« Not the smartest choice of venue | Main | Republicans Insist Congressional Offices off Limits to Searches »

Not To alarm anyone, but...

Democrats, I beg you to puhleeeeeeze let Al Gore be your nominee again.

Of course, if he were to win the nomination we would have to watch media types like Katie Couric gush all over him like this nonstop and we would have to hear urgent global warming warnings everyday. It seems to me a small price to pay, but decide for yourselves. Here is a bit from the Today show segment, courtesy of Newsbusters:

"There's really not a debate. The debate's over. The scientific community has reached as strong a consensus as you will ever find in science. There are a few oil companies and coal companies that spend millions of dollars a year to put these pseudo-scientists out there predending there is a debate. It's exactly the same thing that the tobacco companies did after the Surgeon General warned us about the linkage between smoking and lung cancer."


Having timidly trotted out the other side of the argument, Couric left no doubt where she stands: "Where there is disagreement among scientists is not if but when we may see drastic environmental changes across the globe. Al Gore says the clock is ticking."


She later asked: "What do you see happening in say 15 to 20 years or even 50 years if nothing changes?"


Gore: "Well, what I think is going to happen is that we're going to respond to it. But if we didn't respond, what you would find is desertification of the mid-continental areas of the U.S., Europe, Asia and Africa. The melting of the polar ice cap and the beginnings of the same things in Antarctica and sea level increases of 20 feet or more worldwide. Of course Florida and Louisiana and Texas are particularly vulnerable. The San Francisco Bay area. Manila, and we have seen the impact of a couple of hundred thousand refugees from an environmental crisis [as pictures of Katrina victims flashed on the screen]. Imagine 100 million or 200 million."


Couric: "Even Manhattan would be in deep water, right?"


Gore: "Yes, the World Trade Center memorial site would be underwater."


Can we just go ahead and nickname him Al the Alarmist and get it over with?

UPDATE: Really, it would be so much fun to run against this guy again.

UPDATE II: Al Gore is not practicing what he is preaching. Link via Drudge.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Not To alarm anyone, but...:

» Wizbang Bomb Squad linked with An Inconvenient Ass

Comments (49)

Over at RetroCrush they ask... (Below threshold)

Over at RetroCrush they asked Al about Manbearpig, apparently he hasn't seen that episode yet...otherwise he may of ben more ceral about the response.

Did you know that at the pe... (Below threshold)

Did you know that at the peak of the roman empire, there was no snow on the Alps?

The globe has been warming ... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

The globe has been warming for about the past 15,000 years or so, therefore to people who don't think (like Comrade Couric) it makes sense that it should only take another 15, 20, or 50 years to see devistating results...

At what point does Man lear... (Below threshold)
CUS:

At what point does Man learn to not build cities in flood zones?

You mean Baghdad by The Bay... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

You mean Baghdad by The Bay would be partially underwater? How damn, it's a start!

How..."hot"...what's the di... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

How..."hot"...what's the difference...

oops...s/b "hot"

Lorie, I'm still f... (Below threshold)
Luke:

Lorie,

I'm still following you around like a wandering Nomad.

You are an asset to any blog and Wizbang is fortunate to have you posting.

Keep up the good work.

Al Gore is a loony Moonbat, may be the Chief of the Moonbats. Can't wait for him to toss his hat in the ring and hear "...BETRAYED THIS COUNTRY...." played about 10,000 times in that crazed voice of his, shouting to the treetops.

Al Gore is so full of crap.... (Below threshold)

Al Gore is so full of crap. I challenge him to find one, ONE, respected scientist who will stand behind virtually anything Gore is saying. 20 feet sea level rise? According to who, Mr. Gore? The UN climate panel's most serious scenario from their report back in 2001 said a whopping... 80cm rise!

What Gore is saying, basically, is that if I won a million dollars this instant, I could buy a Ferrari. Is it going to happen? No. Could it happen? Sure... if crazy things happened.

There's not a single non-pseudo-scientist who will stnad behind's Gore's scenarios of 20 feet of sea level rise.

Who's the fear-monger now, Gore? What a hypocrit. I shudder at the thought that I voted for the guy in 2000.

This is a little off topic ... (Below threshold)
Sam the Man:

This is a little off topic (well, a lot actually) but it is really hilarious!

