Al Gore and the UN Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If Al Gore persuades 10 million people to reduce their CO2 emissions by just 1% he has more than offset the use of any jet fuel it required to get him to his lectures.

It is the OUTCOME that is important, not how you get there.

Isn't that like saying that if Mark Foley's actions put away 100 sex offenders, it more than offsets his indiscretions?

Elvis Presley was also appointed as a federal narcotics officer. As the song said,
"He knew every pill he'd eat
Would be one less on the street
Elvis took them all for you and me."

Poor Al Gore. He must pollute from private jets and purchase non-green power so that the world must be saved. Jeez, Professor, Al Gore is living anyone's idea of a personal hell. Sure, there is the internet, teleconferencing and DVD's of an inconvenient truth, but he cannot command $50,000.00 appearance fees for those. How can the guy make his living without polluting in the lap of luxury.

Look, Professor - it's wrong. He is living a life that he condemns.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

And since you're replying to MY comment, let me remind you that I DO NOT skydive anymore so I do not leave a large carbon footprint every weekend.

Oh yeah I forgot.. most of the right wingers in speakers corner that continually run their mouths dont actually skydive..

My Bad.



But since I have never met any right wingers yet who were truely green I guess its still hypocritical to run offf at the mouth about how someone else uses fossil fuels.

Your continued inability to argue any inteligible point is just bewildering to me. All you do is spew rhetoric and hot wind, which is suprising, considering how cold it must be in the rarified air that you breathe. Not a thing has changed in the time I've been away. Some people continue to argue with logic and sound reasoning while others just... well, prove their intelligence quotient by the rhetoric they type.

Well ...at least she is a skydiver.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[kallend 2,117]

Quote

Quote

If Al Gore persuades 10 million people to reduce their CO2 emissions by just 1% he has more than offset the use of any jet fuel it required to get him to his lectures.

It is the OUTCOME that is important, not how you get there.

Isn't that like saying that if Mark Foley's actions put away 100 sex offenders, it more than offsets his indiscretions?

Elvis Presley was also appointed as a federal narcotics officer. As the song said,
"He knew every pill he'd eat
Would be one less on the street
Elvis took them all for you and me."

Poor Al Gore. He must pollute from private jets and purchase non-green power so that the world must be saved. Jeez, Professor, Al Gore is living anyone's idea of a personal hell. Sure, there is the internet, teleconferencing and DVD's of an inconvenient truth, but he cannot command $50,000.00 appearance fees for those. How can the guy make his living without polluting in the lap of luxury.

Look, Professor - it's wrong. He is living a life that he condemns.

Can you tell me in which areas Gore has NOT made or is making a significant cut in his personal carbon footprint? Just grumbling that he doesn't bicycle everywhere doesn't count, since he has never advocated that anyone return to the stone age lifestyle.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Can you tell me in which areas Gore has NOT made or is making a significant cut in his personal carbon footprint?

How about air travel. I would surmise that the carbon output of a Gulfstream is more per passenger than a 767. Like a bus is more than a car. Did he always fly Gulfstreams? If not, his personal carbon footprint has increased.

True, whereas previously he only had access to commercial air or personal vehicles, his Gulfstream II likely has less of a carbon fottprint than the coal-fired steam locomotive he could be using.

What about the reports that Gore's own house uses more electicity in a month than the average american uses in a year. Maybe he's cut that down to only 8 times as much. I suppose our green God deserves applause.

In an Inconvenient Truth, I seem to recall Gore calling on Americans to reduce their energy consumption at home. But, then, Gore’s energy consumption for his house increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.

Jesus, in August 2006, Gore's hous einhaled 22,619 kWh--guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. Okay, so maybe he cut it to 20k KWh in August 2007. A step in the right direction, eh? '

Think about it, Proessor - what would his stats be lik eif he DIDN'T REDUCE! The waste would be simply mindblowing. Honestly, you have to TRY to burn that much power at home.

But, Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

How bout THEM apples? Research it yourself. He is INCREASING his carbon footprint in a remarkable fashion, worthy of Haliburton.

