Thread: Al Gore is an idiot

was that when the planet was still made from gas?

I'm not to familiar with astrophysical history

Originally Posted by skaterdude

I don't believe they've figured out what causes, and then reverses, the ice ages.

Originally Posted by lnvanry

c'mon...I know that with your last comment you have a sense of humor You just choose not to use it when its about Bush.

It does seem rather strange that this President has a nasty habit of letting remarks (even in a joking manner) like this get into the press, particularly when some of the biggest criticisms about his Administration is that the executive branch is trying to consolidate too much power. At the same time, he doesn't like to take any responsibility for anything when it does go wrong - and for some reason both Congress and this President can't quite figure out that their poll numbers are in the toilet because they won't take that responsibility.

Originally Posted by kbm8795

It does seem rather strange that this President has a nasty habit of letting remarks (even in a joking manner) like this get into the press, particularly when some of the biggest criticisms about his Administration is that the executive branch is trying to consolidate too much power. At the same time, he doesn't like to take any responsibility for anything when it does go wrong - and for some reason both Congress and this President can't quite figure out that their poll numbers are in the toilet because they won't take that responsibility.

I think Bush has a sense of humor and assumes that most people do. However, he is wrong - the extreme left couldn't care less about the context of the remark and only care about using it to bash the President.

What is odd to me is that Bush gives you enough reasons to criticize him, why do you need to misinterpret a joke?

Originally Posted by Pepper

I think Bush has a sense of humor and assumes that most people do. However, he is wrong - the extreme left couldn't care less about the context of the remark and only care about using it to bash the President.

What is odd to me is that Bush gives you enough reasons to criticize him, why do you need to misinterpret a joke?

I didn't misinterpret a joke - only one of the quotes listed his remark as a "joke" - the Business Week article only attributed it to "said." There is a difference, and it becomes amplified when those remarks are made with any repetition. Joking or not, the remarks appear more serious when his actions as President start a campaign to expand the power of the Executive Office, whether the excuse is being "at war" or that he just doesn't like the bills Congress passes and uses a signing statement as a disclaimer eliminating his office's responsibility to follow the law. That wouldn't be a Leftist position, by the way. . .we have a system of checks and balances in government so that we don't instill a dictatorship.

It has been pretty well established that Bush has the lowest IQ of all the presidents. This is subject to some debate but likely a fact. At present,he is the second worst president of all time..right behind Wilson.
In ten years that status will likey change as his disastrous policies become evident to his current supporters as well.

You come to a bodybuilding website and your first post is about politics.

I'm sure you'll be a worth addition...

Originally Posted by DOMS

You come to a bodybuilding website and your first post is about politics.

I'm sure you'll be a worth addition...

You are only saying that because you don't agree with me.

Reality has a liberal bias- Stephen Colbert

global warming oh shit everyone panic but dont panic if u have sars because u will be dead by then,,,oh and that goes for all the bird flu victoms too

Originally Posted by lnvanry

what was that planet that was made from gas?

Uranus

Originally Posted by JimR

You are only saying that because you don't agree with me.

Reality has a liberal bias- Stephen Colbert

They also say that reality sucks.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

Uranus

Originally Posted by lnvanry

AHHHH global warming...the sky is falling!


Even if global warming is due to human activity (which isn't even proven) there isn't a whole lot we can do about it at this point.

There's a ton we could do about it. But even if global warming isn't caused by humans, there's still the ability to clean the air by reducing emissions--which would be a worthwhile cause.

Originally Posted by DOMS

They also say that reality sucks.

Originally Posted by JimR

It has been pretty well established that Bush has the lowest IQ of all the presidents. This is subject to some debate but likely a fact. At present,he is the second worst president of all time..right behind Wilson.
In ten years that status will likey change as his disastrous policies become evident to his current supporters as well.

I think he's a solid notch above Andrew Johnson

Originally Posted by musclepump

There's a ton we could do about it. But even if global warming isn't caused by humans, there's still the ability to clean the air by reducing emissions--which would be a worthwhile cause.

like what....force third world countries to abide by our EPA laws?

Originally Posted by JimR

It has been pretty well established that Bush has the lowest IQ of all the presidents. This is subject to some debate but likely a fact. At present,he is the second worst president of all time..right behind Wilson.
In ten years that status will likey change as his disastrous policies become evident to his current supporters as well.

Care to quote some reputable and reliable sources for these claims? I mean.... something OTHER than your personal feelings?

Originally Posted by JimR

It has been pretty well established that Bush has the lowest IQ of all the presidents. This is subject to some debate but likely a fact. At present,he is the second worst president of all time..right behind Wilson.
In ten years that status will likey change as his disastrous policies become evident to his current supporters as well.

its subjective.....so how is it a fact?

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Care to quote some reputable and reliable sources for these claims? I mean.... something OTHER than your personal feelings?

Now you've gone and hurt his precious feelings...

Originally Posted by JimR

It has been pretty well established that Bush has the lowest IQ of all the presidents. This is subject to some debate but likely a fact. At present,he is the second worst president of all time..right behind Wilson.
In ten years that status will likey change as his disastrous policies become evident to his current supporters as well.

Best post on this thread

Originally Posted by DOMS

Now you've gone and hurt his precious feelings...

Will a kitten help?

Originally Posted by Witmaster

Will a kitten help?

Your dog thinks that you're a traitor.

Not really. She has a healthy respect for kittens. The last one we had nearly killed her when it got stuck in her throat

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Best post on this thread

That is not saying much!

Originally Posted by Pepper

That is not saying much!

This thread is ghey.............who started it?

Originally Posted by topolo

Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe
"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom Harris
Monday, June 12, 2006

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?

Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?

No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.

Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."

This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.

So we have a smaller fraction.

But it becomes smaller still. Among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not "predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."

We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.

Here is a small sample of the side of the debate we almost never hear:

Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"

Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and "hundreds of other studies" reveal: on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.

Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."

Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."

But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.

The Antarctica has survived warm and cold events over millions of years. A meltdown is simply not a realistic scenario in the foreseeable future.

Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."

Karlén explains that a paper published in 2003 by University of Alaska professor Igor Polyakov shows that, the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise. "For several published records it is a decrease for the last 50 years," says Karlén

Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. gives the details, "There has been some decrease in ice thickness in the Canadian Arctic over the past 30 years but no melt down. The Canadian Ice Service records show that from 1971-1981 there was average, to above average, ice thickness. From 1981-1982 there was a sharp decrease of 15% but there was a quick recovery to average, to slightly above average, values from 1983-1995. A sharp drop of 30% occurred again 1996-1998 and since then there has been a steady increase to reach near normal conditions since 2001."

Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."

Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."

Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

In April sixty of the world's leading experts in the field asked Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake - either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents - it seems like a reasonable request.

actually he didn't sound like too much of an idiot off of the men's health magazine ... june i think 2006....

I think he is great and prob. think he would have been a good president.