Mentos, the fresh maker!

http://hotair.iad.cachefly.net/video/2006-05/kos-mentos1.wmv

Lorie, in my opinion Al Gor... (Below threshold)
Sam the Man:

Lorie, in my opinion Al Gore would really whip Hillary. His views are really where the kooky Democrat base is at right now.

Chicken Little strikes agai... (Below threshold)
stan25:

Chicken Little strikes again. How many times have we heard that he sky is falling? More times than I can count and the dire predictions that algore and his ilk have not come true once. I think that algore needs to have the boys in the little white coats put him back into his rubber room. What I am wondering is, who let him out this time? Maybe Willaim Jefferson-DemocRat Louisiana?

Geez, Perky Katie isn't hap... (Below threshold)
Sam the Man:

Geez, Perky Katie isn't happy or anything to see Al.

http://www.newsbusters.org/media/2006-05-24-NBCTSGore2.jpg

I've never seen her smile that big, period. Can you ever imagine her looking at any Republican like that?

Hmmm.Frankly I pre... (Below threshold)
ed:

Hmmm.

Frankly I prefer the nickname "Al Global" for Al Gore.

It seems every schtick he's got has something to do with global somethingorother.

"There's really no... (Below threshold)
kbiel:
"There's really not a debate. The debate's over. The scientific community has reached as strong a consensus as you will ever find in science. There are a few oil companies and coal companies that spend millions of dollars a year to put these pseudo-scientists out there predending there is a debate."

Michael Crichton needs to call his lawyer, this is straight out of State of Fear.

Algore is, indeed, in deep:... (Below threshold)
La Mano:

Algore is, indeed, in deep: way over his head. However, it is not from melting icecaps; it is his own BS. He being a 'C' student must have been a gift.

I don't know who is more of... (Below threshold)
snowballs:

I don't know who is more of a tool - Couric or Gore? It's really a toss up at this point. Wow.

Here's an interesting article published last week from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

Linking Climate Change Across Time Scales

Global warming has finally ... (Below threshold)

Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research.

A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes.
-The Telegraph day before yesterday

"Global warming has finally... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research."

You heard it here first! The whole problem has been solved by a guy named Bithead.

Bush's environmental advisor on Gore's film:
"They're giving the same advice I've been giving for years."

Wizbang: please stop hurting America.

"There's really not a debat... (Below threshold)

"There's really not a debate. The debate's over. The scientific community has reached as strong a consensus as you will ever find in science."

Methinks he doth protest too much... WAAAAYY too much.

The debate is only over in the MSM, and only because it was never allowed to start in the first place. But for those actually honest enough to engage in informing themselves rather than spewing propaganda, here are a few pages worth reading...

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/offset_calc.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

RH

Let us not forget this inte... (Below threshold)
scsiwuzzy:

Let us not forget this internet gem
Al Gore or the Unabomber?
http://www.crm114.com/algore/quiz.html

Gore can barely contain his... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

Gore can barely contain his hubris these days. Diane Sawyer made a comment on GMA this morning about Gore being "born to rule". The last time I checked, we didn't have royal families in America.

Gore will split the Democratic party even more than he did in 2000. Unions will hate him, until he promises a massive "job retraining" program that will basically assure all union members of incomes for life. But the moment he does that, the "traditional" minority groups will be on his case about the threat to their government checks. The party's statists and control freaks will love him... until it comes time to divide up the political booty, at which point some will be in and some will be out, and the outs won't be the least bit happy about it. After all, there's only so many ambassadorships to go around.

Gore supporters will be all for high taxes... until Al threatens to tax their Starbucks coffee or take their SUVs away. Because of course that isn't the way it's supposed to work. Problem is, Gore is a True Believer. His faith allows for no questioning, no doubt. Anyone who differs with him in the least little way is not just wrong but evil. The Democrats wind up being split into two bitter, intellectually feeble, self-important groups: the apparatachiks and the malcontents. They may hate conservatives, but they hate each other more.

Yeah, Dems, go right ahead and nominate Gore. I double-dog dare you.

We've had global warming ev... (Below threshold)
Tim:

We've had global warming ever since Al Gore invented the internet

Please get your science fro... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Please get your science from junkscience.com, website of ExxonMobil and Philip Morris shill Steve Milloy. Spewing propaganda? That's Steve's entire purpose in life!

Let's review: Manure, which... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Let's review: Manure, which emits methane gas, is a known contributor to greenhouse gases and global warming. So, if Al Gore is speaking...

I don't see any direct evid... (Below threshold)

I don't see any direct evidence of global warming, and I'm doubtful humans can do anything about it if it's true. However, I also don't see any direct evidence of intelligent design, UFOs, angels, devils, or Jesus coming back to save everyone, so there's a lot of crackpot crap out there that people believe on both sides. All you can count on in this day and age is that Americans are generally incapable of rational thought and people would rather watch two talentless hacks compete for a recording contract than either see boring films about global warming... even if their lives depended on it.

what you would find is d... (Below threshold)

what you would find is desertification of the mid-continental areas of the U.S

Been there, done that. It was called the dust bowl. Somehow we survived. It even seems to have cured itself. If you've ever read Earth book he was predicting that the planet would be devoid of life by the year 2000 if we didn't outlaw the internal combustion engine in the early 90's. Anti-capitalist B.S., nothing more, nothing less.

I hope the lefties nominate... (Below threshold)
RFA:

I hope the lefties nominate him. He is the nutcase standard bearer and is oh so easy to putup on the moonbattery pedastal.

He has a history to deal with and that is a far cry from anything I would ever want to be in control of anything.

And what about his pet dog...errr wife Tipper? How is he going to sell her censorship tendacies to the Hollywierd crowd. She thinks everything should be rated "G".

How is he going to connect his Internet invention to Global warming? Will he get someone to yank that broom handle out of his A$$? Will he be able to find more personality than a can of tomato soup?

I don't see any direct e... (Below threshold)
mantis:

I don't see any direct evidence of global warming,

And this is based upon what, exactly? For those of you who think global warming is a hoax, or that it is real but has nothing to do with our activities, let me refer you to the recent report by the US Climate Change Science Program (in case you're wondering that is an agency founded by the Bush Administration):

According to the published report, there is no longer a discrepancy in the rate of global average temperature increase for the surface compared with higher levels in the atmosphere. This discrepancy had previously been used to challenge the validity of climate models used to detect and attribute the causes of observed climate change. This is an important revision to and update of the conclusions of earlier reports from the U.S. National Research Council and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

"This synthesis and assessment report exposes the remaining differences among different observing systems and data sets related to recent changes in tropospheric and stratospheric temperature," said Chief Editor Dr. Thomas Karl, director of NOAA's National Climatic Data Center. "Discrepancies between the data sets and the models have been reduced and our understanding of observed climate changes and their causes have increased. The evidence continues to support a substantial human impact on global temperature increases. This should constitute a valuable source of information to policymakers."

Not to mention the National Academy of Science's (those hacks) teaming up with the academies of pretty much all the other major technologically advanced countries of the world to release thisjoint statement in 2005 (.pdf):

However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring1. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)2. This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.

What a bunch of chicken littles the Bush administration and all the world's scientific academies are! Nothing to see here. Move along, move along.

Hey Mantis,Run out... (Below threshold)
Luke:

Hey Mantis,

Run out and hug a tree or suck on a kumquat. The only thing the world scientific community can agree on is to disagree.

Jeez. The glass is half empty and leaking huh? Gotta run and gas up the SUV, put the AC on high, and drive around in circles screaming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling".

Anyone ever done the math o... (Below threshold)
Gmac:

Anyone ever done the math on what kind of volume they're talking about to increase the depth of the world's oceans by 20 feet?

Stunning rebuttal, Luke. G... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Stunning rebuttal, Luke. Gotta go stick my fingers in my ears and scream "Na na na na na, I can't hear you!"

It's simple to debunk the w... (Below threshold)
Neo:

It's simple to debunk the whole global warming think. I can see it now ..

Bush comes out for major global initiative. Will ban carbon emitters like cigarettes, joints, same with methane emitters like bread factories and cows.

Left hits back .. Bush's new lies, Billions will die.

