The newest trend in Airline Fees...Al Gore dream come true!

[ex j-41]

Go start your car in your garage with the door closed. Wait 15 min and get out of your car. Now tell me that is a smart thing to do. Now start 154 million cars and see what that does to our enviroment. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how bad the gasses are. Get your head out of your ass and think big. The melting ice caps is an indication or symtom of what is to come. Bush wants you to buy gas, make his buddies rich, show me a texan that cares about the enviroment and i will show you a philly ramper that isn't lazy.

 

[Skyboy722]

Go start your car in your garage with the door closed. Wait 15 min and get out of your car. Now tell me that is a smart thing to do. Now start 154 million cars and see what that does to our enviroment. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how bad the gasses are. Get your head out of your ass and think big. The melting ice caps is an indication or symtom of what is to come. Bush wants you to buy gas, make his buddies rich, show me a texan that cares about the enviroment and i will show you a philly ramper that isn't lazy.

You said exactly what I was thinking. I won't go into "how bad" or conspiracy theories or politics or any thing else, but you have to agree, it ain't good. It CAN'T be. Otherwise, locking yourself in a running car in the garage wouldn't be suicide...

 

[dalegribble]

http://www.wecnmagazine.com/2007issues/may/may07.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek/

Warming yes, but don't be so arrogant as to assume you or I as humans can stop it. Gross polution is horrible, and should we do something to eliminate it, yes. Should we learn to conserve, yes. But most enviro types are going on emotion, feelings and NOT the facts.

 

[Skyboy722]

http://www.wecnmagazine.com/2007issues/may/may07.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17997788/site/newsweek/

Warming yes, but don't be so arrogant as to assume you or I as humans can stop it. Gross polution is horrible, and should we do something to eliminate it, yes. Should we learn to conserve, yes. But most enviro types are going on emotion, feelings and NOT the facts.

I ask you this: you agree that it is "horrible", and that we "should do something to eliminate it", and that we should "conserve". Why are we arguing about what everyone is "going on"? Who cares if they are going on "emotion, feelings," or "facts"? Isn't the end result the same? Isn't gross pollution still "horrible", shouldn't we still "do something to eliminate it", and shouldn't we still "learn to conserve"?

 

[HoursHore]

Who cares if they are going on "emotion, feelings," or "facts"? Isn't the end result the same?

This is pretty much why we are doomed as a species.

 

[fly4surf]

IT dosen't matter if you believe the global warming theory/fact.

Buying oil/ securing oil is bad for america.

We can save ourselves(USA) by spending our money on research to get everyone a vehicle/ house that uses less energy. Giving less money to the people in the world that hate us.

If not for the green-ness of the planet, how about taking the reason for the terrorists hating us out of their minds.
Because oil men won't make money on it. They want to run the world till it dies, along with them, on oil. Because a bank account with alot of zeros might just save their a$$ then. Someone tell them we could be the next Saudi Arabia in the technology/ solar field. If they wanted that. But They are busy stocking up on zeros. Letting China become the world leader in cheap solar technology.
The military industrial complex won't make money either. And they won't let that happen.
This place and it's people scare me. Buy your SUV. Be ignorant.
The world can't wait to see your fall.
A true American.

 

[Cobra]

What does Cheney have to do with Global Warming?

Open your mind and quit being a hand puppet.

OMG, reserve that last line for yourself Mr. willfully ignorant!

 

[jayme]

Warming yes, but don't be so arrogant as to assume you or I as humans can stop it.

"Arrogance" would be a good arguement if this were a philosophical debate, but it's not. It boils down to science. Pure numbers.

Since humans started burning oil, we have driven CO2 concentrations from ~280 PPM to ~380 PPM.

Humans contribute ~27 BILLION tons of CO2 each year.

Global temps have risen about 1 degree F since we started burning fossil fuels, most of that in the past 25 years. The rate of temp change is accelerating. The amount of CO2 we emit is increasing almost exponentially.

 

[jayme]

Enter the morons. I'm outta this thread.

Wow! Who would have thought a few facts would be so intimidating?

 

[Cobra]

Wow! Who would have thought a few facts would be so intimidating?

For some reason certain people can't deal with the fear factor on this topic. Fear greatly influences their opinions/judgement.

 

[AA717driver]

"Arrogance" would be a good arguement if this were a philosophical debate, but it's not. It boils down to science. Pure numbers.

Since humans started burning oil, we have driven CO2 concentrations from ~280 PPM to ~380 PPM.

Global temps have risen about 1 degree F since we started burning fossil fuels, most of that in the past 25 years. The rate of temp change is accelerating. The amount of CO2 we emit is increasing almost exponentially.

How do you know what the CO2 concentration was in 1890? Where were the samples taken and by whom? Just another example of "scientific proof" that sounds good but has no evidence to back it up.

