Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore
Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore
Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth.
Who is CEI? The Washington Post explains:
The Competitive Enterprise Institute, which widely publicizes its belief that the earth is not warming cataclysmically because of the burning of coal and oil, says Exxon Mobil Corp. is a “major donor” largely as a result of its effort to push that position.
CEI also gets funding from other oil companies through the American Petroleum Institute.
Exxon documents reveal the company gave $270,000 to CEI in 2004 alone. $180,000 of that was earmarked for “global climate change and global climate change outreach.†Exxon has contributed over $1.6 million to CEI since 1998.
CEI’s general counsel Sam Kazman said, “I think what attracted [Exxon] to us was our position on global warming.” CEI’s position? The Institute believes the dangers of global warming are akin “to that of ‘an alien invasion.’â€
Exxon’s spokesperson Tom Cirigliano has explained why the company is so dedicated to funding CEI’s pushback on global warming:
We want to support organizations that are trying to broaden the debate. … There is this whole issue that no one should question the science of global climate change that is ludicrous. That’s the kind of dark-ages thinking that gets you in a lot of trouble.
The science is not questioned because the science behind global warming is indisputable. Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus that the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program concluded that humans are driving the warming trend through greenhouse gas emissions. And the EPA has said that the recent warming trend “is real and has been particularly strong within the past 20 years…due mostly to human activities.”
For the oil industry, Al Gore’s film exposing the truth is perceived as a threat, and they have no shortage of funds to try to distort it.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Go Al .
May 17th, 2006 at 12:53 pmThe sad reality is that in the US, a group like CEI has as much influence as it does.
The scientific community has overwhelmingly reached a consensus on global warming. CEI might as well be spewing that the Earth is flat.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:53 pmGlobal warming exists. There’s not much argument about that. The only real discussion left is wondering whether the cause is from burning fossil fuels, or the emissions from the planet’s inhabitants (which has increased by one-third in the past 20 years).
In any case, there’s a whole lot more free energy on the surface of the planet in the past, and it’s humanity’s fault.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:54 pmThey’ve GOT to get these ads in BEFORE hurricane season starts. After the U.S. is drilled by…say…4 Cat 4s this year, and the ocean approaches temps in the mid to upper 80s in the Gulf, they’d look like fools calling this “alarmist”.
Quick Citgo…you only have a few weeks left!
May 17th, 2006 at 12:56 pmThis is really good news. They are going to get more attention on this topic by spending this kind of money on such obviously self-serving PR. Gore’s message, if not Gore himself, will get heard a lot more.
It is amazing the ability of these people to deny the objective facts. It is almost as if they don’t have to live on the planet too.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:57 pmObviously, there’s truth to Gore’s movie. The oil companies are afraid of being exposed for the corrupt pieces of shit they are.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmHaha Big Oil vs. Al Gore?
Guess which is more hated nowadays?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmAmericans hate “big oil”. They should understand this and that any attack on Al Gore will produce more hatred of “big oil”.
GO FOR IT YOU “BIG OIL” ASS WIPES
May 17th, 2006 at 1:06 pmF*CK EXXON! Reparations still have not been made to the people from the VALDEZ DISASTER. The UW is helping them sue for at 2 million. the asshole ceo that just stepped down got 450 million severance. BOYCOTT EXXON!!!!!!!!!! anyway you can.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:07 pmThey should be scared. Michael Shermer who is Scientific American’s official “SKEPTIC” and writes a column under that title said he was converted by Al Gore’s movie into an environment activist. It’s in the latest issue (not on the website yet).
He had previously done a conference presentation based on info from one of the global-warming skeptics so this is BIG news and proves that the movie demonstrates quite convincingly the seriousness of the problem.
People seeing this are going to be transformed. This is great news (I haven’t seen it myself, but now I’m eager to go)
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmFolks, you have to check the ads out at
http://streams.cei.org/
You will fall out of your chair laughing. Here’s a quote: “Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution, we call it life!”
They also show some poor sap riding his bike in the snow, as though that’s what we’re trying to force everyone to do. Unreal.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmThis is the exact same tactic that has been used with teaching Intelligent Design in schools.
1. Create a scientific sounding front group.
2. Act like there’s a controversy, which creates a controversy to talk about (very clever).
3. Exploit legitimate scientific debate to enforce the belief that there’s a controversy.
4. Treat established scientifc knowledge as some sort of elitist ivory tower which refuses to accept new ideas, even if those new ideas fail the scientific tests.
The goal of this is to simply put enough doubt in the public’s mind about global warming to enable them to achieve their business goals. Reality doesn’t matter.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmIf ExxonMobil is so sure that man-made CO2 emission has nothing to do with global warming why can you find this on their website?
FAIRFAX, Va.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–May 16, 2006–ExxonMobil today announced that it has joined the SmartWay Transport(R) Partnership, a voluntary collaboration between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the freight industry designed to increase energy efficiency while significantly reducing emissions that may result in air pollution.
ExxonMobil’s participation in the Carrier category will contribute to the Partnership’s goal of reducing carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions by improving the environmental performance of freight operations. ExxonMobil operates a fleet of 150 company-owned tanker trucks that deliver gasoline products to many of its Exxon- and Mobil-branded service stations across the U.S.
ExxonMobil Joins U.S. EPA SmartWay Transport(R) Partnership
Why on Earth do they have a goal of reducing carbon dioxide?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:10 pmTypical left-wing speech suppression. If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like, you attack the money to suppress the message. If a rich politician pays for a speech you do like, you ignore the money and embrace the message.
The important point is not who paid, or how muchj. It is which message is true. So far, there is no evidence of anything other than cyclical warming and cooling, and no proof that regulating Amercian greenhouse emissions will have any measurable effect on global climate trends. As far as I’m concerned, Gore’s film is mainly a marketing tool for his new book. Like his past book and his speeches, there is a lot of chicken little nonsense. So why should those who disagree remain silent?
The antidote for offensive speech is more speech – not suppression or paranoid ad hominems.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:12 pmWhat gas stations use Exxon gas?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:12 pmCounter the bastards at CEI by visiting this website
http://climatecrisis.net/seethetruth
See the movie, spread the word and prove CEI wrong. If the movie is a success they will be really really mad and desperate.
So don’t forget to tell everyone you know they have to watch this movie.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:14 pmBlue State Red — RAPTURER – go already would you please?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:15 pmWell, we know who to run for President. The guy they routinely smear is the guy who will NOT be their puppet. No one owns Gore anymore.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:15 pm[...] I wonder why. Do you suppose it’s because he has so much more credibility than Bubble Boy? Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 1:19 pmBlue State Red,
I don’t think anyone is calling for the suppression of this kind of advertising. We’re just noting that it’s not truthful.
There’s a lot of evidence that this is not cyclical. The scientific community did not reach the consensus it did based on “no evidence”. Think about it.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:19 pmWhat gas stations use Exxon gas?
Not the convenience stores 711 – they sell CITGO gas!!!!1
May 17th, 2006 at 1:22 pmI will be very interested to see this astroturf group’s non-anthropogenic model that accounts for observed climate change over the last two decades.
There isn’t one.
Like evolution, there is no controversy among the scientists. It’s all a bunch of advertising used to manufacture the APPEARANCE of a controversy.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:24 pm.
Typical left-wing speech suppression. If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like …
Yes, I don’t “like” lies. True. Unlike drooling superstitious freaks like you, I don’t need to hide in someone else’s lies.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:26 pm.
…again, which gas stations use Exxon gas???
May 17th, 2006 at 1:30 pmBlue State Red,
The message of CEI is hogwash. Even if it was not funded by ExxonMobil it would still be hogwash because it lacks any scientific truth.
The movie is a promotion for the book?
Idiot. The movie will bring much more money than the book.
And the book will be out earlier than most theaters would be screening the movie. so why don’t you say that the book is the promotion for the movie?
Chicken little? You confuse Gore with Bush, buddy.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:33 pm#14 – The antidote for offensive speech is more speech – not suppression or paranoid ad hominems.
Comment by Blue State Red
No shit, Sherlock. You’re commenting here, aren’t you?
Faiz posted this item to let us know about the latest news. No one is attempting to suppress any speech. Using your own language — this think tank is paying to try to suppress the message in Al Gore’s movie. We just get to respond to it. It’s the American way!
May 17th, 2006 at 1:40 pmand I would suppose the storms in New England will make people THINK again!
in their words “storms of biblical proportions”
May 17th, 2006 at 1:40 pmhas anyone gone to the site and seen these, can you say may day?
we should welcome these debates, because the ads are a joke…they are bring this fight to the forefront?
sweet, lets meet ‘em head on!
just like ther practicallity of creationism is being felt within schools, do we really want to put truthiness ahead of truth…thats a debate that should be met everyday
May 17th, 2006 at 1:44 pmI know global warming exists. It’s been 90+ degrees for the last 4 days, and I live in northern Idaho — this is May for christ’s sake! We haven’t had a decent winter in several years. I keep meaning to buy a new winter coat, but, oh yeah, we haven’t had a decent winter in years! I believe in the science, who needs science to look out your window?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:44 pm“It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his SALARY depends upon his NOT UNDERSTANDING IT.”
-Upton Sinclair
From the intro on the movie’s web site.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:45 pmI so wish the deniers of global warming would pay attention to the glaciers and the speed at which they are melting. More than 400 polar bears drowned not too long ago. They can swim, but not 50 miles. I wish they would also pay attention to the death of the coral reefs. Coral reefs take hundreds of years to grow…and they are being destroyed at a drastic rate. If they don’t notice it in their own homes, that the climates are just not the same, well I would blame them for not PAYING ATTENTION. and damn them for not caring about this planet. They truly believe there is some Eden somewhere “up there”. I feel so sorry from them that they do NOT RECOGNIZE EDEN RIGHT HERE ON EARTH!
and it would be very arrogant for us to think we can control this planet, it will purge humanity first and morph into something else. Perhaps the cockroaches and rats shall inherit the earth.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:48 pmto that moron redneck in that blue state:
CEI is the same group which denounced Bush for using “dangerous rhetoric”
when he said “American is addicted to oil.”
Who denounced Bush’s proposal for higher fuel economy standards
Who denounced Bush for “making cheap political points about high gas”
and not “promoting policies that will lead to more domestic oil production and lower prices”
So careful when you kiss their collective ass.
If you want ot have some fun watch their ads here
I couldn’t stop laughing while watching them. They are not only stupid but cheesy, sentimental and weak-kneed.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:49 pmZookeeper, Wayne and I know that global warming exists, since our neck of the woods has tornadoes every summer – several years ago a tornado hit the development that Wayne and I both grew up in, near my parents’ house–scary shit! That was the first time our area had gotten hit in about 30 years. Now every time there’s a thunderstorm, it seems, we get tornado watches – in southeastern NY! That was never tornado alley!
May 17th, 2006 at 1:51 pmFunny that supporters of the administration in general so often bring up the now somewhat stale “chicken-little” buzz-phrase.
In Republican world, where everything is topsy-turvy, there must therefore be an inverse chicken-little scenario, where Republican chicken-little is running round the farmyard trying to persuade the animals that the sky is not falling and that it is in the best condition it’s ever been in, even though he has bits of broken, fallen sky sticking out of his face.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:52 pm2 comments:
1. Alan is right (#5). The CEI and its ilk will only self-destruct by spewing the same lies over and over, bringing attention to the truth of global warming.
2. I have a feeling that Blue State Red gets paid by Corporate Oil slimeballs to troll here – probably some amount for every post responding to the troll’s messages of distraction. So I’d say, tag trolls but dont feed them. The attack by CEI proves they know that they are vulnerable. The trolls reinforce the correctness of our position and the vulnerability of theirs when they come here and say demonstrably ridiculous things. First they ridicule, then they fight, then we win.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:53 pm#14 – “If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like, you attack the money to suppress the message. If a rich politician pays for a speech you do like, you ignore the money and embrace the message.”
You beat me to it! That’s typical right-wing tactics to a “T”.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:54 pmWill Big Oil ever make up its mind? From pushing the Anti-Global Warming Petition in 2000 (do not misconstrue the petition name: this collection of wingnuts from the CEI, AAPG, et al. was signing an anti-Kyoto-treaty, we-don’t-believe-in-global-warming, we-hate-Al-Gore petition), we recently were treated to the “new” philosophy of the AAPG, elucidated by Director Rick Fritz, in the April 2006 issue of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Explorer,:
May 17th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
I like how the REVERSED the footage of a massive glaciar falling into the water to prove that other studied are coming up with opposite findings. Do they think that revsersed image helps ANYONE believe their theory?
Of course, they only list TWO scientific studies that support their argument. Funny that the studies that support the global warming theory FAR OUTNUMBER that. We all know that if there are more headlines, you place them all in the frame at the same time, political advertisements do it all the time. So they can’t use the argument that they only had 30 seconds. And anyways, they could trim down a lot of the BS video footage of people on their bikes in the snow if they really needed more time to explaine their side.
Let us also note that both studies are from the same magazine, and both from within only a four month period.
I’ll end this comment with one more link for everyone to look over: Union Of Concerned Scientists On Global Warming
May 17th, 2006 at 1:57 pmAlso… they say we depend on fules that emmit CO2 “to grow our food, move our children, light up our lives.” It is WELL KNOWN that there are alternate sources of energy out there which could be used to power all of that. It’s also interesting to note that the visuals they choose for “light up our lives” is Times Square in NYC. Do we REALLY need all those lights in TImes Square? Of course not. I would have no problem with seeing less, of those rediculous signs.
Yes, C02 is what we breathe out. And yes, it’s what trees turn into oxygyn again. But we are overpowering those trees which create oxygyn from C02. We don’t have enough trees to compinsate for how much C02 is being spewed out!
Environmentalists wouldn’t push for alternate sources of energy if we didn’t think the current situation is hurting us, and enviornmentalists wouldn’t push if they didn’t think alternate sources of energy were possible. They ARE possible, and they have been proven to work.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:02 pm#33 – Jane, that’s amazing, I never would have thought of tornadoes in NY state. Several years ago there was a tornado right on the Clearwater River, and it took out a huge patch of pine trees. It took quite a while to figure out what had actually happened since we’d never had one before. Tornados scare the crap out of me.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:08 pm#39, newname, do you remember when Ronald Reagan stated that ‘trees cause air pollution?!
May 17th, 2006 at 2:09 pm#24 – which stations use Exxon? That’s a multilayered question. The petroleum supply chain is driven by two open spot markets – the one for crude oil and the one for gasoline and other derviatives. The fact is you don’t know whose hands the stuff you pump has been through – even Citgo’s could have come from Exxon.
Simple message – buy from Citgo if you want to avoid giving money to big oil. ALL the profits from Citgo’s operations go back to Venezuela to their national oil company, which in turn goes to the Venezuelan government, which in turn finances any number of social programs for the poor in LA. QED. Search Citgos website for a list of stations near you. Your other choice is to get a bike.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:10 pmeven Citgo’s could have come from Exxon.
Citgo comes from Venezuala (the only reason the US has any interest at all), and Venezuela does not belong to OPEC.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:14 pmWay to Go Al!
#42 thats is what I’m trying to get people to do Buy Citgo Screw Big Facist Oil Companies and the bush cabal
May 17th, 2006 at 2:15 pmCitgo’s profits go to Venezuela. Period. Exxon doesn’t see a dime. This argument has already been debunked.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:17 pmGO GORE!!!!!!! yeah baby!!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 2:18 pmcan you say LANDLSIDE!!!!!?????
