You're WRONG Gore! WRONG! ....discuss....

[MiniSimp]

Czech President Klaus ready to debate Gore on climate change

Posted : Tue, 27 May 2008 21:21:02 GMT
Author : DPA 
Category : Environment 
News Alerts by Email ( click here )
Create your own RSS

Environment News | Home 



Washington - Czech President Vaclav Klaus said Tuesday he is ready to debate Al Gore about global warming, as he presented the English version of his latest book that argues environmentalism poses a threat to basic human freedoms. "I many times tried to talk to have a public exchange of views with him, and he's not too much willing to make such a conversation," Klaus said. "So I'm ready to do it."

Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President richard Cheney Wednesday.

"My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity," he said.

Gore a former US vice president who has become a leading international voice in the cause against global warming, was co-winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. Gore's effort was highlighted by his Oscar winning documentary film An Inconvienent Truth.

Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the "climate alarmism" perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.

"Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality," he said.

"In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet," he added.

Klaus said a free market should be used to address environmental concerns and said he oppposed as unrealistic regulations or greenhouse gas capping systems designed to reduce the impact of climate change.

"It could be even true that we are now at a stage where mere facts, reason and truths are powerless in the face of the global warming propaganda," he said.

Klaus alleged that the global warming was being championed by scientists and other environmentalists whose careers and funding requires selling the public on global warming.

"It is in the hands of climatologists and other related scientists who are highly motivated to look in one direction only," Klaus said.

[46&2]

Now this I would pay to see!!!!!

[WHITE_TRASH]

It'll never happen....   Gore likes to use the excuse that global warming is too important an issue to debate....  he won't debate anyone on it for that reason.  I vote its because he's a lying,freedom thieving son of a goat with no basis for his new religion of global warming....  May he rot forever in an icecube.... 

[toyotamobing]

well put...

[abnormaltoy]

Czech President Klaus ready to debate Gore on climate change

It seems to me I've heard President Klaus speak on this same subject before...a year or two ago. He nails it...at least as far as I'm concerned.

Between President Klaus and President Sarkozy (France)...I've find more to admire in world leaders than I find in "leaders" in my own country.

[abnormaltoy]

It'll never happen....   Gore likes to use the excuse that global warming is too important an issue to debate....  he won't debate anyone on it for that reason.  I vote its because he's a lying,freedom thieving son of a goat with no basis for his new religion of global warming....  May he rot forever in an icecube.... 

There is no one more closed minded than an Open minded liberal.



I'd like to add that Gore is a power mad, megalomaniac. I hope he lives long enough to be held up for public ridicule.

[WHITE_TRASH]

There is no one more closed minded than an Open minded liberal.



I'd like to add that Gore is a power mad, megalomaniac. I hope he lives long enough to be held up for public ridicule.

Thats a fact!  For once I'd love to see him be torn to shreds by the public.....  He'll get his in the end... 

[79coyotefrg]

It'll never happen....   Gore likes to use the excuse that global warming is too important an issue to debate....  he won't debate anyone on it for that reason.  I vote its because he's a lying,freedom thieving son of a goat with no basis for his new religion of global warming....  May he rot forever in an icecube.... 

Gore just needs to SHUT UP,  he IS global warming,  we need him "fighting Global warming" like we need Hillary and Obama in the White House


http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp

[WHITE_TRASH]

Oh no your wrong Glen, he buys carbon credits so its ok!  We as "normal" people just can't afford to buy them but the elitists can afford them so they can offset their wasteful and extravagant lifestyle. 

[79coyotefrg]

i think he needs  to step off the planet  to redeem his "carbon footprint"

OH OH  i know  we can shove some carbon up his....   

[WHITE_TRASH]

Oh did I forget to mention he is a big wig in a company that sells carbon credits?  Hmm I smell a rat.

[skipnrocks]

 


Gore just needs to SHUT UP,  he IS global warming,  we need him "fighting Global warming" like we need Hillary and Obama in the White House


http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp

I read a funny artical about that!   bush has a house completly off the grid using solar power, virtually zero carbon footprint, heated and cooled by geothermals...  And gore has a house that uses more in a month than the average american uses in a year....  Funny stuff.  kinda like the main officer of pita uses insulin with the excuse that for her its ok to use animal products cause she is fighting for the greater good.  How how pita put to sleep most of the animals they "saved"!!  

[Lady Di]

In re: all this "global warming" talk... I would like to bring up one point that everyone seems to ignore or forget or choose not to see.

I know most of you know where I stand and so this is not a popular point but is a fact... regardless of where you stand, there are too many damn people on this planet.

And if the chicken littlests want to make a point why do they never bring that up? Why does de-populazation of the planet never come up?