Global temperature increases have occurred at varying intervals throughout the history of the world (that HAS been established by scientists).

No aspect of this GW/CC movement will do anything to get us off fossil fuels. In fact, it is being driven by politicians who are owned by "big oil". How the he!! can you follow Al Gore who made much of his money owning oil stocks? (And, one who clearly does not practice what he preaches.)

When Al divests his portfolio of all stocks related to the fossil fuel business, I'll start to believe. Until that time, it's just another power grab by elitists.TC

P.S.--I'll take them seriously when the IMF/World Bank stops funding the clear-cutting of the rain forrests.

 

[Lebowski]

When Al divests his portfolio of all stocks related to the fossil fuel business, I'll start to believe. Until that time, it's just another power grab by elitists.TC

P.S.--I'll take them seriously when the IMF/World Bank stops funding the clear-cutting of the rain forrests.

People keep insisting on bringing politics into this issue. Why do you care what Al Gore does? Does that change what is physically happening to our environment? Do you always look to Al Gore (or the IMF or whatever) before making your own judgments?

The science is clear. I think some people will never believe in global warming just because it was a cause that was championed by Al Gore. I don't get all the talk of leftist, socialist conspiracies. Maybe I don't watch enough Bill O'Reilly. I guess some people will believe things that are absolutely ridiculous (there's an "eco-industrial complex" that is replacing the military-industrial complex? give me a break) before they can admit that a democrat or "liberal" or whatever you want to call it, could be right about something that could be vitally important.

Have a good day.

 

[Cobra]

How do you know what the CO2 concentration was in 1890? Where were the samples taken and by whom? Just another example of "scientific proof" that sounds good but has no evidence to back it up.

Global temperature increases have occurred at varying intervals throughout the history of the world (that HAS been established by scientists).

No aspect of this GW/CC movement will do anything to get us off fossil fuels. In fact, it is being driven by politicians who are owned by "big oil". How the he!! can you follow Al Gore who made much of his money owning oil stocks? (And, one who clearly does not practice what he preaches.)

When Al divests his portfolio of all stocks related to the fossil fuel business, I'll start to believe. Until that time, it's just another power grab by elitists.TC

P.S.--I'll take them seriously when the IMF/World Bank stops funding the clear-cutting of the rain forrests.

1890? With tremendous accuracy atmospheric CO2 levels can easily be determined by ice core samples alone for that time period, that isn't even remotely a challenge for current technologies. You can determine the atmospheric makeup of a celestial body (if an atmosphere exists) by spectral analysis of light that was emitted hundreds of millions ago.

Just because politicians distort the facts, or the person delivering the facts is not your favorite politico doesn't change the fact of Global Warming. I wonder if Ann Coulter were the author of An Inconvient Truth you'd probably believe her I'm guessing? Another thing is that people get wrapped up around CO2 emissions cocerning global warming. That is just one vector when it comes to human activity influencing climate change. Massive deforestation, Crappy agricutural practices, crappy ranching techniques, population rise, urban sprawl, all these things influence the climate just to name a few more variables than CO2 emissions.

Ultimately, we collectively will decide our fate. We can either use our collective heads or we can continue to butt our heads together. Either way, the problem persists and how we eventually handle it I have no guess. History tells me that we will go the way of the dodo bird.

 

[jayme]

How do you know what the CO2 concentration was in 1890? Where were the samples taken and by whom? Just another example of "scientific proof" that sounds good but has no evidence to back it up.

Global temperature increases have occurred at varying intervals throughout the history of the world (that HAS been established by scientists).

Do you see the irony?

It is convenient for you to argue that my CO2 concentration numbers are unreliable.

It's also convenient for you to argue that average global temperatures are cyclical and completely out of our control.

Now here comes the ironic part: you believe that past CO2 concentrations could not possibly be measured accurately, but past average global temps are positively known.

You can't have it both ways.

Just because this stuff is too complicated for you to really understand, doesn't mean the professional scientists don't understand it either.

 

[jetflyer]

Did you know Al Gore thinks we're at Peak Oil NOW and that oil prices are going to continue to rise.

He said so on the "Larry King Live" show.

Here is a link to the discussion:
http://www.energybulletin.net/17142.html

Also you must LISTEN to Al Gore talk about how we're at peak oil in 2005 in a Q&A townhall meeting. It's only 3 1/2 minutes long:

Here is the link to the audio of Al Gore talking about peak oil: http://globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/747

He says in the interview above the oil price rises in 2005 to $54/barrel are just the beginning.

He says we've gone to war in the middle east for oil.

He says Global Warming and Peak Oil are very connected.

Is Al Gore worried about GW or really the coming energy crisis from Peak Oil?

The solution is the same for both........

Makes you wonder doesn't it!?

I think you GW worriers are worried about the wrong thing! Your job is OK if the Earth heats up. If peak oil is now, your job is in jeopardy NOW.

Jet