NY Times plans Tuesday hit on Gore, Newsroom sources tell Drudge.

Drudge-NY Times ^ | 3-12-07 | Drudge

[Names Ash Housewares]

NY TIMES PLANS TUESDAY HIT ON GORE, NEWSROOM SOURCES TELL DRUDGE: 'Scientists argue that Gore's warnings are full of exaggerated claims and startling errors'... Developing..

From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype

"Hollywood has a thing for Al Gore and his three-alarm film on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth,” which won an Academy Award for best documentary. So do many environmentalists, who praise him as a visionary, and many scientists, who laud him for raising public awareness of climate change.

But part of his scientific audience is uneasy. In talks, articles and blog entries that have appeared since his film and accompanying book came out last year, these scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore’s central points are exaggerated and erroneous. They are alarmed, some say, at what they call his alarmism.

“I don’t want to pick on Al Gore,” Don J. Easterbrook, an emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, told hundreds of experts at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America. “But there are a lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data.”.."

[gondramB]

>>Exactly how much responsiblity does mankind deserve for a trend that started before we existed? As I see it, that is the crux of the problem between environazis who want cars to be illegal and the intestinal tracts of cows taxeed and regulated like Al, and most of the rest of us.<<

My point was that rising oceans are a problem no matter what the cause. They are not a short term catastrophe that mandates caving into Al Gore but they would be a problem even if he had never been born.

IMHO we need to do 5 things

1. Concede that global warming is real
2. Concede that global warming/rising sea level is a real problem
3. Make the public aware of the slow nature of the problem to hold off stupid/radical solutions
4. Put the focus back on seeking proof of what is causing it
5. Electing officials, particularly a President, who understand #1 - #4

[ElkGroveDan]

Is Smith a Gore fan or a global warning fan?

global warming

[ElkGroveDan]

IMHO we need to do 5 things 1. Concede that global warming is real 2. Concede that global warming/rising sea level is a real problem 3. Make the public aware of the slow nature of the problem to hold off stupid/radical solutions 4. Put the focus back on seeking proof of what is causing it 5. Electing officials, particularly a President, who understand #1 - #4

What if it's NOT real?

[presently no screen name]

I find nothing in Jesus' words to indicate we should try to learn all we can about the world.

Exactly - because it's not there.

the people of biblical times could have comprehended how long 5 billion years in the future is

No, because it wasn't their focus.

[gondramB]

>>What if it's NOT real?<<

All major scientific groups and government agencies agree that global warming and sea level rise are real. Since this is measured so many different ways by so many different groups and they all agree that point is settled.

We have everything from cliffs marked with historical sea level to buoys to satellite measurements. These include many measurements taken long before they was any political pressure. It was actually the Reagan administration that set up the NSIDC to study glacier melting and sea level rise in 1982.

But, to answer your question, if we can focus effort at looking at the cause of global warming and sea level rise we would also be on a good path to find any errors in the measurement of warming and ocean rise.

[Ditter]

True, I also have doubts about gore's intelligence. I remember watching gore and clinton before they took office, I think, being interviewed. Maybe they were on the trip to Washington DC. Anyhow, they were at some historic place, maybe Monticello, where there were bust of the founding fathers. Gore pointed to one of them and asked who it was. It was Thomas Jefferson, and the look on clinton's face was priceless. clinton looked like he could not believe the stupidity of gore, who was raised in Washington DC. I am sure that film has been destroyed by now but it was very telling.

[ElkGroveDan]

All major scientific groups and government agencies agree

When you start sounding like Al Gore, you lose me.

The above statement is not scientific proof of anything, nor is it a valid argument in a logic discourse.

"All major scientific groups and government agencies" once agreed that the Earth was flat.

[gondramB]

>>I find nothing in Jesus' words to indicate we should try to learn all we can about the world.<<

Sorry about that.... That was a typo and should have read

"I find nothing in Jesus' words to indicate we should not try to learn all we can about the world."

To take the position that God does not want us to explore and learn would limit us to the technology of the time of the Bible. We would need to get rid of everything from cars to guns to modern medicine and space travel and everything else that comes from this exploration.

Surely you are not suggesting that?

[gondramB]

>>All major scientific groups and government agencies agree

---

When you start sounding like Al Gore, you lose me.

The above statement is not scientific proof of anything, nor is it a valid argument in a logic discourse.

"All major scientific groups and government agencies" once agreed that the Earth was flat.<<

If you reject all scientific conclusion then we are probably going to be lost to each other on this issue.

Since neither of us has satellites or can go around the world and look at all the cliffs and buoys the decision to reject all findings by others would mean we can never draw any conclusion about anything that isn't in our particular study. I can't consider a position like that as one I can rationally accept.

BTW, seagoing communities like the Greeks and Phoenicians recognized the earth was curved because of the way the top of the mast appeared first as a ship approached.

[Grampa Dave]

Does an ex-politician like Al Gore, as he flies around the world doing his PowerPoint show, collecting his Oscar for An Inconvenient Truth, lapping up praise from an uncritical media and kidding about whether he'll run for president, strike you as someone who truly believes we're facing Armageddon?

"People like Al Gore jet about the earth, living from mansion to mansion and say that they want to drastically lower the living standards for most people on the earth. Then, the so called peoples's people, who talk about "eqality" the most, think this is just fine."

