Why did it take Al Gore to tell us that AGW is occurring and is a problem?

Question

There are many other reports from around the world that go into great detail regarding the scientific evidence that AGW is almost certainly occurring.It's a shame that the whole issueseems to be split along an ideological divide which weakens the arguments of both camps.The whole issue seems to be at best poorly understood.The amount of time of heard comments such as "it's snowing in Utah; AGW my ****" or "more people die from the cold than warming" betrays a total lack of understanding amongst vast swathes of the public.
I'm not saying that AGW deniers are idiots, most base their argument around atleast a semblance of understanding of the issue but many just jump on the political bandwagon and base their stances on politcal allegiance.Make up your own minds people but PLEASE LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE FIRST.
Source below was comissioned by the British government led by Tony Blair; the staunchest ally of the US since WW2.I'm implying that these guys are your friends.Listen to them.Endrant

Here's the source: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm

I won't debate my understanding or otherwise but I do condemn those who make ridiculous statements without resorting to peer reviewed scientific literature to back their contentions up.

"More and more scientists are coming out of the closet and admitting that there's no proof humans cause climate change. " Details please - Give me a credible source - not just conjecture.

Answer 1

People don't follow science. And this is not an "in their face" issue. But they're getting it now:

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/412.php?lb=hmpg1&pnt=412&nid=&id=

For the record.

Al Gore NEVER said he invented the Internet. The guy who did, Vin Cerf, has said that Gore's actual words are true. Proof:

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

The idea that scientists are evenly divided on this is utterly ridiculous. Proof:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

PLASMA - socialists like these?

"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"

"National Review (the most prestigious conservative magazine) published a cover story this past week calling on conservatives to shake off denial and get into the climate policy debate"

"Pat Robertson (very conservative Christian leader) 'It is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air. We really need to do something on fossil fuels.”

"I believe there is now more than enough evidence of climate change to warrant an immediate and comprehensive - but considered - response. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial."

Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

Answer 2

What's more interesting is the obsession with the "moderate" believers in global warming to downplay the importance of Gore. Gore, who has no formal training in science was actually able to to realize global warming is a major problem long before most formal scientists did, probably including the supposed climate scientists on this board who wimp out in defending Gore, as if by giving into the Denier bullies they are showing Fairness & Balance. Most bizarre are the non-scientists here who say people should not listen to Gore because he is not a scientist--clueless they are implying that they should not be listened to either. EDIT <> This is exactly what I was talking about. The guy I just quoted saud we should only listen to experts in the field. But in other posts he has given recommendations, even though he is not an expert in the field!

Answer 3

I think Al Gore was just very passionate about it. Jim Hansen (spelling?) of NASA (not the Muppet guy) had gone before congress in the 1980s to draw attention to the theory. It was an issue before Gore got involved. He just tried to take it to the masses.

Conservatives are always angry (yeah, I know - the pot calling the kettle black!). They have a chip on their shoulder because the stupid stuff Bush has done gives conservatives a bad name. Al Gore taking global warming to the masses infuriates them because it makes their position appear even more unreasonable. They resort to fanatical radio and websites to "prove" they are as smart as Al Gore.

Cantrememberanything, your information is wrong. There is not a 1 to 1 ratio of scientific articles supporting vs not supporting AGW. I realize researching what you post may not produce the results you want, but I'll see if I can find the ratio for you. I saw it years ago. Most supported the theory then. I suspect it is higher now. I'll look around over Christmas when I get some time. You obviously haven't looked at the literature.

Answer 4

Gore just happened to package it in a way that got a lot of airplay. Also, the deniers (who are almost entirely right-wingers) hate Gore and in their rabies-esque style of hate, they tend to attach to anything that gets them all the more rabid.

Ironically, their rabidness only propelled him to further popularity regarding the topic.

People, like myself, have been looking at Global Warming for quite some time and haven't been reading or watching anything by Al Gore.

In their insanity, the right-wingers think that anything Gore touches is bad and wrong, and they presume that we're all as deluded as they are. See, they believe that just saying Gore's name means that something is unbelievable to others. (The sane of us in the world know otherwise.) These are the same exact people that will say he claimed to have invented the Internet, when he said no such thing. They are, at best, poor sources...

And that really is where the cycle started with regard to Gore's connection to global warming with regard to the public consciousness.

Edit: Umm... it's not a 1:1 ratio for scientific reports for and against AGW... I have to wonder where you're looking to that ratio. The scientific evidence OVERWHELMINGLY supports AGW. Even studies attempting to disprove AGW at worst find some ambiguity in the model figures (which is expected because they're models, not analyses).

There has not been a single study that has had any success in disproving the science behind global warming predictions. There have been quite a few news articles and position pieces taking the position (often with no evidence, always with little assumptions) that it doesn't exist, usually written by someone with an economic motive to distract the public.

News articles and position pieces are NOT the same thing as scientific studies. Not by a long shot.

The science says it's happening... the data says it's happening... and there isn't an iota of data that says otherwise.

Answer 5

It was a scientific issue that was heavily debated and no one could prove that humans caused global warming, so they needed a political figure with some notoriety to try to convince the very ignorant that their every day activity is affecting the climate of the earth so taxes could be increased on the people.

It's worked pretty well except that most are waking up to the politicizing of this issue and can see it's just a hoax.

More and more scientists are coming out of the closet and admitting that there's no proof humans cause climate change. Many are ruined for daring to go against the political beliefs, so they are very courageous for opposing the powers behind the hoax.

There's also a lot of money supporting the Gore agenda and anyone who disagrees is called a skeptic and they don't want them involved in the debate anymore. It's become a socialist issue that must be imposed on the people by force.

The latest world meeting on climate change will not allow anyone in who doesn't believe in AGW. Further proof that they want no debate on this issue.

Answer 6

Because scientists absolutely stink at conveying information to the general public. We talk in probabilities and likelihoods and run from definitive statements like oil separates from water.

Answer 7

I'm not political, however for every scientist and study you find in favor of global warming, there is also one against it. They are nuts on both sides. It seems those who believe in AGW are worse as far as not wanting to debate the issue. I know there are many falsehoods in Al's movie also. It may be you also who has a lack of understanding.

Answer 8

the people that dont believe in global warming tend to be republicans. i think it would be near impossible to find a democrat that thinks global warming is not a reality. Makes me really question the reasoning behind denying it. Many republican politicians insist Global warming is not a reality...hmmmm. would they have anything to gain from that.... how about oil companies, big car companies, lumbar companies..... who is to gain by arguing global warming exists... well everyone ultimately

Answer 9

I've always wondered how Al gore managed to get involved with something, and then ends up winning the nobel prize...maybe because he was VP or something. He is likely walking around like a peacock, thinking HE brought the whole issue to light, my like he once claimed to have invented the internet.

That being said however, he should be running for President.

Answer 10

I think people paid attention to Al Gore because of the design of his book. We've all heard all the facts before, and while most people I know agreed that (a) it is happening and (b) we've got to do something about it, his very well designed book brought the message home very succinctly. The medium is the message, because it presents the facts in a clear, non-confrontational format.