|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
|
AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie
#5796517 - 06/27/06 05:30 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The Article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060627/ap_o...TdmBHNlYwM3NTM-
The Truth:
Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia, on Gore’s film:
"Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
"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." – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press, June 12, 2006
Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:
“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore's approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” - Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal
Gore’s film also cites a review of scientific literature by the journal Science which claimed 100% consensus on global warming, but Lindzen pointed out the study was flat out incorrect.
“…A study in the journal Science by the social scientist Nancy Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web of Knowledge Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the key words "global climate change" produced 928 articles, all of whose abstracts supported what she referred to as the consensus view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser, checked her procedure and found that only 913 of the 928 articles had abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the remaining 913 explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus view. Several actually opposed it.”- Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal.
Roy Spencer, principal research scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville, wrote an open letter to Gore criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film:
“…Temperature measurements in the arctic suggest that it was just as warm there in the 1930's...before most greenhouse gas emissions. Don't you ever wonder whether sea ice concentrations back then were low, too?”- Roy Spencer wrote in a May 25, 2006 column.
Former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball reacted to Gore’s claim that there has been a sharp drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970.
"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,” –Tim Ball said, according to the Canadian Free Press.
The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President. In addition, Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP. See http://www.junkscience.com/feb06.htm
The AP also chose to ignore Gore’s reliance on the now-discredited “hockey stick” by Dr. Michael Mann, which claims that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere remained relatively stable over 900 years, then spiked upward in the 20th century, and that the 1990’s were the warmest decade in at least 1000 years. Last week’s National Academy of Sciences report dispelled Mann’s often cited claims by reaffirming the existence of both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. See Senator Inhofe’s statement on the broken “Hockey Stick.”
Gore’s claim that global warming is causing the snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro to disappear has also been debunked by scientific reports. For example, a 2004 study in the journal Nature makes clear that Kilimanjaro is experiencing less snowfall because there’s less moisture in the air due to deforestation around Kilimanjaro.
|
GabbaDj
BTH


Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5796575 - 06/27/06 05:49 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Im all for Gore and bringing light to the truth about Global Warming.
We all know that we are destroying our planet, call it what you will, the fact remains that we will kill ourselves off some day due to polution.
I just wish that more were done to put these problems into peoples minds.
If we fought the war on global polution like we are fighting the war on terros then maybe we could get rid of that layer of smog that sits above my city.
-------------------- GabbaDj FAMM.ORG
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: GabbaDj]
#5796699 - 06/27/06 06:18 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Im all for Gore and bringing light to the truth about Global Warming.
How is manipulating people with bad science "bringing light to the truth about global warming"?
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero


Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5796792 - 06/27/06 06:41 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
amen.
Gore = career politician. his wife wanted (and still does) to kill all music, plus hes a complete tool. he seems to stamp his name on shit when it gains popularity. thats not where i get my information from, and whenever i look deeper into specific things, the "facts" are never as factual as some people make it out to be.
not to say humans aren't destroying the earth. of course. but they dont need to tell US about it, they need to handle that shit in the upper levels of industry and business. by telling people we need to stop driving so much, and recycle, etc.. its not bad, but its not even considering how much industry really contributes, especally companies that go overseas to avoid environmental laws (not to mention the laws they break here in the US)
-------------------- No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
lonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.


Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5796799 - 06/27/06 06:43 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
its not about Truth or Facts... its for the Children.
-------------------- America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure" We have "reckless fiscal policies" America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better Barack Obama
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: lonestar2004]
#5796882 - 06/27/06 07:06 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
> its for the Children.
... and for those of us that made the choice not to have children?
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy


Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Seuss]
#5797052 - 06/27/06 07:49 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I hope you are implying we need a serious environmental clean up and restoration act for everyones sake.
Remember our talk about the Caribbean reefs dying from microbes brought over by the Sahara Sand winds every summer? The Sahara use to be forest that is still being logged. It's a man made desert. Not only are those microbes killing the reefs at an alarming rate, the cause was discovered when researchers were working to understand why so many Lessor Antilles islanders were suffering from allergies and asthma at growing rates.
Same microbe allergen cause thats killing the reefs blowing over from the man made desert. We are screwing with earths eco system and peoples health hard in so many ways. The storms rolling off Africa causing billions of dollars of damage, are the result of the logging. There are no trees or eco systems to suck in and contain the rising moisture off the ocean there so it all gets blown out and turns into hurricanes.
I don't care what whack job or politician raises awareness on ecology for popularity reasons. I'm glad people are.
I use to live on one of the Caribbean and Hawaiian islands, where smog pollution is ZERO. When I would fly to Chicago to visit family and step out of the doors of O'Hare Airport, I would be like, "ackkk blechch yechs what is that smell? Cough cough choke gag." I can't believe I was huffing in that stuff for the first 25 years of my life. The air is filthy inland near cities.
I think it was flowie who said that its so thick around Atlanta, he was going start driving around with a gas mask on to keep his lungs healthy.
Nice pic of LA's fine air quality, whoever posted that. It's not just the air. I should dig up stats on how many U.S. beaches are at toxic levels. The clean water situation near cities is just as dank as the clean air one is.
Get Kermit the frog and Miss Piggy or Charles Manson to speak up on it, I don't care who does.
If Al Gore becomes popular again for raising awareness on how nasty the air and water quality is becoming do to industrial times, outdated technology and mass consumption, Great by me he is. I don't need 50 year studies by "government approved" scientists to tell me all is well. I can see and experience for myself how the air and water in certain places is disgusting and or a health hazard.
It's no where near to late to turn it around and start clean up and restoration projects and acts. Why wasn't America running cars on bio-fuels before Brazil was, which has been has been for the last ten years? Things in the U.S. are turning in that direction now, yet, we should've beat them and all other countries to it.
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: gettinjiggywithit]
#5797106 - 06/27/06 08:05 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Change in local ecosystems due to anthropogenic factors is completely different than global warming and its impact is generally well-accepted.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy


Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5797215 - 06/27/06 08:38 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry,
I started wondering what Seuss meant by his comment and the thought stream took me into other ecological issues.
Global warming??? I agree with the research that says, what humans are putting out in emissions doesn't yet equal what nature naturally does which contributes to it.
I think the research is all falling insignificant because they are looking at auto and industrial emissions and trying to pin it on aerosol hairspray and deodorant. 
Who Dares to look deeper into googling "HAARP causing global warming" ? 
Nothing much I can do about that if it's true but suggest people research its potentially dark side.
In the mean time, I prefer warm tropical climates myself. Let the polar caps melt and flood out the low lands. I enjoy mountain climbing and sailing as well. 

edit- HAARP not HARRP
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
Edited by gettinjiggywithit (06/27/06 09:09 PM)
|
Basilides
Servent ofWisdom


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5797304 - 06/27/06 09:11 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Here's the original AP article for anyone who's interested:
Climate experts: Gore's movie gets the science right
Tuesday, June 27, 2006 Posted: 1944 GMT (0344 HKT)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The nation's top climate scientists are giving "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore's documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy.
The former vice president's movie -- replete with the prospect of a flooded New York City, an inundated Florida, more and nastier hurricanes, worsening droughts, retreating glaciers and disappearing ice sheets -- mostly got the science right, said all 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or read the book and answered questions from The Associated Press.
The AP contacted more than 100 top climate researchers by e-mail and phone for their opinion. Among those contacted were vocal skeptics of climate change theory. Most scientists had not seen the movie, which is in limited release, or read the book.
But those who have seen it had the same general impression: Gore conveyed the science correctly; the world is getting hotter and it is a manmade catastrophe-in-the-making caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
"Excellent," said William Schlesinger, dean of the Nicholas School of Environment and Earth Sciences at Duke University. "He got all the important material and got it right."
Robert Corell, chairman of the worldwide Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group of scientists, read the book and saw Gore give the slideshow presentation that is woven throughout the documentary.
"I sat there and I'm amazed at how thorough and accurate," Corell said. "After the presentation I said, 'Al, I'm absolutely blown away. There's a lot of details you could get wrong.' ... I could find no error."
Gore, in an interview with the AP, said he wasn't surprised "because I took a lot of care to try to make sure the science was right."
The tiny errors scientists found weren't a big deal, "far, far fewer and less significant than the shortcoming in speeches by the typical politician explaining an issue," said Michael MacCracken, who used to be in charge of the nation's global warming effects program and is now chief scientist at the Climate Institute in Washington.
One concern was about the connection between hurricanes and global warming. That is a subject of a heated debate in the science community. Gore cited five recent scientific studies to support his view.
"I thought the use of imagery from Hurricane Katrina was inappropriate and unnecessary in this regard, as there are plenty of disturbing impacts associated with global warming for which there is much greater scientific consensus," said Brian Soden, a University of Miami professor of meteorology and oceanography.
Some scientists said Gore confused his ice sheets when he said the effect of the Clean Air Act is noticeable in the Antarctic ice core; it is the Greenland ice core. Others thought Gore oversimplified the causal-link between the key greenhouse gas carbon dioxide and rising temperatures.
While some nonscientists could be depressed by the dire disaster-laden warmer world scenario that Gore laid out, one top researcher thought it was too optimistic. Tom Wigley, senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, thought the former vice president sugarcoated the problem by saying that with already-available technologies and changes in habit -- such as changing light bulbs -- the world could help slow or stop global warming.
While more than 1 million people have seen the movie since it opened in May, that does not include Washington's top science decision makers. President Bush said he won't see it. The heads of the Environmental Protection Agency and NASA haven't seen it, and the president's science adviser said the movie is on his to-see list.
"They are quite literally afraid to know the truth," Gore said. "Because if you accept the truth of what the scientific community is saying, it gives you a moral imperative to start to rein in the 70 million tons of global warming pollution that human civilization is putting into the atmosphere every day."
As far as the movie's entertainment value, Scripps Institution geosciences professor Jeff Severinghaus summed it up: "My wife fell asleep. Of course, I was on the edge of my chair."
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/06/27/gore.science.ap/index.html
--------------------
    "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
|
Basilides
Servent ofWisdom