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5780/fatcatzb9.jpg">

Carbon Offsets: Al Gore's Big Easy
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY ^ | 3/6/07

Posted on 03/06/2007 8:20:32 PM PST by Winged Hussar

Gore's carbon footprint may be the size of Godzilla's, but he eases his conscience with "carbon offsets." He buys them from himself. And every time someone else buys them, Big Al gets richer.

...Speaking of carbon offsets and shell games, guess where Gore buys his carbon offsets? Well, he buys them from a firm call Generation Investment Management LLP, a tax-exempt U.S. 501(c)3 corporation. The chairman and co-founder is Al Gore. In other words, he buys his carbon offsets from himself. Others who buy these offset are really buying stock in Gore's growing business. You, too, can green up his portfolio, if not Earth itself.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

[Zon]

3. Make the public aware of the slow nature of the problem to hold off stupid/radical solutions

stupid/radical solutions scare mongering. Apparently you've bought into the global warming, supposed, problem. There isn't a problem yet your inclination is to think there are solutions. Which presupposes you think global warming is a problem.

the slow nature of the problem

So slow that by the time man figures out what to do about global warming that they find out that the slow moving cycle is headed to an ice age. Perhaps man's technology advances are and have been thwarting greater global warming.

--

See graphs at post 178.

[gondramB]

For an interesting comparison, consider George Bush's ranch. Treehugger.com, not exactly a fan of the administration, ran this photo and description.


>>Evidently his Crawford Winter White House has 25,000 gallons of rainwater storage, gray water collection from sinks and showers for irrigation, passive solar, geothermal heating and cooling. “By marketplace standards, the house is startlingly small,” says David Heymann, the architect of the 4,000-square-foot home. “Clients of similar ilk are building 16-to-20,000-square-foot houses.” Furthermore for thermal mass the walls are clad in "discards of a local stone called Leuders limestone, which is quarried in the area.<<
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/02/is_george_bush.php

[Zon]

BTW, seagoing communities like the Greeks and Phoenicians recognized the earth was curved because of the way the top of the mast appeared first as a ship approached.

The early sailors also knew the Earth revolved around the Sun -- that Earth is not the center of the Universe -- because they used the stars to navigate. Despite that early knowledge, the scientific revolution would have to wait 1,700 years to pull civilization out of the Dark Ages.

[wouldntbprudent]

Exactly.

And it becomes more and more obvious that Al Gore may indeed ride in at the 11th hour and swoop the nomination away from the Witch--to great cheers from the moonbat base and Hollywierd---or that he may deign to run as the "experienced partner" in the VP slot of an Obama ticket.

None of that works for the NYT. First, it leaves them, alas and again, NOT in control. Secondly, they have a vested interest in the candidacy of MRS BILL CLINTON and her Strap-hanger. Third, they are feminazi central and the irrational desire for a "woman" prez trumps even the good sense that Algore would be a more formidable candidate than the Witch.

[LexBaird]

Holy Moonbats! Hell just froze over.

Aha!! Climate change!

[gondramB]

>>stupid/radical solutions scare mongering. Apparently you've bought into the global warming, supposed, problem. There isn't a problem yet your inclination is to think there are solutions. Which presupposes you think global warming is a problem.<<


Denying the problem with rising oceans and glacier melting. Isn't helpful. In 1982 the Reagan administration set up the NSIDC with contributions from various federal agencies, notably NASA and the NOAA. But reputable estimates of the expected rise are no more than 2-3 feet per century.

Likewise, desertification is a known function of increased evaporation from the temperature rise as are movements in the the citrus line etc.

If we just say these things are not real, we just get dismissed as not being in touch with reality. There is no way to combat Al Gore from that position.

[wouldntbprudent]

It's quite a sight, isn't it?

[wouldntbprudent]

He hasn't hinted, but there are many who see him as the savior of the Rat party. Moreover, he is the ONLY Rat out there who has consistently been giving the moonbats and Hollywierd orgasmatics over the last year.

And now that he's more adipose, he's less, well, wooden.

[ElkGroveDan]

If you reject all scientific conclusion

I do not. In another life I was a scientist/engineer. I do however reject what is known in logic as "appeal to authority." If you are aware of a compelling study and have been swayed by it's facts and conclusions, then cite it so that others may agree or disagree with the facts and conclusions at hand. Using a superlative like "all scientists believe" is not proof of anything nor is it a valid argument.

Since neither of us has satellites or can go around the world and look at all the

You are confusing data and hypothesis (conclusions). You are correct that you and I do not have the resources to acquire global data. That data is available, especially in the published research of others. It is the conclusions that I (and many more qualified climatologists) reject, especially the group conclusions of societies and conglomerations of so-called scientists where a "vote" was taken. By definition Such conclusions are merely political.

[presently no screen name]

No typo. Your first statement was correct.

Your taking one thing and mixing it with other with your question. . Surely you are not suggesting that?...
God does not want us to explore and learn would limit us to the technology of the time of the Bible.

Have no idea why you felt it necessary to jump to inventions as proof to your 'end of the world'? You were speaking about God's creation and how man 'thinks' it will end and how. And God says, otherwise.

As for inventions, they will be used to fulfill prophesy - i.e., satellite's, TV - where everyone will see the 'two witnesses' in Jerusalem and the return of the Lord where every knee will bow.

Fifty years ago, we could not understand how that prophesy would be fulfilled. Now we do. As scripture states - in the end times, knowledge shall be increased. End times does not mean the end of the world but the end of the 'age of grace'. Our spirit never dies - it lives somewhere for eternity.