Wait, I'm confused, did he ... (Below threshold)

Wait, I'm confused, did he just try to "use 9/11" for political gain? When he said "the World Trade Center memorial will be underwater", isn't he playing on our emotions from that day to get people on his side? I thought that was just wrong, because when Bush said we need to catch those who did it, those who helped plan for it, and ANYONE who had ANY CONNECTION (no matter how small (my words, not GW's), he was "using 9/11 for political gain", but when algore says that if we don't stop global warming, that the WTC memorial will be under water, he isn't?

Al Gore is applying his pol... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Al Gore is applying his political spin to the science of global warming. In one excerpt from his movie, Gore shows a photo of the polar ice caps and then says IF these melt, then sea level would rise by 20 feet and then he goes on to show how such a rise in sea level would effect various cities. The key here is there is no credible evidence that the ice caps are going to melt.

Next, Gore equates the rise in greenhouse gas to global warming and then states the obvious that human activity has increased greenhouse gases. What he doesn't tell his audiences is that human activity also brightens the world so that more sunlight is reflected back into space. Gore also doesn't tell his audience that there is continued debate about the link between CO2 and global warming. That on-going research has shown that there were two periods since Roman times where the global climate was warmer than today intermixed with periods where the global climate was cooler, and these occurred WITHOUT any significant change in atmospheric CO2. Obviously, there's more going on than can be explained by CO2 changes.

I used a computer model to predict what would have happened if Gore had been allowed to steal the election in 2000. Some of the highlights are that inflation would be in the double digits as would unemployment, New York city would have been surrendered to the Taliban, and Saddam would have been Gore's guest at his third state of the union address. Hey, it's a computer model, so it must be right. Al Gore = No Good

I am not as convinced as Al... (Below threshold)

I am not as convinced as Al Gore that Global Warming is something that man has caused or can significantly affect. It seems likely that given what we do know about our climate's history, that earth does enter significant cycles, for which we have competing and or complementary theories regarding the cause(s).

As far as survival of the human race is concerned by 2020, nuclear fallout, heat and dust generation and contamination of fresh water and food sources from 20-40 above ground explosions one might expect from the arsenals of N Korea, Iran and Pakistan (as well as anyone retaliating like Israel, US, and God forbid the Chinese should decide to weigh in) seems a more likely cause for worry than sea level changes.

What's Al's spin on prevention there? I can't wait for the movie.

"I beg you to puhleeeeeeze ... (Below threshold)
phoenix:

"I beg you to puhleeeeeeze let Al Gore be your nominee again. "

OK.

Our knowledge of the atmosp... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Our knowledge of the atmosphere is somewhere in the neighborhood of non-existant. We have ZERO evidence that man has increased global temperatures (especially since it's not true in every location in the country). All we have is raising temperatures --- which have happened, consistently, for the entire history of the world.

Christianity has more factual basis behind it than environmentalism.
-=Mike

Frankly I prefer the nic... (Below threshold)

Frankly I prefer the nickname "Al Global" for Al Gore.

I call him "L" Gore.

The globe has been warmi... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

The globe has been warming for about the past 15,000 years or so

No, no, no! A globe is the round plastic map of the planet earth that sits on a desk. The only way it's going to heat up is if you sit it next to a radiator.

Sorry, pet hate of mine...ranks up there with "gender/sex"

I personally find myself re... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I personally find myself referring to Gore as "Sore Loserman" in my head, harkening back to the Gore-Lieberman Florida recount days.

I wish he had been 'sorer'... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

I wish he had been 'sorer'. Officially, Bush's national margin of victory was only the 537 votes in Florida, which the Supreme Court on strict party lines voted 5 to 4, to upheld. The chances of the Supreme Court voting that way randomly, are 712 to one.

For those of you w... (Below threshold)
BrianOfAtlanta:
For those of you who think global warming is a hoax, or that it is real but has nothing to do with our activities, let me refer you to the recent report by the US Climate Change Science Program
This report deals a serious blow to those who believe global warming is not happening at all. However, despite the spin of the media and Thomas Karl himself, it does not support anthropogenic (human caused) global warming. This report merely states that the satellite temperature measurements, which some had said show no warming, in fact gibe with surface temperature measurements which show a gradual warming. Unfortunately for the anthropogenic warming crowd, those same surface temperature measurements show no effect from human activity.
Steve Crickmore: ... (Below threshold)
SeanF:

Steve Crickmore: ...which the Supreme Court on strict party lines voted 5 to 4, to upheld. The chances of the Supreme Court voting that way randomly, are 712 to one.