May 17th, 2006 at 2:20 pmThis (the rebuttal) is EASY! All president Gore has to do is: Show the before and after picture that he showed on SNL (forget location at the moment).
Then, he says, “let me say that again” and shows the before and after picture again. Fade to black with him saying, “Once more now, for those suffering from myopia, the incredibly obtuse, or all you gluttonous mega oil corporations…
May 17th, 2006 at 2:21 pm#43, nope – Citgo stations buy gasoline on the spot market – they get a decent cut from the Citgo refining operation which refines MOSTLY Venezuelan crude (I say mostly because Venezuelan crude is heavy and sulphury, and not all refineries can handle it). Citgo refineries also buy crude from the spot market.
So at those two points on the chain, the oil or gasoline could be someone elses. However that is not important, the profits from you buying gasoline from a Citgo station (which is all you can affect here anyway), goes to Venezuela – finito Benito.
Oh, and Venezuela is a member of OPEC.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:23 pmHoly crap, CO2 has a press agent? Pretty impressive for a simple gas.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:24 pm“The mainstream media has posed the most serious impediment to Americans and politicians understanding the scientific consensus and knowledge of global warming, Gore said.
A striking slide in the film showed that 0% of a large sample of peer-reviewed scientific studies disputed global warming or its man-made, or anthropogenic, causes. Meanwhile, 53% of media accounts portrayed global warming as a debated issue, according to one study cited in the film.”
Gore May Run Again in 2008 for US President, Warns of Global Warming
May 17th, 2006 at 2:25 pmAs I’m sitting around my wood fire talking with grandkids by candlelight, I picture myself shrugging my shoulders and saying, “Heck, I told everyone I knew we were screwing up, I cut my car mileage down by 75%, upgraded as much as I could around my house, including adding rainwater catches etc etc”. And my grandkids just jump up and yell: “But Grandad, you knew the glaciers were going, you knew you couldn’t go outside in the sun for more than 15 mins without sunscreen, you knew you’d never see a gallon of gas below $3 again – WTF were you thinking? Thanks a lot – hope you enjoyed your party on the Titanic – wish we knew what icebergs looked like though”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:30 pm[...] Read more Attacks [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 2:30 pmGlobal warming is in direct relation to human activity.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:33 pmFast food consumption results in production of “farts”…do I need to say more ?
No Humans = No Farts = No global warming.
:)
And “Tell us again how far you could drive in a day? Could you really just go anywhere there was a road?”
And “So you flew on a plane almost every week? Wow”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:33 pmI sailed the seven seas for 35 years, 1945-1998 with some breaks for electronics teaching. In that time, I have seen MASSIVE CHANGES IN THE SIZE AND FEROCITY OF STORMS AND HURRICANES. tHIS IS NO ABERRATION, OR SPIKE. iT IS A TREND. oNE OF THOSE JUNK SCIENTISTS SHILLING FOR BIG OIL STATED THAT THE OCEAN TEMP A/2 MILE DEEP HAD NOT CHANGED. hOW CONVENIENTLY HE FAILS TO NOTE THAT HURRICANES DERIVE THEIR MASSIVE ENERGY FROM THE SURFACE WHICH HAS WARMED ONE DEG f IN RECENT YEARS. wAIT UNTIL THIS HURRICANE STARTS! i PREDICT 5 TO 6 VERY STRONG ONES, AND 4 WILKL HIT THE STATES CAUSING MASSIVE DAMAGE EXCEDDING kATRINA. rEMEMBER, YOU SAW IT HERE.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:41 pmLonesome Chuck, caps lock is usually on the left of your keyboard – I think its stuck.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pmRegarding the influence of movies to our lives, it seems to me that after all the media hype, controversy and debate over Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11″, little changed in the American body politic. George Bush went on to “win” another term as President.
Only now, when his “shock and awe” war is doing to us what he promised to do to them, has the public turned against him to some degree. Which to me only proves that Americans care more about winning and losing than about right and wrong.
For years now, an increasing number of scientists have been sounding the alarm about global warming. Yet it was only since gas prices have gone up that sales for gas-guzzlers pushed on the world by the the auto industry have begun to slide.
Likewise, it will take more than Al Gore’s movie to wake up Americans to the enormous threat this is to the world as we know it. Even then, if the Republicans stay in power, corporations and their paid stooges like the CEI will ignore the crisis until the Atlantic Ocean rises to the level of the Oval Office.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pmI wonder how many of the posters above drive cars. In fact HAVE to drive cars, or eat the food thats delivered on 5 mpg trucks. The problem is astronomically bigger than the “asswipe” big oil companies vs Al Gore. What will we do when gas goes to $7 or $10/gal, Which it will? What will we eat when hamburger hits $15 a pound and california oranges are $5 each?
May 17th, 2006 at 2:50 pm#41 Talking about California, California Governators and trees… remember the answer to frequent summer fires, presented from someone right of the spectrum (don’t remember if was Bush, Schwarzenegger or some other lame duck)? Cut the trees.
Next summer? Landslides caused by rains and lack of trees’ roots…
May 17th, 2006 at 2:52 pm#59, Tim thou speakest sooth. Unless you are living the subsistence lifestyle – we’re all at it – eating supermarket food, driving lumps of metal about, lapping the city on the freeway and stopping to get a burger and fries every now and again. More from my future discussions with my grandchildren:
“What’s an orange Grandad?”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:54 pm“Can you remember what bananas taste like?”
The bastards cite two studies.
The first is Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland by
Ola M. Johannessen , Kirill Khvorostovsky , Martin W. Miles , Leonid P. Bobylev
Submitted to Science on May 26, 2005
And they suggest that this study somehow proves that global warming is a hoax. Except that this study actually claims this:
“Efforts to measure changes in the Greenland Ice Sheet from field observations, aircraft and satellite remote sensing – such as altimeters that measure surface height – have improved our knowledge over the past decade. However, there is still no consensus assessment of the overall mass balance of the ice sheet. There is however evidence of melting and thinning in the coastal marginal areas in recent years, as well as indications that large Greenland outlet glaciers can surge, possibly in response to climate.”
http://www.bjerknes.uib.no/pages.asp?kat=2&id=170&lang=2
Moreover Johanessen et al. did not measure all of the coastal ranges.
In the earlier Science paper, Johanessen et al. found increased snow accumulation on the top of the interior Greenland ice sheet between 1992 and 2003. Above 1500m a.s.l in much of the interior Greenland they estimated an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year and below 1500m they observed a decreasing trend of -2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year. Hence, growth in the interior parts and a thinning of the ice nearer the edges. However, Johane
ssen et al. were not able to measure all of the coastal ranges. Indeed, the thinning of the margins and growth in the interior Greenland is an expected response to increased temperatures and more precipitation in a warmer climate. These results present no contradiction to the accelerated sliding near the coasts, but both will affect the ice/snow (fresh water) mass estimate. Whereas the finding of Rignot & Kanagaratnam suggests a larger sink of the frozen Greenland fresh water budget (the ice is dumped into the sea), the snow deposition in Greenland interiors is a source term (increases the amount of frozen fresh water). It does not matter for the general sea level in which form the water exists (liguid or solid/frozen) when it is discharged into the sea: The same mass of liquid water and immersed ice affect the water level equally (Archimede’s principle).
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/03/greenland-ice-and-other-glaciers/
I wonder why CEI neglected to mention this in their ad.
The second study is Snowfall-Driven Growth in East Antarctic Ice Sheet Mitigates Recent Sea-Level Rise by Curt H. Davis, Yonghong Li, Joseph R. McConnell, Markus M. Frey, Edward Hanna
Science 24 June 2005
But again this does not deny that global warming leads to rising sea levels.
Rather it says “a gain of this magnitude is enough to slow sea-level rise by
0.12 ± 0.02 millimeters per year.”
Which is still not good.
But if CEI likes Science so much why didn’t they show this study in their ad?
Seasonality and Increasing Frequency of Greenland Glacial Earthquakes Göran Ekström, Meredith Nettles, Victor C. Tsai
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Accelerated Sea-Level Rise from West Antarctica
R. Thomas, E. Rignot, G. Casassa, P. Kanagaratnam, C. Acuña, T. Akins, H. Brecher, E. Frederick,1P. Gogineni, W. Krabill, S. Manizade, H. Ramamoorthy, A. Rivera, R. Russell, J. Sonntag, R. Swift, J. Yungel, J. Zwally
Science 8 October 2004
or this
Paleoclimatic Evidence for Future Ice-Sheet Instability and Rapid Sea-Level Rise
Jonathan T. Overpeck, Bette L. Otto-Bliesner, Gifford H. Miller, Daniel R. Muhs, Richard B. Alley, Jeffrey T. Kiehl
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Measurements of Time-Variable Gravity Show Mass Loss in Antarctica Isabella Velicogna, and John Wahr
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Changes in the Velocity Structure of the Greenland Ice Sheet
May 17th, 2006 at 2:57 pmEric Rignot and Pannir Kanagaratnam
Science 17 February 2006
#60 reminds me of Jared Diamond’s “Collapse” – how advanced, cultured civilizations simply run right off the cliff of existence. Just what was the last man who cut down the last tree on Easter Island thinking? My guess: “I don’t give a crap, I’m going have a big fire and then I’m going to eat your mother – how’d you like that, Grog?”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:57 pm#63 And “I’m sure that the souls of the past kings that inhabit the mohays will grow more palm trees by next summer.”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:00 pmHand Al the Megaphone, and let’s march.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:03 pmBesides the greenhouse gases issue is the greater issue that oil is not a renewable source of energy!! some day it’s going to be all used up. then what? the repugs can call it ‘chicken little’ but i prefer to be called that then ‘big dumb-ass ostrich with your head in the sand’!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:05 pm#64 And the last Californian who pumps the last tank of gasoline into his convertible:
May 17th, 2006 at 3:05 pm“I don’t give a crap, I’m driving to Vegas, baby, 90 miles an hour and when I get there, I’m going to eat your mother – how’d you like that, dude?”
I know global warming exists. It’s been 90+ degrees for the last 4 days, and I live in northern Idaho — this is May for christ’s sake! We haven’t had a decent winter in several years.
This is a perfect example of how the theory of global warming is believed less on scientific grounds than on largely on anecdotal “snapshots of conditions that are isolated as to place and/or time.
We know that climatology and meteorology ar two different sciences. We know that climatology, like geology, requires consideration of the historical record, such as it is, always with the disclaimer that we recognize the limits of our own certainty in interpreting that record.
Thirty years ago the alarmists were predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age. Now the same people are predicting a long and devastating warming of the earth, leading to melting of the polar caps, rising seas and increased cancer from UV rays. Meanwhile, no one can predict the average temperature next week, let alone next year or 50 years from now.
Then there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:06 pmalso…. i say we start up a second presidency. that is just totally ignore the one in the white house and let Al Gore who was cheated out of his presidency start now! He is gonna be plenty busy in 08 so lets give him a jump start!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:08 pm#66 Perfect Storm mac – massive US deficit, climate change screwing up everyone’s ability to get or grow food, peak oil pulling the energy rug out from under all that cheap energy for heating, driving, buying plasma TVs. As my Grandkids are going to say:
“WTF were you thinking Grandad?”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:08 pm#68 Blue State Redcoat – produce your data for your statements and prepare yourself.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:11 pmBSR… okay big dumb ass ostrich with your head in the sand! whatever you say. jeesh!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:12 pmto the moron redneck in that blue state:
No reasonable person was predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth thirty years ago . Especially not Gore.
You should not listen to assholes but to real scientists, like Gore does.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:13 pmBut for that first you should get your head out of Bush’s ass. And I know chicken little wingnuts are just too weak to do that.
“I do not believe that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer…”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:15 pmi say we start up a second presidency. that is just totally ignore the one in the white house and let Al Gore who was cheated out of his presidency start now!
LOLROTFLMAO! This is the best fever swamp fantasy I have read in a long time! Oh, please, say it will be so. I would LOVE to see His Pompousness start up a “second presidency.” He could even film it for “Current TV.” Of course, if he did, no one would see it . . .
May 17th, 2006 at 3:15 pmRedcoat – back up your statements or piss off
May 17th, 2006 at 3:17 pmBSR,,,, better than what we got now!! see you in 2008 baby!!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pmThen there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
Wow, how toughtful. Too bad that the USA is and has been the bigger source of emissions on the planet since the end of the WWII, at least, and the countries you cite don’t increased their emissions significatively until a few years ago. And, even today, the combined emissions of China and India (over 2 Bilion people) don’t match the emission level of the USA (290 Milion of people).
So, screwing 2 bilion people to the benefit of 0.3 bilion doesn’t seem the wiser way…
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pm[...] Also see ThinkProgress, where I learned about this, and Sourcewatch, which has the low-down on CEI. [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pmBSR…. I will meet you here in 2008 and we will discuss this further.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:21 pm#78 Oh, that was directed to #68, and if you want links to data:
PEW Climate Center
Thay have a LOT of stats to look at.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:22 pmThirty years ago the alarmists were predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age. Now the same people are predicting a long and devastating warming of the earth
Now THAT’s a swamp fever fantasy. George Will has been pushing this fiction hard, and got the smackdown on national TV for it. Keep up your delusions though. Don’t worry, I won’t ask you to actually back up that claim with facts and names, LOL.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:23 pmIncreased cancer from UV rays?
Little boy, that’s the result of stratospheric ozone depletion not global warming. Two different things.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:25 pmDecrease of stratospheric ozone was first reported in 1974 and it was linked to the increasing presence of CFC’s. Thanks to people who are not like you there was a global effort to scale back use of CFC’s and as a result ozone depletion stopped.
Crow’s Nest: “Peak oil right ahead, surrounded by a hurricane brought on by climate change – collision imminent!”
Captain of the Titanic: “No problem, we’ve got oil sands in Canada, what climate change?”
Number 1: “They are still rowdy in steerage sir, a bunch of Indians and Chinese think they deserve to be up here in the First Class cocktail lounge”
Crow’s Nest: “Captain, it appears we’re f***ed, what do we do?”
Captain: “Let’s let some of those darkies and such up from steerage, Number 1, I’m sure we could pin it all on a few of them – see you at the helicopter”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:25 pmIan Murphy over at NRO’s The Corner (2:05 PM) says CEI is using ’scientific studies’ to debunk Al Gore’s claim. Of course, the NRO has never really paid much attention to science, economics, or anything that is serious analysis.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:29 pmBlue State Red,
You are not just stupid you are not even funny.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:30 pmThe problem is that no up-to-date peer-reviewed scientific study denies
May 17th, 2006 at 3:34 pmanthropogenic climate change. So CEI have no choice but to fabricate some.
Time for a revolution, don’t ya think?