Of course, Gore's people did NOT say that these aren't true - only that he purchases carbon offsets. Picture, if you will, a restaurant. The restaurant allows a certain amount of smoke. But there is a guy who is such a cigarette fiend, he needs his fix. He can burn through more cigarettes that ten other people combined. In order to do his part for the environment, he purchases credits to keep other smokers out. He's doing his part for the environment, right? It's no worse than if ten other people would be there. He pats himself on the back for his environmental wonders. And he makes millions as the leading anti-smoking crusader.

A ridiculous situation, eh?

Remember when Jimmy Carter wanted to demonstrate that Americans need to lower their energy use? He turned down the thermostat and publically wore sweaters. He didn't ride a bike everywhere. He didn't do much - but he did A LOT.

Schwarzenegger lieks to talk about his environmental policies. It doesn't stop him from buying Hummers and hopping on private jets.

Same with Gore. Let me ride a bike, take a bus, eat tofu and lentils and power my home with a bicycle so that Gore can fly around on a privat ejet, guilt-free. His use of "offsets" doe snot make his footprint any smaller. Bigfoot's footprint is just as big regardless of whether he kept Gentle Ben the Grizzly in hibernation.

Was he bouncing around in private jets before "Earth in the Balance?"

How many pounds per hour of fuel does a Gulfstream burn? 400? a 737 fully loaded would burn 800 or so, right? Let's divide 800 by 150 and
see what we get, do the same for 400 by 19. The carbon footprint is equal.

Travolta, Beckham, Crusie, etc., have all caught flak over their use of private jets from the environmental movement. Why not the movemnet's messiah?

He has not done anything to decrease his footprint. By all appearances, it's growing.

By the way, when an "INconvenient Truth" was released, Gore flew the private jet from Atlanta one night, to hollywood for the next night, then D.C. the next night - on a private jet.

How much less environmental damage would have been done by arranging for Altanta to D.C. to Hollywood instead of two traanscontinental trips in two days? Maybe make it ONE in two days?

It's the little shit, John. And the big shit, too.

He seems to be TRYING to destroy the environment. Doing so would keep him employed.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,117]

A lot of "surmise" and "there are reports that" in your diatribe, counselor. How about some FACTS.

I am reminded how the gun enthusiasts here always tell us it's the % change that's important, not the actual numbers themselves.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lefty 0]

Quote

A lot of "surmise" and "there are reports that" in your diatribe, counselor. How about some FACTS.

I am reminded how the gun enthusiasts here always tell us it's the % change that's important, not the actual numbers themselves.

It is the CONCLUSION that is important, not the reports that get you there.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Lefty 0]

Quote

If we want to have a true democracy, and have our votes actually count, we need to do away completely with the Electoral College.

Hah, a "true democracy". I don't think you really want that.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Quote

If we want to have a true democracy, and have our votes actually count, we need to do away completely with the Electoral College.

Hah, a "true democracy". I don't think you really want that.

We live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic, not a true democracy.

In a true democracy, rights are not protected. Anything goes, so long as the majority agrees. If, for example, the majority voted to outlaw Muslims, then so be it.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

How many pounds per hour of fuel does a Gulfstream burn? 400? a 737 fully loaded would burn 800 or so, right?

As for the GS I dont know the exact number but I know that yours is low. Same with the 737. I flew JS in a 767 last week and at cruise we were just under 9,000lbs an hour. Most people have no idea how much fuel these things guzzle. It amazes me sometimes!

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If we want to have a true democracy, and have our votes actually count, we need to do away completely with the Electoral College.

Hah, a "true democracy". I don't think you really want that.

We live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic, not a true democracy.

In a true democracy, rights are not protected. Anything goes, so long as the majority agrees. If, for example, the majority voted to outlaw Muslims, then so be it.

Yup.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If we want to have a true democracy, and have our votes actually count, we need to do away completely with the Electoral College.

Hah, a "true democracy". I don't think you really want that.

We live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic, not a true democracy.

In a true democracy, rights are not protected. Anything goes, so long as the majority agrees. If, for example, the majority voted to outlaw Muslims, then so be it.

Minor correction, our government type is a "Constitution-based Federal Republic with a democratic tradition"

A democratic republic could be related to California, as they also have referendums that by-pass their legislature.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

A lot of "surmise" and "there are reports that" in your diatribe, counselor. How about some FACTS.

