An Inconvenient Truth

[SkinBasket]

I forgot the car company in europe, but they planted enough trees to neutralize the pollution their sold cars produced. That's what all car companies should do.

Yeah. Then they could hump them. How about the motherfuckers who buy the cars (yes, all of us) plant a fucking tree. I've planted three this week. Only one died.

What's this need to put the blame on the auto industry for making the car YOU drive and YOU pollute the world with while YOU are driving in circles on an ozone action day singing how great life is?

*note: "YOU" does not necessarily refer to you personally Partial. So don;t respond with some, "Well I bike to work" bullshit.

[the_idle_threat]

Ten years is a pretty small sample. For that matter, so is 200 years.

Now, I don't necessarily believe that this is all hooey, but there are dissenting opinions in the scientific community. I've read that there was actually a global cooling trend from about the 1940's to the mid 1970's, and at that time, the fearmongering types were clamoring about a new ice age.

I'm hedging my bets. Although I don't buy into the fearmongering from people like Al Gore (who also wrote breathlessly about global overpopulation, and yet he still had kids), I save energy when I can, by doing the simple things like driving a fuel-efficient car, using energy-efficient light bulbs and not wasting electricity. It's more than enough to satisfy what little liberal guilt I might have, and has a bonus effect of saving me money. [/i]

[Partial]

I do bike to work but because i'm a fatty and thats gotta stop, not because I am concerned about pollution.

I say the car company because you're already paying thousands of dollars for a car, they could take care of that for you, and do it more efficiently.

The reasons I think this are because:
1. You may not have a spot for another tree. The car company could easily purchase a huge plot of land and plant hundreds of trees on it.

2. good pr for auto company. They'll be looked at in a much better light by consumers for very little extra relative cost to the company.

3. by relying on the consumer to plant a tree, it may not grow up properly and accomplish what they want. If this is mandated and contracted by a giant car company, you have quality control and are assured what you want done will happen.

What they really should do is give you a tree with your car, and plant one for you. You plant yours and hope it takes off, they also plant one that is almost a sure thing to take off. Future proofing for a very small cost. Thats the way to go.

[the_idle_threat]

I cranked up my air conditioning today to combat global warming.

Although I must say, Scott's idea is pretty damned funny. I'm totally going to rip off this line without any permission whatsoever the next time the subject comes up in liberal company.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If only 19 of the 100 climate scientists had even bothered to read the book or see the film, do you suppose they were likely to be the ones who agree with Gore to begin with, or the ones who think it's a bunch of hooey?

The 19 respondants completed a survey! I have been involved with lots of research projects. If you send a survey to 100 people, and 19 complete it, that's good participation.

I don't know what the article said or implied, but I expect that 100% of all Climate Scientists will see this movie. How could they possibly resist? This is a dramatic event in their world, connecting their research with the public. Of course they are interested to see if the science is right! And to answer your question, I expect any pissed-off people would be most likely to respond to the survey.

[Harlan Huckleby]

source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science....ap/index.html

It's gratifying to get positive feedback from scientific community. I'm not surprised, Gore has been intensely involved with this issue for 25 years, he knows the terrain from all angles.

The people who think Gore is opportunistic or insincere are pissing in the wind. Global Warming has been a tough sell politically, and Gore has stuck with it. The guy is a wealthy man. Trapsing around the world and giving 200 presentations a year for several years is not a pleasure, it's a labor of love.

OK, with that said, I think "An Inconvient Truth" is a tragedy. It is tragic because the scientific information is presented so well and completely, but the political/personal Al Gore stuff ruins its effectiveness. Why did Gore turn such an important project into a vanity piece?

I am thinking about starting a web site called, "A More Convient Truth.com".
It will just offer the most important video clips from the documentary. There are about 20 essential minutes in that 95 minute film that should be considered and discussed by people of all political stripes.

[Scott Campbell]

Today, on a very special episode of Oprah:



Actor Leonardo DiCaprio shares what he believes is the most pressing environmental issue of our time: global warming. And Leo's definitely not alone—many scientists have been warning the public for years that the Earth is getting hotter. Some say that if drastic measures aren't taken to stop it, global warming may cause catastrophic results for the billions of people living on our planet.

