the caves/die in miserable squalor in order to accomplish that?

    Meanwhile, Red China and India (or in other words, 2.5 billion people, or roughly 40% of the world’s population) are gonna ignore every single request/plea/demand from the “green” West, while they rapidly grow their economies on dirty coal and poisoned rivers/lakes.

  • Dr Dreadful

    Truth is, the atmosphere is such a complex, dynamic and poorly understood entity that there’s really no telling what it will do.

    For instance, rising ocean temperatures might fundamentally alter the flow of sea water, shutting off the North Atlantic current and thereby depriving Western Europe of its mild climate. Ports would be frozen shut in winter and huge fleets of icebreakers would be needed to keep imports and exports flowing.

    Even if we accept that our activities are causing warming, we don’t really know what effect, if any, remedial action on our part will have. We run the risk of bollixing things up even worse than they already are.

    Arrrgh.

  • http://nightdragon.diaryland.com Mark Edward Manning

    RJ: “Meanwhile, Red China and India (or in other words, 2.5 billion people, or roughly 40% of the world’s population) are gonna ignore every single request/plea/demand from the “green” West, while they rapidly grow their economies on dirty coal and poisoned rivers/lakes.”

    Exactly. We exempted them from Kyoto because there’s no way they’d have agreed to it. It’s simply much easier to brow-beat the U.S. instead, it’s the world’s favorite activity.

  • moonraven

    I don’t know if browbeating the US is the world’s favorite activity–but it SHOULD be.

  • zingzing

    “you cannot possibly “know” what I do or do not think, particularly on the internet.”

    you’re the one who brought up how it is that you can or cannot “know” something. ok, i “believe” that you are just hopeful. and i think it is “arrogant” (and dangerous) for you to put so much faith (i mean, look at what hangs in the balance) in scientists who claim that we can’t “know” that we are the ones doing this to the climate.

    augh. answer the rest of my comment. like that part about cutting pollution and saving the planet from man-made global warming being pretty much the same damn thing. if you want to put it down to wanting cleaner air, rather than saving the planet, that’s fine with me.

  • sr

    RJ. It’s hotter then dog crap every day as you know in The Sunshine State. I remember and old Buddy Holly song called Moonbeam. For some unknown reason a comment on this thread brought that to my attention. In a few hours I will be outside watching the bat’s fly by.

  • sr

    Doc. Due to the fact I have A Phd in atmospheric science your logic is not logical. Of course the atmosphere is complexed. Should you consider the Alantic with the Pacific. Maybe. The reason’s are many. A great example would be the case of Michael Jackson compaired with Paris Hilton. It is a very simple solution. I started drinking wine at 9am. Im just playing in the cat litter box eating toosie rolls. No I dont have a Phd. Im just a fucking drunk. Have a great weekend Doc and try to stay away from the atmosphere.

  • sr

    Mr Sing. Feel free to drop by my place tonight. It should be A great night for bat viewing and watching the moon.

  • Dr Dreadful

    sr. I don’t know about you viewing bats. You are bats. It sounds kind of narcissistic.

  • sr

    Doc. THANK YOU SIR. MY WIFE ALSO THINKS IM BATTY. I MADE MILLIONS SELLING BATTY FINGER PUPPETS. NOW IM RETIRED AND MAKE BATTY DRINK’S FOR MYSELF AND EATING FRESH OYSTERS AND TOOSIE ROLLS OUT OF THE LITTER BOX.

  • moonraven

    Amazing the high quality of debate on this jerkoff site.

  • Clavos

    “Amazing the high quality of debate on this jerkoff site.”

    Particularly your comments, mr…

  • moonraven

    Keep on jerkin’, clav

  • Dr Dreadful

    Moonraven:

    I don’t think I’ve ever commented directly to you on BC, mainly because you seem to operate on such a different wavelength to everyone else (me included) that I don’t think it would be fruitful.

    From some of the information you’ve shared on the site, I’ll infer (if I may) that you must be at the very least in your mid-fifties. One would expect a level of maturity in your debating skills. Yet you respond to dissent like a 17-year-old who opted out of forensics. I disagree with a lot of what Dave and Clavos say as well. But they are decent gents who don’t deserve the mixture of adolescent insults and thinly-veiled threats you habitually throw at them.

    This has probably all been said to you before, and will probably have much the same effect. Like I said, it’s hard to find your station on the dial. If you don’t like the standard of debate on BC, then what are you doing here? This is just me, MR, but if I came across a site inhabited by a bunch of “jerkoffs”, I wouldn’t keep coming back for more…

  • Clavos

    The very reason I’ve stuck with BC for more than a year now is the opportunity to discuss with reasonable people from all over the world who hold differing points of view.

    There are a number of sites on the web in which the participants mostly hold views similar (and in some cases, VERY similar) to mine. For the most part, after an initial browse, I quickly find them boring.

