AngelaMarie88 AngelaMarie88

Al Gore, We're listening now

Al Gore, We're listening now

As I logged in, I wasn't too surprised to see that you Joes are already talking about this. Well dangit, I want to talk about it too.

A couple days ago as I was trying to make sense of the pile-o-everything that's always accumulating on our computer desk, I noticed a couple DVDs that John rented the night before. Garfield's Holiday Celebration (yes, the orange Cat) and then something called An Inconvenient Truth. I didn't think much of either, maybe because I doubted that anyone who comes home from Blockbuster with a Garfield cartoon could have anything significant on his mind. I did, however, notice on the cover of An Inconvenient Truth that Roger Ebert said, "In 39 years, I have never written these words in a movie review, but here they are. You owe it to yourself to see this film."

The next day my random internetting informed me that Al Gore (haha, I just typo-ed, "Bore" twice before I finally found the G key) ...that Al Gore had just been announced as the winner of the latest Nobel Peace Prize. In my own little corner of the world I wondered how my husband had the foresight to rent Gore's DVD the day before the Nobel Prize was announced, but it was just a coincidence.

My interest was piqued to find out what Al Gore had to say that was worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize, so I had no problem agreeing to watch the movie with my hubby this evening. I'm pretty picky about movies.

I must say that was a damn good movie. I found it absolutely riveting, educational, fascinating, eye-opening, and Mr. Gore even made it entertaining.

My childlike mind jumps to one part in particular: With a happy little cartoon frog, Al illustrates his point that the general population doesn't notice Global Warming because it's so gradual. We see the animated frog jump into a pot of boiling water and immediately jump back out because the water's dang hot. Smart li'l froggie. Then we see the same frog jump into a pot of lukewarm water and he sits there complacently, unaware that it's gradually begun to boil. He probably won't notice he's in trouble until it's too late to jump out. But Mr. Gore doesn't want that frog to boil. In the knick of time, the hand of a knowledgeable and forward-thinking person pulls that frog out of the hot water.

Al is simply urging mankind to use our own knowledge and resources to save ourselves in the knick of time.

So Gore's compelling speech has spurred me into a more globally-conscious, energy-efficient mindset.

In my little la-la land I come up with ways I can do my part to help the environment. For example, I'm just dying to overhaul our Ford Freestyle's engine into a more environmentally-friendly fuel cell. (We bought that car without doing any research at all. It was simply "bigger" than the car we'd been driving, and had room for more people and big stuff. We weren't even thinking about fuel efficiency.) Now if we were to overhaul that Ford's engine into a fuel cell, we'd need hydrogen for fuel. For lack of hydrogen filling stations around here, we could make our own hydrogen at home with shredded aluminum foil and Drain-O! Oh yeah baby. With my hubby the chemistry junkie and me the globally-aware wife, we could have some fun. (And we'd probably need life-happens with her fix-it prowess to help tear our car apart and put it back together.) OK, I'm only joking a little bit. I'm not mocking global warming. I AM serious about fuel cell vehicles. I really think vehicles should be run on hydrogen. Can you imagine the only byproduct of vehicle fuel being water vapor? With less CO2 being trapped in the atmosphere, the global warming trend could be slowed or reversed.

But we'll start by taping plastic around our widow frames and buying some of those nifty spiral light bulbs. It's a start.

Al Gore's movie really makes me long to know, if in a parallel universe he had won the Presidency instead of Bush 1 or Bush 2, what the world would be like today. I think Gore would have focused on improving the world. I wonder how he would have responded to the 9/11 attack? Would he have waged this War on Terrorism? Would there be troops in Iraq? Would Sadaam have been captured? Good and bad things have come from Bush's administration. In my current optimistic mindset, and having just watched An Inconvenient Truth, I can only imagine that good things would have come from Gore had he been elected President.
15,392 views 96 replies
Reply #51 Top
i don't know about many people but i have been hearing about long before i even knew there was an al gore. except then we were worried about an ice age