Leo says global warming is not only the number one issue affecting the environment—it's one of the most important issues facing all of humanity. "It's something that's going to affect not only us, but our children and our grandchildren…and generations to come," says Leo.

[MJZiggy]

And Leo would know...! He should have a PhD sitting next to him with a slide rule in his pocket (by the way, I've just recently learned that slide rules are for the most part obsolete).

[SkinBasket]

The 19 respondants completed a survey! I have been involved with lots of research projects. If you send a survey to 100 people, and 19 complete it, that's good participation.

And I've been invovled in a lot more scientifically based research projects than you can even dream of you slutty hound. It was my fucking job. Anything below 40%, and that is being extremely liberal, is considered a waste of money and time to even consider trying to use the data for anything, even wiping your ass to save a tree.

Anyone who wants their data to be taken seriously needs upward of 60%.

19% isn't even a bad joke.

[SkinBasket]

It's gratifying to get positive feedback from scientific community. I'm not surprised, Gore has been intensely involved with this issue for 25 years, he knows the terrain from all angles.

The people who think Gore is opportunistic or insincere are pissing in the wind. Global Warming has been a tough sell politically, and Gore has stuck with it. The guy is a wealthy man. Trapsing around the world and giving 200 presentations a year for several years is not a pleasure, it's a labor of love.

OK, with that said, I think "An Inconvient Truth" is a tragedy. It is tragic because the scientific information is presented so well and completely, but the political/personal Al Gore stuff ruins its effectiveness. Why did Gore turn such an important project into a vanity piece?

I am thinking about starting a web site called, "A More Convient Truth.com".
It will just offer the most important video clips from the documentary. There are about 20 essential minutes in that 95 minute film that should be considered and discussed by people of all political stripes.

You lying bitch. You are a fucking Al Gore groupie. You want him to stick it (the truth) in you and push, don't you? You'll slurp anything he says you slut. Now you try to justify your love with all this nonsense about 19% studies and articles that don't say shit in the end. Come clean.

This turns you on doesn't it?

[SkinBasket]

3. by relying on the consumer to plant a tree, it may not grow up properly and accomplish what they want. If this is mandated and contracted by a giant car company, you have quality control and are assured what you want done will happen.

Want them to wipe your ass too since you might fuck that up?

[Partial]

No, but for average american that is naive and couldn't care less, then yes, I would like them to wipe my ass.

That is if and only if by wipe my ass you mean plant a tree for me.

[Scott Campbell]

You lying bitch. You are a fucking Al Gore groupie. You want him to stick it (the truth) in you and push, don't you? You'll slurp anything he says you slut.

Harlan could barely contain his excitement when he got to shake Mr. Gore's hand at the Greenpeace fundraiser:

[the_idle_threat]

I don't know what the article said or implied, but I expect that 100% of all Climate Scientists will see this movie. How could they possibly resist? This is a dramatic event in their world, connecting their research with the public. Of course they are interested to see if the science is right! And to answer your question, I expect any pissed-off people would be most likely to respond to the survey.

The article explicitly stated that *most* of the scientists had not seen the movie nor read the book. And why would they? They don't need Al Gore to tell them about their own field of expertise. And for those who don't support Al's fearmongering on the topic, why waste time reading his book or pay to see his movie? I'm sure they know which of their colleagues he's getting his facts from, so they know the story already.

The only scientists who would be running to the theater to see his movie are those whose views are being expressed in the movie, because they want to be sure they are being represented accurately. And if you read the quotes in the article, this is exactly what happened.

Of course he did get some facts wrong, but the reporter still gave him 5 out of 5 stars for accuracy.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You lying bitch. You are a fucking Al Gore groupie. You want him to stick it (the truth) in you and push, don't you? You'll slurp anything he says you slut. Now you try to justify your love with all this nonsense about 19% studies and articles that don't say shit in the end. Come clean.

Well, the "study" in question was just a survey by CNN. And whether they have 19 or all 100 people respond, it still isn't a statistically significant sample to predict the opinion of all 10,000 (or whatever) climatologists in the world. So the writer is just summarizing 19 opinions of climatologists, take if for what it's worth. 19 climatologists that are all impressed with Gore's documentary is convincing to me.

BTW, marketing surveys can be returned at a 1%, 2% rate, and they still get useful info out of them.