I am reminded how the gun enthusiasts here always tell us it's the % change that's important, not the actual numbers themselves.

I have put forward to you evidence that Al Gore has NOT cut his carbon footprint, and has indeed "INCREASED" his carbon footprint. I put forth the increase in KWh's at Gore's house between 2005 and 2006 showing a net increase. Tell me I'm wrong. Show me contrary evidence. I did not spin. I put down "FACT."

Are my facts wrong? Then show me. Otherwise, I have shown by clear and convincing evidence that Gore is INCREASING his carbon footprint because the evidence is irrefuted.

Gore's people themselves don't refute it. They rest on his purchasing carbon offsets, which is self-imposed sin tax. It doesn't mean you aren't sinning, but it is paid to others who don't sin to keep not sinning.

Gore's actions have informed us that he views energy misers the way the Romans viewed the chaste - exhibitive of great and admirable qualities, said qualities best found in others.

I posted about his "Inconvenient Truth" opening schedule of Atlanta to Hollywood to D.C. This is FACT. I didn't even write that he should have not been there for them. But there can be no reasonable doubt that he could have saved a few pounds of CO2 from the atmosphere by going from Atlanta to D.C. to LAX.

THAT is putting your money where your mouth is.

I'll take from billvon here:
There are five stages of denial:

1. Al Gore is NOT creating more than his fair share of carbon pollution!
2. OK, so maybe he is puttign more carbon in the environment than his fair share, but he is purchasing offsets to ensure that the Yanomamo and the Amish cut back on their use high-carbon pollutants.
3. Well, if Al Gore didn't use that private plane or buy that huge house, someone who did not use offsets would have used it. We'd rather have Al Gore, who pollutes responsibly, that lawrocket, who purchases NO carbon offsets.
4. OK, maybe Al Gore's personal carbon footprint matches that of Perris Skydiving. But Al Gore is doing it to shwo the world how pollution is bad, resulting in a net negative of pollution in the world, meaning he can pollute 100 times more than he actually does and still do the world some good.
5. So it's bad news. Al Gore could have done so much more himself to personally lower his role in global warming. Had he, and ten of his private jet flying buddies just flown commercial air instead, Trees would be growing in the lower 10 miles of the Sahara right now.

---

I found this on the smoking gun website. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0717071gore1.html It is Al Gore's Speaker Addendum for what he requires if he is to travel to a location for a speech ($100k asking price for 75 minutes of multimedia.)

It says some things like, "For security reasons, when Vice President Gore is traveling on commercial flights we will be unable to..." This shows that commercial aviation is a viable option. But "If Vice PResident Gore provides his own roundtrip private air transportation" then the sponsor is responsible for what the roundtrip First-Class would have been.

Knowing what we know now, Al Gore's other transportation is a private jet. But, Gore wants them to use a "hybrid" if at all possible. (Point for Gore.)

Paragraph 3 says that the agreement must be confidential.

Paragraph 4 means that Gore's message may only be spread by Gore. (The purpose is that he gets paid for it. We don't want anyone pirating his environmental message. Even if it saves the environment. Which, of course, shows the capitalist GENIUS of the guy)

The presentations are closed to the press (his message goes out to those who pay), he conducts no press conferences or interviews.

It's nice for Gore to use the hybrid. It's a small step that, when added together, does good things. But flying commerical air (which, according to Gore's agency, is an option) would do far more for the environment than a private jet.

Thus, we are not asking that he ride a bicycle cross-country. First-class travel is better than most of us ever do. Why can he not fly first-class air? Because a private jet is more comfortable.

Therefore, his comfort is more important than the environment.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,117]

Quote

Gore's people themselves don't refute it. They rest on his purchasing carbon offsets, which is self-imposed sin tax. It doesn't mean you aren't sinning, but it is paid to others who don't sin to keep not sinning.

.

Offsets - one of Ronald Reagan's better ideas. Originated by a conservative administration, embraced by industry, must be good and appropriate!

Thank you for making my point.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pop 0]

Quote

Quote

Can you tell me in which areas Gore has NOT made or is making a significant cut in his personal carbon footprint?

