An Inconvenient Truth

[TripleB]

For those who missed the showing of An Inconvenient Truth at gulfplace, you will have another opportunity to see it. It will be shown at the Potluck Indipendant Film Series at the Seaside Rep. Hope to see you there.

Free mittons and ear muffs to the first 100 people!

 

[TripleB]

If I think old Ms. Fonda should be imprisoned as a traitor and Susan should just shut up half the time, does that mean I am still part of the left? I think the whole global warming debate poses an interesting question. Is the issue of man made global warming going to become politically polarized? It is an interesting question. I know of quite a few Republicans that believe in man made global warming, but would they do nothing about it because of their party line? I guess that is basically what Bush is doing. He said he believes in man made global warming, but doing anything about it that would affect the American economy is out of the question. That seems a bit crazy wouldn't you agree? If he believes in it and does nothing about it, what kind of economy will be left? I am sure there will still be an economy, but it couldn't possibly be better off. Looking at New Orleans tells me this. I consider myself a fairly conservative person on most topics, but if I believe in man made global warming does this mean I will be viewed as an ultra liberal?

It should not mean you should be viewed as an "ultra liberal". I might add that being on the "other side" should not cast one as "anti-enviromental".

 

[John R]

Free mittons and ear muffs to the first 100 people!

tripleb, no earmuffs or mittons are needed inside the theater. but bring a covered dish and good cheer.

 

[seacliffes]

Woke up this very early morning and it was 2 degrees in STL, so I had to deice the car and dig it out. Sure hope that Global warming thing is real..... BTW normal average temperature is 45 degrees at this time up here...

 

[iceage]

I saw it when it premiered at the barely reopened Canal Place Theatre in New Orleans. Maybe it was the crowd, but I found it remarkably moving. Watching that movie, in that city, at that time was an experience I'll never forget.

The movie didn't really seem offer up a lot of opinion...it was fact, backed up by scientific evidence. My brother, a geologist who is conservative and works for a big oil company, even vouched for the authenticity of ice core sampling. As he put it, no objective scientists really doubt global warming at this point.

Al Gore is an easy target, but maybe it would be more productive to use some of this energy to scour the internet looking for academic/scientific information that debunks his points about CO2 levels, the effect of CO2 levels on the temperture of the Earth, and the effects of increased temperatures on weather patterns. And as for private jets, he makes a point about buying carbon credits to offset the travel he does giving the lecture.

Seriously, even the current administration is now admitting global warming exists and that consequently polar bears are now a threatened species.

There is definitely global warming occurring at the current time. Just like there was global cooling between roughly 1940 and 1980 and warming in the 1920's. Ever hear of the little ice age that occurred several hundred years ago. Global warming is what got us out of the little ice age and it wasn't due to CO2 or other chemicals produced by man. There was also a major cooling in medieval times. And, what about the last ice age that ended about 10000 years ago when ice sheets covered most of North America? The ice sheets retreated during a period of major GLOBAL WARMING before mankind had a chance to impact the environment. Most doomsday global warming fanatics avoid discussing this INCONVENIENT TRUTH.

Warming and cooling cycles are a natural part of the rythym of the world and universe that God created. Man probably has a very minor impact on the current warming period we are in, but most of it is due to the natural cycle of the planet. There are just as many scientists that believe the warming period we are in is 100% natural as there are who believe it is due to mankind. Many, many scientists actually are convinced that our warming and cooling periods are almost 100% tied to cycles of activity on the sun. Doesn't it make more sense that fluctuations in the sun throughout history have created the periods of warming and cooling versus the theory that man is solely responsible for this period of global warming. Remember, many of the scientists espousing global warming are the same ones warning of a new coming ice age in the 1970's.

Don't believe all the propaganda that comes out of Hollyweird. Do some major research before believing either side of the debate.

 

[iceage]

Many of those who depended on corporate mass media and in particular Fox News for their information were more likely to be cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq and to vote for ?W? not just the first time but also the second.

As it turned out both were disastrous decisions. In a democracy the stakes are too high to have a misinformed electorate.

Surveys show that those that watched / listened to PBS/NPR are better informed. They were more skeptical of attacking Iraq and were less likely to vote for ?W?.

If you consider a news source that is more factually accurate biased then you have a peculiar view of reality. But then again ?W?s grasp of reality seems a little shaky too.

By the way you might want to check your spelling of ?bipartisan?.

NPR is just as "factual" as the New York Times. What makes you believe that NPR is more factual and less biased? Every news organization and reporter (actually every darn one of us) has a bias.

What surverys and how were they better informed?

Also, some of us don't believe the invasion of Iraq to be disastrous. Saddam, a ruthless dictator, was toppled. There is a lot of work to be done in Iraq and they may never become a democracy, but some good did come out of the invasion. By the way, the men and women actually doing the fighting in Iraq and seeing what is really happening (not seeing it through the lens or pen of a reporter) voted overwhelmingly for W. I would dare say that those on the ground in Iraq are better informed than any of us over here including anyone that listens to NPR.;-)

 

[iceage]

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2007-01-09-warmest-year_x.htm

TOP 10 WARMEST YEARS IN U.S. HISTORY

Rank Year Average temperature (F)
1. 2006 55.01
2. 1998 54.94
3. 1934 54.91
4. 1999 54.53
5. 1921 54.49
6. 1931 54.34
7. 1990 54.24
8. 2001 54.23
9. 1953 54.18
10. 1954 54.13

Source: National Climatic Data Center

By Patrick O'Driscoll, USA TODAY
DENVER ? Last summer's deadly heat wave and a balmy December helped make 2006 the warmest year ever recorded in the USA, federal climate officials announced Tuesday.

