English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

An "inconvenient Truth" blames global warming on human CO2 production, and uses a mathmatical analysis of data to prove it. Mathematicians from MIT and elsewhere have shown that that same result (a hockey stick like graph) is generated by random data. Several cycles of ice and warm ages have also been ignored by Al Gore's presentation.

2006-06-28 02:21:18 · 8 answers · asked by jrie06 1 in Science & Mathematics Weather

8 answers

GLOBAL WARMING/THE ENVIRONMENT IN GENERAL

Any and I mean any environmental cause or approach must be grassroots in nature. Having PhD's talk about global warming and having those representing industry interests debunk these present theories is a high level and almost an entirely futile effort. Don't get me wrong, it is great that someone with Al Gore's connections and exposure is getting the word out. However, people are people they want to see results.

Yes, the expression is now trite but still true, "Thing Globally, Act Locally". Watching the sky over a city, town or even a more rural area become darkened by smog has local impact, people take note and actually see A PROBLEM. A problem that can measured in terms of air quality or perhaps an AIR QUALITY HEALTH INDEX like the one that the provincial government in Ontario, Canada is in the process of implementing. You can measure results (however small) in terms of air quality and the affect it has on the health care system (those with breathing problems, doctor's visits, etc). It certainly speaks to the advantage of a UNIVERSAL health care system (however, actually implemented) as it actually makes sense to improve the environment as it keeps people healthy (a humanitarian cause) and when health care it publicly funded it affects the public coffers when people become ill therefore it even makes better financial sense to keep the environment a top priority.

Plus any approach must be entire with a complete overall plan (the big picture). Including recycling initiatives, energy solutions (alternatives/renewables can now present a real potential financial threat to the big oil companies and even power companies...), government involvement at all levels, public transit, greener vehicles in general (Hybrid, Hydrogen, Conventional electric, bio-diesel, ethanol), conservation in all energy arenas, ETC!

Economic viability is the real sell as many of these solutions are just that economically sensible (ensuring we look at the entire picture). Yes as more people use solar, wind and other renewable energy sources the cheaper the technology will get. Two of the newest billionaires have earned a large portion through renewables Solar (India I believe) and Wind (China I believe). Yes in many ways developing nations and economies will be the first and early adopters of such renewable tech as they are just building much of their infrastructure.

So what do we all need to do? GET INVOLVED ! Contact your local government about improving your recycling program, contact provincial/state/federal government about the adopting of these new technologies (renewables such as solar/wind), buy gas with ethanol in it and demand it, use and demand bio diesel, buy products with less packaging and demand manufacturers to reduce packaging and to offer a price break as a result. More ECONOMIC VIABILITY! After all energy diversity just like economic diversity is the safest and best bet for good long term results and return on investment.

Joe...


KEEP IT UP MR. GORE THE POLAR BEARS NEED YOU FIRST **GRIN**.

2006-07-02 14:26:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Ice samples taken from under the polar ice cap prove that temperatures have fluctuated in cycles of up to 20 degrees farenheit many times over the last several hundred years. Just the fact that global warming advocates choose to leave this tidbit of information out of their theories makes me suspicious.

2006-06-28 03:09:30 · answer #2 · answered by Islander Doug 1 · 0 0

Al Gore enjoys hearing himself talk. He comments on issues well outside his grasp (whatever that is), pretending so persistently that he now considers himself an expert.

An idiot and a jackass.

People only feed his delusions of grandeur by parroting his outlandish assertions and saying the words "Al Gore said..."

Politicians mainly expell large volumes of hot, malodorous air when they breathe through their vocal cords. For that reason, I stick to the driest, most understated peer-reviewed literature on any scientific issue mentioned in current political discourse.

2006-06-28 03:43:20 · answer #3 · answered by Ethan 3 · 1 1

whether al gore's movie is accurate or not is despite the point. global warming is a serious issue that has not reached global awareness (or at least acknowledgment) until now.

the fact that you are on this page discussing this serious issue and making comments about it shows success in itself.

now it is up to you to educate yourself on the facts...please do not choose to look away from this matter.

2006-06-29 08:22:58 · answer #4 · answered by alexgirl82 1 · 0 1

No, I do not believe him. He is just trying to hype things up to get his name back out there so he can run for President and lose again.

2006-06-28 02:26:15 · answer #5 · answered by Leah 6 · 1 0

It is not that the planet is warming it is the speed in witch it is warming.GET A BRAIN!

2006-06-28 09:39:33 · answer #6 · answered by christine2550@sbcglobal.net 2 · 0 0

What Al Gore is trying to say is absolutely true. It is such a shame that people HAVE to reduce all of this into politics. No wonder this planet is on a path to destruction. Shame on you all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2006-07-02 12:29:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

bnbn

2006-06-28 03:45:08 · answer #8 · answered by deshaun v 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers