Blame Al Gore

Posted: May 19th, 2008
at 9:26am by Black Ock

Categories: life,green,not ninja-worthy,politricks,science

Comments: 2 comments


2 Responses to 'Blame Al Gore'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Blame Al Gore'.

  1. First of all, Hannity and all his Fox Friends are not scientists, or even informed laymen. They are parrots. Talking heads with limited RAM using outdated software. Their opinion means nothing except to politicize a scientific issue. They will deny night exists if that’s the political line. Their comments aren’t even their own ideas because, frankly, if they bothered to think, they’d lose their jobs. They are posturing, self-important, politically motivated shills. I’m a fine one to speak, but at least I KNOW I’m a Shill. I wear it in my name as not to confuse anyone as to my ultimate goal.

    Secondly, bio-diesel, initially presented as the savior of the environment was NOT thoroughly researched in all areas before it was thrust upon the industry by pundits equally as uninformed as Hannity. To listen to this side of the argument, every scientist
    on the planet agrees, and that’s simply not true. This entire issue plays out like one of those made-for-TV disaster movies, where everyone wants to be the scientist to discover imminent doom first. Most scientists do NOT agree with either side of this issue, so, let’ talk corn….

    The logic trap goes as follows: Bio-diesel removes a food stuff to make fuel, using MORE fuel to process it, which increases the carbon footprint while making a less efficient fuel., which has now been shown to increase ozone emissions and further pollute the “house that Jack Built”. Not to mention removing food from the food chain for cattle and people.

    Coming from these two divergent, but equally vehement camps is “no solution”. It’s preposterous to claim that bio-fuel is starving people since surplus corn seldom got to the people who needed it even BEFORE bio-fuel. It’s also ridiculous to accept the “first solution” to an issue (like global warming) as the ultimate solution. Both sides are beating dead horses NOT in order to come up with undisputable proof one way or the other…but simply to be right, which is where the pundits and the scientists diverge.

    My personal belief is that some aspects of global warming are natural phenomena but some are manmade. No one has yet broken it down to the proper proportions, but everyone still has a strong opinion. At this stage, that opinion, no matter which one it is, is nothing more than a belief. The “heat island” effect has long proven that man alters his environment and alters his weather: rainfall patterns, winds, evening cooling patterns, afternoon highs. Why NOT increased carbon causing higher global temperatures? This is not a GOP versus Democrats issue but both camps are guilty of politicizing it along party lines.

    But, the “proof” just isn’t there, yet, but with continued scientific research an answer will come we can all hang our hat off of. What if it turns out that a spike in global temperature precedes every ice age? Might that affect the direct we choose to go in order to “solve this doomsday scenario”? There’s already been a reversal in some camps regarding the link between global warming and hurricanes. But, if you want to talk doomsday, a study done waaaaaay back in the 80’s showed that children growing up in urban areas had several times more lead in their tissues and blood than kids in rural areas.

    Looks like a slow, steady poisoning of the population might kill humanity long before the oceans get us. Maybe increases in autism and other brain malfunctions such as earlier onsets of Alzheimers make a better argument for reducing emissions than nebulous, grand scale disaster scenarios. It may be indeed Doomsday, but the Devil is in the details.

    Jill The Shill

    Jill The Shill

    19 May 08 at 10:56 am


  2. Jill! nice to see you comment on here. I might re-post this!


    19 May 08 at 11:09 am



Leave a Reply