Al Gore (politician) vs. Climatologists (scientists), who do you believe?

Question

Al Gore has made more than $100 million dollars off of global warming, and a Nobel Peace Prize. Yet a recent studies by NASA and NOAA disputes his claim about the Polar Ice Caps melting. What say you?

http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/article.cfm?artId=22375

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRaeEIN5Sh8&feature=related

What about this quote from John Coleman (founder of the Weather Channel)

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an illusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going.

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/

Answer 1

ROFL, see what happens when you question the left's religion? They minimize NOAA and the genuine 'rocket scientists' at NASA. They say that their evidence is 'real science' as though NASA and NOAA...the NOAA!! is nothing more than fluff. It'd be pretty funny if their koolade intellectualism weren't so sad.

Answer 2

#1 heartland institute isn't credible by any means. all you have to do is look at who their staff works for or have worked for and you'll see why.

#2 I don't see any recent NASA studies claiming what you say they do in any of your links. All I see is an argument over CO2. Which has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt to increase the heat trapping ability of water vapor.

#3 CO2 isn't the only greenhouse gas that effects water vapor as CO2 does.

#4 it is only the southern ice cap that seems to be uneffect with a passive glance. In reality it is being affected. And when you study a little physics and chemistry to understand how temperature and equilibrium effects water, you'll understand better, what is going on.

#5 your links are only referring to the southern icecaps, try looking at the north.

Answer 3

Scientists have and always will be making best guesses when it comes to things like the melting of the polar ice caps. None dispute global warming though.

So I believe both. Try posting a non-partial website if you would like to be taken seriously.

Answer 4

All warming comes from the sun.

The tempurature on earth has not changed in the last 10 years.

The highest change in the last 100years was during the 40's.

There used to be an ice bridge between N. America and Asia. This tells us the earth was warmer at one time than it is now.

Answer 5

That is Al Gore for you!! He has an awful lot of the Americans fooled and thank God for the Electoral College for this person could have been president and if he were shot we would have had Lieberman. Talk about a revolting development avoided. Documentaries have stated that severe climatic changes occur eons apart and that they are cyclical.Dinosaurs did inhabit the earth and disappeared.So what can we believe that we are in a cycle of warming? If climatologists state positions, I would favor their opinions,

Answer 6

When are you going to realize this. Al Gore was a politician, he no longer is. His efforts are to help mankind, not his political career. If he was doing it for political gains, he would be running for president. There actually are many Republicans who are concerned about our enviroment, believe it or not, it is not a dem vs repub issue. Too many people are trying to make his noble efforts into something they are not. He is showing the world a point of view which if more people were open minded, it would be seen for what it is.

Answer 7

first, crappy source

second, in your source they never said Global Warming wasn't real or wasn't a threat.. just that it wasn't (at least directly) causing the melt of sea ice, rather it was a change in weather pattern (which may or may not be influenced by global warming)


Your sources prove nor disprove anything.. they just throw some info out about one small part of the total picture.. and in no way do they state or enforce anything having to do with your question.

Answer 8

Because some republican scientists have skewed there findings to please the party doesn't make the othe 95% of the scientists worldwide wrong.

You $100 million dollar figure is about as truthful as the
"VERY FEW CIVILIANS HAVE DIED IN IRAQ"
CRAP THIS ADMINISTRATION TRIES TO SELL
when independent groups around the world put the number between 1/2 million and 1 1/2 million !!!
ALL EXTREMELY DEAD BECAUSE OF BUSHCO !!!!


BY THE WAY Kellem

BUSH BELIEVES IN GLOBAL WAMING

Answer 9

Seeing the way that the government under the Bush administration has cooked the books when it comes to scientific research, I'll take Al and the bajillion independent scientists who agree with him over scientists who get their paycheck from the federal government.

Answer 10

Global Warming Heartland?

That one made me laugh.

How about you check out the NASA GISS, American Meteorological Society, and National Academy websites?

These are actual scientific organizations, not conservative political organizations.

Answer 11

sorry, i trust gore - and the 99.999999% of scientists who have submitted PEER REVIEWED research on global warming over your cherry picked research.

edit:
if these other guys have a beef with the current science, all they need to do is to submit a paper to one of the peer reviewed journals of record - there are many of them.

by NOT doing this they do your cause a great disservice. if they are so certain that global warming is a farce and fraud, then by NOT submitting serious scientific research to peer reviewed journals and thereby starting a serious conversation with other scientists about the topic - it is THEY who think so little of your anti-global warming cause.

as stated, you have the opinions of a COUPLE of visible weather forecasters stating that the evidence of our eyes, such as melting glaciers worldwide - is not a valid reason for concern.

your 'science' is by the choice of your scientists - not serious.