Al Gore likens global warming skeptics to racists, homophobes, apartheid supporters,

M

Max E.

The more evidence that comes out against global warming, the louder windbags like Al Gore seem to get in support of it.



Al Gore likens global warming skeptics to racists, homophobes, apartheid supporters, and alcoholics

EK: Give me the optimistic scenario on what happens next. If all goes well, what do the next few years look like on this issue?

AG: Well, I think the most important part of it is winning the conversation. I remember as a boy when the conversation on civil rights was won in the South. I remember a time when one of my friends made a racist joke and another said, hey man, we don’t go for that anymore. The same thing happened on apartheid. The same thing happened on the nuclear arms race with the freeze movement. The same thing happened in an earlier era with abolition. A few months ago, I saw an article about two gay men standing in line for pizza and some homophobe made an ugly comment about them holding hands and everyone else in line told them to shut up. We’re winning that conversation.

The conversation on global warming has been stalled because a shrinking group of denialists fly into a rage when it’s mentioned. It’s like a family with an alcoholic father who flies into a rage every time a subject is mentioned and so everybody avoids the elephant in the room to keep the peace. But the political climate is changing. Something like Chris Hayes’s excellent documentary on climate change wouldn’t have made it on TV a few years ago. And as I said, many Republicans who’re still timid on the issue are now openly embarrassed about the extreme deniers. The deniers are being hit politically. They’re being subjected to ridicule, which stings. The polling is going back up in favor of doing something on this issue. The ability of the raging deniers to stop progress is waning every single day.
 
I tend to agree, Gore is confusing the changing of social norms, which aren't supported or refuted (generally) by evidence. He should have used the early days of tobacco smoking health science as an example.
 
Quote from Ricter:

I tend to agree, Gore is confusing the changing of social norms, which aren't supported or refuted (generally) by evidence. He should have used the early days of tobacco smoking health science as an example.
More...

exactly, you should always be very skeptical of findings made by "researchers" and "scientists who earn a living if the findings turn out one way. Beware of statistical tricks.

So we had scientists saying no causal connection between between smoking and cancer.

and now we have scientists whose data shows CO2 lagging temperature change claiming man made co2 causes temp change.
 
Quote from Fractals 'R Us:

Al Gore is a sick man. He should be taken away for a nice vacation where all the nurses are just super nice when they bring his meds...
More...

Just don't allow them to give him a massage.
 
Gore seems emotionally attached to the issue. This will make it nearly impossible for him to look at the science objectively, whatever the outcome. One has to discount anything he says from here on out regarding AGW. Scientific matters must be looked at as objectively as possible. This is extremely difficult for anyone to do that has an emotional stake in the outcome. By now, many, if not most, of the scientists working of AGW research will have issues similar to Gore's. It's very unfortunate that the AGW question became politicized and the focus of so much media attention while there were still gaping holes in our knowledge. It's a near perfect example of how not to go about settling scientific questions.
 
Quote from jem:

exactly, you should always be very skeptical of findings made by "researchers" and "scientists who earn a living if the findings turn out one way. Beware of statistical tricks.

So we had scientists saying no causal connection between between smoking and cancer.

and now we have scientists whose data shows CO2 lagging temperature change claiming man made co2 causes temp change.
More...
That's a primary reason this kind of research, where there are great amount of money, and potential profits and losses at stake, must be done in Universities and National Laboratories rather than in companies that have a stake in the outcome. The "data" from the tobacco companies cast doubt on the smoking and lung cancer connection. When massive amounts of statistical data from long term studies by disinterested parties became available, the connection became incontrovertible.
 
Quote from piezoe:

Gore seems emotionally attached to the issue. This will make it nearly impossible for him to look at the science objectively, whatever the outcome. One has to discount anything he says from here on out regarding AGW. Scientific matters must be looked at as objectively as possible. This is extremely difficult for anyone to do that has an emotional stake in the outcome. By now, many, if not most, of the scientists working of AGW research will have issues similar to Gore's. It's very unfortunate that the AGW question became politicized and the focus of so much media attention while there were still gaping holes in our knowledge. It's a near perfect example of how not to go about settling scientific questions.
More...

Exactamundo! It ain't science if there is an emotional and/or bias of any sort, and the climate change arena is filled with nothing but emotion and bias. Been trying to tell the GW cultists that all along.
Poor Al been waiting since 2005 for a Hollywood movie type hurricane to kill a couple million people, and it just ain't coming fast enough for his fragile ego to deal with. 2005 was supposed to be the beginning of the end far as gulf hurricanes go, and what has happened? One quiet year after another. If Al is looking for the irrational type throwing a tantrum, he need look no further than the mirror.
 
Quote from jem:

exactly, you should always be very skeptical of findings made by "researchers" and "scientists who earn a living if the findings turn out one way. Beware of statistical tricks.

So we had scientists saying no causal connection between between smoking and cancer.

and now we have scientists whose data shows CO2 lagging temperature change claiming man made co2 causes temp change.
More...
We had industry scientists saying no cause between smoking and cancer. Why do you suppose industry scientists opposed the public scientists?
 
Quote from Ricter:

We had industry scientists saying no cause between smoking and cancer. Why do you suppose industry scientists opposed the public scientists?
More...

And of course only industry scientists can be bias? All others are pure as the driven snow?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top