Al Gore--environmental saboteur?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

In his bracingly acerbic blog, Walter Russell Mead takes on Al Gore. Mead, while disclaiming expert knowledge, believes that increasing carbon emissions may well produce global warming with possible negative effects for which the leaders of affluent societies should be on the alert and be prepaered to mitigate if possible. He also believes that the global warming alarmists’ project of getting the world’s nations to stringently reduce carbon emissions, at great economic cost, was in words I used in my Sunday Examiner column, a bridge too far—a goal that was always unrealistic and whose prominence prevented milder but more useful steps from being taken. And who is to blame? Let me quote:

"Frankly, I blame Al Gore. Unlike naive scientists who know little about life beyond the lab, or eco-activists whose concepts of the international political system come from writing direct-mail solicitations to true believers in rich countries, the former vice-president had decades of experience with high politics. It was his job to provide the leadership that could channel the energy and concern of this movement into an effective political program. Perhaps there’s a story we don’t know yet about how Mr. Gore labored quietly and in vain for many years to explain to his fellow global greens about the difficulties and intricacies of the political process. Perhaps he reminded them that it takes 67 votes in the US Senate to ratify a treaty, and that the ideas of the Kyoto Protocol were preemptively rejected 95-0–such a thorough beating that the Protocol itself was never even submitted to the Senate while he was in office. Perhaps he tried to explain to them that a global movement for a treaty was setting itself up for a colossal and comprehensive failure and begged them to take a more realistic course. Perhaps he urged them to be their own harshest critics and to make sure that any information and projections that came out the movement and institutions like the IPCC should be scrubbed cleaner than clean. Perhaps he begged them to make sure that the IPCC was staffed and led by competent, thoroughly vetted and full-time people whose tempered judgment could lead the institution through the inevitable storms it would face.

"That could have happened, but I don’t think it did. I think Al Gore failed the climate change movement and that his negligence and blindness has done it irreparable harm."

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/...l#ixzz0gIISNRmx

[Peikko 1,575]

Al Gore more than likely has done more harm than good in the climate change debate in America - whether that constitutes 'irreparable' harm to it is extremely debatable - his contribution is totally inflated by the ideological skeptics, he is simply not that important.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Al Gore more than likely has done more harm than good in the climate change debate in America - whether that constitutes 'irreparable' harm to it is extremely debatable - his contribution is totally inflated by the ideological skeptics, he is simply not that important.

htOWpkSgOkw

[Peikko 1,575]

I'm not really interested in that kind of ####### to be honest Bill.

The question is where are the skeptics coming from? A genuine desire to learn the truth, or simply rebutting something that is inconvenient to the life style that the person is committed to? Climate scientists are not invested in a life style.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I'm not really interested in that kind of ####### to be honest Bill.

The question is where are the skeptics coming from? A genuine desire to learn the truth, or simply rebutting something that is inconvenient to the life style that the person is committed to? Climate scientists are not invested in a life style.

It's not about you. Jeez!

[Peikko 1,575]

The clip you posted wasn't in response to something I said about Al Gore not being important?

Some guy going on about how everything Al Gore said has come true, blah blah blah, that's as unimportant as Al Gore.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The clip you posted wasn't in response to something I said about Al Gore not being important?

Some guy going on about how everything Al Gore said has come true, blah blah blah, that's as unimportant as Al Gore.

You don't think it's import that Algore has a following similar to David Koresh, Jim Jones, and that guy that cut everybody's nuts off before they committed suicide waiting for to the comet to take them to Jupiter?

[Peikko 1,575]

You don't think it's import that Algore has a following similar to David Koresh, Jim Jones, and that guy that cut everybody's nuts off before they committed suicide waiting for to the comet to take them to Jupiter?

Not really. That's another silly analogy to go along with the throw away comment that climate science is like a religion. It's not. Climate scientists are legitimate with legitimate goals which have nothing to do with preserving life styles or making profits by sabotaging legitimate business.

Al Gore himself may have his own personal agenda, he probably does, a lot of politicians do, particularly rich American ones, but that's just fluff, although of course, the ideological skeptics would have one believe that is the issue.

Edited February 22, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Not really. That's another silly analogy to go along with the throw away comment that climate science is like a religion. It's not. Climate scientists are legitimate with legitimate goals which have nothing to do with preserving life styles or making profits by sabotaging legitimate business.

Al Gore himself may have his own personal agenda, he probably does, a lot of politicians do, particularly rich American ones, but that's just fluff, although of course, the ideological skeptics would have one believe that is the issue.

So, you are not bothered that all reasonableness has been removed from the dialectic? We have let the wings drive the debate, rather than the quorum as a whole. Either it's all doom and gloom, or it's all made up. I don't see anyone looking at the actual data, that believes either case is true.

[Dan J 277]

He probably wasn't the best person to take on the issue. As an already polarized political figure, and ended up making the debate more polarized than it should have been.

Most of the opposition is not based on any science, or if it is, the scientific argument is pretty weak and or produced by unqualified or biased individuals. Its driven by an business to create enough doubt to derail any legislation that would shift the environmental costs of doing business onto the businesses themselves. Since science education in this country is poor and most people are incapable of seeing beyond their own circumstances, this sort of thing can persist.

[Peikko 1,575]

So, you are not bothered that all reasonableness has been removed from the dialectic? We have let the wings drive the debate, rather than the quorum as a whole. Either it's all doom and gloom, or it's all made up. I don't see anyone looking at the actual data, that believes either case is true.

I don't think that's what I said. However, there isn't much that is rosy coming out of the data currently as far as I am aware. Most are wondering when the tipping point will be crossed, not if it will be.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I don't think that's what I said. However, there isn't much that is rosy coming out of the data currently as far as I am aware. Most are wondering when the tipping point will be crossed, not if it will be.

You didn't notice that the "hockey stick" disappeared?

[Peikko 1,575]

I do understand the problem regarding business - if you are part of a global market, and you more or less believe in laissez faire economics in the short term, pollution legislation drives business to operate in more 'favourable' markets.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I would love to get into a debate over the theory of Global Warming and how manmade CO2 emissions are making a significant impact with Bill, but history tells me he hasn't got the cajones to do it.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I would love to get into a debate over the theory of Global Warming and how manmade CO2 emissions are making a significant impact with Bill, but history tells me he hasn't got the cajones to do it.

Just let me know which Wikipedia links you are going to post, so that I can "correct" those ahead of time.