The National Climatic Data Center says factors include the El Ni?o climate pattern and "the long-term warming trend" of climate change, due in part to greenhouse gases. The center says drought in the Plains and parts of the West also played a role. Wildfire agencies say warmth helped make it the worst wildfire season ever, with 9.8 million acres burned.

"There's no denying that climate change is occurring, and warmer winters and warmer years are more common for that reason," says Jay Lawrimore, monitoring chief for the center, which keeps the nation's weather records. "What we're seeing (in 2006) is just becoming so much more common."

New York City, still without snow this winter, last week broke a 129-year record for latest date for the first snowfall. In the Northeast, ski resorts report little snow and temperatures too warm to make artificial snow.

Temperatures were above normal even in Colorado, where major snowstorms before Christmas and New Year's paralyzed Denver and socked the Great Plains. The city's average reading for December was still 1.4 degrees warmer than usual.

A side benefit: Residential energy demand for heating was 13.5% lower than normal for October through December, the center said.

An average national temperature of 55.01 degrees pushed 2006 past 1998 as the warmest on record. Fifteen of the years since 1981 rank among the 25 warmest since national record-keeping began in 1895.

The climate center says the current El Ni?o, the periodic warming of Pacific waters, is the biggest factor for 2006, and global warming is "a contributing factor." This is believed to be the first time the annual temperature report mentions climate change as a cause.

It was the warmest year ever in New Jersey, and five states had their warmest December ? Connecticut, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont.

During last summer's heat wave, record highs from South Dakota across the Plains taxed water supplies for crops and livestock. Heat was blamed for at least 140 deaths in California.

The year's warmth wasn't just about extreme highs. Lawrimore says more than 40% of the USA had higher-than-average overnight lows last summer, compared with 10% in a typical year. Daily records for the highest overnight low were tied or broken more than 3,000 times last summer in hundreds of cities and towns, especially in the West. About 100 locations recorded their all-time highest lows for any date, from 88 in Cedar Butte, S.D., to 102 in Death Valley, Calif.

So, what. I'm sure the last ice age ended with lots of years in a row with record highs and no people were around to influence the climate then.

Also, remember, we have only been keeping temp records for about 100 years out of 4 billion.

 

[iceage]

Dude you are just striking out left and right here. I have actually seen the film the Inconvenient Truth, and the data used on the film is from 3,500,000,000 years ago. They got the data from ice cores taken at both poles. These core samples reveal data as far back as the first ice age because there has always been some ice at the poles. If you don't believe that, then you probably don't believe in carbon dating either, or better yet gravity or relativity. Which means that you obviously can't believe that scientists put rovers on Mars, or that dinosaurs existed. As for saying you have a life, I have to question that. Look at how many posts you have on this message board.

No there has not always been ice at the poles.

 

[iceage]

Sorry, but "The world's top climate scientists (according to who?) said..." is not scientific proof! Now I see that the hottest years on record (since 1850's) fall after 1994. Earlier in this thread, the top ten hottest years on record were given. The rankings showed that only 4 out of the 10 years listed were after 1994. The 1930's remain the hottest decade on record.

Scientist projections, opinions, ideas etc.... isn't scientific data. I agree, the data seems to show warming but the J U M P from that to "its our fault" isn't scientific at all. Lets face it though, you don't really think its our fault. You think its "big oil", the gluttonous USA and of course conservatives because they don't "care" as much as you do.

We have a devestating tornado last night in FL (it was referenced earlier) so it was due to GW (implied). Hurricane projections for this past fall were ominous but no major storms. I sure this is due to GW too, I just haven't figured out the angle. I must go now and see if there is still snow in my backyard

Remember, most of the manmade chemical emmissions occurred while our government was controlled by the Democrats. But, of course, W is responsible for Katrina, the tornadoes, and all of the other environmental/climate problems occurring in the world today. I got that info from NPR.

 

[John R]

iceage, welcome to the fun. of course there are opposing sides to any argument or research, and everyone is entitled to their own. mr. gore has made a movie based on his beliefs, just as you could make one based on your own. just like npr, you have the freedom to not listen. and, you can not see the movie.

your argument holds some weight, sure there is ebb and flow to the earth's temperature, we'd be screwed without. mr. gore freely admits the same, and he also points out how extreme things are now. his numbers go far beyond natural ebb and flow.

what i don't believe i've seen in this thread, is anyone who discounts mr. gore's argument take into acount that there are a good deal more humans on the planet now than there were before. surely these additional people and their footprints are contributing something.

what a. zalace has stated above is that even if we're(the treehuggers) wrong, is the contribution of everyone who attemps to conserve hurting things by doing so? we as a nation produce and consume more than anyone else on the planet. i don't think anyone on either side of the fence can argue against that. i for one, hope we can lower the numbers a bit, and if the movie causes just one person in each viewing audience to reduce their footprint, that's a good thing in my book.