Author Topic: GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY  (Read 1101 times)

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« on: June 03, 2006, 04:42:53 AM »
GORE'S HOT AIR
FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
By KYLE SMITH
AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
http://www.nypost.com/movies/66485.htm

AL GORE'S global-warming documentary, "An Incon venient Truth," is sure to get an Oscar nomination for Best Documentary, but Gore should campaign for Best Actor, too.

Avoiding the usual vein-popping diatribes, he comes across as learned, calm and folksy. But much of what Gore says in this slide show he gives to people whose minds are not yet fully formed (undergraduates, actors) is absurd, and his assertions often contradict each other.

He implies that no reputable scientists dispute anything he says - basically, that the ice caps are melting and people on the 50th floor of the Empire State Building had better learn to swim. But there is wide disagreement about whether humans are causing global warming (climate change preceded the invention of the Escalade) and about whether we should be worried about the trends. Look carefully at Gore's charts and you'll see that the worst horrors take place in the future of his imagination.

His implication that he is our only hope - every ticket bought for this movie amounts to a soft-money contribution to his 2008 campaign - is ridiculous. He and his friends were in charge for eight years. His charts say global warming got worse in that time. The environment doesn't seem to care whether the president is a Texas oilman or the Man from Hope.

Global warming hasn't noticed that we got the lead out of our gasoline or that Stage One smog days in Los Angeles fell from 121 in 1977 to zero in 2004. All regulations and taxes to date have done nothing. Does this hint that pollution isn't the cause?

Gore claims, with pie-chart-in-the-sky dreaminess, that unspecified measures can reduce emissions to 1970 levels. He assesses the tradeoff between the economy and the environment with the kind of buffoonery you'd expect in a Marxist comic book, displaying a cartoon of a scale with Earth on one side and bars of gold on the other. "OK, on one side we have gold bars," he says. "Mmm, mmm, don't they look good!"

Why doesn't he get specific and replace the "gold bar" side of the scale with, say, a $50,000 tax on SUVs? The ensuing destruction of the car business would hurt blue-collar workers, not the rich. What if global warming continued unabated? Gore's faith-based pessimism would lead him to call for even more taxes.

People are skeptical about global warming because it builds up to the same chorus as every other lefty hymn: more taxes, more hypocritical scolding (the film is the brainchild of Larry David's wife, Laurie, part of the community of people who drive a Prius to the private plane) and especially more America-bashing.

Gore says that America, alone, is the problem. Taking us to China, he ignores the filth spewed into the air by its coal-fired cities. He does not meet with bronchitic citizens who wear surgical masks outdoors and pause to hawk up brown gunk every few minutes. Instead, he tells us America is lagging behind. "China," he says, "is on the cutting edge" of environmentalism. Nonsense.

Gore is a dangerous evangelist for whom all roads lead to his sole, holy revelation. Remember how his son was injured in a car accident, the story he told at the 1992 convention? He's still telling it, and what was once touching has become exploitative. This time, the accident's meaning is that he wondered whether the Earth would still be there for his son. (Never mind that earlier in the film, he dates his eco-awakening to his Harvard years).

A sister who smoked and died of lung cancer? The lesson is that those who used to deny that smoking caused disease were wrong, so anyone who doubts catastrophic global warming must also be wrong.

Still not convinced that Gore's mind has only one emission? "We have to think differently about war," he says, referring to environmental effects of weapons. "We can't just mindlessly continue the patterns of the past." It's a chilling statement: Even when bombs are flying, Gore promises to measure CO2 first.

The man's shamelessness is astounding when he compares himself to Churchill, but that's not the worst of it. The final shot of Gore shows him bravely silhouetted against the cosmos, a lone figure tenderly surveying the firmament. The job he really wants, no recount can give him.

kyle.smith@nypost.com

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2006, 06:12:22 AM »
Does this look like global warming or global cooling?


China reports shrinking deserts
BEIJING, June 2 (UPI) -- China's deserts are shrinking annually at a rate of about 3,000 square miles.
http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060602-103610-9168r

A senior forestry official said that the new finding sharply contrasts with the 4,000 square mile annual expansion at the end of the 20th century, the official news agency Xinhua reported.

Zhu Lieke, deputy director of the State Forestry Administration said data showed the desertification that started in China in the late 1990s has been "primarily brought under control." Addressing the Beijing International Conference on Women and Desertification, Zhu said that although China is much more aware of the problem than in the past, "the work in this regard remains tough."

Chinese officials say desertification affects the lives of 400 million people and causes annual economic losses of 54 billion yuan ($6.75 billion).

The Chinese government spends about 2 billion yuan ($250 million) a year fighting desertification.

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2006, 06:45:20 AM »
How bout we call it "Global BS"?

Cheesy
Avoid cliches like the plague!

grampster

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 9,452
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2006, 01:58:33 PM »
I wonder how much of the polar ice is actually in the water.  What % of it is over land mass and not in the water?

  Having said that, my simple mind seems to observe that when you have a glass of water full of ice cubes, when the cubes melt the liquid does not contain any more mass than it did when it was frozen.  The glass does not overflow.   So any polar ice that is actually in the seas and oceans, when it melts,  will have zero effect on the oceanic water leves using the same principal, no?  Only snow and ice that over a landmass would drain into the seas and oceans.
"Never wrestle with a pig.  You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."  G.B. Shaw

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2006, 02:23:22 PM »
No, there's people that will argue that there's still a great big whoopin' pile of ice on land and that will be our undoing. However I'm with grampster.

