What is Al Gore thinking?

Question

Traveling the country talking about global warming in his Gulfstream 4 burning enough fuel to keep 4 houses warm for an entire winter each leg of his trip?

And is he not a typical Democrat highlighting the problem but no clue how to fix it!

Answer 1

You are so right. I care about global warming and the environment, but am tired of people like him with the big houses, big cars, and private planes
telling me what WE should be doing. When they start following their own advice, then they deserve our attention and respect.

Answer 2

Yup, pretty hypocritical, isn't it? He should be traveling in a bus powered with bio diesel, shouldn't he? Setting an example, right? Are you sure he is flying in a jet? Do you have a source? If he really is, someone should call him on it. Publicly. Like when the governor of California said people were wasting water due to the utilities not metering usage, just charging everyone a flat fee. If the water were metered, the wasters would be exposed and charged for using all that water. Then someone found that the governor's mansion had a water meter that was not being used. But it was working and measuring usage. And guess what? The governor was a big water waster. He had a leaky pipe or wasteful lawn watering timer or whatever. He had to clean up his act then! But to get a coup like that, you need facts. So are you sure he is flying, or have you just heard that?

Answer 3

It appears to me that he is thinking that humankind is facing a very big disaster if we don't do something and so he is going around the world talking to people to help them understand the danger and then working with them to try to do something to deal with it.

You all remember the Kyoto Accords I assume. Al Gore was the United States chief negotiator. Even though Bush lied about wanting to help reduce CO2 emissions back before the 2000 election and then flip-flopped and backed out of it, the fact that nearly all other countries on Earth are signatories means that it is helping. Of course they think Bush is an idiot, which sadly is true.

Much more needs to be done of course. Global Warming will be addressed an overcome even without the help of the naysayers. I am guessing the grandchildren of the naysayers will be thanking the grandchildren of the treehuggers for what we are doing.

Answer 4

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**.

Answer 5

First off pretty much everyone is hypocritical. Your intrests are not the same as those around you. The only way not to be hypocritical is to just say how everyone should be irresponsible, which is worse for everyone than being hypocritical. Otherwise, you will make some descisions, perhaps subconciously, that are hypocritical.

Second, you have to aslk yourself what helps the world more. Sitting at home biking to work and using as little energy as possible or flying around asking others to join him and pay for something to be done for global warming. Considering the failure over the last couple decades of the first stragedy it is ridiculous for people to condemn the latter stragedy.

Answer 6

Well I can see you point concerning hypocrisy. However, are the Republicans purely consistent with their views and practices? I think not. Remember, Mr. Bush is the person in the 2000 election that didn't believe in nation building, and now he is doing the biggest reconstruction project on a nation he was primarily responsible for destroying. Or how about the bigger dichotomy between his professed devotion to Jesus Christ and his preemptive attack on a nation under false pretenses, thus contradicting a Christian maxim of nonviolent resistance. Duplicity abounds on both sides of the aisle, with Mr. Bush's hypocrisy having graver consequences to the world.

Answer 7

I think you should give Gore a little slack. Sure, that's hypocritical, but top scientists have acknowledged that he got the science correct in his movie. Therefore, I think he's worth listening to since he has done his research.

Also, I think his aim is more to bring awareness so people will realize what the problem is, and then they will take appropriate action.

Answer 8

Im sure has a way to fix the problem..he isnt a stupid republican who just wants to brag about Social issues like gay marriage and stupid stuff like abortion in order to keep us from paying attention what hes doing!

Answer 9

That's awesome. Hey, maybe if he'd just shut his yap, he could cut down on ozone depletion and noise pollution simultaneously.

Answer 10

I agree,I think he is still in denial over LOSING the election,and still wants to be politically relevant.