    The same thing happens when I stand in front of my bathroom mirror and talk to myself…

  • Dr Dreadful

    Exactly, Clavos. And I don’t think it’s any coincidence that the folks who stick with BC are, for the most part, pretty decent sorts. The assholes quickly get bored and move on.

    What’s great about BC (especially the Politics section) is that your intellect is continually challenged just by posting a comment – even if you’re not actually a contributor (which, BTW, is something I’m considering). You have to be prepared to defend your opinion because, in most cases, someone will come back at you with a well-reasoned dissent – and you won’t necessarily have a whole bunch of like-minded people backing up your position.

    I disagree with you about the bathroom mirror, though. I’m pretty scintillating company. 😉

  • Clavos

    “I’m pretty scintillating company.”

    Hmm. You DO have a cool sense of humor, though.

    As you said to mr, Doc, we don’t always agree…:>)

  • Dr Dreadful

    we don’t always agree…:>)

    Yes we do! (No we don’t) Yes we do…

    Reminds me of that Monty Python skit where a bloke pays to have an argument and instead gets a guy who just contradicts everything he says.

    Speaking of people getting bored and moving on, we don’t seem to have heard from MBD recently. He disappeared at about the same time as that troll who got banned for impersonating everyone and making personal attacks. I wonder if it was him?

  • Zedd

    Clavos, DD,

    I think MR is hilarious!!

    I think she objects in her own way. Her initial post is typically quite poignant and speaks to the issue at hand. Its only when she is challenged especially by you Clav that she flies off (which I love because she is absolutely unequivocally talented at being absolutely rude). Its rare to encounter a female who is so comfortable at being directly insulting without being emotional. She has massive balls and is funny.

    I get embarrassed easily and some of her comments make me blush but for some reason, I end up laughing out loud.

    I think she is clever and unique and a great addition to this mix of individuals that we get to converse with.

    I’ll take her any day to RJ and sr.

    Besides I think you have a secret crush on her Clav. You got sort of weird when she disappeared. Now you are back with your zingers and I’m enjoying the entire thing.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Dr. D., I do hope you’ll get motivated and contribute. The Politics section has been a bit slow lately, and I can’t make up the deficit myself, and with less activity every Mike Green article gets more attention, thereby bringing armageddon a little bit closer.

    Dave

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “I started drinking wine at 9am. Im just playing in the cat litter box eating toosie rolls. No I dont have a Phd. Im just a fucking drunk. Have a great weekend Doc and try to stay away from the atmosphere.”

    I love you, sr.

    (In a purely platonic way, I promise…) :-/

  • moonraven

    I have made it clear in the past why I pass through this site. I believe in being as rude as possible to rightwing extremists. Especially since rightwing extremists are paid to post obnoxious racist comments on the progressive sites where I post REAL commentary.

    It’s tit for tat–and mine are big.

  • Clavos

    “It’s tit for tat–and mine are big.”

    You’re 62 years old – who cares???

  • moonraven

    You, apparently, of sex-starved one.

  • moonraven

    OOOOH sorry for the typo: OH sex-starved one.

  • Clavos

    The bigger they are, the further they fall; especially at 62.

    No thanks; the image alone is a turnoff.

  • moonraven

    Some folks–especially those who are not trailer trash and who have spent a lot of time teaching and practising dance–have tits that have NOT fallen at 62.

    Why not harrass Soophia Loren for awhile–she’s in her 70s, I believe.

    Good luck, sucker.

  • Clavos

    Yeah, sure. And I’ve got some great waterfront land in the ‘glades to sell you.

    In any case wench, you’re at least 15 years older than anyone I’m interested in.

    As to La Loren:

    She might object to being addressed as Soophia, don’t you think?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    I have made it clear in the past why I pass through this site. I believe in being as rude as possible to rightwing extremists. Especially since rightwing extremists are paid to post obnoxious racist comments on the progressive sites where I post REAL commentary.

    It’s tit for tat–and mine are big.

    Mr. Christopher Rose:

    What we have here is a clear admission from the poster that his/her entire purpose in coming to BlogCritics and posting comments here is to insult other posters, which is in direct violation of the Official BlogCritics Comments Policy.

    You have a monopoly on the Ban Hammer. You own it. Now, use it.

    Can I get an amen?

  • Clavos

    …Or better yet Chris, a “Moonraven Exception,” wherein she becomes fair game to receive as much (and as raw) as she dishes out?

    Think of the entertainment value!

    What fun!!

  • troll

    here we go again with the banning bullshit…fascistas

    if you don’t appreciate her pov and brilliant commentary then think of her as a charity case like sr

  • moonraven

    Ban me, you imbeciles!

    But remember, that leaves you beating off to Nalle’s posts–not to the image of 40DDs.

  • troll

    earth mother – !

  • moonraven

    If I am the earth mother, I have to say that your heedless species has beaten my baby to a bloody pulp.