How about air travel. I would surmise that the carbon output of a Gulfstream is more per passenger than a 767. Like a bus is more than a car. Did he always fly Gulfstreams? If not, his personal carbon footprint has increased.

True, whereas previously he only had access to commercial air or personal vehicles, his Gulfstream II likely has less of a carbon fottprint than the coal-fired steam locomotive he could be using.

What about the reports that Gore's own house uses more electicity in a month than the average american uses in a year. Maybe he's cut that down to only 8 times as much. I suppose our green God deserves applause.

In an Inconvenient Truth, I seem to recall Gore calling on Americans to reduce their energy consumption at home. But, then, Gore’s energy consumption for his house increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.

Jesus, in August 2006, Gore's hous einhaled 22,619 kWh--guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. Okay, so maybe he cut it to 20k KWh in August 2007. A step in the right direction, eh? '

Think about it, Proessor - what would his stats be lik eif he DIDN'T REDUCE! The waste would be simply mindblowing. Honestly, you have to TRY to burn that much power at home.

But, Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

How bout THEM apples? Research it yourself. He is INCREASING his carbon footprint in a remarkable fashion, worthy of Haliburton.

Of course, Gore's people did NOT say that these aren't true - only that he purchases carbon offsets. Picture, if you will, a restaurant. The restaurant allows a certain amount of smoke. But there is a guy who is such a cigarette fiend, he needs his fix. He can burn through more cigarettes that ten other people combined. In order to do his part for the environment, he purchases credits to keep other smokers out. He's doing his part for the environment, right? It's no worse than if ten other people would be there. He pats himself on the back for his environmental wonders. And he makes millions as the leading anti-smoking crusader.

A ridiculous situation, eh?

Remember when Jimmy Carter wanted to demonstrate that Americans need to lower their energy use? He turned down the thermostat and publically wore sweaters. He didn't ride a bike everywhere. He didn't do much - but he did A LOT.

Schwarzenegger lieks to talk about his environmental policies. It doesn't stop him from buying Hummers and hopping on private jets.

Same with Gore. Let me ride a bike, take a bus, eat tofu and lentils and power my home with a bicycle so that Gore can fly around on a privat ejet, guilt-free. His use of "offsets" doe snot make his footprint any smaller. Bigfoot's footprint is just as big regardless of whether he kept Gentle Ben the Grizzly in hibernation.

Was he bouncing around in private jets before "Earth in the Balance?"

How many pounds per hour of fuel does a Gulfstream burn? 400? a 737 fully loaded would burn 800 or so, right? Let's divide 800 by 150 and
see what we get, do the same for 400 by 19. The carbon footprint is equal.

Travolta, Beckham, Crusie, etc., have all caught flak over their use of private jets from the environmental movement. Why not the movemnet's messiah?

He has not done anything to decrease his footprint. By all appearances, it's growing.

By the way, when an "INconvenient Truth" was released, Gore flew the private jet from Atlanta one night, to hollywood for the next night, then D.C. the next night - on a private jet.

How much less environmental damage would have been done by arranging for Altanta to D.C. to Hollywood instead of two traanscontinental trips in two days? Maybe make it ONE in two days?

It's the little shit, John. And the big shit, too.

He seems to be TRYING to destroy the environment. Doing so would keep him employed.

Gore's intent is very positive. He is not out to harm anyone. Beats our current moron running the country.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[AWL71 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Can you tell me in which areas Gore has NOT made or is making a significant cut in his personal carbon footprint?

How about air travel. I would surmise that the carbon output of a Gulfstream is more per passenger than a 767. Like a bus is more than a car. Did he always fly Gulfstreams? If not, his personal carbon footprint has increased.

True, whereas previously he only had access to commercial air or personal vehicles, his Gulfstream II likely has less of a carbon fottprint than the coal-fired steam locomotive he could be using.

What about the reports that Gore's own house uses more electicity in a month than the average american uses in a year. Maybe he's cut that down to only 8 times as much. I suppose our green God deserves applause.

In an Inconvenient Truth, I seem to recall Gore calling on Americans to reduce their energy consumption at home. But, then, Gore’s energy consumption for his house increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.

