… former Vice President Al Gore on Monday said he made a mistake in supporting corn-based ethanol while he was in office, admitting he was more interested in farm votes for his presidential run than what was best for the environment.
Wonder when he’ll ‘fess up & admit that he was similarly “misguided” in his ranting about Global Warming Climate Change. I won’t be holding my breath waiting for it.
Just to nitpick a little —
There’s no question that Global Warming/Climate Change is real. Any weather service in the world can tell you the planet has gotten hotter over the last generation.
The question is WHY is it happening? Gore thinks it’s man-made. Conservatives tend to think it’s natural and cyclical.
So, the argument isn’t whether or not it’s happening. The argument is about the cause and whether or not it will reverse itself naturally, or require human habits to change.
But the alarmists in the Global Climate Change crusade won’t tell you that temperatures have been much hotter in centuries past than they are now. The narrative they try to paint is that the planet is warmer than it has ever been and is getting warmer, and it’s completely our fault. Only by making massive changes (that will have untold economic ramifications) can we save the planet, or so they say.
The point of the post is that Gore actually admitted having other than altruistic motivations for the positions he took on the ethanol issue while in office, and that calls into question his credibility on other issues. I bring up the global warming thing because he’s the global warming crowd’s most vociferous champion, and at the same time their biggest hypocrite. Admitting to this lie isn’t helping to bolster his credibility; funny thing is it didn’t get much attention when he gave the speech.
As for the global warming issue as a whole, sure it’s happening, just as it’s been happening since God spun the planet in motion. Where I disagree with Gore and the alarmists is that it’s where they lay the blame solely on human influences. Part of the reason I disbelieve them is inconsistencies like in this video — http://bit.ly/3qBaBv — when confronted by an interviewer who doesn’t just swallow the global warming propaganda without question, this Greenpeace guy folds like a shirt, but excuses the alarmist tone (lies) as “emotionalizing” the issue. If it were someone other than an environmentalist lefty pulling something like that it would be called “scaremongering” and you’d never hear the end of it from the mainstream media crowd.
All of that goes back to the original point of this post; Al Gore, considered by some (not me) to be an authority on many things admits to overlooking facts when considering the corn-based ethanol issue. How many other relevant facts did he overlook in his pursuit to foist his global warming albatross on us all, and how many organizations like Greenpeace are conveniently overlooked in order to draw undue attention to their cause?
In no way am I trying to let Gore off the hook at all. Sorry — that wasn’t my intention.
It’s just a pet peeve of mine when people question the mere existence of Global Warming. It exists, there’s no question. The real question is why and how do we stop it, or even can we stop it.
(Personally, I don’t think it matters. See this post: http://deanebarker.net/blog/post/704 )
At no point did I question the existence of global warming (no capital letters, thanks) just the global warming crowd’s chief hypocrite. 😉 I think this is similar to what you pointed out in your recent post on the abortion/religion connection; you know I’m a conservative + I take a shot at Al Gore = I must be a climate change denier. Lazy conjecture.
I read that post you wrote and agree with bits of it; where I part company is with the claim that we’re anywhere near that “inexorable slide to oblivion”, and that global warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions. The science is far from settled on either point, and if you dig far enough you’ll find that the only people claiming consensus are those with a vested interest in following the crowd or pushing anthropogenic solutions to the “problem”. Either they have an ulterior motive driving them (political or societal goals) or they chime in with the crowd to further their own careers, or just to keep their jobs.
You’re being hyper-sensiitive. I never said you were a climate change denier. I merely noted that you weren’t clear on the real point under debate.
You know I’m not as conservative as you + I question something you write = I’m making some liberal attack. Lazy con-…oh, forget it.
Hypersensitive? Me? Good time to drop this; we can pick it up again over some adult beverages. I’ll buy.