Daffodil Lane

A very, very inconvenient truth

Time for ole Al to walk the walk.

Wow, that's is the worst written hit piece I think I've ever seen in my life. Are you sure you want to lead with that? Your argument is that since Al Gore is rich and lives in a big house, he's not entitled to the same rights as any other American? It's baffling and once again you use a single data set of data points and claim a trend. How much energy did Al Gore's house use before he moved into it. And what about all the Secret Service and everything else that goes along with protecting him? Are you saying he's better off than you that he doesn't deserve the same rights? It's a little loopy for the party of the wealthy elite to make that kind of argument. Also this ignores the more likely possibility which is that Al Gore is a big fan of carbon offsets. I suspect a little research would yield that he's using renewable energy combined with carbon offsets for what isn't renewable. Which brings up another interesting point, why is it when I research your TCPR that I keep getting relationships with AEI showing up?? I know these radical right wing think tanks are interconnected, but honestly do you think an organization that is a front for Oil Company money is really the best evidence you've got at your disposal?

First, Al Gore urges people in his movie to reduce their electricity consumption. Therefore, he has opened the door for the question; what has Al Gore done personally to reduce his own energy consumption? Al Gore has pointed the finger, the good thing about finger pointing is that there are always three pointing back at you.

Second, I am fascinated by the racket known as carbon offsets. Basically, the underlying principle is that if you can afford the offsets, your energy consumption or over consumption is limitless. Further, these offsets do nothing to improve the environment in the areas where the energy is consumed. And, the offsets can't replace the non-renewable resources consumed.
I don't disagree that our energy consumption is out of hand but believe everybody should play their part in this global effort to reduce energy consumption, not just pay lip service to it or write a check.

Third, I've got a simple theory that I'd like to run by you. But first, would you agree that the sun has the single greatest impact over our climate? I realize there are other factors, the tilt of the earth on its axis in relation to the sun, the orbit of the earth in relation to the sun, but ultimately, it all comes back to the sun. After all, the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around.

So if the sun plays such a significant role in the climate of the world, what would happen if the sun began to burn hotter or cooler? What if the temperature of the sun flucutated? Would that mean that the earth's temperatures would also do the same?

"The Sun's output is not entirely constant. Nor is the amount of sunspot activity. There was a period of very low sunspot activity in the latter half of the 17th century called the Maunder Minimum. It coincides with an abnormally cold period in northern Europe sometimes known as the Little Ice Age. Since the formation of the solar system the Sun's output has increased by about 40%." Link

And, if there were no sun, would the earth continue to get warmer because of all the green house gases humans are releasing into atmosphere?

It's entirely possible that human beings have no impact at all global warming.

The link

You asked the question and it was answered. And it's pretty obvious that you haven't watched "An Inconvenient Truth". Because there is no finger pointing going on. It's a movie about what's happening and gives suggestions on what each of us can do to help solve the problem. Never does Al Gore say that you have to do any one of them.

It's amazing to me that the Republican party pushes carbon offsets as the cureall for all environmental problems, right until someone they disagree with starts using them. How does that work exactly? Only big business that has been holding us hostage gets the get out of jail free card offered by carbon offsets? So we all have to change and not them. Doesn't seem fair to me.

The Solar variation theory is quite amusing. Everyone knows that the sun works in 11 solar spot cycles, so it's been a desperate attempt by the radical right to try and use that passing knowledge to try to blame global warming on it. When you are telling a big lie, it always helps to start with a kernel of truth I guess. Before 1980 half the temperature change that occurred on the Earth could be attributed to solar activity. As we all know from 1900 to 1950 there was a period of lower solar activity and as the sun returned to normal activity that caused the temperature to rise back up to normal levels. The radical right has pointed to this as incontrovertible proof that we can ignore all the additional change that has occurred since 1980. Have you noticed that we are the bottom of the 11 year cycle of solar activity and we are still having the hottest years on record? That means in 11 years when the sun is at its most powerful solar activity level we are going to be starting from the hottest levels in history. It's an interesting theory, but it just doesn't explain away anything.

But I think it's an amusing exercise when I think about it. Let's take leave of our senses for a moment and assume you are correct. Let's say that humanity isn't responsible for anything that's happening on Earth at this time. Does that change the fact that coastal cities are going to flood? Does that change the fact that we will suffer droughts and freakish weather events. Are you serious proposing that we surrender all of human advancement and civilization to the inevitable and wait for death to overtake us? It seems a bit extreme to me.

I am absolutely disgusted and SICK of the repeated attempts by the neocons on the right to use smear campaigns to discredit people. SICK OF IT! And anyone who sheepishly follows is dispicable. Lloyd should be ashamed of himself. This is freaking ridiculous. Let's just call it what it is. A smear campaign.