I will agree there has been serious confusion in scientific communities about shifting weather patterns and in passing on their confusion to us, they've only clouded the issue even more in the public mind. I would rather scientists say 'we don't really know what is causing this' than espouse half-baked hypothesis'. I would rather our politicians be honest with us too, but I don't see that happening either.
Reply #52 Top
Try living with the extinction of animal and plant species. Try living with all this and then see if you can say SO WHAT.




animal and plant species have been going extinct longer than man has walked the earth. other wise where are the dinosaurs.
Reply #53 Top
I will agree there has been serious confusion in scientific communities about shifting weather patterns and in passing on their confusion to us, they've only clouded the issue even more in the public mind. I would rather scientists say 'we don't really know what is causing this' than espouse half-baked hypothesis'. I would rather our politicians be honest with us too, but I don't see that happening either.




i can tell you what is causing it.


we are near a 70 year sun cycle. just 7 years off of it give or take. in about 30 years al gore will be screaming about the next ice age. the thing about this 70 year sun cycle is it corresponded with the peak of solar maximus. that would be two peaks at the same time.
Reply #54 Top
Daniel,

I don't see the connection between Y2K and this discussion. Of course I haven't forgotten about Y2K. Like you, I thought it was a whole bunch of people running around saying 'the sky is falling' and yes, I laughed too.

I don't think it means the end of the world. But I do acknowledge the seriousness of it.
Reply #55 Top
Daniel,

we are near a 70 year sun cycle.


I have not heard this theory before. Could you point me at more information as I'd like to understand it before I make any further comments.

Reply #56 Top
WWW Link

i believe this has a list of all of the known solar cycles.
Reply #57 Top
Nope, doesn't mention a thing about 70 year cycles. Mentions 11, 22, and some others but not 70 years.
Reply #58 Top
So politicians are destroying Australia's agriculture, river systems, etc., are they?


no, I'm just saying it's not global warming doing it. Man can cause havoc on the earth...I agree. But it's not global warming.

BTW...the rivers are abounding in our neck of the woods. No talk of any global warming in our state. In fact...saw snow today and there's been a frost every day this week.
I still have the ice storm of 98 in mind. I've got a video of it even. Google that while you're at it.


Reply #59 Top
Nope, doesn't mention a thing about 70 year cycles. Mentions 11, 22, and some others but not 70 years.


i know


in 2000 i got the 70 cycle from newspaper in salt lake


they said something about 11, 70, 100 year cycles.

but the page does talk about an 87 years (70-100 years): this may be what the newspaper got.
Reply #60 Top

your still not taking into account the natural dance between prey and predator. when prey goes up predators go up. when prey goes down predators go down.


Yes, I know of the relationship between prey and predator. The prey that polar bears go after are seals, of which there is currently an over-abundance, so if anything the polar bear population should be exploding right now, not declining as precipitously as it is.

and again during the ice ages the arctic ocean is nearly ice free because the gulf stream(you know that hot river in the Atlantic that keeps Europe from freezing) is flowing freely into the arctic.


Well, you see that depends on your definition of "ice free"- the arctic archipelageo and arctic islands (which is where a lot of the polar bear population lives) had pretty good ice coverage at the time, so they were probably quite happy. Polar bears need sea ice that takes them far enough out from land and over the water so that they can go diving for seals, and that definitely existed. Granted, any ice age is typically a big extinction event for a lot of species.

Yes, I know of the gulfstream, and as the salinity of the water changes due to more freshwater entering the ocean it could and quite possibly will seriously alter it's direction (or as some have postulated stop entirely)which could leave a lot of people in a world of hurt.