May 17th, 2006 at 3:38 pmHey I have a great idea. How about we put all the global warming scientists in a room together, without food or water, for as long as it takes their climate prediciton models to be proven true by actual experience!? No takers? I thought not. Besides, the decomposition of all that useless human flesh might create dangerous emissions!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:38 pmWell alls i’ve got to say is it looks like the shit is finally hitting the fan.Hope Gore does run so we won’t have to put up with head up Bush’s ass Hillary.He’s my president now and has been since 2000.As for BIG OIL the end is near and you can almost feel them starting to panic.As for global warming, i live in Michigan and we haven’t seen a good skiing or snowmobiling season in years and Bush’s interior policies have laid our forests almost barren.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:41 pmBSR… … this bears repeating…..big dumbass ostritch with your head in the sand!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:43 pm#89 Provided you head for Mauritius and promise to live there the rest of your life, no matter what the sea level does. You put some skin in the game and so will we, asshat.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:46 pm#92 Still waiting for a fact or two to adorn your foaming, redneck diatribe, Redcoat.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pmBlue State Red Moron,
We know that you hate scientists. They are much smarter than you are and you just can’t digest that. That’s why you hate Gore, too.
Look, why don’t you try to read a book or two. Then maybe you would have a higher self-esteem and stop whining.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pmWhy is there no legal remedy? Must we sit and listen to the harmful lies of organizations like CEI as the world crumbles around us?
Can’t we file class action lawsuits demanding that they cease and desist with their lies and misrepresentations, which are clearly defined by the bottom line of oil corporations and have nothing to do with the possibility (albeit slight) chance of the continuance of the human race as a viable species on planet earth?
We need a sustainable development act, which revokes the charter of organizations that actively seek to destroy the environmental factors needed to sustain human (and all biological life-forms). For example, it is against the law to poison a well, isn’t it? It should be against the law to poison the atmosphere with lies about the toxicity that corporations are dumping on us in their race to the bottom of the scum-pool.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:49 pmPeople, don’t waste you time with Bull Shit Red. He probably lives with his mom in a trailer in Alabama somewhere and when he works, which is probably not often, he makes about 8 or 9 bucks an hour. He has no power, and his time is soon coming. He and his kind are on the way out. He knows it, and so do most others that know him. Don’t waste your time.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:51 pmSorry Lex, but the First Amendment not only guarantees free speech but also free lies.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:52 pmThis is my biggest problem with this entire situation: let’s say global warming statistics are off, or incomplete, or too much warning not enough warming to show for it. So what?
What is so incredibly horrible about instituting technology and measures to insure the dilution of pollution into the atmosphere? There is nothing wrong with acting NOW to prevent any further, future polluting of the environment.
The only people who have a problem with enacting rules and regulations to prevent more polluting are the CEOs and executives of the companies that do the most polluting, the lobbyists who make millions pushing pro-pollution measures into Congress, and the Republicans and occasional Democrats who allow those pro-pollution laws to be enacted.
Think about it. If you’re a huge corporation making millions and billions a year, is it really going to kill you to spend money to stop polluting?
Pollution affects the entire planet, the wildlife that lives on it, and all of us in one way or another.
Whether or not we’re having a serious negative climate change within the decade or 50 years from now, or 100 years from now, instituting anti-pollution measures NOW means we’ve started before the problem is out of control and can’t be fixed.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:54 pmWhy is there no legal remedy? Must we sit and listen to the harmful lies of organizations like CEI as the world crumbles around us?
Sure there’s a legal remedy. It’s called amending the Constitution. See, if you get enough people to agree with you, you can change the Constitution – even the First Amendment!
Until then, though, all political speech is legal, whether you like it or not. Except, of course, campaign contributions, which are only legal if they come from approved sources in approved amounts for approved purposes. But hey, what’s a little fudging where the First Amendment is concerned?
May 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pmBrought to you by your gas dollars…Buy more gas and help fund a PR campaign.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:03 pmWhat is so incredibly horrible about instituting technology and measures to insure the dilution of pollution into the atmosphere?
But what if the global warming models are way off, or even flat wrong? If we overcorrect too much in the wrong direction, then the premise of the global warming theory (that is, that human industrial and commercial activitiy is a major cause of global warming, and that regulation of such activity will prevent a global warming meltdown) suggests that we might wind up creating another ice age. Then what would we do? Jeepers, I’m so confused!
May 17th, 2006 at 4:04 pmBSR… your confused and you are a ‘big dumb-ass ostrictch with your head in the sand’
May 17th, 2006 at 4:35 pmBSR….errr….. you are confused and you are a ‘big dumbass ostrich with your head in the sand’
May 17th, 2006 at 4:36 pmBe sure we give big oil what they need Big Al Gore in White House in 2008 to rein in the greedy BASTARDS.FUMIGATE the place and get it ready for honest goverment for a change.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:39 pm#14 Who paid is of the utmost importance. If CEI were an organization that was just dedicated to intellectual honesty and sound science, they wouldn’t have been taking money from Exxon Mobil. $1.6 million from Exxon Mobil! Why not an independent organization?
So far, there is no evidence of anything other than cyclical warming and cooling, and no proof that regulating Amercian greenhouse emissions will have any measurable effect on global climate trends.
First, I don’t think there is any amount of evidence that would suffice for someone who calls the opposing view “typical left-wing speech suppression”. Who’s suppressing speech, anyway? Second, there’s no proof that regulating emissions wouldn’t have a measurable effect on climate trends. But, continuing to do the things that have clearly been shown to cause a greenhouse effect certainly will not alleviate the problem. It would make sense to stop. And, when you say “cyclical warming and cooling”, what kind of cycles are you referring to? When was the last time we had glaciers and arctic ice cover receding at the rate that they are today?
I would love to see the matter debated in public. As a public service, maybe Exxon Mobil would like to sponsor an hourlong boradcast debate between CEI and some real honest-to-goodness climate scientists. And then let the public decide for themselves who’s telling the truth.
At the very least, you and the oil companies and all their buddies in the Republican party seem willing to roll the dice with the fate of the planet. For what? For money, and to show that you’re a badass who isn’t afraid of a little thing like the end of all life as we know it? Play with your own life. Leave the rest of us out of it.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:43 pmRun back through the comments on 5/17/06 – “Blue State Red ” demonstrates why it’s not much fun anymore to debate wingnuts online – like shooting fish ina barrel. mosat of those who can read and write have deserted the Halls Of Idiocy in the last few months.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:48 pm#99 there I was agreeing with Blue State Redcoat there for on one issue and then he went ahead and exercised his 1st Amendment right to make no sense whatsoever in post #101.
And yet in post #68 we have this:
You know I would put post #101 right up there with the “Dammit Bubba, it’s hot outside, must eb that there global warming” kinds of analysis. Still waiting for a fact or two or something that even coherently sounds like a sound opinion from Blue State Redneck
May 17th, 2006 at 4:52 pm[...] Josh Marshall linked to our earlier post on the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by big oil – and their attack on Al Gore’s new movie. Josh mentioned he remembered that CEI’s founder, Fred Smith, was on Crossfire years ago talking about how “global warming was actually a good thing because of all the cool new crops we could grow.” [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#106 – just like the numbers of people for whom the statement ‘Dude, I was at Woodstock’ is actually true and not an article of faith now exceeds the numbers of people who were actually at Woodstock by several 100s of %, the number of people who ‘always thought (1) George W. Bush was a malicious, incompetent frat-boy with a god complex (2) invading Iraq had nothing to do with WMD and the GWOT and was always going to end up as a murderous clusterf*** which destryoed America’s reputation’ will vastly outnumber the people who actually DID think (1) and (2) above are correct and have always thought it – even when the aforementioned Two-Pint Caligula was pimping for the Texas Rangers.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:59 pm#68 Then there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
So, I guess you’ve abandoned your other argument, that it’s all a bunch of hooey. Now you’re conceding that greenhouse emissions are the culprit, but we shouldn’t do anything about it, because we’re not the worst offenders? As for the American economy, the oil companies are not exactly helping it out right now. They’re doing well by their own economies, but they’re screwing the rest of the country.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:01 pmThe public has so much negative opinion on big oil, it won’t make any difference what they say about Gore — they are despised.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:04 pmThe fans of Nascar, Hummers, 4X4 races, and other Republican die-hards will buy the bull-poop from the oil companies, but I think this is a loser for big oil.
They should tuck their tails between their legs and slink away to build more refineries for today and develop new sources of renewable fuel for tomorrow. They should make a deal with the auto companies.
Sorry meg_mac, I had pledged not to respond to trolls, but I have relapsed. Climbing back on the wagon…
May 17th, 2006 at 5:10 pmSure this is just the “natural” cycle of things…right? Right Wing Nut Jobs believe that “global warming” is the direct result of the Sun…Also two weeks ago I heard an “official” from the API on the Rush Limberger show actually agree with a caller that “oil” is NOT the remnants of dead plant and animal life, but a natural occurance of the “earth’s crust”(that is such as gold or iron as example)….I only had ONE semester in Organic Chemistry in college…but almost EVERYONE agreed then that oil (petroleum HYDRO-CARBONS) are the end results of fossilized dinoaurs, insects and sea-life(mostly)…but I heard this American Petroleum Institute EXPERT actually tell this dittohead idiot that this snake oil theory actually warranted investigation…if THAT is the case then we better get oil derricks up on the MOON as quickly as possible to reap that NATURAL OCURRANCE of Planetary CRUST!…Will Conservatives STOP grasping for straws here? By the way…
GO AL GO!
May 17th, 2006 at 5:13 pmBlue State Red flaunts his ignorance. He would never go see Al Gore’s movie, because it doesn’t fit his preconceived notions. Hell, he’d rather destroy the standard of living and the climate of America, and have his neighbors’ kids come home in body bags from Iraq FOR NO GODDAMMNED REASON rather than admit he’s wrong.
Note to BSR- you’re being played by a fool by an alcoholic imbecile with a criminal record who’s bankrupted 4 businesses. Every rational poster at this site knows it- you’re a laughingstock.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:20 pm#113 – What does Intelligent Design have to say about climate change? Apart from the occasional Biblical Flood, I mean?
May 17th, 2006 at 5:23 pmI heard one a**hole recently who said that “oil bubbles up out of the center of the earth”. “It’s never going to run out.” What a f**g moron. He probably didn’t go past the second grade like some of these a**hole talk show radio hosts. Do we want to ignore global warming? I don’t think so. Even it if doesn’t turn out to be a problem twenty years from now do we really want to be dumb enough to ignore it and not do something about it?
May 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pmUnfortunately, this is America where Faith trumps Science everytime and proudly so… it seems, so this message will be believed by large numbers of Americans for whom ads are truly a source of “news”.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:28 pmI think the farts from all the 6 billion of people on this planet is also going to be a problem in the future. That doesn’t count cattle and other farm animals. If each person farts a cubic foot of gas a week that would be 6 billion cubic feet of methane. We could light a city. This methane could similarly damage our planet if it isn’t contained and burned.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:32 pmI saw “An Inconvenient Truth” in Chicago. I have been semi-environmental. Not passionate about it, but fairly consistent. The movie alternately awed, terrified, angered and inspired me. I pledged to go back with friends opening night.
The AEI even has a moment in the film. In any event, the media coverage and public attitude in general about the environment are going to be intense and highly politicized soon, I think. I brought some “Inconvenient Truth” 1-page posters into work, and posted one on my cube wall. A day later, someone had posted a really shoddy opinion piece article by Philip Stott, a Global Warming debunker, next to it.
They’re looking to get as many people out to see it on opening night as possible to get it to play deep into rural areas, too. I blogged about the experience at my site, kuniform.org, and posted some Flickr photos of Al Gore, who was there to speak.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:50 pm#116 – Um, sorry, no idea.
May 17th, 2006 at 6:04 pmAre the numbers out of whack again?
[...] Big oil and their record profits as a result of price fixing/gouging/manipulation are attacking Al Gore with billions in order to “prove” what the scientific community has already debunked. [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 7:02 pm#111 The “more refineries” argument is a canard. You want to know why we haven’t built new refieries? Because it’s cheaper to expand the old ones. That’s right, if you say “We haven’t built a new refinery in this country since the 1970s” that is true, but if you say we haven’t increased our refining capacity, that is a lie.
Just more Karl Rove word play. We have enough refining capacity, and the solution to our problem is NOT a lack of capacity to burn oil faster.
May 17th, 2006 at 7:47 pm[...] Via Think Progress. CEI also gets funding from other oil companies through the American Petroleum Institute. [...]
May 17th, 2006 at 8:01 pmblue state red wins the ULTIMATE SHILL AWARD!
by stepping up to defend the corporate oil interests, bsr has proven he will shill for anybody! even though they will mercilessly and endlessly ream him and the planet, bsr is still willing to get in line and suck the cock of big corporate oil while they belittle him, treat him like a worthless whore, laugh at him and spit in his face.
congratulations, bsr! your ass must really hurt!
May 17th, 2006 at 8:34 pmThe sad thing is that so many Americans are persuaded by 60 secon ads. They no longer read, think or discuss anything. Only what they are told by the MSM or their churches matter.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:37 pmYeah, Rush Limbaugh has been preaching his ignorant BS for so many years, the wingnuts (many of whom like their leader can barely read) are dummied down to the extent that all they can do is wave a flag , and say “ditto, Rush, ditto” while the world crumbles around them. Maybe they like to fantasize about all the riches their capitalist masters are accumulating: or feel proud of having such a fine “christian” as their heroe, Bush, in the White House.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:40 pm“Thank You For Smoking”…was that a documentary?
May 17th, 2006 at 8:42 pmThe “more refineries†argument is a canard. You want to know why we haven’t built new refieries? Because it’s cheaper to expand the old ones. That’s right, if you say “We haven’t built a new refinery in this country since the 1970s†that is true, but if you say we haven’t increased our refining capacity, that is a lie.
Anyway you slice it we are maxed out on our refining capacity and we need more refineries, along with more coastal and ANWR drilling, nuclear energy and solar energy. We especially need more refineries in places that are not vulnerable to hurricanes and tornadoes, so we don’t get weather related shut downs.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:43 pmMostly, we need alternative fuel and the oil companies could begin to think about what they might do about it – if only with the thought that it would be another area where they might reap obscene profits.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:15 pmBSR you left out the perface to your latest rant;
which is;
If I want to be as stupid as I sound and pretent that the energy crisis we face is not real then….
May 17th, 2006 at 9:24 pmbackwash state red,
drill, drill, drill. rape, rape, rape. deplete, deplete, deplete. depend, depend, depend.
repeat.
sure, a new refinery is being built. biggest ever. in port arthur texas on the gulf of mexico, right about where hurricane rita hit last year.
sure, let’s cluelessly (or shamelessly) cling to the idea that “peak oil” doesn’t exist.
sure, let’s drill in the anwr, and subsequently ship the majority of that oil to asian countries (destination china, japan and india – the true plan for anwr oil).
sure, let’s shill for oil companies, like exxonmobil, who still owes about $6.5 billion in damages from the exxon valdez oil spill (17 years ago now)…and also made ALMOST 6 TIMES THAT MUCH in profit alone last year. simply their profits from the 3rd quarter alone – you remember, when katrina and rita hit, and oil refining capacity was so “tight” – would’ve covered those damages.
sure, let’s suck the cocks of oil company executives so they can make obscene profits while america’s debt increases and our children and grandchildren are left with no resources, a shell of a planet and a number followed by 12 ZEROS that they are expected to pay off.
sure, that’s a great plan for america you have there, backwash.
HOW DOES IT FEEL TO BE THE ULTIMATE SHILL, BSR?
May 17th, 2006 at 9:29 pmI have not been to a movie theater in 4 years. I will go see this movie 4 yes no less than four times. Once for myself and 3 times for those that died in New Orleans. This will be my memorial to them. From one white trash midwestern boy to a city that was murdered while I watched from 3000 miles away. I will not watch there commercials, I will not allow them to lie in debates with nothing to back up there statements and I will always remember New Orleans a city that died so that America would awaken. Hollywood you want me to go see movies??? Make films that matter, tell me the truth and tell stories like these instead of crap about rich people living in Manhattan and there daily dating woes while people all over this nation TRULY struggle everyday in moving and amazing ways just to survive.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:31 pmNot having seen Al’s movie, I hope it comes to the conclusion that the main source of carbon dioxide and methane pollution is the growth of the far right in this country.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:33 pmExxon’s position on global warming is a crime–just ask Swiss Re or Munich Re about the rates they will be charging companies that are not managing carbon output. Exxon will be facing greater liability claims that simply the Exxon Valdez once connections are made to the corporation for these criminal actions.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:49 pmWhen will Exxon’s shareholders realize their long term assets are at risk of losing their value and that their company is ignoring their fiduciary responsibility.
Paying scientific prostitutes like Richard Lindzen and Patrick Michaels is a crime against humanity.
Blue State Red is correct on one count. In the 70’s there was serious research and discussion regarding increased particulate pollution of the stratosphere acting to reduce the amount of solar gain in the lower atmosphere. The primary cause: human activity, especially large scale slash and burn activity in the rain forests. However, there was concurrent research and discussion regarding the greenhouse effect of CO2 from said burning and fossil fuel use. The conclusions were inconclusive, primarily along the lines of computational capabilities simply are not being powerful enough to manage the variables. Remember, this was pretty early in the computer age – the tiny chip in a baby’s moo toy today has more capacity than a roomful of 1970 blinkin’ boxes. Climatology has progressed exponentially. Along with the mathematics of chaotic non-linear systems such as weather. Pretty much looks like we’re headed for a hot spell. Whether or not accellerated by human activity. General advice when the boat is sinking…bail water OUT of the boat, not INTO the boat.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:05 pmI guess you could say, Gore has been EXXONERATED!
May 17th, 2006 at 10:14 pmBlue State Red
You are an ignorant slut.
You are so poorly informed. Turn off fox news.
Get on the “internets” and do a search for “gobal warming scientific evidence”
When the movie comes out go see it.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:20 pmThen report back here with your tail between your legs and provide a big apology to the humans who do care about things other than just ourselves.
[...] According to Progressive Blog Site, Think Progress, CEI, plans to unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†[...]
May 17th, 2006 at 10:23 pmIf you go to CEI’s website, their environmental “expert” is some little dweeb named Myron Ebrell, who has NO SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND WHATSOEVER. He has a economics degree. What a JOKE.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:26 pmWho exactly ” predict[ed] a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age?”
I can remember seeing a movie in science class (more than 30 years ago, actually) warning about global warming, though that term wasn’t used then. But I vividly remember the remark that a rise in the earth’s atmosphere of 2 or 3 degrees could melt the polar ice caps.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:28 pmCEI claims global warming is a myth. Yea, right. And cigarettes aren’t addictive and don’t cause cancer.
Amazing how the oil companies can’t lower gas prices due to “market pressure” and yet they have tons of cash to throw around on TV time spreading their misinformation.
And our soldiers are dying for the profits they’re pocketing. You’d think they would help pay for the funerals and medical care instead of phony science stunts.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:49 pmAnother sad fact is that these types of lobby groups are not just confined to the US. Australia which I have read has greater carbon emissions per capita than the US due to its heavy reliance on Coal fired electricity (The Weather Makers, Tim Flannery). An oraganisation known as the Levossier Group has been set up to achieve the same ends for the Australian coal industry.
May 18th, 2006 at 12:02 amI feel that many of these comments assaulting Exxon and their lobby simply do not consider the fact that this is simply politics as usual. The attacks of the environmentalist/global warming lobby (not to mention market-controlled gas prices) have set public opinion against energy corporations like Exxon to the point that they need to retaliate with something to make themselves look good. I disagree with your allegedly scientific position that global warming is happening, but I would be far more likely to listen if you were talking science rather than saying “it is indisputable.” I would even read bad science far sooner that I would watch a movie (of all things) made by a politician (of all people) filled with “worst case scenario” predictions presented as definite facts. Hope you like the film. Does popcorn cause global warming?
May 18th, 2006 at 12:26 amYou would think that when it comes to the only home mankind has ever known, mankind would err on the side of caution in keeping it habitable for future generations. But Noooooo! If we can’t get an asteroid to trash the place for us, let’s do it ourselves! Nuclear annihilation is so-o 80’s. Let’s get Big Oil to do it for us! Why wait for the Anti-Christ to raze this joint? Let’s just give everybody on the planet a Hummer. In 20 years, 30 years tops, we will have sucked all the oil from the teat of Mother Earth. By then when the spy satellites look down to check on everybody, they won’t be able to see a thing! Mother Earth will look just like her cousin, the planet Venus. And mankind, having taking its cue from that original ‘Scorch Earther’ himself, Adolf Hitler, will have turned our once lovely abode into one big toasty oven. Extra crispy anybody?
May 18th, 2006 at 12:29 amwaaaaaaaaa. poor exxon. quick, defend them so no one can cut into their 36 BILLION DOLLAR PROFIT from last year.
cave, have you been living in a cave? have you noticed anything in the news recently, say, about glacier melt, or the shrinking polar ice caps, or rising sea levels? these things aren’t beholden to science, they are a matter of public record – photographical, meteorological, oceanographic record. i don’t need an “alleged” scientist to tell me, i can see the footage. (nice effort at disinformation, cave, you get your shill points for the day)! clearly you must LOVE “bad science” because that’s the only way left to attempt to debunk reality.
nothing like those ‘faith-based’ scientists for a reliable opinion!
May 18th, 2006 at 1:02 amdoes bloviating cause global warming? maybe cave knows…
the thing i don’t get is how some are so willing to defend the oil companies. guess what? the oil companies have exactly ZERO interest in america being energy independent. so are you against energy independence?
attacking al gore only says one thing:
yes, america, here’s someone who is concerned that we may be endangering our future by damaging our eco-system irreparably. sure, maybe he has some “alleged scientists” with so-called “facts” to back up his claims.
but you know what? al gore is obviously a nutjob. he must still be pissed off from that whole 2000 thing. we’ve got a better idea — let’s ignore all the experts in meteorology, oceanography, climatology and so on who spent years getting an education and studying these things. let’s ignore the historical record that proves a climate change is occurring.
there’s no reason to change your habits, america! let’s not let these ‘dead-enders’ and ’sore losers’ convince us that we have to make difficult choices for the benefit of future generations. that’s just defeatist liberal talk. the world is here for us, right now, and we should exploit every last resource we’ve been given by the lord god almighty. to not do so would be denying our devine right as masters of this dominion. just have faith, and trust us, the oil companies. we’ve been drilling oil for a long time and we’re here to tell you that it will last FOREVER, and our earth is COMPLETELY IMPERVIOUS to EVERYTHING. in fact, the more oil we use, the stronger we make the earth, so just get used to the idea of being dependent on oil until the end of time — which of course, will never come, because our use of oil has actually turned the earth into an INDESTRUCTABLE SUPER-PLANET.
you don’t have to thank us. we thank you, the loyal oil consumer. keep up the good work! and remember, al gore is that crazy guy who claimed he invented the internet, so he can’t be trusted.
love,
May 18th, 2006 at 1:03 amexxonmobil
Progressaurus Rex:
You have a dollop of backwash on your chin.
May 18th, 2006 at 1:27 amYea..ahhh-right there.
Hope it wasn’t too salty.
THANX!
Man made global warming is a myth. The real science proves this conclusively.
Unfortunately, there is a parallel politically motivated pseudo-scientific industry growing around this “global warming” crisis.
People need to educate themselves fully on climate issues, and especially on astrophysical phenomena – not just corporate driven atmospheric ‘pollution” – and remain objective, rather than reacting emotionally to yet another oligarchical propaganda operation.
Thik about it. “Global warming” … how do we solve “global” issues? WORLD GOVERNMENT.
May 18th, 2006 at 1:55 ame-coli,
May 18th, 2006 at 2:05 amuh, sarcasm, thank you.
go back and read my post, maybe you’ll get it…
The real science proves that RAL’s brain is 60% smaller than Bush’s brain.
May 18th, 2006 at 2:13 amCave Oppugno,
If you were willing to listen to science you would not say dumb things like this:
“I disagree with your allegedly scientific position that global warming is happening.”
May 18th, 2006 at 2:17 amI am not going to waste my fingers reiterating that global warming is real (like the other 100 or so posters).
Instead, I will simply suggest that people take a look at PBS’s NOVA episode that discusses GLOBAL DIMMING, because it (dimming) compliments AND complicates the situation with global warming. A real must for environementalists.
May 18th, 2006 at 2:50 amI’m surprised no one has mentioned the recent, and increasing, appearance of tornados in California’s Sacramento Valley. 20 years ago tornados NEVER occured in the Sac Valley. About 15 years ago, funnel clouds started appearing, but not touching down. The phenomena increased over the next few years, and now in the last 5 years or so all of a sudden we are having tornados touching down, here in the valley – and each year there are more, and they are stronger. Last year a couple of tornados did some serious damage east of Sacramento and up in the Yuba City area. NEVER happened before.
Now I recognize this is purely anecdotal and no “proof” of anything more than what could be a natural long-term variation in climate. But it certainly does conform with the innumerable other changes happening over the world, all of which indicate more changeble and extreme weather patterns – exactly what science predicts will happen as extra energy is fed into the climate system by warming ocean temperatures.
Locally, this warming of the ocean is evidenced by the gradual shifting to the north of species off the US west coast. All sorts of sea life that, before, one never encountered above the Baja Coast, or up toward Montery Bay, are now showing up as far north as Eureka and even off the coast of Oregon. This, while all of a sudden we’re having tornados here in the Valley.
Wonder what it will be like here in a few more years? All those news items about wiped-out trailer parks in the east coast “tornado alley” will be coming from California instead.
Also – I’ve never stopped supporting Al Gore for president, way back to when he first ran. GO FOR IT AL! PLEASE stop Republocrat Hillary from getting the Dem’s nomination!
May 18th, 2006 at 4:11 amWhat the conscientious people can do is to DRIVE LESS. Consume LESS PETROLEUM PRODUCTS. Evil people will always find ways to destroy this planet in one form or another. But what decent human being can do is to remove politicians who serve the interests of the polluting industries and to educate others about conservation and to expose the lies that would eventually kill us all.
May 18th, 2006 at 4:27 amAl Gore for President NOW or by 2008!
May 18th, 2006 at 6:51 am#14.BSRS..Stay away! You are a flatliner!
People, how can we quickly eliminate APATHY in Our America?
We, the People MUST become enlightened and involved in the governance of our Nation. PLEASE. Blogs are a good start…I thought for years that I was alone in my thinking and views…..Come On, Somebody Get This Rolling!
[...] Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore: Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 8:57 am#109 – Hey Terry! You are probably right about the exaggerations, but as it turns out, I really was at Woodstock and I also really did believe Bush was a complete idiot, there were no WMDs in Iraq, and all the other (absolutely correct) things you said in your comment. Of course, although I have no real proof about Woodstock, this is how it happened. I had just gotten married to my ex, I was 22 years old, we took our motorcycle from Allentown PA with no real notion of how huge it would be and wound up there in the midst of the biggest “happening” of the 1960s. It was hot part of the time, raining most of the time, and the music was awesome, as was the feeling of camaraderie. (I saw a South Park last night making fun of people who say “we accomplished something at Woodstock” by depicting everyone there as wigged out on drugs, but in fact, something very wonderful DID happen there.)
As for believing the worst about The Deciderator, I know dozens (perhaps hundreds) of family, friends, and acquaintances that can vouch for my disdain for him right from the beginning of his appointment to the presidency in 2000. I am proud to be among those who fit the true profile you described. Thanks for the smile.
May 18th, 2006 at 9:14 am[...] This couldn’t have anything to do with the incipient release of An Inconvenient Truth, could it? [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 10:02 am[...] Yesterday, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by ExxonMobil and other big oil companies – launched two advertisements in response to Al Gore’s new movie, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 10:09 amI think it would be widely agreed upon that human nature causes us to retaliate when our survival is threatened.
This statement/ movie/ book is an obvious threat to the interests of many people who have earned a living with a blatant disregard for the consequences of fuel emissions and dependence on foreign oil… and they feel threatened.
It really is about business… Trolls under the bridge with dead eyes, that watch, measure and manipulate their prey (The American Consumer Public) by creating campaigns based on fear and scare tactics vs. getting involved and learning the facts – just to save their own comforts and cop-outs.
It does not matter to these people that the world may someday be too hot for us to go outside unprotected – because they will be right there selling us the thermo-protective suits, smiling and patting themselves on the back for how they are protecting the public and making our world a better place…
May 18th, 2006 at 10:27 amFor all the truth on Exxon’s stoolies check out GREENPEACE’s research website http://www.ExxonSecrets.org
CEI has received over $1.7 MILLION from Exxon since the Kyoto Protocol was crafted in 1998 – the largest recipient of the companies cash as far as we know. Their TV ads are crap, but their mission to derail the public’s understanding of this issue and stall momentum for action is relentless. As long as the checks keep coming from Exxon, they will keep at it.
We still dont know how much they got in 2005 or 2006. Stay tuned
On ExxonSecrets you can find and map indiviual spokespeople, lobbyists and skeptic scientists and the many conservative, libertarian and ‘free-market” organizations they work with. Have fun.
May 18th, 2006 at 10:33 amBTW – @ Progressaurus Rex:
right on.
You bring up a very poignant issue that reeks of hypocrisy to me…
Why are people defending the oil companies?????
Do they babysit your kids in a pinch?
Do they run your errands or buy Girl Scout cookies from your bosses kid to make you look good?
From where I sit the only impact they have on your life is to make you more dependent on them for your perceived “survival” so that when they bend the rules and cut into your personal budgets with price gouging, you won’t feel that you have any other choice but to do go along…
THAT IS NOT FREEDOM – that is a loss of it. And that, along with the fact that people support their own theft, is a very sad thing indeed.
May 18th, 2006 at 10:51 ampardon,
“…but to go along…”
May 18th, 2006 at 10:55 amMuch as I completely agree with the FACT that global warming is happening, to blame JUST the oil companies is a bit too facile. Unless we as individuals are doing as much as possible to minimize our own fossil fuel usage (e.g. buy a Hybrid, super insulate your house, always buy CFL bulbs, etc), then we need to take a pretty hard look in the mirror before throwing stones and vitriole to the evil oil folks. Be positive and pro-active; make a list of the top 3 things you ARE GOING TO DO in the next 12 months to minimize and then make a list of 3 friends you are going to work on to do them same, and so on, and so on, Get your kid’s schools to teach them about this stuff. There are a million tiny steps that need to get started NOW buy many millions of us…
May 18th, 2006 at 11:12 amProgressaurus Rex = starboard.
May 18th, 2006 at 11:13 amNice try at glorifying yourself.
You still have a little backwash on your chin.
Mmmmm.Salty.
#157 – Aha – thanks for the tale. I have heard it said that anyone who claims to remember something from Woodstock probably wasn’t there and anyone who can’t remember that year at all probably was. Part of the myth of course.