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5797342 - 06/27/06 09:22 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Tt seems that various scientists simply have a different take on things. There are high end scientists who assert global warming is real, and high end scientists who are skeptical. I don't see how just because a few have a skeptical take on it that it's an all out lie. Global warming is probably real though by all accounts. Whether fossil fuels are causing it is unknown, but logically the burning of such fuels in vast amounts isn't going to be good environmentally.
It seems contending that the green house gas effect is real is a heresy these days. Like when Galileo laid upon the world another inconvenient truth pertaining to geocentrism, it wasn't exactly popular. History will prove green house skeptics to have been dangerously wrong.
--------------------
    "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth


Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 7 years, 12 days
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Basilides]
#5797376 - 06/27/06 09:33 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Basilides said: It seems contending that the green house gas effect is real is a heresy these days. Like when Galileo laid upon the world another inconvenient truth pertaining to geocentrism, it wasn't exactly popular. History will prove green house skeptics to have been dangerously wrong.
Without a doubt, The real irony though is that we can cut emmissions and what not and it wont affect the situation at all. The world has made the bed and now everyone has to sleep in it. Unfortunate.
|
Basilides
Servent ofWisdom


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 12 years, 11 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: The_Red_Crayon]
#5797407 - 06/27/06 09:42 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Hopefully we'll run out of fossil fuels soon.
--------------------
    "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
|
GabbaDj
BTH


Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: The_Red_Crayon]
#5797718 - 06/27/06 11:15 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Without a doubt, The real irony though is that we can cut emissions and what not and it wont affect the situation at all. The world has made the bed and now everyone has to sleep in it. Unfortunate.
But we can keep things from exponentially getting worse.
Yah, I dont care what scientist says global warming isnt real, just as many say that it is real and I see that thick layer of gunk floating above Los Angeles every day. Its real and its real sick.
Summer is here and we will begin to have "Unhealthy Air" warnings on the news saying that children and the elderly just shouldnt breathe today.
WTF is that?
-------------------- GabbaDj FAMM.ORG
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5797790 - 06/27/06 11:29 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
There appears to be no doubt among scientists that the carbon-cycle on this planet is out of balance and this unbalance is having a negative impact on ecology, but whether or not all life on Earth is doomed isn't as clearcut.
|
kake
The answer to1984 is 1776.



Registered: 05/06/99
Posts: 2,782
Loc: The 66th harmonic
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: MushmanTheManic]
#5797829 - 06/27/06 11:38 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
It all boils down to money ... who's got their investments where and who's going to make the most out of this whole circus.
-------------------- The answer to 1984 is 1776.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero


Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: kake]
#5798449 - 06/28/06 05:08 AM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tt seems that various scientists simply have a different take on things. There are high end scientists who assert global warming is real, and high end scientists who are skeptical. I don't see how just because a few have a skeptical take on it that it's an all out lie. Global warming is probably real though by all accounts. Whether fossil fuels are causing it is unknown, but logically the burning of such fuels in vast amounts isn't going to be good environmentally.
The entire debate is very complex because people are intentionally mixing different issues, out of proper context, to support their position.
For example, we can look at global warming. Based upon hundreds of years of records, the planet is on average hotter now than it was anytime in recent history. This is a simple fact that is easy to verify as correct.
Why is the planet getting warmer? Ooops... we all ready made a mistake. We are basing the premise that the planet is getting warmer off of a whopping couple of hundred years of data. Unfortunately, the climate is a dynamic system and has cycles of warmer periods and colder periods. These natural cycles can last anywhere from a few thousand years to a few hundred million years. It is very difficult for people, with an average lifespan well under 100 years, to envision how long 1000 years is and nearly impossible to envision 400 million years.
We can boost the lack of sample size (only a few hundred years) with science. By drilling down into ice that is millions of years old, we get a picture of the climate changes through time. This tells us what was in the air, not what the climate was like, back in history.
Now we have two bits of data. One shows that the planet is hotter now than it has been anytime in the last couple hundred years. The other shows that greenhouse gasses are in greater concentration now than they have been anytime in history. Obviously these two are related and the greenhouse gasses are causing global warming. Ooops! Another mistake! We made an assumption on the "obvious" and we brought back "global warming" out of context. See how easy it is? It makes sense, but has no scientific basis. If a doctor tells you, "Well, it makes sense, so I am going to go ahead and cut off your leg" you would get a second opinion. Making sense isn't proof and in science it is often incorrect.
Now lets toss in computer models and satellite data and ... well, you get the idea. Finally, take a bunch of "wanna-be-environmentalists" (not the kind with a college degree in science, but the kind that fly around in their jet plane using more petrol in a single hour than I do in an entire year, telling me how bad I am for using too much oil) that are good at spinning facts and figures and you end up where we are today... lots of facts, lots of figures, a bit of good science, and a ton of bogus science being repeated over and over as fact.
The reason that the "experts" cannot agree if something like Gore's film is correct or not is because of the way the science is viewed. Individually, the pieces of research are good (for the most part). The scientist that is working with ice cores is correct. The scientist working with satellite data is correct. The scientist working with computer models is correct. However, when somebody like Gore comes along and tries to tie all this correct science together, it becomes incorrect. One cannot take science A and mix it with science C while pretending that section B is also science because it makes sense and was based off of science A and science C.
For the "expert" that looks at each bit of research, the science in the movie is good. For the "expert" that looks at the connections between the different types of research and the conclusions made by the movie, there is no science, only a lot of hand waving that "makes sense" on the surface.
Quote:
Yah, I don't care what scientist says global warming isn't real, just as many say that it is real and I see that thick layer of gunk floating above Los Angeles every day. Its real and its real sick.
Another example of generous mixing of what makes sense to science. Because somebody can see and experience the effects of horrid pollution, they automatically associate the pollution to dynamic climate change (global warming), just the way the wanna-be-environmentalist want them to. "See, it is real, just look at it." Yes, the pollution is real, but the research that proves that the pollution is causing the planet to get hotter does not exist. We can toss in models and data and all sorts of scientific "proof", but then we are making the same mistake that Gore made, connecting research without a scientific basis to prove that the connections we are making are valid...
> I hope you are implying we need a serious environmental clean up and restoration act for everyones sake.
I was trying to imply that the issue extends beyond one's own selfish needs. My toilet is your back yard and your toilet is my backyard. Telling you that you need to clean up your toilet, so that my children have a nice place to play, doesn't do anything to help the problem. Had the original post implied that we should be healing the planet for the sake of healing the planet, rather than for some selfish interest such as our children, I wouldn't have had anything to comment against.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
Phred
Fred's son


Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: Catalysis]
#5799241 - 06/28/06 12:41 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Here's just one of dozens of rebuttals to Algore's "science" and AP's laughable claim regarding the supposed solidarity of the scientific community on his movie --
http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909
Phred
--------------------
|
xDuckYouSuckerx
xBannedx


Registered: 05/25/06
Posts: 1,410
Last seen: 17 years, 9 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: GabbaDj]
#5799665 - 06/28/06 02:50 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GabbaDj said: We all know that we are destroying our planet
The comments in bold do not agree with ...
Quote:
, call it what you will, the fact remains that we will kill ourselves off some day due to polution.
Perhaps we will make the earth uninhabitable to humans, and at our present rate we will (Though most likely not through the garbage BS of "global warming"), but we won't, we don't even have the ability to, destroy the earth. Making the earth uninhabitable for humans isn't the same as destroying it. If we make it uninhabitable, we'll all die, and the cycle will start again.
Quote:
If we fought the war on global polution like we are fighting the war on terros then maybe we could get rid of that layer of smog that sits above my city.
If you don't like it, get off of the internet, burn your oil-based clothings and go without electricity. What city are you in? Do you use your air conditioner?
-------------------- Unions are the bastions of the mediocre. - luvdemshrooms
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero


Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
|
Re: AP Lies About Scientific Consensus Over Gore's Movie [Re: MushmanTheManic]
#5799910 - 06/28/06 04:06 PM (17 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: There appears to be no doubt among scientists that the carbon-cycle on this planet is out of balance and this unbalance is having a negative impact on ecology, but whether or not all life on Earth is doomed isn't as clearcut.
and at the same time, it must be taken into consideration that this planet may not be designed for human life. the "unbalance" (equilibrium, in fact is much worse than unbalance, for complete balance would mean absense of life) you speak of is not so extreme to those who are truly adapted to this world.. termites, ants, roaches, many forms of plant life, etc.
not to say i dont understand the implications, or that i don't care about them: i do. it's been clearly shown over and over that if all of our projections were correct for environmental disaster, etc then we would have all been dead hundreds and hundreds of years ago.
the fact is, we still dont understand how the earth works, and the dataset we have to work with is still very limited when considering the grand scheme of things.
-------------------- No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
|