Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (20756)	6/12/2006 3:57:16 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 541181

I'm not going to respond to every possible quote of a quote from Gore someone posted on the internet. It's simply not doable. In this particular instance, who knows whether Joyce Persico, the reporter, got the quote correct. It's reasonably easy for someone not schooled in the difference to get it wrong. Or whether in a loose conversational mode, Gore said what she quotes. It's the usual old trick. Try to find some misstatement, any misstatement, however slight, and then try to discredit the whole with it. Only attack journalism. To return to your earlier post, we still don't know who the National Post is and whoever that particular journalist is. I'm responding to the assertions about the recent movie. His argument there, very clearly stated, was that global warming led to the increased likelihood of more intense hurricanes. I think, just to add my own little comment, however, it's not hard to stretch to a prediction of more hurricanes. If one of the causes of more intense hurricanes is the global warming of the ocean, it's not too much of a stretch to argue that more tropical storms might gain sufficient strength to become hurricanes. But Gore did not argue that in the film.

To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (20756)	6/12/2006 3:58:00 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541181

As far as Gore is concerned, "the debate is over in the scientific community" as to whether or not global warming will have a devastating effect on the earth within the next decade. Alistair, I haven't seen the movie but I think this is a straw man. The debate he claims is over is whether humans are a major part of the problem, not whether there will be a devastating effect in ten years. (I've already had this discussion with Suma who claimed she also heard, although not in the movie, that the world was coming to an end in ten years.) I'm as sure about this as I can be not having actually seen the movie. I've been reading about the points he makes and the points made about his points and, while I have issues with his points and hs approach, those criticize him are scandalously sloppy.

To: Alastair McIntosh who wrote (20756)	6/12/2006 4:09:55 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 541181

As far as Gore is concerned, "the debate is over in the scientific community" as to whether or not global warming will have a devastating effect on the earth within the next decade. One more comment, Alistair. I have no idea whether Gore has ever said that. But he didn't say that particular thing in the movie. He notes any number of things that are already happening which he attributes to global warming, he notes some other things which are likely to happen in the next decade, but I don't recall any reference to a prediction of "devastating things" in the next decade. He's clearly arguing the path we are going down is a dangerous one, that there is now a scientific consensus that human activity contributes to global warming (his evidence here is pretty convincing, I must say), and that climate change is non-linear. In that latter respect, he is arguing that you can't simply extrapolate from the pace of present change. He then refers to the melting rates of large glacier sections in Antarctica and Greenland to reinforce his point that, should those glaciers melt, as seems likely, the resulting changes would definitely not be linear. All reasonably acceptable arguments. So far the only stuff I've seen like that in your post is a deliberate attempt to politicize it or from someone whose income depends on undermining global warming arguments.