May 18th, 2006 at 11:46 amEven from reading the abstracts of the scientific papers in the ads on still-frame, I was dubious as to whether they actually provided evidence for the ad’s statements. So I emailed the co-lead author of one of the scientific papers cited by the CIE ad “Glaciers”. He told me: “Our article does NOT in fact support this statement.”
More here.
May 18th, 2006 at 12:02 pmchippehogwa -
Please do not misunderstand me…
I only attack the oil companies because as a consumer I am already taking personal measures to lessen our dependence. I live in an urban environment and do not own a car, work from home and walk to the market on quick trips. We do buy CFL bulbs and make efforts in many areas to be conservative.
I agree that we have the personal responsibility to take measures in our own lives… we also have the right to question the practices of others if there is evidence that those methods are hazardous.
And this is not me trying to, um… how did E-coli so perceptively phrase it, “glorify myself?”
I do not believe that most people consider compromising comforts, Glorious.
For those looking for alternatives, I know Chicago has launched numerous bike-commute support organizations, I-Go cars for those that just need to run quick errands but do not want to rely on constant automotive transport and encourages corporations to support biking and alternative commuting methods… If something like that exists in your city/ town – great! Take advantage of it… if not, start it!
http://www.chicagobikestation.com/services.htm
I will continue to point the finger outwards as well as inwards because comfort and acquiescence is a dangerous thing.
May 18th, 2006 at 12:11 pmDon’t get mad at big Oil, We broke up that monopoly before and it is time to do it again. They may as well be members of OPEC. First you have to remove their hired guns in congress. Start with Bush and Dick. Who knows we may have to nationalize
May 18th, 2006 at 12:27 pmout oil in the interest of national security. That seems to be catching on arround the world today and it is pissing them off. Don’t get mad, Just get even.
Alien Fat Cat Big Oil Barons would rather blow up the planet than lose control of it to Dems, Women, or especially that low life scum they call human beings. Heartless is strong and caring is weak in their world. They jus don care.
May 18th, 2006 at 12:30 pmstarboard et al
May 18th, 2006 at 1:03 pmAfter I’d hit “post” I thought it was probably likely that many of those reading this blog would already be doing what needs to be done at a personal level if not yet shouting it from the rooftops or blogosphere…My comment wasn’t directed at any specific response (but kudos to you for your steps), just hoping for a more proactive, hopeful dialogue sometimes….
It seems that everybody has an opinion on this subject? Why is global warming so controversial? Because it involves a major business industry that is very political: oil.
So what if there is global warming! If no global warming, the earth wouldn’t be habitable. As the right-wing like to point out volcanoes, and other sources contribute to global warming. Yes they do-that’s what allows us to live on the earth. But, increase that warming by only a small amount and you have serious problems. It’s a simple calculation-how much oil is being burned per hour; per day; per year by humans. How many trees are burned (sq acres) per year. That is a rough estimate of how much CO2 is being released. If that number is very very high, logic and common sense tell us that it will have to be reabsorbed by something (oceans, trees, etc) or it will build up in the atmosphere. Is this happening? Yes. Is it proven to be happening? Yes.
We shouldn’t be afraid of this. We just need new ways of powering our machines. The result will be better designed, more efficient tools and autos, and new business opportunities. Smart businesses know about global warming, and want to have the latest technology. We talk about capitalism, but capitalism means choices and competition. With oil we have none.
It’s in everyone’s best interest, especially farmers to have a stable weather pattern. With as many people as we have, and as much food as we need to produce globally, we can’t afford to have unpredictable weather; be it caused by humans or natural cycles or both. A natural ice age would be just as devastating as global warming caused by humans.
May 18th, 2006 at 1:21 pmpull my finger, i’ll show you some global warming
is it the fault of the oil companies that the people of america can’t give up the oil addiction OR is it the fault of the american people that they elect leaders of the oil industry to lead their country? the GOP has made being an intellectual a “dirty word”, like being a “school girl”… so we elected Mr IQ80 to run the show, and Mr Blast From The Past to run MR IQ80. You get what you deserve people. Maybe next time around a few of you will get into your fossil fule burning cars and help get out the vote. BY THE WAY given how the GOP throws people off the voter lists, it might be a good time to get several Voter Registration Forms out to your friends.
May 18th, 2006 at 1:50 pmThe argument for global warming is pretty compelling and I’m inclined to support this film. I would feel better, however, if somebody on our side could offer a solide rebuke for the two articles in Science magazine which the CEI ad quotes, which say that the Antarctic ice sheets are in fact thickening, not thinning; and another one they don’t directly reference (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/sci;308/5730/1877) that calls into question the whole ability to interpret what the changes in Antarctica’s ice sheets really mean to sea levels.
The problem with movies like this is that filmmakers want us to ‘feel’ something, and they know that weighing us down with two many scientific shades of gray undermines that gut-level emotional response. The problem is that this approach opens an otherwise important and well-researched film up to criticism and ridicule when the other side can point to articles in respected journals that dispute the film’s position.
The big problem with some liberal Democrats – and I sometimes fall into this camp – is that we tend not to have our intellectual arguements as well thought-out as our emotional and idealistic ones. I’ve been cornered in this way a few times; it’s not fun and it doesn’t serve our cause. Going out with a film and an associated marketing campaign that fires on all the emotional cylinders but leaves holes in the scientific arguement can have the unintended effect of making us look hysterical rather than justifiably alarmed. This plays into the hand of our opponents.
May 18th, 2006 at 2:24 pmYou jackasses actually still believe oil comes from rotting dinosaurs!!! How did they get 10 miles under the earth’s crust!!!! LOL ROTFLMFAO!!!!!!
Moonbat idiots!
I guess the FACT that the sun is sending us more heat radiation in the last 20 years than at any other point in recorded history means nothing. The FACT that the last time the opposite happened with the sun we had a “little ice age” (maunder minimum) means nothing.
What cars caused the Earth to warm after the ice age anyway?
How come the Earth didn’t warm up at all in the period when tens of thousands of trains and billions of people were burning straight coal every day all day? Your theories are as full of holes as your empty heads.
Oh God the insanity and guilt that must come with being a crazy liberal!
>>The science is not questioned because the science behind global warming is indisputable.
That’s just because you refuse to listen to anything that doesn’t agree with y
May 18th, 2006 at 2:25 pm[...] Competitive Enterprise Insitute, you say? Attackin’ Al Gore, huh? Defending the pro-emissions folks?!? [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 2:46 pm[...] Yesterday, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by ExxonMobil and other big oil companies – launched two advertisements in response to Al Gore’s new movie, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 3:00 pmGive’em Hell AL! Go get em big guy!
May 18th, 2006 at 3:10 pmBill Greer – so freak, tell us where exactly DID OIL COME FROM?
May 18th, 2006 at 3:21 pmDarkvadar is well named since he(she,it) seems to want to let big oil off the hook. Sure, individual responsibilty is crucial, but so is corporate responsibilty. For instance, Just because people are addicted to cigarettes doesn’t mean big tobacco shouldn’t be liable for lying about the science they knew about and suppressed for decades regarding lung cancer and smoking. Now it’s big oil’s turn to face the music!
Accountibility, responsibilty and adherence to the best science at all scales!
May 18th, 2006 at 3:32 pmTom, my understanding on the arctic ice sheets is that ,do to warming, precipitation at the poles has increased, thus more snow, thus more thickness. When it’s cloder the poles are very dry; frozen deserts.
Bill, crack a geology 101 book sometime instead of your favorite UFO website.. “how’d the dinosaurs get 10miles down?” sheesh!
May 18th, 2006 at 3:41 pmTom Sanders: the two articles in Science magazine which the CEI ad quotes do not in fact support its claims. The ad is simply lying.
May 18th, 2006 at 3:54 pmI hope all of you spend as much energy on conservation as you do on sharing your opionions. People (not just the US) need to get out and vote, take back control of ‘our’ government and then help nurture OUR Earth MOTHER. Lets not be divided, the human race needs to be united in nurturing our Earth Mother and divide and conquer all the lame systems that do the opposite. If you are interested in starting healthy systems and want to help nurture the Earth Mother, start at home, educate yourself and the children. Check out some of Paul Stamets’ research on bioremediation, it’s awesome! Visit, http://www.fungi.com – it inspired me and hope it does the same for you.
May 18th, 2006 at 4:55 pme-coli,
May 18th, 2006 at 8:06 pmno offense, but learn how to read.
if you can’t understand sarcasm, try dictionary.com
or go check out my blog p-rex.blogspot.com
it’s the only identity i’ve ever used.
“How did they get 10 miles under the earth’s crust!!!! ”
that has got to be the most ignorant question i’ve ever seen NOT asked, since a question actually is meant to be followed by something called a ‘question mark’.
sounds like bill greer wants a little attention.
May 18th, 2006 at 8:16 pmwhat’s the matter, bill? are you lonely? depressed because nobody likes chimpy anymore?
c’mon, you can tell us…
[...] Competitive Enterprise Institute, an oil money funded think tank / lobby group, has released two ads that will be shown in 12 major markets claiming that global warming hasn’t been proved and that the ice-caps and glaciers are actually getting thicker. And the internet is in a frenzy. They then go on to call carbon dioxide life and claim that any attempt to label it pollution, a greenhouse gas, or the cause of the ice-caps and glaciers melting is ludicrous. The ads wrap up by stating that trying to set emissions limits is not in the viewer’s interest. [...]
May 18th, 2006 at 10:33 pmI’ve posted a full commentary about these ads and the internet frenzy surrounding them at greenr.
If you look at it, there have been 4 cycles of cooling in warming of +/-5 degrees C over the past 450,000 years, and I’m betting there weren’t CO2 humans to blame back then, so why should they be to blame now?
We are in the MIDDLE of a warming cycle, that still has +5 degrees C to go. Of course we are seeing global warming.
See my site for the full details.
May 18th, 2006 at 10:42 pmVote for me in 2008 :)
You weenies should look at Brazil and the infrastructure created to use sugar cane ethanol as an alternative fuel. You can’t keep buying yourself out of trouble.
May 18th, 2006 at 11:58 pmDang, that’s pretty good! Ethanol is 190% alcohol! Let’s tank up(in more ways than one!) We can’t lose!!!
May 19th, 2006 at 1:46 am(proof, that is)
May 19th, 2006 at 1:49 am# 184..Progressaurus Rex:
I’m sorry I’ve been so nasty;
May 19th, 2006 at 2:34 amThat’s just how I am.
.
awwww damn I forgot to close a bold tag at the very beginning. agh.
May 19th, 2006 at 10:58 amHow’s this?
May 19th, 2006 at 11:57 amOr this?
May 19th, 2006 at 12:00 pmgotta love those ads!
water: they say you might drown in it, we say ‘take a bath.’
fire: they say it might burn you, we say ‘what’s for dinner?’
The bottom line insinuation common of these types of tactics is that global warming is your fault because you breathe. Or because you drive. Or because you eat the food they make available. Or because you are American.
Yes, I drive a car, but I certainly didn’t invent our car culture that forces me to. Maybe I’m just an ingrate, after all that gas they refined for me over the years.
Well, to thems I say “Excuse me for breathing!”
May 19th, 2006 at 12:21 pmhttp://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20060305
Doonsebury on the ‘teach the controversy’ bullshit.
And to Orion…. there are alternatives to car culture — the time to start working on them is now… what do you want you kids to inherit? A dead dry husk of a planet or the rambling green space you grew up to love… think about it.
And yes the bigger problem is the wider relaince on petrochemicals YOU can help change that.
May 19th, 2006 at 2:01 pmAl Gore,
Thank you for the movie “Inconvenient Truth.” Please ignore the Oil/Gas (i.e., Bush/Cheney) attacks on you. They are all smoke, no fire. Keep up with all the good work you are doing on Current TV. Down with Fox News and all evil doers who have hijacked this nation and are planning to crash it.
If you run in 2008, you have my vote.
If you don’t run in 2008, you still have my vote.
-JR
May 19th, 2006 at 2:23 pmBravo Al Gore !
Vive l’Amérique !
Olivier, France
May 19th, 2006 at 4:46 pmto citizen jane:
i completely agree that there are alternatives to car culture and that is what we need, but in the last few decades all the growth in this country, mostly suburban sprawl, specifically encourages a car culture. there are many places in this country where you can’t get to the bank, grocery store, post office, work, or any other practical location without a car. no sidewalks, no bike paths, no density around mass transit hubs. this was no accident. whatever i have tried to do in my life hasn’t yet changed the reality on the ground, not that it isn’t changeable.
but the point i was making in my earlier post was not only that the oil companies delberately promote and create the necessity of a combustion engine society, but that they have the gall to beyond the guilt of “you too drive” to “you too breathe,” as if you are complicit in their game.
even if i were to walk everywhere and never get in a car, most my food would still be taking rides in a diesel truck before i ate it. we must always remember that we are all culpabale and responsible for our carbon footprints, but that this culpability is relative to our situations. the computer you are reading this on, and the lines of transmissions and servers and corporate structures behind all have a footprint, even breathing, as exxon’s pr think-tank pointed out, has a footprint. this shared culpability does not mean we should shrug our shoulders at every consumer wastrel and enter into the future with benign resignation, but in our solutions we would be wise to correct the systemic problems as much as peoples attitudes. this country would be greener than grass if it was a tenable option for most, but unfortunately it’s not. i don’t blame someone making near minimum wage for buying an old beater car to get to a crappy job and not buying locally grown orgainc foods at triple the price of agribusiness Mc swill, even if that person was made aware of the options and consequences.
air: they expect you to hold your breath, we say breathe it!
May 19th, 2006 at 4:52 pmThe cigarette companies perfected the art of using science to prove/disprove inconvenient scientific results. They were able to continue their charade for a long time. Looks like oil companies have learnt their strategies from them
May 19th, 2006 at 5:16 pmThat fat pig Lee Raymond with his jowels large enough to feed a starving family getting $400 million dollars for his unprecedented plundering of the world has the gal, the nerve, the will, the sheer unintelligence, to say that we ought not be concerned about protecting this polluted planet?!
I have now heard everything.
May 19th, 2006 at 6:14 pmThe carbon dioxide which is present in the atmosphere is produced by respiration and by combustion. However, it has a short residence time in this phase as it is both consumed by plants during photosynthesis. Large quantities of solid carbon dioxide (i.e. in the form of dry ice) are used in processes requiring large scale refrigeration. Carbon dioxide is also used in fire extinguishers as a desirable alternative to water for most fires. It is a constituent of medical gases as it promotes exhalation. It is also used in carbonated drinks. If Al Gore gets his way we will drinking flat soda pop, firefighters will die because they have to use water instead of CO2 to put fires out. Hey I hate EXXON too, but CO2 is not the way to fight them.
May 19th, 2006 at 7:07 pmunderstanding the carbon cycle and how carbon dioxide fits into it is obviously important. i haven’t seen Al Gore’s movie or read his book either, but i will assume for the sake of arguement that he is not suggesting we eliminate all uses of carbon dioxide. more likely, it is the fact that we are introducing carbon dioxide into our atmophere on an unprecedented scale by taking the fixed carbon in fossil fuels and combusting it.
saying Gore is fighting against all uses co2 is like saying exxon is fighting the environment by purposely spilling tankers of oil into the ocean. putting words into other’s mouths and then arguing against them serves no decent purpose, don’t you agree?
fires: all gore says let them kill firefighters, we say put them out.