Al Gore is doing a GOOD THING teaching people about the effects of global warming. And Jamison is right, never in his movie does he point any fingers and tell anyone that they have to do anything about it. He is educating people on global warming. THAT'S IT. At the end there are some things listed that are printed on the screen that people can do to help. And what is so wrong with trying to do something about it? What is the freaking problem with shutting off your lights once in awhile? What is the worst that can happen? You, personally will benefit by having a lower electricity bill. Plus if we all do just a little something it will begin to end our dependance on foreign oil. So even if you don't believe in global warming then it still doesn't hurt you (and may help you) to shut your freaking lights off when you leave a room. The benefits of lowering your environmental footprint far, far outweight the costs. Why the fight against it? I just don't get it! I am ready to pull my hair out.

Lloyd. Just watch the freaking movie before you go sheepishly spreading the smear about AL Gore. ugh.

Nice...so dissent is a smear campaign from the neocons on the right.

I saw the movie, he made suggestions on how to reduce consumption. I just wish he followed what he was preaching and turned off that heated indoor pool for a couple of days.

Rupert Murdoch and news corp. is now carbon neutral. I'm not going to go around and hold them up as model of great protectors of the environment. Those admirations are held for people who actually live their lives each day striving to make their environmental footprint on earth as small as possible.

No actually it's all a part of an organized effort by the radical right today. What did you not think we'd all notice the organized effort? You drones head out on your mission, repeating the exact same lies over and over again everywhere you go. You can't change the fact that the lie comes from a Republican Oil Company front can you? This is a standard Republican swift boating operation. Honestly I feel sorry for you for embarrassing yourself like this, because each time you guys try this you are worse at it.

Dissent is fine, but propaganda to support your radical ideology is a different matter all together. You've been exposed for the puppet you are, now run back under whatever rock you crawled out from under, because you'r e going to lose this argument and then you're going to lose your temper, break the rules and get banned. Save yourself the fake outrage and self righteous indignation, and just give up on pushing your lies any further. They won't sell here.

I am not sure they are lies. I didn't get this from right wing media. I got it from this link and then used the original source for my original link.

Second, Al Gore today responded to the "swift boating" by saying that he was working to reduce energy consumption through the installation of solar panels and replacing the windows.

But he didn't deny that he consumes over 18,000,000 watts/hour each month (that's my own editorial 18,000 x 1000). They admit as much in his response today. But ultimately he says that its okay because they pay a third party to be carbon neutral.

I am going to bottom line this and be done. I am opposed to the concept of paying a third party to become carbon neutral - period. I am opposed to right wing extremist big corporate businesses doing it, I am opposed to rich people doing it. I am opposed because it enables them to justify over consumption. Ending our dependence on foreign oil and carbon based fuels depends on each of us directly doing our part, not paying somebody else to do it for us.

Our family does its part. Our thermostat stays at 68 when we are at home, drops to 45 at night and when we aren't home. We own just one car which is a ulev that gets 45 miles the gallon and we commute to work using the closest mass transportation to reach our jobs. For all of our hard work to conserve, our electric bills are about $75 per month.

Regarding your attacks on me, that's okay. It's your blog and you can treat people however you want. Your prerogative.

I wish you the best of luck converting the masses of undecided voters to your points of view. I only hope that the Democrat Party, after it has the opportunity to once again rule this country, will do a better job uniting this country.

Attacks on you? You attack Al Gore, I prove you wrong and point out that your facts are flawed at best and disingenuous at worst, and it's my fault that you're wrong? That's what I love about talking to the radical right, no matter what happens you guys are always the victim.

I really find your political advice the most laughable of all. The radical right has been pushing the myth of the undecided voter for years as a method to destroy the Democratic platform, while you've been focused only on your radicalized base. Trying to make us rush to please an insignificant portion of the voters while ignoring our base. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck yesterday? Democrats have always stood for uniting the country. It's only you and your buddies on the radical right with your wedge issues and radical ideology that have divided us.

In the market place ideas the Republican party has nothing but bad ideas to offer. And I know that sucks, but remember your political affiliation is a choice, you can abandon the part of bad ideas anytime you want. The rest of America has to feel free to follow their lead.

I would like to add that what is happenning by the right is NOT dissent. Dissent is when you have an adult argument with someone and respectfully dissagree with someone and have the facts to back it up. Attack is what the right wing bloggers (and you) are going to Al Gore. You are attacking him for having a high electric bill (which has nothing to do with the greater issue of global warming, btw). what you are doing is not dissent. It is an attack.