a poem for Al Gore
 

has anyone heard Gore's new attempt at poetry:rotf2:...pretty moving and really scary stuff....I decided to write my own poem in response...for proper effect please imagine a voice sounding annoyingly pretentious and with a distinct lisp...like Gore :uhuh::rotf2:


Fat Tub of Lard sinks slowly into a sea of Snake Oil

My, how you've profited from your Global Scam

The earth shivers though you claim it is on fire

Noone expels more CO2 than you.....
your data charts are all askew

What penalty for defrauding the entire Planet?

Perhaps you'll discover your Controlling Legal Authority

As you burn in Hell....
:devil2:

Sometimes I wonder if the deniers are more paranoid than the alarmists.

Ok, that's not really true. I don't wonder...

-spence

I would say being a paranoid alarmist, has to be a little rough on you.

Rememeber it's now called "climate change " not "global warming because they really don't know WTF is happening or if it's happening.

Actually Buckman:
among the science community, it has always been 'Climate Change' "global warming" became the pop name.

So it wasn't a phrase used by scientist? Then who made it a pop name? Al ($$$$) Gore maybe?

The term global warming is much like weapons of mass destruction... Both dreamed up to push an agenda
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why in the world would you bring French currency into a discussion about Al Gore?

Al Gore is out of his freakin' mind.

According to him in 5-7yrs every Summer season thereafter the ENTIRE polar ice cap will completely melt every Summer season.He actually said this,really he stated this.He said this.

So sometime between 2014 to 2016 his beloved Washington will be underwater every Summer season?If the entire polar ice cap melts than yes this is what will happen.And millions of miles of coastal regions will be underwater also every single Northern Summer,globally.

Gore is out of his mind.

Its easier to believe jesus will show up in a flying saucer behind a comet than it is to believe anything out of Gore's cornhole.

Actually, the polar ice cap is floating sea ice, and has no impact on sea level rise, other than a slight bit from thermal expansion as it warms more when not frozen. Land based ice has a direct impact on sea level rise, sea ice doesn't. Loss of polar ice does have a significant impact on the Earth's albedo, creating a negative feedback, but that wasn't the point of the post.

Greenland certainly has an impact, and if it were to melt completely, then yes, it will raise sea level ~7m. However, that won't happen in 5-7 years. 200-400yr is more likely, IF it were to completely collapse. The more likely forecast is 1+m by 2100. Still significant if you live in Boston, New York etc... much more so if you live in the Florida Keys.

Gore also stated recently that the core temperature of the earth is "several million degrees" :rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:

and it only became climate change after the temps started to drop and the Watermelon Marxists realized that they might be in a pickle due to that Inconvenient Truth......

"scientific community" :rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:
as corrupt as any other "community":uhuh:

Times Online
"Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

The embarrassing error cast another shadow over the conference after the controversy over the hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, which appeared to suggest that scientists had manipulated data to strengthen their argument that human activities were causing global warming.
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE.....only just figuring it out that Gore makes it up as he goes along???

Here's the problem.

You view this as Al Gore vs. Glen Beck.

I view at from the Science. Here's what I could do, I could cite a ton of papers from the most respected scientific journals, from authors not related to the email group, and you'd say something intelligent like Liar Liar Pants on fire.

the anti-climate change group views this as a political issue, those on my side view it as a scientific and environmental issue. Thats the fundamental difference.

One of the greatest dangers of climate change is the expansion of the Manbearpig habitat, which could have serious implications for the human race.

:uhuh:you assume a lot from your "pedestal"....:rotf2:.... please cite for me a single individual or group contending that the climate doesn't change ... "anti-climate" change group....how "intelligent"? :uhuh::rotf2:

"your side"
Hans von Storch, director of the Institute for Coastal Research, calls the climate change axis a "cartel." A colleague, Eduardo Zorita, went further and said the scientists implicated in the e-mails "should be barred" from future United Nations proceedings and warned that "the scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas." One estimate from a free-market group says that 12 of the 26 scientists who wrote the relevant section of a U.N. global warming report are "up to their necks in ClimateGate."

"used to be on your side"

A UN scientist is declaring that his three fellow UN climate panel colleagues "should be barred from the IPCC process." In a November 26, 2009 message on his website, UN IPCC contributing author Dr. Eduardo Zorita writes: "CRU files: Why I think that Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred from the IPCC process."
Zorita writes that the short answer to that question is: Short answer: "Because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore."

Zorita indicates that he is aware that he is putting his career in jeopardy by going after the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists. "By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication," Zorita candidly admits, a reference to the ClimateGate emails discussing how to suppress data and scientific studies that do not agree with the UN IPCC views.


[...]

Zorita's stunning candor continued, noting that scientists who disagreed with the UN IPCC climate view were "bullied and subtly blackmailed."
"In this atmosphere, Ph D students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the 'politically correct picture'. Some, or many issues, about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of the attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture. I had the 'pleasure' to experience all this in my area of research," Zorita explained

Let me resphrase:

"The anti-human induced climate change" was a better choice of words for me. I have repeatedly said I am not on a pedestal! I drive a truck, not a prius, and fish on a diesel powered boat. We DO however, need broad scale changes in how we use energy, over the coming decades. I'm not running around, the sky is falling type. For no other reason than WE DO NOT have an unlimited supply of oil, domestically and abroad. We should be looking at alternative energy sources, even if it is for less reliance on foreign oil. You can believe that CO2 is not a bad thing in the atmosphere, but what about the well documented effects to the oceans (coral bleaching etc).

I find it baffling that we as fisherman have a hard time believing that we as a species can have a serious impact to the Earth. 50 years ago, the prevailing thought was that we could never have over fished the oceans, there was just too many fish, and it would be sustained, and look what happened.