May 19th, 2006 at 7:38 pmIt seems to me that by attacking Al Gore that they are making more people want to see his documentary. My bet is that not many people knew or even cared about Al Gore’s documentary, but now that big oil companies, which aren’t popular in the moment are “attacking him” people will be curious and see the film.
May 19th, 2006 at 10:03 pmunfortunately ‘my’ Senator is “I am outraged by the outrage” Inhoff from here in the land of the 900ft Jesus – Senior Senator on the Environment. He has and always will be owned by the Oil & Gas Industry (and anyone else who will grease his campaign).
An additional Part of the problem is that Inhof (and a great deal of the Energy Industry executives) are also Christian Reconstructionist/Dominist so they actually BELIEVE that what we do to the earth doesn’t matter becacuse when Christ comes “no stone will be left unturned and the Mountains will be cast into the seas” and the Earth will be “born anew”.
The immeadiate Energy economic problem is the market manipulation of the storage and refinery capacity – especially with diesel (cheaper to make – 2 refining steps less then gasoline). Because we have also (due again to market manipulation) devoted all our mass transit, construction equipment, and both local and long distance trucking to diesel (while also willfully destroying our railroad infrastructure) we are bordering on local hyper-inflation.
All the “official” inflation figures from the government and industry are a lie to keep the population confused and powerless. Nevermine gasoline prices to the driving public – Diesel is key to all of our basic needs since everything is “trucked” in.
We have lost our democracy to a corporate kleptocracy, the worlds greatest Banana Republic. Death by a thousand cuts.
The NSA/CIA/DOD “Total Information Awareness” domestic data mining via “private” industry marketing/data/communication companies like Choicepoint, AT&T, SW Bell, Yahoo, Microsoft is ultimately destined to form “enemies lists” of supposed internal “5th column”.
Once again one must consider the Xian Reconstructionist/Dominionist not only believe that Armagedon is to be not only embraced but facilitated, also believe in “the Mark of the Beast” where the population can neither buy nor sell nor trade.
You don’t have to be a believer to understand a group who “create our own reality for historians to study” actually may be daft enough to try such a thing. Doesn’t matter that their sequence doesn’t actually agree with Revelations and the word “Rapture” is nowhere to be found in any biblical text. Faith is all. The same kind of faith that Jim Jones, David Koresh, Rev Moon (present owner of the Wash Post), Pat Robertson, et. al. Many forget and most history classes/programs skip the part about Hitler’s deadly embrace of Christianity (jews killed jesus).
We certainly are in “Interesting Times”.
May 19th, 2006 at 10:51 pm[...] http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/17/attack-on-gore/ [...]
May 20th, 2006 at 7:20 amRed and Blue your stupid switch is stuck on. Thank the Canadian scientists for their CFC campaign that brought world attention the damage CFCs were doing to the ozone layer for saving your sorry ass from malignant melanoma-and heaven forbid you should reproduce -your children too! The ozone layer is now repairing itself! Over the last five years I’ve offered anyone who could provide a published journal (a research paper that has undergone peer review) that disputes human causation of global warming, a monetary reward. To this day nobody has been able to produce one. What you have trouble understanding is that a “scientific study†is a term companies like Exxon like to throw around as proof when in reality anyone can call anything a scientific study. What are you suggesting; scientists all hate oil companies so they’re going to produce studies to hurt them while their own livelihood depends on the very things that produce these greenhouse gases? That’s really kind of lame isn’t it? Real science produces data in a non-biased form. The objective is to collect evidence that disputes a theory not proves one. To this date the evidence for human caused global warming has stood the test of thousands of carefully planned studies and published journals. Scientists have nothing to gain from misreporting their findings and big oil companies have everything to lose. The writing on the wall is very clear so get your head out of your ass! There never was any evidence produced in journal form that suggested an ice age was coming. This comes from your Fox News information source not the scientific community. You could go ask Rush Limbaugh about the ozone layer and I’m sure he’ll pad his ass and tell you the recovery was a natural cycle. In the meantime try not to build any high powered lasers or jet aircraft in your garage or you may just earn the Darwin award!
May 20th, 2006 at 12:18 pmNo dont spend the money on Ethanol or Hydrogen technology. I better not hear anyone at the big oil companies talk about cost- because it sure seems like they don’t mind spending money on sucking the earth dry and buying a 14th mercedes. Reminds me of the Truth ad that shows a company donating a few thousand dollars and then spending millions on PR telling everyone they spent thousands. Big oil/ Big corps = Big Evil. The world is out of control. We are all part of an unstoppable machine. Until everyone becomes a hippy we are doomed. therefore, we are doomed.
May 20th, 2006 at 4:05 pmThe efforts by the oil industry to downplay the link between the oil industry and global warming sounds exactly like the efforts of tobacco companies to convince us that cigarettes do not cause cancer. Given the HUGE financial stake that the oil industry has in this issue, I’m not inclined to believe they truly have our best interests in mind.
By the way, the movie “Thank You For Smoking” really puts industry comments in the right light, in my opinion.
May 20th, 2006 at 4:19 pm[...] On Wednesday, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by ExxonMobil and other big oil companies – launched two advertisements in response to Al Gore’s new movie about global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 20th, 2006 at 6:27 pm[...] Via Think Progressive comes some news regarding those Manbearpig ads that purport that CO2 isn’t pollution, it’s life itself: On Wednesday, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by ExxonMobil and other big oil companies – launched two advertisements in response to Al Gore’s new movie about global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
May 20th, 2006 at 10:18 pmI’m just glad that Al Gore has found a new hobby than trying to hunt me. Turns out his movie is top notch and everyone should go see it, and don’t worry about me – Man Bear Pig. Half Man, Half Bear, Half Pig. I’m slowly destroying the world and Al Gore is running smokescreen.
Really, I praise any vice-president that can attempt to stay relevant without anyone really caring. Unless you just believe whatever someone makes a movie about, or believe every book you read, or believe that there is no way you would ever side with someone who has a different political opinion than yourself. This is Man Bear Pig and when Al Gore blames me for Global Warming please don’t be upset at me, I’m doing the best I can. Really, we have been around for a blink of an eye, until conclusive proof is shown to me Man Bear Pig than I’m finding it hard to believe that we can blame global warming on just one single thing. The half of me that is a man realizes that all of humanity doesn’t know enough, and until someone steps up and takes the five dollars the Professor has offered for proof
Until then just realize that Man Bear Pig isn’t to blame for Global Warming. Al Gore should know who is to blame. Think about it, he invented the internet just so we could have this conversation about it. Bless him for leaving me-Man Bear Pig-alone.
p.s. I don’t like oil companies, but wonder what life would be like without them. That’s why I Man Bear Pig never buy gas/food/cigarettes/Boone’s/lotto from Exxon stations. I frequent Valero.
May 20th, 2006 at 10:43 pm[...] The video above, produced by an oil industry supported astroturf organisation called the Competitive Enterprise Institute is an absolute beauty by most standards. It’s a nice little window into the darky comedic soul of the oil industry. [...]
May 21st, 2006 at 8:59 amI agree with all of that…. but I also grew up in the burbs and rode my bike EVERYWHERE. So don’t tell me Americas fat children can’t get on bikes….. that said you are absolutely right about how our cities and burbs were designed. That said – there are many places where poeple are fighting for and winning alternatives. You HAVE TO FIGHT. Nihilism and defeatitism is counterproductive….. but believe me I’ve been there.
but the point i was making in my earlier post was not only that the oil companies delberately promote and create the necessity of a combustion engine society, but that they have the gall to beyond the guilt of “you too drive†to “you too breathe,†as if you are complicit in their game.
Skip the guilt — but understand that our cumulative choices are a big BIG part of the problem. You can’t get around that…. AND that is the only thing you can immediatly and directly affect. You are not powerless. That said our choices are not of course the only part of the problem — so get involved in bigger campaigns. They work. Not immediately – but change is happening all the time – good change.
even if i were to walk everywhere and never get in a car, most my food would still be taking rides in a diesel truck before i ate it. we must always remember that we are all culpabale and responsible for our carbon footprints, but that this culpability is relative to our situations.
Agreed. Still you can affect change – both on a personal and a wider level – and those changes ad up.
the computer you are reading this on, and the lines of transmissions and servers and corporate structures behind all have a footprint, even breathing, as exxon’s pr think-tank pointed out, has a footprint. this shared culpability does not mean we should shrug our shoulders at every consumer wastrel and enter into the future with benign resignation, but in our solutions we would be wise to correct the systemic problems as much as peoples attitudes. this country would be greener than grass if it was a tenable option for most, but unfortunately it’s not. i don’t blame someone making near minimum wage for buying an old beater car to get to a crappy job and not buying locally grown orgainc foods at triple the price of agribusiness Mc swill, even if that person was made aware of the options and consequences.
Nope – I don’t blame that person either. But I do not believe that we cannot change our direction both through personal action and change – to whatever degree possible (and there are hundreds of things people can do that do not require hardship or great expense) — and affecting how the large multinationals operate and yes of course recognizing that they are the real problem here.
May 21st, 2006 at 11:45 amSpecial interests should never fund research devoted to their cause.
And no one should ever question scientific findings.
Yeah – that’s it!
Michael Chrichton should be sent to prison like Galileo. How dare he question commonly held beliefs. What an arrogant right-wing windbag.
Truth to Power! Silence the scientific dissenters in the name of the “Common Good” and props to Al for devoting mass resources to this problem.
Hey – by the way what happened to that 1980’s Newsweek article about the scientific consensus of a global “mini ice age”?
May 21st, 2006 at 5:26 pm[...] Think Progress » Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore They are still trying to deny global warming exists. Who are they kidding? (tags: politics) [...]
May 21st, 2006 at 6:18 pmWell, well, well…
It’s unreal to see so many idiots supporting CEI and Big Oil.
For a century or so, we have been at the mercy of BO, of Detroit and let’s don’t forget: Saudi Arabia!!!
This country is filled with idiots like “Blue State Red” clearly a f***ing Republican who most likely drives a huge-mega SUVs… aka Stupid Unecessary Vehicle!! [H1 anyone?]
People like BSR make me vomit just thiking about their incredibly and ridicolously brainwashed sheep brains.
When can we all figure out that this planet, our lives and our future can be 1000% better without oil and gasoline!
Why can we simply give the middle finger to the Saudis and their dirty affairs… why are our young troops dying so that RSB can drive his beloved Hummer H1???
Why do we have to stand and see this “president” and “his” adiministration bring this country to his knees? WHy are those f***ing Crhistian fanatics running our country?
Why do we stand and let big oil, Bush, SA and all the others do whatever they want?
Why???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Why can the people of this great country create a new [3rd] political party that focuses on real issues: Death by Global Warming? Why do we have only two parties that in the end don’t do much for this cause anyway…
Fred Sands, Ph.D.
May 21st, 2006 at 8:44 pmElectric Car Visionary
Trying to talk some of these “anti-climate warmimg” lunatics into beliving there is such a thing is pointless. Just look at Fox news opinion page today (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196017,00.html). I try posting there, but as usual the Foxcistas (you may quote me on that) usually only let a few liberal (the ones that come across as the least intelligent) post. 80% percent of the posts are basically saying “There is no such thing as Global Warmimg, it is all a cycle”. So basically we should listen to Frank, and Betty, and even that guy (Scott) that said she didn’t believe there was Global Warming because he once visited the Museum of Natural History in NY and saw an exhibit on the ice age. Really. Some brilliant logic over there.
Because when it comes to science, we never should listen to the scientists. What do they know?..Right?
When I got sick two years ago I seeked multiple doctor’s opinions. I visted 4 doctors, and three of them agree on one diagnosis whle the the other one came up with something else. What did I do?. I went with the opinion of the three doctors, all who happened to be right. But these “anti-climate-warmimg” loonies would probably go to the one that came up with the worng diagnosis; That is pretty much their “logic”. It’s all about Truthiness, like Colbert said.
In closing: These cats remind me of the Dodo birds in the scene from that movie “The Ice Age” (rent it, great family film): They collected three watermelons and with them they were planing on surviving ” a billion years”.
The movie, funny stuff. The reality, not so much.
citizen # 233885673
May 21st, 2006 at 10:21 pmWhen there is undeniable proof that the big oil companies and Governments are incorrect on their position with regards to global warming, we will have to do the right thing and SUE them all to hell.
May 21st, 2006 at 10:41 pmMy apologies for the typing errors. Dyslexic and angry makes for a bad combination.
May 21st, 2006 at 10:43 pmThis has been an interesting thread, but I wish that the peoplke bashing BSR, who I believe to be wrong, did so by refuting his arguements rather than reducing their comments to personal attacks. For the poster who listed the counter articles in Science, that was a good start.
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:03 amb==
Would you please care to point out WHERE in this threat did BSR made any coherent argument about his case?..Any links he provided to reputable scientific sources?…
I can’t seem to find any. (Not being sarcastic here)
BSR is all about Thruthiness. Zero substance as far as I can tell.
May 22nd, 2006 at 12:38 am[...] Two important points need to be made: 1. Bush casts his answer in terms of a debate that exists on whether greenhouse gases are caused by human activity. In fact, as ThinkProgress has repeatedly documented, there is no scientific debate on this issue. Not a single peer-reviewed study conducted between 1993 and 2003 challenged the consensus that the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 3:29 pm[...] Think Progress also notes that Big Oil is doing its best to discredit Gore and his work. [...]
May 22nd, 2006 at 11:16 pm[...] How could anyone top Vox Day’s call for El Solutiono Finale? A difficult challenge, but Reason’s Ron Bailey is up to the task, doing his best “fair and balanced” routine in aid of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (Exxon’s off-site propaganda mill, and a long-time source of work for Bailey) and their attacks on Al Gore’s global warming movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”. After pointing out that opinions differ, it’s all very complicated, etc., etc., Bailey makes his pitch: Neither of CEI’s TV spots denies the existence of man-made global warming, but they do call attention to the enormous benefits that people have gained from fossil fuels and point to significant scientific uncertainties. CEI’s spots are not subtle (hard to do in 60 seconds of video), but neither is the trailer for the movie about Gore’s crusade. In both media presentations, CEI and Gore are ignoring scientific evidence that cuts against their views. [...]
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:46 amMSRB Update 2006-5-1
For Immediate Release
May 18, 2006
Part 4. Could We Build Bridges To The Future?
The evolutionary forces that separate the fattest from the fittest and the sustainable from the irrelevant are tearing apart the homeostasis that maintained the stability and survival of the energy-intensive businesses, urbanized communities and consumer lifestyles.
The tsunami created by the energy plunder is engulfing humanity, pushing the ecosystems to the brink of imminent collapse. The tidal waves will crush and bury the energy dinosaurs.
Our paths to the future are being washed away. Ahead lies a gaping abyss, which separates us from the future. Could we build new bridges to the future and help a cross-section of humanity and other life forms survive the cataclysmic changes?
Here’re snapshots of the catastrophic environmental changes and other factors which would occur between now and 2015. The estimates were obtained by extrapolating recent data and examining current trends.
Civilization-Induced Catastrophes
4.1. Ultraviolet Radiation – the Ozone Hole. In September 9, 2005 the Antarctic ozone hole covered an area of about 24 million sq km – more than twice the size of Europe. The 2005 Antarctic ozone hole was one of the largest ever recorded.
