An Inconvenient Truth

Had a thread on this a while back..........

http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=61064&posts=26&highlight=Inconvenient%20Truth&highlightmode=1#M620008

Never seen it and not going to do anything different.

Apperently the Gores are not either because Tipper drives around town in a muscle car (mustang) and Al drives his SUV everywhere.....

Thanks for the link to the previous discussion.  I found the responses interesting. I would have hoped that more would have been moved to action and not been so skeptical.  I feel all my life I have not been seeing the forest for the trees (please pardon the cliché.  I would hope more people would be inspired to make small differences in their lives that are not only helpful to the environment but also save them some money but reducung energy costs.

I plan to go carbon neutral by the end of 2007.  Anybody else up for the challenge?

Well you know it all has to start with the person.. I say practice what you preach and I doubt very seriously that the SS have special orders for Tipper to drive a 70's suped up Mustang. Global warming is pure bunk anyway...

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm

Maybe you should read the otherside and make your judgement.  That door swings both ways..

Oh and BTW... the fact that Gore flights all around the US in a plane that uses far more gas and emits more emmisions than a SUV ever could is pure bull and then he has the nerve to tell me "I need to drive something smaller"... He is a media ****. He is no worse than Micheal Moore.

Preface:  I consider myself a tweener.  I listen to NPR on the way into work and Sean Hannity on the way home.  I look for both sides to spin it and make my decision from that. 

Chris,
You really can't be serious about there not being any global warming.  Granted, you may disagree that humans are causing it and all that stuff, but how do YOU explain the glaciers melting and all that jazz?

That petition doesn't have any science behind it.  It talks about the Keyoto protocal and is a VERY blanket statement about Carbon Dioxide.  Do you really think that it holds water? 

I personally think that the earth is in a warming cycle, but we are accelrating it.  It just makes sense.  But then again, the earth tends to fix itself.  I think it will fix itselt sooner or later.  How many people that kills only time will tell.  Just my 2 cents on that.

Carbon Neutral:  That doesn't really make sense in regards to practice.  One would have to figure out how much energy their house is taking up, car fuel efficiency or bus efficiency if they are taking public transportation.  Power to purify tap water, etc.  It seems like it would be impossible to actually do.  Though, in theory, it's interesting.

No I do not believe in Global Warming and you just said it yourself that " we are going thru a warming period". Remember back in the 70's when scientist were calling for another ice age. Then they were talking about the ozone was depleating and  then scientist came back and and said no, the Ozone acts like a thermostat on a car and opens  and closes to let heat escape from the earth.

Dan look at all of the records in history for the hottest days in America, they are usually in the 1920's and 30's. They didnt keep good records before 1890's so who knows how hot is was before then.

So my question for you who do you say that SUV and idustrial companies are causing temps to rise when it was hotter in the early 20th century than it has been now. Weather men are calling for a cold winter this year than has been on record for a few years....

I'd like to address some of the issues/questions raised.

 1) What is going Carbon Neutral. You can visit the site www.davidsuzuki.org and he gives you all the links and explanation you would require but basically it means that if you can't bring you CO2 emissions to zero then you can offset the ones you do produce by purchasing CO2 credits.  Businesses and individuals can then lay claim to being carbon neutral.  There are some famous people in Canada, including some Olympic athletes that are promoting this.  The money you use to purchase these credits (and you can purchase them online just like a CD) is then used to support green energy sources such as windfarms and solar.  The purpose is to get enough will and enough money to get these projects going and make them viable.

2) Is global warming caused by human activity?  The facts are undeniable.  All scientists agree on this and that is why the Kyoto accord was created and ratfied by several contries (except the US of course).  You can't believe that governments would commit to such an agreement unless the facts were incredibly compelling.

I believe that if we make our own personal lifestyle changes then we can push our political representatives without feeling like a hypocrit and demand that they do the same. Gore alluded to the tobacco industry and I find the scenarios very similar.  People will deny, deny, deny until they're in the hospital dying of lung cancer. 

Yes, that's basically what I'm saying.  I think that the earth does go in cycles, but we just speed it up.  2000 yrs ago, there wasn't the ability for that much CO2 to go into the atmosphere.  I think (unscientifically) that the earth takes care of the over and under by heating and cooling. 

