« previous   misc   next »

Let's call a spade a spade...


By CaptainShuddup   Follow   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 5:48am PST   375 views   6 comments
Watch (2)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (2)  

“Of course Al didn’t show up,” said one high placed Current staffer. “He has no credibility. He’s supposed to be the face of clean energy and just sold [the channel] to very big oil, the emir of Qatar! Current never even took big oil advertising—and Al Gore, that bulls---ter sells to the emir?”

There you go suckers, Mr. Inconvenient truth, sold out quicker than laundry day at a Naval base.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2013/01/08/current-tv-staffers-rip-al-gore-for-sale-to-al-jazeera/#ixzz2HQGpk54n

Comments 1-6 of 6     Last »

CMY   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 6:21am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 1

I do believe there were plenty of warning signs--- Like when it was exposed that his house uses something like twenty times the energy of a normal home.. or when he bought a second one (by the ocean)... or when they used CGI footage in his film... or his private jet use..

I'll be surprised if he ever turns up in public again, but hey, he managed to create a problem and profit from the solution. It's not his fault anyone actually fell for it.

curious2   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 6:35am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 2

CMY says

they used CGI footage in his film

I've always wondered about the chart in An Inconvenient Truth showing historical temperatures and CO2 levels. Critics have said he presented the sequence (and thus causation) backwards, i.e. he said temperature follows CO2 but the real sequence is CO2 follows temperature. (The causation for that would be, as oceans get warmer, they release CO2 faster than at lower temperatures.) I haven't looked into that aspect of the film carefully enough to know.

CMY   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 6:54am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 3

curious2 says

I haven't looked into that aspect of the film carefully enough to know.

To be honest, I've never seen the film, but this is an excellent site to find the answer to your question:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

curious2   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 7:44am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 4

CMY says

this is an excellent site to find the answer to your question:

Thanks - I found this about the long chart showing CO2 and temperature:

"This is the most egregious error in the movie... All technical studies of ice-cores show the same thing; CO2 increases follow temperature increases and CO2 decreases follow temperature decreases. In other words, ice-core data show that temperature changes drive CO2 changes to a very large extent. The actual amount of the lag varies from different studies but it is approximately 800 years. The reason for the lag is postulated to be the delayed release and absorption of CO2 from the oceans, the earth’s largest reservoir of carbon."

I also found a response here:

"This proves that rising CO2 was not the trigger that caused the initial warming at the end of these ice ages - but no climate scientist has ever made this claim."

In other words, the film made an erroneous claim that no climate scientist made. The Dimmock case included this among nine errors in the film, concluding, "Although there is general scientific agreement that there is a connection, the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts."

edvard2   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 7:47am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 5

Never understood why Conservatives are so hell-bent on ever considering that all of the crap we spew into the air just might.... just 'might' cause a problem someday and then go on to try and find any shred of proof that there really isn't any problem whatsoever so they can ( I guess) feel relieved?

CMY   Tue, 8 Jan 2013, 8:17am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 6

edvard2 says

Never understood why Conservatives are so hell-bent on ever considering that all of the crap we spew into the air just might....

I guess it's because when you take this thought process to it's logical conclusion the only acceptable answer is for each person on the planet to go home tonight and quietly hang themselves.

Capt Climate Change just sold out for 100M in oil money (in addition to the other tens of millions he's made via 'investments' over the years) and never really bothered to lead by example. Ever.

Don't you think that 'might' be a shred of proof that he wasn't really convinced of the crap he spewed?

CaptainShuddup is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net