Besides, even if it DOES happen, it will happen so slowly that we will  adapt as time moves along.  We'll put Manhattan up on pilings if we have to. You watch. Tongue
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Antibubba

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,836
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2006, 06:09:19 PM »
Grampster,

   Hold a full glass of water at table's edge so that the rim of the glass is level with the tabletop.  Now empty out all your ice trays onto the table.  As the ice melts (and let us have your table incline slightly so the water runs off), it raises the water level.  Melt it quickly, and your glass overflow faster too.
The Arctic ice masses you hear about are still on land, and have been solid for many centuries.  As that landmass-covering ice melts, that water raises the sea...

Quote
Besides, even if it DOES happen, it will happen so slowly that we will  adapt as time moves along.  We'll put Manhattan up on pilings if we have to. You watch.
One of the biggest concerns is what is called a "tipping point".  Basically, any complex system can be stressed to a certain point with only minor (but increasingly chaotic and unpredictable) consequences.  Past that, and it collapses-the straw that breaks the camel's back.  Suddenly a lot of things happen VERY quickly.  A "Manhattan on pilings" looks a lot less feasible as we watch the "rebuilding" of NO (and the Army Corp of Engineers admits the NO levee system hasn't been viable for decades).  And remember, it wouldn't be just NYC, but every single city on any coast-thousands of cities with over 100 million people.  And keep in mind that the US economy is a complex system too, and would be subject to it's own Tipping Point.  It would make the Great Depression look like a New Year's Eve party on Times' Square; the US as we know it would not come out the other side.

Note I am not taking one side of the argument or the other, but explaining the broad theories as we understand them.  I do recognize that it would be a lot easier to warm up a "globally cooling" Earth than the opposite.
If life gives you melons, you may be dyslexic.

Guest

  • Guest
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2006, 06:15:29 PM »
Quote
Having said that, my simple mind seems to observe that when you have a glass of water full of ice cubes, when the cubes melt the liquid does not contain any more mass than it did when it was frozen
if anything, it should contain less volume, if water actually expands as ice and contracts as it heats up....

Azrael256

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,083
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2006, 10:56:06 PM »
Quote
So any polar ice that is actually in the seas and oceans, when it melts,  will have zero effect on the oceanic water leves using the same principal, no?
Quote
if anything, it should contain less volume
Just a second there, guys.  There's a big difference between displacing by mass and displacing by volume.  Things that float displace by mass.  Things that sink displace by volume.  Remember that the density difference between pack ice and seawater is bigger than it is between your ice cubes and water and that your ice cubes are not particularly good shapes for mass displacement.  Massive sheets of ice float much better than tiny ones.  It's a big enough difference that you'll lose a few percent of displacement savings by liquefying all the pack ice.  It doesn't sound like a whole lot of water, and it really isn't.  Manhattan on pilings would be the order of the day...  once all the looting stopped, that is.

Antarctica, however, really does hold *that much* water out of the ocean.  It won't melt overnight, but a reasonable estimate of how much of it we could concieveably melt (without intentionally setting off a bunch of nukes) would render most of our coastline rather soggy for a few miles inland.  Seawater salinity will go down a bit (which is actually a good thing), and we'd be hurricane free for a time because of the drop in ocean temperatures.

The problem is, as Antibubba observed, we don't know anything beyond that.  Ocean temperatures affect all kinds of things.  Compare the climate of Europe to that of the same latitudes in North America.  It's a big, big difference, and it's caused by a difference in ocean currents.  If they change...  well, we don't know what would happen, but it's reasonable to assume that it would be a Bad Thing(tm) just because it would be a change.  Rainfall patterns could change dramatically.  It could be that all of the Sahara will turn into prime land for growing all kinds of staple crops.  It could also be that the American Midwest, the Chinese rice paddies, and the wheat fields in Russia turn into deserts, inland seas, and ice sheets, respectively.  Desertdog, a change in the size of a Chinese desert means that the planet is heating, cooling, or possibly not changing at all.  Nobody knows, and anybody who says differently is selling something (like a crappy movie).

The point is, however, that the smart thing to do is not to run around in circles wetting ourselves as we drive around in hybrid cars and wear sandals made from hemp, but rather to suck it up, act like intelligent ape-things, and start preparing for the inevitability that our planet's climate is going to change (one way or another).  Getting all our eggs out of this one little basket might not be a bad idea, either.

But, then, that would be the smart thing to do, so forget it.

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2006, 02:28:30 AM »
Alright, that's it. I'm going back to Capitol Equipmenrt and buy that boat and motor I saw. "But HONEY, we're going to need it when the sea rises 'cause of global warming!!"

Tongue
Avoid cliches like the plague!

Ron

  • Guest
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2006, 05:37:18 AM »
There is also a concern a that the melting ice will disturb the ocean currents shutting down our seasons and plunging us into (back to the 70's moment) a new Ice Age!!

That is right, global warming is harbinger of a new ice age.

Antibubba

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,836
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2006, 05:57:31 AM »
Quote
wear sandals made from hemp
But I WANT sandals made from hemp!  The ones withe the manmade uppers give me blisters!  Sad
If life gives you melons, you may be dyslexic.

280plus

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,131
  • Ever get that sinking feeling?
GORE'S HOT AIR. FLAKY FLICK SUFFERS FROM 'TRUTH' DECAY
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2006, 06:11:06 AM »
As long as you don't be trying to smoke them. We know how you hippies are!

Cheesy
Avoid cliches like the plague!