  • troll

    take heart…2012 is just around the corner

  • moonraven

    I DO take heart in that.

    Perhaps I will even do what one of the professors who worked for me at UMAR Puerto Angel did–he painted the glyph for the 13th baktun on his front gate….

  • Clavos

    Aahh, what a good psychiatrist could get out of mr’s comments…

    Example:

    “…one of the professors who worked for me…”

    People who are not insecure and are confident of their own worth would have written:

    “…one of my colleagues…”

    But mr is always compelled to brag to us about her “accomplishments.” Her need for self-aggrandizement is obvious in most of her comments.

    Pathetic.

  • moonraven

    No one could be more secure of my own worth.

    That’s why I couldn’t care less about your disgusting little life.

  • http://theugliestamerican.blogspot.com Andy Marsh

    All I know is that 20 or so years ago it was global cooling…now it’s global warming…what’s next?

  • moonraven

    Oh, just let it come as a surprise….

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    “No one could be more secure of my own worth.

    That’s why I couldn’t care less about your disgusting little life.”

    Now that’s a compelling argument. How could i be so mistaken about you?

  • Dr Dreadful

    Clavos – Moonraven – Rosey.

    The Three Stooges ride again! And this time… they’re throwing poop!!!

  • http://www.robot-of-the-week.com Christopher Rose

    Doc D: What’s Iggy’s band got to do with this? 😉

  • Clavos

    Dr. D,

    Careful stowing those thrones…

  • Dr Dreadful

    Oh, shut up and hand me the bucket of poop! :-)

  • sr

    Dr. Moonraven. Frankly my dear your tit’s look straight up to me as well as your butt. So gentlemen please try to be more respectful of this mature lady. IM IN LOVE WITH YOU, YOU SWEET LITTLE BATBITCH.

    sr
    Doctor of Dipstickolgy.

  • moonraven

    Chris,

    You are wrong about everything else. Why would you not be wrong about me.

    Actually, you are just irrelevant–like farts in a hurricane.

  • sr

    Moonraven, my wife is on a business trip for several days. See you at midnight my love.

  • MCH

    “What we have here is a clear admission from the poster that his/her entire purpose in coming to BlogCritics and posting comments here is to insult other posters, which is in direct violation of the Official BlogCritics Comments Policy. You have a monopoly on the Ban Hammer. You own it. Now, use it.”
    – RJ

    Methinks thou doth whine too much.

  • sr

    MCH. Cant agree more. I have the latest in PC’s. If you blow on the screen and have used drugs it will block you from your keyboard. It’s called PC Smellavision. For example if your siting on the toilet with your laptop it detects various odors. It’s just a matter of time and you will have the ability to smell farts on your PC. Pretty cool dont you think.

  • moonraven

    We apparently ALL have that new smellavision option.

    The computer in this Internet cafe was made by dinosaurs but this site really stinks….

  • sr

    Since this is Valentine’s day I bought you a box of fine chocolate’s Moonraven my love. I ate them all myself. Sorry my dear. Since you have smellavision and chocolate makes me fart I send you this kiss.

  • Dr Dreadful

    #87 — June 30, 2007 @ 17:22PM — sr

    Since this is Valentine’s day

    Clearly, Essie, you purchased your 2007 calendar from Sleazy Harry’s Calendars in the local mall. If you have kept your receipt and look closely at it you will see that it reads, in small print at the bottom, “See you in 2005, sucker!”

    Unfortunately if you try to return your defective calendar you will find that Sleazy Harry is long gone from the mall. However, we at the Federal Chronology Administration have definite intelligence placing him in Tulsa on May 32nd, and we are confident that he is still at this location. My colleagues from the Tulsa FCA bureau will be raiding the motel where he is staying tonight, and if successful you will receive your refund on Monday morning.

    Hope they were nice chocolates, by the way.

  • Clavos

    Oy, Doc.

    Sometimes, I glean, thou dost have too much time on thy hands,

    But soft! Yon comment on a distant thread beckons…

    LOL, BTW.

  • sr

    SR AS LEFT THE BUILDING. SEE YA.

  • Clavos

    And Al Gore III, 24 year old son of Al Gore bestows another “Inconvenient Truth” on his father.

    Busted yesterday, the youngster attracted police attention while driving his Prius at 100 MPH on the San Diego Freeway.

    Who knew that a Prius could even achieve 100MPH? Wonder if the lesser Gore souped it up?

    What kind of MPG does a Prius yield at 100 MPH?

    When police pulled Gore III over, they smelled the distinctive odor of marijuana in the car. A search of the Gore Prius came up with prescription drugs (for which, police say, Gore III had no prescriptions), including Xanax and Vicodin.

    Mr. Vice President, you should thrash that young ‘un to within an inch of his life.

  • KD

    Rather ironic that he is the first of the Gores to hit the slammer on a minor crime by comparison. Those who know about Armand Hammer and the connection with the Russia Mafia in recent times would understand.