Jesus, in August 2006, Gore's hous einhaled 22,619 kWh--guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. Okay, so maybe he cut it to 20k KWh in August 2007. A step in the right direction, eh? '

Think about it, Proessor - what would his stats be lik eif he DIDN'T REDUCE! The waste would be simply mindblowing. Honestly, you have to TRY to burn that much power at home.

But, Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

How bout THEM apples? Research it yourself. He is INCREASING his carbon footprint in a remarkable fashion, worthy of Haliburton.

Of course, Gore's people did NOT say that these aren't true - only that he purchases carbon offsets. Picture, if you will, a restaurant. The restaurant allows a certain amount of smoke. But there is a guy who is such a cigarette fiend, he needs his fix. He can burn through more cigarettes that ten other people combined. In order to do his part for the environment, he purchases credits to keep other smokers out. He's doing his part for the environment, right? It's no worse than if ten other people would be there. He pats himself on the back for his environmental wonders. And he makes millions as the leading anti-smoking crusader.

A ridiculous situation, eh?

Remember when Jimmy Carter wanted to demonstrate that Americans need to lower their energy use? He turned down the thermostat and publically wore sweaters. He didn't ride a bike everywhere. He didn't do much - but he did A LOT.

Schwarzenegger lieks to talk about his environmental policies. It doesn't stop him from buying Hummers and hopping on private jets.

Same with Gore. Let me ride a bike, take a bus, eat tofu and lentils and power my home with a bicycle so that Gore can fly around on a privat ejet, guilt-free. His use of "offsets" doe snot make his footprint any smaller. Bigfoot's footprint is just as big regardless of whether he kept Gentle Ben the Grizzly in hibernation.

Was he bouncing around in private jets before "Earth in the Balance?"

How many pounds per hour of fuel does a Gulfstream burn? 400? a 737 fully loaded would burn 800 or so, right? Let's divide 800 by 150 and
see what we get, do the same for 400 by 19. The carbon footprint is equal.

Travolta, Beckham, Crusie, etc., have all caught flak over their use of private jets from the environmental movement. Why not the movemnet's messiah?

He has not done anything to decrease his footprint. By all appearances, it's growing.

By the way, when an "INconvenient Truth" was released, Gore flew the private jet from Atlanta one night, to hollywood for the next night, then D.C. the next night - on a private jet.

How much less environmental damage would have been done by arranging for Altanta to D.C. to Hollywood instead of two traanscontinental trips in two days? Maybe make it ONE in two days?

It's the little shit, John. And the big shit, too.

He seems to be TRYING to destroy the environment. Doing so would keep him employed.

Gore's intent is very positive. He is not out to harm anyone. Beats our current moron running the country.

Did you read the post? It had nothing to do with Bush or whether Gore's actions concerning GW are good or bad. It has to do with the fact that Gore is a hypocrite and you Gore supporter's can't deal with that so you retort to Bush is a Moron or Reagen is the one that came up with offsets. Heaven forbid you call a spade a spade.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Offsets - one of Ronald Reagan's better ideas. Originated by a conservative administration, embraced by industry, must be good and appropriate!

Thank you for making my point.

What point is that? That Al Gore doesn't pollute as much as 50-100 average Americans? He just pays other non-polluters not to pollute.

Again, you posted about his carbon footprint. His carbon footprint is irrefutably huge.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Did you read the post? It had nothing to do with Bush or whether Gore's actions concerning GW are good or bad. It has to do with the fact that Gore is a hypocrite and you Gore supporter's can't deal with that so you retort to Bush is a Moron or Reagen is the one that came up with offsets. Heaven forbid you call a spade a spade.

Nice thread summary.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Gore's intent is very positive.

We have another term for this: "Symbolism over substance."

How do you know what is in Gore's heart, by the way? Do you look at what he says or what he does?

I tend to look at what people do as opposed they say. Would you say that Mark Foley's intent is very positive? He's done such good.

I don't CARE what people SAY. Show me what they do, and that is the reflection of their TRUE intentions.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,117]

Quote

Quote

Offsets - one of Ronald Reagan's better ideas. Originated by a conservative administration, embraced by industry, must be good and appropriate!

Thank you for making my point.

What point is that? That Al Gore doesn't pollute as much as 50-100 average Americans? He just pays other non-polluters not to pollute.

