Is the media's coverage of the global warming debate TOO balanced?

Question

Al Gore seems to think so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTA2RpDBLSA

Do you agree? Why or why not?

Serious answers only please.

Since when is Al Gore an "expert" on global warming? He's a politician for crying out loud!

Answer 1

Yeah, if you're measuring the balance -- with a crooked scale (that's clearly left-leaning).

It's a fact that the weather's getting warmer -- and it's ALSO a fact, that the weather USED to be on average, about 30 degrees warmer than it is, now!! Hello? Dinosaurs lived in swamps and needed 80-110 degree heat -- and got it for 400 MILLION YEARS +++++ and you're argument is, that getting slightly warner now, is the end of the World?

While my fav is that Gore mentions/covers his OWN 8 years in the White House (in the movie) in 2 SECONDS!!! (and ignores NAFTA, their eliminating Fed. Hwgy MPG standards, and that the Kyoto protocol was ignored by them for 4 full years... lol).

The idea that carbon emissions, in the 1st place affect global weather or warming -- hasn't been proven. We don't know if it's carbon or helium or hydrogen that affects the sun/atmosphere. That movie takes it a HUGE step further, and says that cars/factories = the carbon that causes global warming... know what that means? (you've ignored that wildfires & volcanoes exist -- the calif. wildfires alone of last week, surpassed the tons of carbon by ALL cars in a year's worth of driving across many states...)

The Earth's axis "wobbles" and that has a very definite affect of Earth's weather, polarity/magnetism (which is the meaning of life as we know it, and is ALWAYS but always ignored) -- and plate tectonics/voloatility isn't just a giggle of a story of what happened years back... ask any dinosaur or sabretooth tiger you'll see??

Al Gore is simply a spokesperson/actor in a movie.
He didn't WIN any Oscar (his producers did).
He didn't have anything to do with the movie, but act & promote it (as actors do)... but won a Nobel Peace Prize?

There's nothing "fair" about the coverage.

Answer 2

Al Gore is precisely correct - I've been saying the same thing for months.

Almost all climate scientists agree that humans are the primary cause of the current warming. There are a handful of scientists who remain skeptical, and they're almost always given equal time in the media to present their case.

That's why we always hear from the same people presenting the skeptical side - Lindzen, Christy, Ball (who's not even a climate scientist), Gray, and a couple of others.

I'm certainly not saying that we should suppress their ideas or not give them airtime, but the tiny minority is getting almost as much media attention as the vast majority, and this creates the false perception that there's a huge debate among the scientific community about the causes of global warming. I can't even count the number of times someone on Y!A has claimed that scientists are split 50/50 on the subject, which is an absolutely absurd claim which comes from the media attempting to be "fair and balanced".

Being balanced does not necessarily mean presenting both sides of an argument equally. When you're giving a tiny minority as much attention as a vast majority, you're being unbalanced. The problem is that the media doesn't understand what the term "balanced" really means.

Answer 3

Al Gore has every right to consider himself an expert on global warming (notice I didn't capitalize these two words like so many people do these days, effectively putting it on a higher level, one that cannot be debated).

After all, it was Al's father who single-handedly saved the environment in Tennessee by growing an inordinate amount of tobacco. The oxygen produced by the plants on his families plantation has eliminated the hole in the ozone over the state of Tennessee (unfortunately giving lung cancer to two-thirds of it's inhabitants).

But hey, what's more important? A little cancer problem or a better environment for the spotted owl?

Answer 4

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but a very mild one. There are theories that more CO2 will just result in more plants, which consume CO2, basically the Gaia effect. There is also evidence that the climate goes through cycles of global warming and global cooling unendingly, another Gaia effect. We may be in a global warming phase but it's total paranoia to panic about it, especially since it hasn't been proven that there is more than a half a degree F rise in temperature over the last 100 years. It was a lot hotter than this in the past, btw. The eocene period a few million years was far hotter than any time in history, and there were no ice caps at all. There weren't any SUVs either.

Answer 5

It is difficult to agree with Al Gore when he uses statements like, There are some people that still believe the Earth is flat, but you do not seek them out when you are doing a story on it.." . There is, contrary to what Al Gore states, a large and growing body of scientific evidence that refutes his dire predictions.
Anything that is scientific fact should be replicatable and all possible alternatives must be considered before something is pronounced indeed factual. In the cae of global warming theory, there is not a wild eyed group of crazed outlyers speaking from the fringes against Mr. Gore.

Answer 6

sure it has replace right into a faith and Al Gore is the pope of the cult.think of of ways lots money specific communities will make off of the hype.think of of all that government money going to "examine".as properly there is in ordinary terms lots you're able to do ,regardless of each little thing whoever controls the climate controls the international.concern is the final political motivator. climate replace is an element of the character of the planet.ordinary experience is to have clean skill yet till there's a dollar in all of it that happens is communicate,communicate and extra communicate.government regulations,fines and outcomes(gotta get that bailout money someplace) We actual choose clean air and water .i'm the unique recycler and that i do no longer waste skill in simple terms like many human beings.i take advantage of skill and don't decide for the "guilt" holiday of doing so. I surely have a concern with Gore the guru who flies around a gasoline guzzling jet.So does Queen Pelosi who opted for an even bigger one to fly backward and forward to California.remember her asserting she needs to save the planet,yeah she flies we stroll.we can all commence by utilising utilising the hot skill saving gentle bulbs. Oh I forgot they are those with mercury in them.Oh,properly appears like a solid theory on the time. i assume you all heard that some genius flesh presser needed to tax cow farmers for any that very own extra suitable than one hundred for emitting "methane gas" yeah it is genuine.do we bottle it fairly?Or on 2nd theory deliver some from the bull to that flesh presser as he's definitely-known with the B.S. while he sees or smells it.

Answer 7

No, it is not too balanced. Despite what Al Gore believes (or claims to believe) not all reputable scientists agree on this topic. Al Gore has found a gig that gets him fame and money and it is in his personal interest to keep people believing in man-made global warming.

Edit: Thanks to Eelfins for the info about the Eocene Period. This is a new topic I must search for.

Answer 8

My only though on this is in 80's Time ran a magazine cover on the Impending Ice Age/Global Cooling. Now we're fighting Global Warming. In 2020 Will we be fighting Global Normalcy? I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Answer 9

I agree. You can't suppress the facts. Making global warming more "neutral" between conservatives and liberals is just an insane idea. I know plenty of conservatives who acknowledge global warming. It's not "just a theory". What you people have to understand is that "theories" are supported by piles and piles of scientific evidence.

And besides, what's the harm in converting to clean energy? It would be so much cheaper, safer, and more efficient. It still puzzles me why change is such a big deal for Republicans.

Answer 10

Yes all dissenting opinion should be suppressed, it is a proven FACT that the great Global Warming GOD is coming to eat your children, no one can disagree with that.

By the way, did you know that there is a huge man who pushes the sun across the sky and if we don't sacrifice chickens to him he will also come down and eat our children!
Its fact no need for a debate.