Utah used to have a tropical rain forest. Utah was never near the tropics


Yes, and Antarctica used to have rainforests on it too, and I'm not disputing CO2 levels during the various ages in which dinosaurs lived. I'm not arguing against the cycle of the planet, I fully agree that our world has seen a lot of change and various peaks and troughs in temperature over hundreds of millions of years. Life is a sine wave, it always has been. My concern is that what we are doing (man, collectively, not just the US) is messing with the natural homeostasis of the planet. I think it is ridiculous for people to say that the earth is too robust for us to have any effect on it- yes, I fully agree that we've had periods of global warming many times before. But those periods of warming were gradual, they took a long time to happen and then they peaked and started to drop again. What we are doing is like injecting heroin into the system- the peaks will come a lot faster and probably go a lot higher. And just like a user on drugs, if the heart beats too fast it will become erratic and then stop. (aka- oh noez, we're all gonna die!!1)

and tell me how are we causing global warming on mars and Pluto


Clearly, it is being caused by republicans and their imperialist form of capitalism??? (no wait, wait, I know, the theory that the sun is getting hotter)



Reply #61 Top
KFC,

Try typing Dr. Gray into Wikipedia and see what comes up. The fact is, he doesn't deny global warming, just that he believes it isn't man-made.


Ok I did at your suggestion.... and a few excerpts just to show the controversy will continue....

It bothers me that my fellow scientists are not speaking out against something they know is wrong," he said. "But they also know that they'd never get any grants if they spoke out. I don't care about grants." The retired Dr. Gray said that his beliefs had made him an outsider in popular science. [4]

Addressing a crowd of 300 including meteorology students and professional meteorologists, he stated that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth and complained that "We're brainwashing our children".

Gray explained that a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures - related to the amount of salt in ocean water - was responsible for the global warming that he acknowledges has taken place. That same cycle means a period of cooling would begin soon and last for several years.

Gray does not say there has not been any warming, but states "I don't question that, and humans might have caused a very slight amount of this warming. Very slight. But this warming trend is not going to keep on going. My belief is that three, four years from now, the globe will start to cool again, as it did from the middle '40s to the middle '70s." [5]

I noticed at the bottom where it mentions criticisms of his work was confined to two sentences.

So obviously listening to this guy, who is well respected by his peers, he is not in agreement with Global Gore.
Reply #62 Top
What a wonderfully Christian attitude you have. Try living with the fact that the only major river system in your neck of the woods is almost gone. Try living with the fact of soaring vegetable and meat prices. Try living with the extinction of animal and plant species. Try living with all this and then see if you can say SO WHAT.


OK, you're hitting some sore spots, dynamaso. Why are the rivers so low? In part because they're tapped out by municipal water supplies, added to the drought conditions. The burden placed on the watersheds by municipal water supplies could be eased GREATLY if we simply had a simple efficient way to put greywater recycling systems in our homes to use the greywater for our lawns and gardens, and used only biodegradable detergents. Unfortunately, it would not meet code in most municipalities.

There are some very real things we could be doing that the law doesn't allow.
Reply #63 Top
KFC,

I too can quote from the same page and look what I found:

Bill Gray is [often] excoriated in public, rightfully in my opinion, because he's essentially accused the entire scientific community of fraud ... and for no other reason that I can figure out other than he didn't get the funding he feels he deserves. As a scientist, he knows that the type of conspiracy theories he's suggesting simply cannot actually occur. This has led to a real loss of respect within the community for him. [2]

and...

according to an earlier interview reported by Joel Aschenbach, Gray had similarly said that the current warming in the past decades is a natural cycle, driven by a global ocean circulation that manifests itself in the North Atlantic as the Gulf Stream. Warm water and cool water essentially rise and fall in a rhythm lasting decades. Although then, when pressed on his theory of how thermohaline circulation has caused recent warming of the planet and would soon cause cooling, he conceded that he hasn't yet published the idea in any peer-reviewed journal.


obviously listening to this guy, who is well respected by his peers


Or, conversely, it could be said he is a maverick who is going against what the larger scientific community think. It is all a matter of interpretation, isn't it?

Gid,

OK, you're hitting some sore spots


I'm not really sure what you mean by this.

Amazingly enough, I happen to know a little bit about my own back yard. I understand the Murray-Darling system has been tapped heavily, particularly by the cotton industry in southern Queensland and northern New South Wales. However, the death of the system (and it is dying, believe me), has nothing to do with usage and everything to do with the drought.

Grey water systems can be used in most parts of Australia, they just have to be installed by professionals and the systems need regular maintenance. Grey water can't be used yet on commercial crops either but research and development suggest this won't be the case for too much longer.
Reply #64 Top
I'm not really sure what you mean by this.


