If Al Gore is so Positive his Global Warming Claims are correct...Then why not Debate those who disagree?

Question

Al Gore dismisses everyone who does not agree with his "Carbon Tax, Global Warming Scam" as "Deniers".
If he is right on the subject, why the fear of debating his points with any and all detractors?
After all, he IS the All Knowing Global Warming Expert that everyone agrees with isnt he?
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d5c3c93f-802a-23ad-4f29-fe59494b48a6&Issue_id=

Answer 1

I thought the debate was settled.

Anyone who doesn't believe in our imminent incineration is somehow on Big Energy's payroll.

Heretic! As penance, I hereby sentence you to three viewings of The Eleventh Hour.

Answer 2

If you really want to know the answer, follow this link describing the creators of DemandDebate.com:

http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/11/27/we-berate-you-deride-a-closer-look-at-the-background-of-steven-j-milloy-executive-director-of-demanddebatecom/

The driving force behind requesting the so-called "debate" is the oil industry, principally Exxon-Mobil, funding people like tobacco lobbyist Steve Milloy to form organizations and fund any scientist willing to help him confuse the issue.

Since the arguments against anthropogenic global warming have been examined by scientists and have been thoroughly discredited, agreeing to talk about them gives them far more wieght than they deserve. It would give them a false appearance of credibility, and support the false appearance of uncertainty that ExxonMobil has paid millions to create.

If the "skeptics" had a scientific case, why would they need to slam Al Gore and engage in petty name-calling? It's all propaganda, a way of gaining supporters without having to present any credible evidence. They want a war of rhetoric because that's apparently all they have go to on, in spite of the $10,000 bounty ExxonMobil has announced for any opposing research.

Apparently Exxon's money is well spent, judging by the comments being made here that are quick to pick up and carry on petty attacks, but have nothing tangible to add to the topic.

Have you read the article referenced below?

Answer 3

Why should he debate an accumulation of facts from scientists and many years of mankinds' observations? He has been monumental in bringing this dire situation to the lips of the ignorant and lowly. If he hadn't had been so well known it would have been easier for those companies with a lot to lose by being forced to become more eco-friendly to brush him under the carpet.
And why shouldn't he make money for his book, tours, meetings with world leaders and tireless work for a cause he believes in.
We have been on watering restrictions for a year in Florida and next week lawn watering is reduced to once a week. The largest lake in Florida, Lake Okeechobee is the lowest in recorded history, boat docks are 50 feet from the waters edge. Our coral reefs are dying in Florida due to the rise in temperature of the water. Georgia is scrambling for drinking water! There's nothing to debate.
As the ice caps continue to melt, sea level will rise. A fact! California is loosing inches of beach every year. Adding more fresh water to the sea will create an inbalance for the inhabitants and affect us in the food chain.

Answer 4

Al Gore is a lightning rod for big oil and all of their lobbyists.
They are experts at smoke and mirror tactics.

Every country (industrialized) in the world already accepts global warming and the need to control environmental factors as fact.

It is not a partisan issue. It is a human issue.

It's not even an Al Gore issue. He is just bringing the problem to the forefront in this country (one of the last in the world to address this problem, and one of the biggest consumers).

Answer 5

Al Gore isn’t a scientist. He’s not capable of or qualified to debate. He’s just the bearer of the message or in his case the prince. He’s working on the Machiavellian theory that states if you are the prince (King) always have someone below your statues to shift the blame to if what you are trying to do fails. In this case it’s the scientists. It’s a good gig.

Answer 6

Most likely because he either feels there is nothing to debate or because he feels engaging in debate will give the denialists undue credibility (most likely the former).

Of course, the =real= question is why you would want to see him debate the subject in the first place. Wouldn't you rather watch a stimulating debate between two actual climate scientists?

Answer 7

Debating is for opinion, or point of view. When you have the facts on global warming there is no need to debate. What is needed is for those who don't understand the serious nature of the problem to Read, Research and find out the facts instead of using threats, coercion and intimidation to try to cover up the real facts.

In the last 5 years there has been not one single scientific article even hinting that global warming is not real or that man is to blame. In that same time there have been over 100 articles in the popular press paid for by the administration, oil companies and coal companies that try to debate the issue.

Living in the farm lands at the base of the rockies in Montana I have seen with my own two eyes the damage caused in the last 5 years, decreased farm productivity because of lack of water, high temperatures that have never been recorded here before, weather that is more violent than has been seen here before and to top it off I have watched as winter starts a month later and ends a month sooner than it has been recorded here before. I have been visiting Glacier National Park off and on for 20 years and have watched the rapid decline in the size and number of glaciers remaining. Don't you realize that once the glaciers are gone the water for most of the farms in the western US during the growing season is GONE. Not to mention the drinking water for a third of the US.

P.S. Before you blindly go thumbs down PLEASE, come check it out for your self. Come to Montana at the base of the Rocky Mountains and ask the farmer and ranchers yourself. Come take pictures in Glacier National Park your self for just 2 years in a row and see for yourselves, PLEASE!

Answer 8

I think you got your reason in some of the answers here.

a. It's big oil propaganda.
b. There is a consensus about the science; why debate?
c. Opponents are idiots.
d. Blah, blah, blah.

Liberals really are pretty predictable. Of course, don't even ask them about the Gork's hypocrisy in the way he lives. He's above it all, don't you know.

Answer 9

Liberals do not debate. They are correct, no matter what others may think. Reason and logic are no match for the "just shove it down their throats," method of winning arguments.

Answer 10

Al Gore is not a scientist. He's simply made the scientific data accessible to the public.

Scientists debate the issue all the time by writing research papers. If a scientist thinks humans aren't causing global warming, he can perform an experiment to prove it and then write a paper about it.

There are virtually no peer-reviewed scientific papers which reject the consensus that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming.

http://norvig.com/oreskes.html

The reason is that almost all the scientific data supports the theory that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming. That's why there is a scientific consensus, and why people say the debate is over among the scientific experts.

What does it tell you that Inhofe is demanding that Gore debate the issue rather than challenging the scientific experts to a debate? It tells me he knows science isn't on his side, and he's hoping that Gore doesn't know enough about the details to debate the issue well.

When Inhofe challenges a scientist like James Hansen, then I'll care. This challenge to Gore is just a red herring.