There was a cool piece on either History or Discovery channels the other night tracking the spread of homo sapiens and the extinctions of large mammals. We managed to do that with spears and rocks. But nope, we can't have a deleterious impact on the Earth's Atmosphere., it's too big and able to absorb it all.

The problem I have with your last paragraph is that you go others with an agenda to get quotes about others with an agenda... Do I think the "Climate Gate" emails is concerning! Absolutely, but does it damn an entire scientific community, not even close. It is very similar to the creationist/evolution debate. Everytime there is a news story on evolution, the press has to find a Creationist, with a religious agenda, to give a quote. Doesn't make it any more valid.

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/20...lewis_0217.jpg
Too much science!

You must not be aware of the Transitive Property of Spin (probably because I just made it up). An example is:
The 'anti' crowd uses Al Gore as the 'pro' crowd's figurehead ~> Al Gore makes comments about topics he probably has no business discussing ~> Al Gore's misstatements are used to demonstrate he doesn't know what he's talking about = human-induced climate change must be a farce.

The equation can be found throughout this forum in posts by scott.

The equation is closely related to The "I'm going to copy/paste some random excepts that may or may not have anything to do with your post, not elaborate on any part of it, ignore just about everything you said, and then raise my hands in victory" Equation - also widely used by scott.

Both of the above are typically preceded by or followed with some "witty quip" or random insult that generally doesn't make sense.

Don't let him get under your skin.
You use facts from multiple areas and provide an analysis, he'll quote some article or try to deflect by repeatedly harping on a misspelling.
You view it from the scientific prospective, he'll accuse you of being a crazy, America-hating liberal.

You'd have better luck trying to reason with the Japanese and get them to stop hunting whales or getting a dog to quit crapping on the carpet than you would attempting to have a mature debate with him.

Why does'nt everybody shut the %$%$%$%$ up, Pick up their trash, and buy a Bicycle :hihi:

:rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:

Forecast for Copenhagen

issued Tuesday December 15 at 11:30 hours

Wednesday
Cloudy with heavy snowfall. Maximum day temperatures around 2 degrees Celsius, minimum night temperatures around minus 3 degrees Celsius. Up to fresh wind.


:rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:

another dope on a pedestal:uhuh:

if you are going to claim that "your side" is the only side with the facts and claim to speak for an apparently monolithic scientific community in your mind which doesn't sound all that scientific and dismiss an IPCC scientist as having an "agenda" with no evidence provided at a time when the noted "scientists" that laid the foundation of many of the claims have been shown to have been acting on a clear, organized agenda that did not respect science but sought to forward a hoax and then look with critical disdain at anyone who disagrees with you generally, challenge their intelligence and motivation...... then you are arguing from a pedestal that you have hoisted yourself upon which appears to be crumbing...like Al Gore's own

hey Rock...scientific question....when Greenland "melts" or "collapses", will there be anything there afterward? or will it just be like a big green puddle?

i wanna be
 

as green as Al Gore
up in a tree
when here comes the sea
i better not pee
but i do charge a fee
1+1 makes 3
one for you and two for me

I used to think that Bryan Oakley was a scientist.

Bust now I know he's just a lyingtist.

S#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g from the liberal teet

With JohnnyD, fetal...at his feet.

Hey this is fun! :hihi:

:smokin:

-spence

:smash:

Don't you realize this is all a scam?

Al Gore captured 90% of the global climate scientists, took them to a remote tropical island, and brainwashed them into fabricating data so he could get rich off of Cap and Trade.

He didn't even pay for travel expenses!

Haven't you seen the variable "AG911" in the computer source code downloaded from the credibleclimateuniv.edu?

Context??? We don't need no stinking context.

Al Gore is working for the UN, to suck the wealth from the Western nations in an attempt to destroy the world.

The ONLY thing that's in doubt is if he's working for al Qaeda or the Jews. We're not sure on that point yet, but we're sure it's not both.

Didn't you see Oakley's post about extra fancy wood trim? I've seen the man, he looks like a homeless person...How do you think he paid for his new house!!!

-spence

The sad part is that if a different person posted this, there are people in this thread that would agree with it all.

Let's leave Brian out of this:biglaugh:

90 % of global climate scientists, 90% of economists, 90% of all experts
everyone agrees, all the experts agree
noone can argue, noone can disagree
the science is settled, the debate is over
everyone recognizes

the language of dishonest shallow minded group speak employed by Spence, Obama and Gore, Reid and Nasty Pelosi on a daily basis, if you have to frame your arguements by declaring that "everyone" agrees with you and anyone that does not represents a tiny agendized minority, you are standing on shaky ground and most lkiely about to tell a Whopper if a Lie....

but...if this is true and everyone agrees and it so overwhelmingly obvious..then what's the F-ing hold up...

seems to me that everywhere these folks have claimed complete agreement on both their declaration of a problem or crisis and their hairbrained solutions there is utter chaos....

there is little if any honesty and integrity left in libterd land....

Global Warming

Calgary beats record set in 1893
Dominic Terry, Radana Suk, Kelly Turner and Lisa Grant 2009-12-14 20:02

Calgary has beaten a weather record set more than 100 years ago.

At about 7:00 Monday morning, Calgary dipped to minus 32.4 degrees beating the old record by .2 degrees.

And at least twelve low temperature records have been broken, with the coldest being Sundre coming in at minus 41.6C.

Question, are you intentionally working to reinforce RIROCKHOUND's point, or do you really not know much beyond what you'd heard pundits say and read on blogs?

As for the #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s, my wife works with developmentally disabled kids and adults. I'll be sure to have her ask if any are liberals.

-spence

I wrote l-i-b-t-"e"-r-d-s.."terds"....couldn't wait to pounce though...could ya???.......:uhuh:

so predictable:rotf2:

Maybe Spence had it right.