I mean that this is a pet peeve. We have the ability to greatly reduce our water consumption without a single change (magnifying our efforts when we add in our changes), yet we do not. The same people who demand that global warming is man made are the very same who have turned a deaf ear every time I've tried to approach them about conservationist measures. The truth is, I could use much less than I already do but would be sitting in a jail cell if I did so, as well as stripped of custody of my children. Do you honestly think Mr. Gore would send his lawyers to defend me if that happened?
Reply #65 Top
However, the death of the system (and it is dying, believe me), has nothing to do with usage and everything to do with the drought.


Umm, both, actually, dynamaso. The drought's an uncontrollable variable; the usage much less so.
Reply #66 Top
Clearly, it is being caused by republicans and their imperialist form of capitalism???


Now you are fitting in very well Artysim.

Never be too busy making a point that you cannot inject a little levity.
Reply #67 Top
I mean that this is a pet peeve. We have the ability to greatly reduce our water consumption without a single change (magnifying our efforts when we add in our changes), yet we do not.


Not to debate the point you are making with Dyna, but to go off on a tangent.

The amount of water on this planet is static. Whether you use grey water or flush it down a commode, it is not going to leave this planet. If municipalities do not use grey water, what happens to it? One of 2 things. It evoporates (and falls as rain somewhere else) or it soaks into the ground and becomes part of the ground water.

As someone else noted, some deserts were once rain forests, so the water may not go back to its point of usage. But it does not disappear.
Reply #68 Top
The amount of water on this planet is static. Whether you use grey water or flush it down a commode, it is not going to leave this planet. If municipalities do not use grey water, what happens to it? One of 2 things. It evoporates (and falls as rain somewhere else) or it soaks into the ground and becomes part of the ground water.


However, if you don't use greywater, two things happen: one, you must draw more water from the muni water supply for the greywater you are NOT using, thus exacerbating the effects of a drought.

Two, the greywater must be processed through the water treatment plant with the wastewater, inefficiently utilizing other resources.
Reply #69 Top
Two, the greywater must be processed through the water treatment plant with the wastewater, inefficiently utilizing other resources.


That is a good point. If indeed this is a green issue (and I think those that phrase it that way have a lot more weight with the scientific community and the rest of us), then minimizing the waste of other resources is a good thing to do, global warming or not.
Reply #70 Top
That is a good point. If indeed this is a green issue (and I think those that phrase it that way have a lot more weight with the scientific community and the rest of us), then minimizing the waste of other resources is a good thing to do, global warming or not


One of these days I'll have to do a lengthy article on how my attempts to live green have been rebuffed continually by local laws and ordinances.

Like how they push people to use 2 cycle engines on what is a twice weekly basis some times during the year, just to keep their lawns neat and orderly!
Reply #71 Top
my attempts to live green have been rebuffed continually by local laws and ordinances.


I had a similar frustration a few minutes ago. I just saw the recycle pick-up man dump my PAPER RECYCLABLES into my TRASH BIN which hadn't been collected yet. How's that for recycling?? Every week I drive to the recycle center which accepts the plastics, cardboard, glass, and aluminum that we have. The only thing they don't take is paper so I have to leave the paper out on "recycle pick-up day." I'd like to get to the bottom of this, but this seems so petty. Grr.
Reply #72 Top
One of 2 things. It evoporates (and falls as rain somewhere else) or it soaks into the ground and becomes part of the ground water.




sorry but if you use it. the water will still do one of those anyways.
Reply #73 Top

Just as an aside, there's an interesting article on media perception of Gore at smirking chimp-

WWW Link

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/10504

Curious to know what the fine folks at JU think of the authors assertions!

(dons flame retardant shield)
Reply #74 Top
(dons flame retardant shield)


Does it protect against hysterical laughter?
Reply #75 Top
  

Same thing happened to Nixon after he "won" the 1960 election.

See - you start with a false premise (Gore "won" the election) and anything that follows is garbage.