That's why I just thing that the periods are getting shorter and more intense.  The earth will always balance itself.

I'm sure at one time many governments "agreed" and committed to the "fact" that the Earth was flat also.

If you read the 2 articles I provided in the original thread on An Inconvenient Truth you should know that not all scientists agree on this.  If you mean that all scientists agree that the earth's average temperature has risen in the past 2 decades, then sure I'll buy that.  But if you sincerely believe that all scientists attribute the rise solely to human activity then, respectfully, I think you are wrong. 

How can any credible scientist explain the fact that the Earth has been warmer at least twice in the past 10,000 years (see link to article in the original thread).  But this time around it is due solely to human activity??  I think not.   The argument lies in what percentage of the current increase is potentially due to human activity. 

I saw something in the news the other day about polar bears being affected by receding ice levels.  Did you know that at this very moment the temperature at the pole is 4 standard deviations BELOW normal?  This points to the fact that this is not a straight line phenomenon as Gore might have you believe.

I haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth, but by coincidence while Christmas shopping last week when I was in the television section of the store they had the movie played on the bank of 20 televisions.  I listened to about 2 minutes of Gore and thought I was going to hurl. I'm a wildlife biologist, so I doubt there is anyone on the site that can claim they care more for the environment than I do.  I'm a conservationist, not a preservationist.

In the book Skeptical Environmentalist the author (a scientist) explains that the original intent of his book was to heighten awareness of the global warming issue.  As he examined the theories and models that predicted catastrophe he found they were plagued by poor data, untested assumptions, etc.  Instead, the book turned out to be one that criticized the global warming juggernaut.   The author put forth the idea that if the Earth temperature has been increased to some extent by humans the best response might not be to spend trillions and trillions of dollars trying to remove the tiny impact that humans might be having.  Instead, simply adapt to the changes that are occurring - in fact some of those changes are actually beneficial to humans.  Imagine, I could start to grow oranges up here in Wisconsin.

I predict that 30 years from now Gore will be made a laughing stock for shamelessly trying to push this agenda/cottage industry.  Maybe we'll have another cover of Time magazine in the year 2020 talk about the impeding ice age - just like the cover that appeared in the 1970s (also referenced in the article I put a link to in the original thread).  Geez my blood boils over this issue!!!!!!!!!!

I think it's funny that anyone on this board thinks they know more than the scientists who have examined the evidence. Have you examined the evidence? Didn't think so.

Next, let's all weigh in on the best way to do a heart transplant!

With a pocket knife, some chewing gum, and electrical tape.  Oh, and maybe a little caulk.

Duh. 

Well, since I refuse to put a single penny in Al's pocket I won't be buying the DVD.  Although, I did see on DishNetwork last night that it is on pay per view for $3.99.  I'm not sure I could hold my nose long enough to watch him though.  I don't need his movie to be able to read both sides of the argument.

I'm not a marine biologist (I think Joel ( TH3_FRB ) is) but if there has been a response by coral to increases in ocean temperatures in parts of the world, it would make perfect sense to me.  Ecoystems are not static.  Are you asking me to believe that humans have been solely responsible for the phenomenon you reference, or just saying you'd be interested in my take on it?

Not sure who is meant by "you", but so far I haven't seen any posts wherein anyone claims to know more than the scientists examining the issue.  And it is clear that the scientists that have been examining the evidence for rises in average temperature do not all agree on the causes or the percentage that can be attributed to humans.  I don't think anyone in the thread is trying to argue that the temps are not rising. 

Did everyone read the scientific articles I posted links to in the original thread in their entirety?  I won't say "DIDN"T THINK SO" because that would not be cool.

Here they are:

http://www.carolinajournal.com/print/print_issue.html?id=2592

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/hurricanes1.pdf

Two problems with Gore's movie...

1. too many graphs.  I was waiting for him to pull out something like below...

2. I think he's probably preaching to the choir.  People who side with him are likely to watch the movie, people on the other side of the fence are not, so I'm not sure what kind of real impact his movie would have, other than firing up the already-fired-up. 

(graph.gif)

Hey that is what I do... Just because I do have some peice of paper that says I am a scientist doesnt mean I couldnt be one.
I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night