I've never understood this argument. If the SCOTUS had been majority Democrat in 2000, and found in favor of Gore, you'd still have the same facts - party-line vote at 712-to-one odds. Would you then be presenting those facts as evidence that finding in favor of Gore was wrong?

Gee, Steve, I guess it's a ... (Below threshold)
scsiwuzzy:

Gee, Steve, I guess it's a good thing that the SCOTUS doesn't use a dart board or other random method of voting...

Points taken, by the last t... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Points taken, by the last two posts. I'm sure if the vote was reversed Democrats would have greedily accepted the decision to keep the recount vote continuing, and Republicans would have hollered 'foul' if the vote went 5 to 4, if one less ' Republican' judge had been sitting on the bench.. 'Winning is everything' in America of course even in elections. Gore, of course was as bitter as Nixon was when he felt he was 'robbed' of the 1960 election by a margin of 46,000 Kennedy votes in Illinois and Texas, and also Kerry in 2004, when he lost the national election by only 119,000 Diebold votes in Ohio.

Gee, Kerry ONLY lost by 119... (Below threshold)
MikeSC:

Gee, Kerry ONLY lost by 119,000 votes. Damned close.

By the same token, He won PA by a MUCH smaller margin. He won several states by MUCH smaller margins.
-=Mike

>Gore, of course was as bit... (Below threshold)
Tom Henderson:

>Gore, of course was as bitter as Nixon was when he felt he was 'robbed' of the 1960 election by a margin of 46,000 Kennedy votes in Illinois and Texas, and also Kerry in 2004, when he lost the national election by only 119,000 Diebold votes in Ohio.

Obviously more bitter, since Nixon didn't try to challenge the vote results. Or maybe Nixon was as bitter, but just more of a statesman.

Nixon did at least have credible reason to complain of voter fraud, since Chicago was notorious for it. But for whatever reason, he acted as if he cared more about the country than about the election results, and didn't drag the nation through what Gore dragged us through.

And what relevance does it have to compare an actual Supreme Court vote to random vote results? If Supreme Court votes are exercises in randomness, then what's the point of having one?

Worse, you make very dishonest statements when you refer to the 5-4 vote at the Supreme Court without mentioning the 7-2 vote -- NOT along party lines -- that definitively stopped the recount.

One gets the impression that you're just mad that Gore lost, and trying to explain why you think he really won.

Even the 537-vote margin is marred by the fact that it came about through such a marred process. Properly speaking, once the Supreme Court stopped the recount, the results of the half-finished recount should have been thrown out and the margin before the recount left to stand. Practically speaking, virtually everyone saw that the election was over, and while the official 537-vote margin might well be wrong, it just wasn't worth arguing about once the winner was settled.

I didn´t say the Supreme Co... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

I didn´t say the Supreme Court was an exercise in randomness..I made the opposite point, that the odds of any nine men or women following a predictable sequence of 5-4 , dovetailing by chance the parties that had nominated them, would have been 712 to one. Obviously there are usually other things like similar judicial philosophy, background which are at play and mitigate this, but it would be interesting to note how often the court has voted this in this 5-4 alignment in the past. I would suggest not very often....And it it is a pity that we missed alot of colourful stories and Nixon wasn't dissuaded by Eisenhower to challenge the 1960 election..It may have indeed led a potential constitutional crisis, and the Supreme Court would have had probably to adjudicate , but at least such a scandal it would have exposed the murkiness of the Daley Machine and Landslide Lyndon's efforts in Texas. A recount would also affair have prevented the bitter divisive Watergate and of course Kennedy's assassination, (two constitutional crisises the nation really did suffer through) ....if Nixon had been declared the protracted winner.

Even if a great deal of glo... (Below threshold)
Mary Ann:

Even if a great deal of global warming is due to natural climate change, the activities and limitless individualistic greed of man are still fouling the planet irrevocably. The considerable gifts and talents of man have been largely used to abuse and exploit each other and the resources of the earth we all depend on. Rationalize on people. Your chickens will be coming home to roost soon enough.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy