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

"Without realizing it, we have begun to wage war on the Earth itself," Gore said in his acceptance speech. "Now, we and the Earth's climate are locked in a relationship familiar to war planners: 'Mutually assured destruction.'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071210/ap_on_re_eu/nobel_prizes;_ylt=AtUJ4jdXzDGi3sDBDgjKtxKs0NUE

This is so pathetically laughable, I don't even know where to begin. But here is a humourous guide for all you "would-be Earth destroyers":

How to destroy the Earth

Destroying the Earth is harder than you may have been led to believe.

The Earth is built to last. It is a 4,550,000,000-year-old, 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000-tonne ball of iron. It has taken more devastating asteroid hits in its lifetime than you've had hot dinners, and lo, it still orbits merrily. So my first piece of advice to you, dear would-be Earth-destroyer, is: do NOT think this will be easy.
http://qntm.org/?destroy

2007-12-10 16:54:05 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Lol, I highly recommend you take a look at the Guide, it's hilarious...

"If total human genocide is your ultimate goal, you are reading the wrong document. There are far more efficient ways of doing this, many which are available and feasible RIGHT NOW. Nor is this a guide for those wanting to annihilate everything from single-celled life upwards, render Earth uninhabitable or simply conquer it. These are trivial goals in comparison"

2007-12-10 17:00:37 · update #1

19 answers

This is what you get when you have a leftist Norwegian Nobel committee picking the Peace Prize winner.

It shoulda gone to Rush.

2007-12-11 09:01:27 · answer #1 · answered by SallyJM 5 · 3 1

I could really care less one way or the other. Gore is no longer a serious player. As far as what he thought of NAFTA, I disagreed with him. I didn't hate him for that though. I just thought he was wrong. I could cae less about the Geen chaities. I don't know if he "owns" them but so what? What do I care? Why does that bother you anyway? The "sex scandal".... yawn.... I got to be suspicious that a event in 2006 is now being brought up. Apparently the police thought the complaint was questionable and I am sure a prosecutor found out about the complaint. Hmmm, and no arrest, no trial and no settlement. It sounds like the "victim" was not very reliable about the incident. Could care less about a event in 2006 then.

2016-05-22 23:44:19 · answer #2 · answered by karol 3 · 0 0

I almost CAN'T WAIT until after the next twenty years have gone by, the "warming trends" still continue. All that after Gore and his goofy climate patrol have succeeded in causing major negative changes in everyones lifestyles due to the Kyoto Protocol.

Guess what? When that happens, and we that think Al Gore is full of it try and say " I told you so". The Gore supporters will be like, What? What are you talking about? I don't remember that."
You see. Liberals have good forgetters.
They forgot that they attempted the same thing in the 70's with the "global cooling" theory. What happened to that?

2007-12-11 01:36:50 · answer #3 · answered by scottdman2003 5 · 4 0

Al just wanted recognition sine the Republicans stole the vote from him. I don't know how we did it, but I am sure glad we did!

He got the recognition from the now not so reputable "Peace Prize." Did you think he was going to stop there? Not our spotlight loving Gore.

I just wonder how far he is going to stretch his fantasy?

.

2007-12-11 01:56:36 · answer #4 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 4 0

It is odd to see a guy show up in a private jet that uses an enormous amount of fuel, jump into a luxury SUV, go to a huge arena that must be heated or cooled and speak to a bunch of people who used an enormous amount of fuel to get there, too.

Just to tell them we are using too much fuel. Then back into the SUV and back on board the private jet.

Go figure!

Merry Christmas!

.

2007-12-10 17:12:30 · answer #5 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 7 1

The only thing that could possibly cause enough "global warming" to destroy the earth as we know it is the amount of hot gas coming out of the orifice known as Algore's mouth.

2007-12-10 17:32:38 · answer #6 · answered by LastNerveLost 3 · 6 1

Wow, he's really increased the insanity since he made An Inconvenient Lie. In the movie, if I remember correctly, he claimed thousands of people would die. Now he thinks the entire planet is going to - what? Explode? Disappear? Just because the evil conservatives like to drive SUV's? Liberalism is a mental disorder.

2007-12-10 17:00:27 · answer #7 · answered by qwert 7 · 8 3

I am not sure how we can destroy the earth as he makes it sound. We might reach an equilibrium point that all species reach, but I think that is about it. The earth is here to stay until a force more powerful than man comes along.

2007-12-10 16:58:52 · answer #8 · answered by moonman 6 · 10 3

Maybe we need a bit of melodrama from Big Al. Maybe that will be the only thing that will wake up the "nothing is wrong my head is in the sand" conservatives. Now you know why Liberals understand that Conservatives just do not like facts.

Maybe Al is pushing the facts a little, but he is doing it for the good of humanity.

I just don't get the conservative hatred toward Al Gore on the global warming issue. The man wants to save the world, a very noble, and probably, quite futile thing. At least he is trying.

2007-12-10 17:04:19 · answer #9 · answered by Left Hand Black 5 · 2 7

You're right. It wouldn't destroy the Earth, only "Earth as we know it, and by that we mean as we know it during years A through B" (because you have to leave out all of those pesky ice ages and mini ice ages), and we should probably throw in "during years A through B in location Z" because at any given point in history there's probably some region where climatic conditions are not ideal.

2007-12-10 17:01:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

fedest.com, questions and answers