Ozone depletion leads to higher levels of UV radiation (UVA and UVB) reaching the Earth’s surface and poses the biggest threat to life and the ecosystem. The amount of UV reaching the Antarctic can double during the annual ozone hole.
The overexposure to UV will:
4.1.1. Impair human immune system (including reaction to certain medications, poor response to immunization, sensitivity to sunlight), cause genetic mutations and increase risk of diseases from the human immunodeficiency virus HIV- 1, herpes viruses, malaria, tuberculosis, leprosy, dermatitis, and E. coli as well as other diseases.
4.1.2. Increase the incidents of skin cancer (as well as skin disorders like actinic keratoses and premature aging of skin) blood diseases, and cataracts (as well as other eye damage).
4.1.3. Retard crop growth by altering the physiological and developmental processes of plants.
4.1.4. Affect terrestrial and aquatic Biogeochemical Cycles that contribute to eco-feedbacks that reduce or increase the buildup of greenhouse gases as well as ozone.
4.1.5. Damage Marine Ecosystems: Phytoplankton form the basis of aquatic food chains. Exposure to UV reduces their survival rates. Small increases in UVB exposure would reduce their population size and in turn result in large reduction in the size of the animal population that feed on of these creatures. According to one estimate, a 16 percent ozone depletion could result in a disastrous loss of about 7 million tons of fish per year – almost 10 percent of the current annual catch.
The UV hotspots for 2005: Australia, New Zealand, tip of South America and The Falkland Islands
The human cost of overexposure to UV enhanced by ozone depletion: An estimate for the total number of new skin cancers for 2005
Worldwide (total): 1.5 million cases
New Zealand & Australia: more than 900,000 cases
One in 29 New Zealanders is diagnosed with skin cancer each year, the worst hotspot for skin cancer in the world (together with Australia).
[Source: The Epidemiology of Malignant Melanoma, Desmond & Soong, Surgical Clinics of North America, Vol 83]
MSRB forecast: Large Ozone holes will appear intermittently over Northern Europe and North America by 2015, possibly by as early as 2008.
Human and Financial Costs
Natural and man-made catastrophes claimed about 112,000 lives worldwide and resulted in financial losses of about US$225 billion in 2005.
4.2. Global Warming & Extreme Climatic Changes
Global Warming is causing an exponential increase in the destructive forces of tropical cyclones. MSRB forecasts an 80-90 percent increase in the total power dissipated annually by tropical cyclones in the North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans by 2015 compared to recent averages.
Storms will continue to get stronger (develop greater average intensities) and survive at high intensity for longer (take more time to dissipate peak energy) resulting in substantial increases in storm-related losses in the near future.
4.3. Tropical Cyclones (Hurricanes, Typhoons)
Global climate models show a large increase in the power dissipation of hurricanes since the 1970s. A report by Kerry Emanuel, a climatologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, finds that the total North Atlantic hurricane power dissipation has more than doubled since 1975. The increases correlate to ocean-surface temperatures.
4.4. Extreme Rainfall Events (EREs)
The frequency of extreme rainfall events would increase between 30 and 110 percent (depending on the region) by 2015. The increase in torrential rains cause significant damage to ecology, agriculture, human habitat and infrastructure (houses, schools, hospitals, shops, public utilities, sewerage, roads, bridges… ). EREs disrupt all human activities and result in loss of topsoil, human and animal life.
MSRB forecasts large increases in the following trends:
- Rising Sea-Levels
- Drought (and wildfires)
- Loss of carbon sinks
- Loss of Topsoil and Arable Land
- Increased Climate Refugees
- Pandemic Diseases
The disruptions created by the above events will result in the loss of both human and animal life costing the world economies an average of 4-500 billion dollars annually between now and 2015.
4.5. Municipal Waste, Industrial Pollution, Farm Waste, Industrial Accidents, Automobile Pollution (Acid Rain; Air Pollution; Toxic Waste Contamination of Soil and Ground water; Radiation Poisoning; Increased Dead Zones in Coastal Waters)
If the current trends were to continue, the ability of Earth’s ecosystems to support life would be reduced significantly.
MSRB forecasts that various regions of Australia, Northern Europe and North America will become barren to the extent that they would be unable to support more than a few percent of their current populations by 2015, if the current trends continue.
4.6. Crossing the threshold of sustainability
Humans Ecological Footprint crossed the threshold of sustainability in 1980. Our ecological debts to the ecosystems have been piling up since.
As of 2005, humans were consuming about 27 percent more natural resources than Earth can produce.
The global Ecological Footprint was about 14 billion global hectares (GH) in 2005, or 2.2 GH per person (a GH has biological productivity equal to global average).
Earth’s biocapacity, based on its biologically productive area, was approximately 11.27 billion GH (25 percent of the Earth’s surface) which provided an average of only 1.73 GH per person in 2005.
In 2005, humanity’s Ecological Footprint exceeded global biocapacity by 0.46 GH per person (27 percent).
Human population doubled from 1961 to 2005, however, humans Ecological Footprint has grown by a staggering 170 percent.
4.7. Excessive human consumption is committing many species to extinction. The overshoot takes away living habitats and resources from numerous other species, thus committing them to extinction. Up to a third of all land-based species could become extinct by 2015.
Humans are reducing Earth’s ecological capacity permanently because we are spending nature’s capital faster than it is being regenerated,.
The wholesale plunder of Earth’s ecological capacity and natural capital is facilitated by humanity’s pillage of energy resources.
4.8. The Shrinking Human Habitat:
Our planet faces a full-scale catastrophe. Unless the global energy consumption is reduced rapidly—by no later than June 2006—to about 60 exajoules (6E+19 joules – this level is about 13 percent of total global energy consumed in 2005 and is equal to the total energy consumed in the year 1910) or to lower levels each year, the runaway positive feedback loops triggering the destruction mechanisms described in Part 1 of this report (ozone holes, global heating, extreme climatic events, toxic pollution, waste accumulation, resources depletion, war, unethical behavior, and disease pandemics) pass the point of no return, overwhelm and destroy the life support systems. Nearly all our cities and population centers become mostly uninhabitable by 2015. Cities that bear the full brunt of the devastation and face the danger of total collapse match one or more of the following profiles:
1. Run ethical deficits: corrupt the earth, destroy the ecosystems, wage wars, commit genocide, manufacture WMD…
2. Are located at sea level.
3. Are exposed to excessive UV radiation due to ozone depletion (ozone holes).
4. Have large ecological footprints [The worst offenders would be the first to experience catastrophic disruptions in their lifestyles: United Arab Emirates (10+ GH); Kuwait; The United States; Australia; Canada; Denmark; New Zealand; United Kingdom; Israel ; Switzerland; France; Netherlands; Belgium/Luxembourg; Germany.]
Note: The human population would need an additional 5 planets to support its lifestyle, if everyone were to live like the people in UAE.
5. Are located in countries with huge ecological deficits (claim more ecological capacity than is available within their borders, e.g., Netherlands has ecological deficit of about -2000%, Belgium -1550%’ Germany -1050%, Britain -1000% and South Korea -950%).
6. Consume large amounts of energy.
7. Have a large human population density.
8. Have large numbers of farm animals, pets, rodents, and insects).
9. Have poor sanitation.
10. Are located within 500 km of toxic chemical plants or a nuclear/toxic dumps.
11. Their water or food supply comes from an area situated within a 1000km radius of a nuclear or toxic dump.
12. More than 30 percent of their food supplies come from distances over 40km long.
13. Suffer social inequity.
14. Have water shortages.
It seems highly unlikely that post industrial civilization would voluntarily sacrifice its perceived privileges based on spurious ethics in favor of sustaining life on Earth.
We are therefore creating a radical program aimed at salvaging life amid the looming mass extinction.
The Management School of Restorative Business (MSRB)
[For Parts 1,2, and 3 see http://www.restorative-business.org/stop_burning_earth.htm
May 23rd, 2006 at 11:02 pmI mean, really. Of course people will be more likely to believe the CEI. It’s much easier to believe. If you go along with what they’re saying, you don’t have to do anything, and everything is ok. Why change? As with most things, the easiest thing to do (that being nothing) is always going to have the upper hand, especially when the effects aren’t constantly in your face.
Well, in some ways, they are constantly in your face, but I hope people come around before it’s too late.
*sigh* I wish I had more faith in people. Maybe that’s deep down the root of a lot of our problems. On both sides, I see a shortage of faith in what’s here on the ground…you know, the human race. Now THERE’S a concept
but I digress….
May 24th, 2006 at 12:00 pmITS TOO LATE!
face it – even if we magically stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere today, we already have 30% more than we did 250 years ago. That is HUGE for a gas concentration that kept the climate in fine equilibrium balance. The temps will keep going up, and there is nothing you can do to stop that.
On the possitve note, i think humaity will survive in general – we are just too clever. So the population will drop few billion, and the landscapes will change, but a whole new planet will emerge. I just hope it is one that is populated by humans that will live in much greater harmony with our ecosystems, but no one can truly predict the future….
May 24th, 2006 at 12:04 pmThe public grows wiser by the week and more aware of the preciousness of the Earth to everything we value in our lives. Big Oil and Big top down business in general is being globally mistrusted as dozens of tales of deliberate abuse of their billions leak out, in spite of slick PR machines and ever-deceptive advertising. Only the gullible still believe in the shiny toxic future offered by the rich. In Europe especially, small and local looks like the unstoppable winner for public safety. Many Americans too are joining in. It is local lifestyles, commerce and Earth-friendly consumer habits which alone can change demand patterns towards restoring the planet. That’s if enough of us wake up in time to participate. So much thanks to Gore and many other alert pioneers who spend their lifetimes making us aware of our self-destructive ways. It takes personal courage to stop harming the Earth daily in what we do. But that noble cause leads to much simpler, healthier, less stressful living. It’s becoming delightfully obvious. And free to join!
May 24th, 2006 at 1:45 pmAL! AL! AL! AL!
May 24th, 2006 at 1:52 pmIt is good to see that there are right thinking human beings seeing the posts on this site. What’s not good is that there are a whole lot more people who choose to ignore the warnings on global warming, and buy into the crap that Big Oil puts out as well as the Bush Administration stand that the science behind global warming is skewed. The worst is that no one from either Big Oil or the Bush Administration pays any attention to these posts or to the truth. The big irony of this situation is that Big Oil is claiming that there is only so much oil to be had, yet they don’t want us to consider alternate energy sources and just continue to burn fossil fuel, albeit at the outrageous prices they are charging. So which scenario is the correct one? Big Oil and the Bush Administration is counting on people being ignorant of the situation in order to line their pockets like the greedy scum bags that they are.
May 24th, 2006 at 9:20 pmunfortunately things are alot worse than just debating about is there or is there not global warming. i saw the film last night and to be honest at the end of the film they suggest some things that could reduce greenhouse gas emissions but unless we change our lifestyles so profoundly we are surely doomed. the changes required are so monumental 99.99% of the population is clueless. the “truth” still needs to be told. we are not going to invent our way out of this. life as we know it is over, period….. just hope that your death is peaceful..stop fooling yourselfs.
May 25th, 2006 at 10:56 amyou are all pathetic buffoons. Chat chat chatting with your facts and fictions. Wasting time, trying to prove each other wrong. Stop using cars so much! Its really simple. I hate you all. We’re all going to die. i mean, human life is a mere spec on the arse of time. Why do we think we’re all so important. Can we just gradually fade away with dignity? I say, humanity is a cancer. Lets just let the evolution take place, die away, and let the earth heal itself in a million years, and let the process start over again. You’re not so important, you know? Relax!
May 25th, 2006 at 12:42 pmi agree with you dog face. but it will be a FLAME OUT not a FADE OUT.
May 25th, 2006 at 2:30 pmDo you guys believe absolutely everything you hear? You accuse everyone who does not believe in global warming to be ignorant and to have fallen victim to “big oil”, but you have all done the same thing, except you’ve fallen victim to believing something just because you support the political position of the person preaching it (Al Gore). For every one “expert” you site that says global warming is happening, I’ll site two experts that say it is not, some of them even from institutions you profess to be so astute (MIT, Harvard, Stanford, etc.). It’s arrogant and self-apologetic to think that humans are doing as much damage as you claim. How do you justify two ice ages before fossil fuels were even available? How do you justify the alarmist media reports in the 1970’s that the world was freezing? The same media today is freaking out about global warming. You guys will jump on any environmental bandwagon that comes by just because you think you are saving the world. Get over yourselves.
And, let me ask you: How did you get to work? Are you using anything in your life made of plastic (derived from oil, just in case you did not know)? What about the carpet (fibers are oil derived), wood floors (urethane coating is oil derived) or tile floor (adhesives to attach the tile are oil derived) you are standing on? How about the plastic on your keyboard, monitor and computer? What about the fabric or the foam on your chair (polyester and polyurethane comes from oil, you know)? How does the water-treatment plant that treats the crap that you flush down the toilet get its power? What about the paper-production plant that makes the toilet paper you use to wipe with – where does it get its power? How do the people that run that plant get to work? You bitch, bitch, bitch, but you don’t do anything to make the problem go away unless it fits conveniently in your elitist lifestyle. Get over yourselves. My message to you: Stop bitching unless you are actually doing something about it. I guarantee that if you had to actually make any major lifestyle changes to reflect your “beliefs”, you’d give up your causes pretty quickly.
Convenient Environmentalists (that would be most of you, just to clarify) are even more moronic that the fuel-burning, Hummer driving guy that you seem to hate so much! If you really want to save the world, get off your ass, get out of your Volvo, put down your Starbucks coffee, get rid of the plastic, stop using electricity and actually do something about it. Good God, man, what a bunch of self-centered, trendy hypocrites you are. “Save the Whales”, “Free Tibet”, “No Wal Mart”, “No War for Oil”, “War is not the Answer” — you are bigger suckers than the big-oil, middle-America “rednecks†that you seem to hate so much. I know – how about this: Go out on a limb and protest Target instead of Wal Mart — oh, wait — that is not trendy enough for you, is it? Did you know Target has the same labor practices and product suppliers (”slave labor”, as you call it) that you hate Wal Mart so much for? Free Tibet? I bet most of you don’t even know where Tibet is. In fact, I bet most of you think Tibet is some guy locked up in a jail cell somewhere.
Another thing: How can you let a guy like Al Gore tell you what to do? He’s flying all over the country in a private jet with an entourage of cars and SUV’s taking him to his meetings. He burns more fuel in one day than you do in a year. I’m sure he justifies it by telling himself it is necessary for him to deliver his all-important message to all of you brainwashed cool-aid drinkers.
Quit whining and start enjoying the things the earth has given you. Act responsibly, don’t over-consume and spend time enjoying the gifts that the earth has given you. Stop worrying about global warming, because you can’t do anything to make it better — it is not in your control. Grow up.
May 25th, 2006 at 3:24 pmfor someone who uses the name “knowledge is power” you’re pretty unknowing. you talk the big talk. let’s see you back up the “two for one expert” claim you make in your first paragraph.i don’t think i’m saving the world. on the contrary i wish ignorants like you hadn’t screwed it up. and your crap about doing something about it is negated by your very contradictory statement that “its not in your control”. of course it’s not. fool. it’s in george bush’s control and you know who controls him. or do you? i don’t have time to respond to the rest of your raving drool. you write like nobody here has read your speach before. but it’s safe to say i don’t fit into your profile at all. you, “knowledge is power” know nothing about me. but after reading your crap i know you are as scared as everybody else that your way of life is over dude. stop your whining. you grow up.
