Al Gore bought a 100-ft houseboat. It runs on Bio Diesel and he plans to install solar panels. So he has named the boat "Bio Solar One" (or BS-1, for short) Could Gore be so clueless as to name his boat in a manner that is bound be a joke? Or is he subtly telling us that the joke is on us?
10 comments:
I think the latter. With the recent publishing that 650 Climatologist at a convention said that man made global warming is non existent and a farse he is now looking to be a hysterical idiot if you ask me. I have no problem with him getting the boat thought. Does he realize that the Dems will get him on the luxury tax though?
650 climatologists claimed that human induced global warming is a hoax? Wow, poor polar pears, now who will they blame? Mother Nature (how imprudent of her!) God? (How callous of him!) 'Cause whatever be the cause, the polar ice sheets have shrunk.
We would do well as a race in any case, and for our general health, to act as if man-made global warming was a stark reality.
Can anyone living along the Wasatch Front argue that the pollution that SUPPOSEDLY contributes to global warming is dangerous in any case?
CO2 is a subset of the pollution problem. No one is saying "global warming is a hoax, so let's pollute to our hearts content!" Let's just not base government policy on a hoax and faulty data. In other words, cap-and-trade is a very bad idea.
So yes, of course, let's minimize pollution to the extent possible. Why can't environmentalists use the truth to get what they want. Cleaner air equals better health and a more beautiful environment. That would be enough for me. So why use global warming as a front when the truth would work just as well?
The answer to your question is that greenies do not believe that it is a hoax. They do not believe that they are hiding behind a front to move an agenda.
I suggest then that those who believe it is a hoax ignore that aspect of the argument and base their usage/production habits on a uniquely common pollution/ environmental notion and those who believe it is not a hoax base their usage/production habits on global warming. Everyone will move in the same general direction for different reasons.
Those of my surroundings who believe it is not a hoax produce proof of such via statements by groups of like minded scientists and are confounded that anyone can believe otherwise.
Both sides assume ardently that their truth is absolute.
Since there are those who believe so ardently that global warming is irrefutable, it is reasonable to expect them to urge governmental policies that reflect that belief.
I don't know for sure of course, but I can see that there are environmental changes that seem undesirable and as long as both groups are moving in the correct direction, I am happy. I happen to side with the human-induced-global-warming bunch just because it seems prudent in the long run. None of the related initiatives can cause any harm. I am not concerned with endless business expansion. If it turns out to be a hoax, business will be just fine. No harm, no foul.
Oh yea, and as for Gore. He is a has-been and I hope he sails into the sunset on BS-1 and live long quiet secluded life in retirement never to be heard of again. I have not yet forgiven him for losing the the election in 2000.
Is this where I play my invisable violin? Oh the drama! I am with the group that believes that earth goes through natural cycles of warming and cooling. This is just the warming cycle, not man made. (Not to say that we don't contribute to the issues by not taking care of our air), but we are not the starting factor cause of the global warming. But I do agree with Alan....yes, we should by all means want to keep our air clean for health and beautification reasons. Society has a responsibility to do that. I am all for that! I agree with Doug too....Gore is a has been, and I hope he sails off in to the sunset never to be heard of again, accept to pay his luxury tax on the lovely BS-1 boat that he bought and to tweak the internet that he invented when it has issues.
Touché! Bien dit.
I don' say too much here but I do read the thoughts. My question is if lobal warming is blamed on humans and that we are destroying the environment with our cars and pollution, can someone please explain to me what pollution (other than dino farts) caused the meltdown of the ice age other than what Teresa mentioned as "natural global warming and cooling trends"? For once in a long time Teresa and I agree on something! While I don't deny that pollution contributes to global warming, it isn't the whole of the cause and there are so many other contributin factors to consider...nature as the biggest in my opinion. We should work on pollution and reduce harmful gases but not to the extent that some radicals have done. Just my seldom expressed opinion.
Besides, I worry about global warming caused by that fish! Natural gas bubbles like those are usually warm ones and once released into the atmosphere can cause the polar ice sheets to melt! No wonder Gore bought the boat...to study fish farts!
Biologically-induce methane is only a very, very small part of pollution. I think what Doug is saying that we should reduce pollution to the extent possible if humans are contributing factor. CO2 is in the air we breathe out, but no one is saying that we should stop breathing. Besides CO2 is gobbled up by trees and other plant life, which then produce wonderful oxygen for us to breath. So even if the earth were to warm up due to CO2, plant life would feast and produce more oxygen.
Post a Comment