Again, you posted about his carbon footprint. His carbon footprint is irrefutably huge.

Gore is a multi-millionaire former VP. He is NOT an "average american". Average Americans are inappropriate basis for comparison. You should compare him with others living multi-millionaire lifestyles.

Does he use a Gulfstream V as a matter of course, or is this a one-time event you are all freaking out about?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Gore is a multi-millionaire former VP. He is NOT an "average american". Average Americans are inappropriate basis for comparison. You should compare him with others living multi-millionaire lifestyles.

Do you even know what this thread is about?

[pop 0]

Quote

and you Gore supporter's can't deal with that so you retort to Bush is a Moron or Reagen is the one that came up with offsets.

I tell it how I see it......it happens that 70% of country sees it the same way too. Ill say it again.....Gore's intent is very positive...and Bush is a moron (even if this post has nothing to do with him)

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[AWL71 0]

Quote

Quote

and you Gore supporter's can't deal with that so you retort to Bush is a Moron or Reagen is the one that came up with offsets.

I tell it how I see it......it happens that 70% of country sees it the same way too. Ill say it again.....Gore's intent is very positive...and Bush is a moron (even if this post has nothing to do with him)

His intent is positive for his bank balance and his ego. And you still miss the point...he is a do as I say, not as I do hypocrite. A person that preaches one thing and does another has no credibility with me. If you have a man-crush on him then that is your business...

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

[lawrocket 3]

You asked me to show that he has not been reducing his carbon footprint. I did.

His power bill for his his house is evidence that his environmental abuse is a growing trend.

Quote

Gore is a multi-millionaire former VP. He is NOT an "average american". Average Americans are inappropriate basis for comparison. You should compare him with others living multi-millionaire lifestyles.

Oh - it's not about carbon footprints anymore. Let's have Robin Leach narrate it.. Background music, "On today's episode of 'The Excessive Waste, Over-Indulgence, Over-Consumption and Carbon Footprints of the Rich and Famous, as Opposed to You Peasants Who Should be Covering their Asses by Reducing Your Pathetic Energy Needs - Who cares About your Survival?'"

Professor, I have ALWAYS respected your viewpoints on things. This is the only exception I have run across. You are making an excuse that because he is a multimillionaire he should not be compared with the average citizen. Do the wealthy NEED to use more energy?

All you are now saying is that Al Gore should be viewed as a good guy, because even though he pollutes way more than regular Americans, he should be given a Nobel Prize because there are multimillionaires out there who are worse than him.

Oh, he DID get a Nobel Peace Prize - for his environmental activism. Apparently not because he doesn't pollute more than 99.999 percent of the world's populatiin, but because he's rich and could be polluting a lot more.

And from a guy who advocates reduction of energy usage.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

the Nobel committee can award whoever they want - they can give one to Saddam H if they'd like


Now, if we talk about 'deserving' an award for improving the planet's energy situation..... I will be happy to see the award to the first person to INVENT a cost effective and usuable alternate energy source.

not just bitch about it
not just encourage using an reprocessed form from the same original source
not just tell people to not use energy but not walk the walk themselves
not just use it as political clout to move money from one group to another
not just use it as political clout to move money from one country to another
.......

real results are hard - PR gestures are easy

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,090]

>Gore's people themselves don't refute it. They rest on his
>purchasing carbon offsets, which is self-imposed sin tax. It doesn't mean
>you aren't sinning, but it is paid to others who don't sin to keep not sinning.

Claiming that carbon offsets don't work is like claiming that Bill Gates isn't charitable at all because he only gives money to charity, instead of building houses and cooking food for the poor himself.

We SHOULD all be able to use as much energy as we want. The technology is here. Want to skydive, have an SUV and have a house in the desert with the A/C running all day? No problem at all. Install solar for the drop zone to offset your fuel usage in the airplane, and install solar on your home so it powers the A/C ("offsets" your usage in other words.) Buy a Toyota Highlander hybrid and run it on ethanol. Better yet, do the conversion to make it pluggable (available now) and charge it from your house's solar array.

The problem is people who want to do that and don't give a shit who else it affects. Those are the people causing the problem.