May 26th, 2006 at 10:46 amfor someone who uses the name “knowledge is power” you’re pretty unknowing. you talk the big talk. let’s see you back up the “two for one expert” claim you make in your first paragraph.i don’t think i’m saving the world. on the contrary i wish ignorants like you hadn’t screwed it up. and your crap about doing something about it is negated by your very contradictory statement that “its not in your control”. of course it’s not. fool. it’s in george bush’s control and you know who controls him. or do you? i don’t have time to respond to the rest of your raving drool. you write like nobody here has read your speach before. but it’s safe to say i don’t fit into your profile at all. you, “knowledge is power” know nothing about me. but after reading your crap i know you are as scared as everybody else that your way of life is over dude. stop your whining. you grow up.
May 26th, 2006 at 10:46 amWOW!! “undisputed????” While Canada drills 100 miles east of ANWR and is pumping thouisands of barrels a day and while Cuba & China are co-drilling in the Gulf of Mexico; and Vicente Fox is drilling in the Gulf off the coast of Mexico, Sierra Club Gorions are fretting over global climate change. If fossil fuels cause global climate change, you all are doomed once China & India start driving cars en masse. (BTW, they are EXEMPT from Kyoto and any such restrictive measures). Perhaps the minor change in global temperature over the past 50 years is due to increased solar activity. Get it, the sun warms the planet so it is logical to first look there for any causes surrounding temperature change? Or perhaps you forgot several years ago when people where bemoaning global warming causing El Nina/Nino? Ooops! They discovered that it was due to increased under ocean volcanic activity – “Ring of Fire”!!!!
May 30th, 2006 at 3:42 pmDon’t change however. I like you the way you are. Just like your air-head parents ranting about global cooling causing a next ice age back in the 70’s.
It is the first of June and I, not a scientist by any stretch of the imagination, have noticed that the magnolias were 3 weeks early, the fruit blossoms have gone and should be prolific now, the pollen is dripping from our trees, and, it was 90 degrees yesterday on the north shore of Lake Ontario…methinks there is something wrong with this picture…never thought I would be saying: “Thank the gods for Al Gore” ….not ready for a “Gore in 2008″ as he is still a Democrat and a member of just another big business party…maybe it is time for Mr Gore to entertain the leadership of a “third” party…all that said it is so refreshing to finally here from an American politician who makes sense to the general public and not just to big business who will lead us down a road to destruction in the name of “shareholder’s rights…funny I have never seen “shareholder’s rights”defined in either the Constitution or the Charter…
May 31st, 2006 at 11:40 amI can’t boycott Exxon/Mobil. Apparently they have such bad relationships with their dealers that the gas stations in my area are changing to other brands, like Lukoil (a Russian company).
May 31st, 2006 at 12:47 pmInteresting, to say the least. I just wonder how many people who posted here drive in cars which average
May 31st, 2006 at 2:41 pmmore than, say, 30-35mpg? How many of you own SUV s? How many of you walk to get the “small things” we need each day? How many can, and do use, public transportation? How many of you throw beer bootles, cans and what-not in the garbage?
Like several posters wrote: we ALL need to do the little things to start making a difference. And regardless of your political persuasion, religion, color etc., we all need to realize one very important thing: this earth which we call home is NOT OURS. We don’t “own” the earth. But it has been left up to us to ensure that we take care of our home, the earth. There are those who couldn’t care less. They are obvious. But “We the People” have the power and the right to take back that which has been taken away from us. Apathy is a bad thing. So is
being too comfortable. if you truly believe in what you write then do something about it. Even if it means starting small, you CAN make a difference. We all WILL make a difference. But we have to make a stand. Collectively. And demand no less than that from those elected officials we call politicians.
We as a people cannot remain silent. We should no longer tolerate, or accept, the status quo.
And this holds true for ALL of us, not just Americans. Chinese, Japanese, American, Canadian, Mexican,
German, Russian…. Whatever. Because the alternative to doing nothing is unthinkable. And should that indeed transpire sometime in the future what do we tell the children?
[...] 2. “Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore” ThinkProgress, May 17, 2006 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/17/attack-on-gore/ Support our member-driven organization: MoveOn.org Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.3 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you’d like to support our work, you can give now at: http://political.moveon.org/donate/email.html?id=7858-6679651-LCNgi3BbxSKwt96YREuOzA&t=8 Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. [...]
May 31st, 2006 at 3:55 pmterrifying!!!
my God, the amount of peope who will actually suck this crap up and go “oh yeah, that’s gotta be true” scares the pants off of me!
Where’s Bill Hicks when you need him? Bless him.
I wonder if the woman doing the voiceover got paid enough?
June 2nd, 2006 at 10:31 amCEI does not have a foot to stand on. Whether the climate change is in anyway caused by Oil use is beside the question! We still need to use less oil and more alternative fuels should be in our future, for the survival of all mankind especially in the U.S. I heard recently that it is not a qestion of when we run out of oil but when we run out of the cheap oil. Who do you think will be left in the cold durring this senario, the people who can not afford it, and the profits will only increase for the oil companies. Bill Hicks has left us but his anger lives on with every atrocity committed on the common man. OH Billy
June 2nd, 2006 at 12:31 pmIt seems that the reduction in albedo (the action of reflecting solar radiation back into space) has deteriorated to the point of no return. The combination of melting ice (sea ice, glacial and polar cap ice) has plunged the planet into a spiral that may be beyond human intervention. Big energy conglomerates may already know this and may have already decided to direct their energies (pun intended) into spinning propaganda to confuse the public. They will find a way to milk the public out of every nickle until, miraculously, they will unveil a new (read: invented decades ago and buried until now) energy source that will save (oops, too late) the planet. The first thing Exxon did after the Exon Valdez oil spill was to contact their attorneys and their public relations wizards, rather than mobilizing clean-up crews during the critical hours immediately after the spill, when most of the damage could have been contained. We need a regime change in this country to unseat the cowards that hide behind religous groups while they rape mother nature-God’s creation.
June 3rd, 2006 at 12:24 amI hear Florida Gov. Jeb Bush refused to watch
June 6th, 2006 at 5:09 pmthe movie….Wonder why?
[...] Meanwhile, a pro-emissions, anti-regulation propaganda war against citizens and the former Vice President, timed to coincide with the Gore film, calls into question the message of the film.  [...]
June 15th, 2006 at 9:08 am[...] An Inconvenient Truth is already being coined as "alarming" and "frightning". Perhaps that is why the big oil companies are running scared and getting ready to spend their money (or should I say our money) to launch counter ads, as Think Progress points out: Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.” The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. [...]
July 11th, 2006 at 1:03 amThose who deliberately lie and spread disinformation about global warming, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and their financial backers, are immoral sinners! PEOPLE WILL DIE as a direct result of their actions! They are unpatriotic traitors who will cause great harm to this nation. And to think their friends run this country (into the ground). I’m DISGUSTED!
August 5th, 2006 at 11:12 pm[...] Think Progress Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel into Congress, and the Republicans and occasional Democrats who allow those pro-pollution laws [...]
October 16th, 2006 at 11:43 am[...] The settlement with the tobacco industry has centered around educating people about the harms of smoking. Will Exxon ever be forced to teach people about the harm of oil consumption? Ha. If they can keep reducing the fine for the Valdez spill, then what are the chances they will be accountable for anything else? Between their strong ties to the current President and Vice President, and their success from outspending their critics, something tells me that they will be allowed to continue having their way with the natural resources of the US without fear of accountability. Perhaps the most memorable brief from this first round was the one in which Exxon claimed that crude oil was not a pollutant under the federal Clean Water Act, which it had violated. [...]
December 25th, 2006 at 3:28 amTo all those all gore fans that want to lower co2 emissions i have one little plan and a very easy one to help stop poluting…… Just hold your breath… How much co2 could we stop emitting if we just hold our breath for a bit every day. Or for some just hold it for good. Maybee if al gore would stop his ranting he could save a ton. I mean i had to watch the movie just for fun and i dint pay for it and would never have paid for his movie. But watching it i could just imagine all the co2 he was spewing all over everyone in the audience. And in the one ad here i agree They dont talk about it much nor will they talk about humans and animals breathing it out and green plants taking it in. And how its just a normal part of life. And the last thing i saw in his movie telling me its bs is how he said the ozone issue was fixed because of bla bla bla but hmmm funny that the issue just went away when they found out it was not a problem like they made out in the 80s. But nobody mentioned that and the fact that cfc’s were baned not because it ate ozone how could it its heavier than air so we must be swimming in the crap to be making a hole . But it was baned only simply because big company Dupont had lobiests that got treehuggers to complain but all it was over was the fact that there patent had run out and they wanted to corner the market with new stuff. And keep the money flowin into there pocket. No i agree with the cei ads and you should too.
December 31st, 2006 at 8:03 am[...] Exxon can attempt to soften its language as much as it wants, but its record remains clear. According to a recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Exxon has “funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.” The big-oil front group the Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1.6 million from Exxon since 1998, using the funding to distort global warming research and attack any meaningful action to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. [...]
January 9th, 2007 at 12:04 pmGroup: ExxonMobil Paid to Mislead Public
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=1000...
http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvestin…
January 12th, 2007 at 1:08 pmLet’s just stipulate that ExxonMobil will say whatever it thinks will make it the most money. But dont’ imagine that everyone in a debate doesn’t have an interest, such as, say, running for President.
The basic greenhouse effect is driven by the fact that CO2 absorbs and scatters infrared radiation, but not shorter wavelength radiation. All else equal, the more CO2 I have in the atmoshpehere, the hotter it gets. Be skeptical of that and you are skeptical of the last 120 years of particle physics. But here’s the trick: all else is not close to equal. Any climate forcing (like more CO2) creates an incredibly complicated set of feedback effects (polar ice caps melt, accelerating warming, plants grow faster, decelerating warming, etc.). These feed back effects are not well-understood and assumptions about them, embedded in non-validated Gloal Climate Models, are the basis for rpediction fo future warming.
So before you start shouting “science says”, you should be aware that there are credible arguments that a business-as-usual carbon emissions scenario could result in less than a 0.5C warming or more than 5C warming over the next century. 0.5C would be no big deal, but 5C would be pretty scary. In other words, in spite of all the table-pounding, nobody knows how serious this risk is.
Jim
January 17th, 2007 at 10:26 amLoved Inconvenient Truth. I wondered why there was no mention of the cattle ranching industry’s effect on CO2?
January 21st, 2007 at 3:19 pmHilarious stuff on here. So Exxon has no right to state it’s opinion, backed by MANY climate scientists who say AGW is bunk? And we have no right to confront the views that the only results from GW are cataclysmic scenarios, requiring governments to dismantle our economies now for possible disasters that may occur decades in the future?
We’re supposed to ignore the fact that the globe has been much warmer in the past than it is now, but now, it’s a bad scenario? Who knows what the globe’s average temperature is supposed to be? What is the optimal temperature? You don’t know, the “scientists†who support the hysteria, many who are not climate scientists, don’t know, and we may never know.
The hyperbole peddled by you alarmists is frightening. Science does not quell a debate by declaring consensus. Science does not silence it’s critics because they dissent from the status quo. If “science†is so confident of it’s conclusions, it allows unlimited debate and stands back to watch it’s conclusions stand.
February 17th, 2007 at 9:30 amOnly dogmatists like you people try to silence critics through spurious claims that “The science is not questioned because the science behind global warming is indisputable. Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus that the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program concluded that humans are driving the warming trend through greenhouse gas emissions. And the EPA has said that the recent warming trend “is real and has been particularly strong within the past 20 years…due mostly to human activities.â€
The organizations cited in the quote above are agenda-driven and to be taken as seriously as anything Exxon and CEI have to say.
If you don’t believe there is a wealth of climate scientists who dispute global warming, then you’re burying your heads in the sand, and a good place to start finding them and what they have to say about this hysterical, anti-industrialilzation-led drive to tank our economies and send us back to the mud-hut age, is at http://www.junkscience.com.
Wow, the more I read here, there were a lot of nutcases in here. The hysteria and big-oil is the boogie man paranoia is hilarious. Who comes up with this stuff. Oil companies sell us the oil we use every day in our cars, homes, clothes. Petroleum is all around us and we DEMAND it in our purchases of everything made from oil. Vilifying companies who sell us what we want is silly and you moonbats on here are great for laughs.
Boo, there’s an oilman behind you. Scared you out of your wits, eh?
February 17th, 2007 at 9:39 amIts clear from even a casual reading of the climatology studies, that warming and cooling of the Earths climate throughout geologic time is the norm….and like any large scale effect it varies in its severity in any given epoch….not attributable to man. Mans industrialization and domination of the Earth has only been pre-eminent during a tiny, tiny fraction of the geologic time scale…
The warming and cooling of the earths climate has been correlated with numerous factors including Sun Spot cycles, variance in the Earths orbit relative to the Sun, levels of various atmospheric IR absorbing gases, extent of cloud and snow/ice cover above and on the earths surface, major ocean current patterns, obscuring of the earths atmosphere by increased suspension of particulates and sulfur based chemicals (primarily due to increased volcanic activity), etc
The correlation of all these factors and which ones may be dominant during a given epoch is still the subject of intense research and is more of a guesstimate than firmly established scientific fact…..
With this in mind, it’s highly irresponsible to present, as fact, that Man IS the primary culprit behind any current warming trend and to claim to predict with certainty the extremity or severity of any on-going warming trend…certainly the 2006 climate performance doesn’t mesh with Global Warming dire predictions; one of the most benign hurricane seasons and one of the coldest/snowiest winters in many parts of North America…..
The current contribution of industrialization to the overall global emissions of C02 is still a relatively small fraction of those emissions that occur from natural phenomena….
The politicizing of Global Warming by the Gore Brown Shirts is a dangerous thing for any scientific body, such AAAS, to support. There can be one and only one standard for scientific fact and when a hypothesis outcome is still inconclusive, the only responsible behavior is to present it as inconclusive; the jury is out, in other words.
Finally, human society has been pursuing control of emissions for over 30 years and has made tremendous strides in vehicle emissions, recycling and other environmental pollution control………..why do we need some extreme effort NOW??
In all likelihood any massive effort to reverse a global climate trend, whether caused by Man or not, would be completely futile and tragic waste of economic capital…
If the eco-Nazis want clean power, why have they opposed the use of nuclear power for over 30 years..if they had worked with industry back in the 60’s instead of blindly opposing nuclear power..…we would have far fewer coal-fired and oil-fired generation plants today….
The agenda of the Gore-nics is clear… and its not concern for the climate.
In other words you and your ilk are, at best, brain damaged and cant tell truth from reality, or you are bunch stinking communist liars…get out of my country and off my planet
February 24th, 2007 at 12:15 am[...] Gingrich went on to say that acknowledging the scientific consensus around climate change “is a very challenging thing to do if you’re a conservative” because they associate environmentalism with “bigger government and higher taxes.” Another possible explanation? Global warming skeptics find it lucrative and rewarding to side with the deep pockets of the oil lobby. [...]
April 10th, 2007 at 1:47 pm[...] gas emissions. Pressure from The Chamber of Commerce, Detroit, Big Oil and their anti-regulation front groups on the right will squeeze him into a barely existent political space: A free market economic conservative [...]
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:28 pm