I read/heard recently that there was concern that there was a negative population grown in I'll call them "first world countries" as opposed to third world countries.

As far as I am concerned it should not be a concern but encouraged world wide.
Whether or not you believe the change in our weather patterns has anything to do with us (which I don't) reducing our population on this planet can only help.

So... my question is.. why do the "chicken littests" not address this? They should be pushing for tax breaks for non-breeders. Not tax breaks for more tax upon our earth.

I know this won't be a popular post... everyone loves to breed. I don't get it but it is what it is.

[abnormaltoy]

So... my question is.. why do the "chicken littests" not address this? They should be pushing for tax breaks for non-breeders. Not tax breaks for more tax upon our earth.

First of all...I think you're wrong. Relatively little of the Earth's surface is habitated. True, there is a fair amount of Earth that is not habitable, but, we have room to grow. One reason there is concern about negative population growth in 1st world nations is...most of the world's "stuff" is made here/there...most of the food and most of the machinery used to produce food.


Secondly, socialists have long sought to de-populate the planet (Hitler, Stalin and modern China). It's only more recently that the Progressive and Environmental Socialists have gotten in the act. Environmental Socialism has resulted in more deaths than Hitler and Stalin...combined. Just remember people...the last word in environmental is mental, they're all freaking crazy or in a trance!

[BigMike]

Just remember people...the last word in environmental is mental, they're all freaking crazy or in a trance!

That is signature material right there!!

[79coyotefrg]

given time, God  will handle the "de-populazation"

i hear china recently lost  70k or so,  watch the news,  i'd be surprised if the murders  didnt outweigh the births

[kneedownnate]

given time, God  will handle the "de-populazation"

The agrument could be made, which god?  There are too many religions and beliefs to hope one will take care of all, so shouldn't it be gods will handle it? 

Nature has a way of taking care of itself, and if there get to be too many of us to exist we'll all go away 

There is no one more closed minded than an Open minded liberal.

I'd like to add that Gore is a power mad, megalomaniac.

Absolutely couldn't have said it better myself, right down to the king of the hill reference 

He'll get his in the end... 

We can only hope, but unfortunately not before he brain washes the idiotic masses who don't have much to start out with upstairs..

In re: all this "global warming" talk... I would like to bring up one point that everyone seems to ignore or forget or choose not to see.

I know most of you know where I stand and so this is not a popular point but is a fact... regardless of where you stand, there are too many damn people on this planet.

And if the chicken littlests want to make a point why do they never bring that up? Why does de-populazation of the planet never come up?

Again,    Why don't they bring it up?  Because then they'd have to deal with a REAL problem that people would have to be accountable for.  I absolutely, 100% guarentee that we'd have far less a population issue in the US alone if we nearly wiped out welfare!

[WHITE_TRASH]

Stop allowing mommy parts to act as an ATM machine to the gov't..... 

[BLACKDOG]

The agrument could be made, which god?  There are too many religions and beliefs to hope one will take care of all, so shouldn't it be gods will handle it? 

Nature has a way of taking care of itself, and if there get to be too many of us to exist we'll all go away 

As a believer in the Christian God, personaly I think God created the earth to be much more durable than we give it credit for.  I'm right there with ya Nate, nature does have a way of taking care of itself.  

[WHITE_TRASH]

What is really crazy is the day before the chinese earthquake I was telling my wife that the best thing to happen for our economy would be for china to have a huge quake and slide into the ocean....   

[abnormaltoy]

Absolutely couldn't have said it better myself, right down to the king of the hill reference 

You'll have to clue me in on the King of the Hill thing...what, did I steal Dale's line?

[kneedownnate]

Oh... I thought that was a mega-low-mart reference 

[abnormaltoy]

Oh... I thought that was a mega-low-mart reference 

I never even made the connection...but, every time I see that in print, I think megalow..something! Dang it Dale!

[Lady Di]

Again,    Why don't they bring it up?  Because then they'd have to deal with a REAL problem that people would have to be accountable for.  I absolutely, 100% guarentee that we'd have far less a population issue in the US alone if we nearly wiped out welfare!

Stop allowing mommy parts to act as an ATM machine to the gov't..... 

  Yup, totally agree! 

First of all...I think you're wrong. Relatively little of the Earth's surface is habitated. True, there is a fair amount of Earth that is not habitable, but, we have room to grow.

room to grow!? Well let them grow in your neck 'o the woods. We have way over development in these parts to the point that even when we have a rainy season we are stiill under water restrictions cause the aquifer can not support the # of people living here even in a good year.

Natural resources of any given area are not limitless, you can not continue development unchecked.

I don't agree we have room to grow, and I do agree that nature will take care of this little problem, as it already is and that's fine with me, yes, even if that means me too.

[MiniSimp]

room to grow!? Well let them grow in your neck 'o the woods.

True, for you.
Your pop density is 309 per square mile, while ours is 233 per square mile.

We are better off than some though:

District of Columbia 9,378.0 per square mile
New Jersey 1,138.0 per square mile
Rhode Island 1,003.2 per square mile

[79coyotefrg]

The argument could be made, which god?  There are too many religions and beliefs to hope one will take care of all, so shouldn't it be gods will handle it? 

i personally believe there only one GOD, there are different religions  but  they just have their own names  for him.

doesn't matter if its, 'God', 'Father', 'Holy Spirit', 'Jehovah', 'Abraham', 'He who sits on high' , 'Man above', 'Alah', 'John', etc etc

[MiniSimp]

More Than 31,000 Scientists Disagree With Al Gore
Posted by Tom Remington on May 19, 2008

I have for quite some time now offered the argument that only idiots and those with personal agendas would claim that anthropogenic global warming was "settled science". At no time in history has intelligent man stopped discussing or studying scientific information in order to better learn and advance the scientific community. Why should climate change be any different?

Along came a politician who couldn't win his home state in an election and began a campaign to convince the world we were all going to die if we didn't make people stop creating carbon dioxide. And they followed in masses, ready to lay down everything in their lives to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

If you recall, Mr. Gore even said that anyone who is a holdout on man-made global warming was no different than members of the Flat Earth Society. He also said these are the same kind of people who think the lunar landing was staged.

Mr. Gore, you now have over 31,000 scientists who have signed a petition basically calling you a phony. Of those 31,000, over 9,000 of them hold PhDs. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine sponsored the petition.

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

If you're interested in what these "Flat Earth Society"-type scientists base their conclusions on, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine has a peer reviewed research paper.

I have been asking that at a minimum, we reopen the scientific discussion about global warming and end this jumping off a cliff foolishness based on theory. Not only does it look as though discussions will continue along with qualified research but existing research is presenting a completely different picture than the one Al Gore et. al. are presenting.

Tom Remington

http://www.petitionproject.org/
http://www.oism.org/pproject/


Here is an over-detailed report on global warming
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

There are no experimental data to support the hypothesis that increases in human hydrocarbon use or in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing or can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperatures, weather, or landscape. There is no reason to limit human production of CO2, CH4, and other minor greenhouse gases as has been proposed (82,83,97,123).
We also need not worry about environmental calamities even if the current natural warming trend continues. The Earth has been much warmer during the past 3,000 years without catastrophic effects. Warmer weather extends growing seasons and generally improves the habitability of colder regions.

As coal, oil, and natural gas are used to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe, more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere. This will help to maintain and improve the health, longevity, prosperity, and productivity of all people.

The United States and other countries need to produce more energy, not less. The most practical, economical, and environmentally sound methods available are hydrocarbon and nuclear technologies.

Human use of coal, oil, and natural gas has not harmfully warmed the Earth, and the extrapolation of current trends shows that it will not do so in the foreseeable future. The CO2 produced does, however, accelerate the growth rates of plants and also permits plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon plants, also flourishes, and the diversity of plant and animal life is increased.

Human activities are producing part of the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of this CO2 increase. Our children will therefore enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life than that with which we now are blessed.

[BigMike]

Tulare County, a county right next to Fresno measuring 4,863 sq miles with plenty of habitable land, has just 76 people per sq. mile.

The County where I live is 917,575 people per sq. mile. There is plenty of room to expand.

[skipnrocks]

chute where I grew up we are probably at .75 people per square mile.

[abnormaltoy]

room to grow!? Well let them grow in your neck 'o the woods.

Ha! I figured if you saw that last night...you'd be too pissed to sleep and if you saw it this morning...you wouldn't be able to concentrate at work! Either way, I knew it would put a burr under your saddle.

The way, in my opinion, to reduce population growth is to expand prosperity. The main reason families in 3rd world countries have so many children is...they need them to help feed the family and the localized group...also, their life expectancy is very low. Societies based on subsistence agriculture need every hand to tend livestock, farm, prepare food and tend to the younger children. Americans, up to the post WWII era had much larger families than we do now...because we were still an agrarian based people. I believe the same holds true for all people...in any country, the prosperous "classes" have fewer children than those in the lower financial groups because there is no need for large families. This allows for more resources to be devoted to fewer children...resulting in healthier kids. It may take a generation or so...but, once people "get used" to prosperity birth rates decline.

As a believer in the Christian God, personaly I think God created the earth to be much more durable than we give it credit for. 

I agree. The Earth has been hit by neighborhood sized space boulders, has had all life wiped out and yet...Earth rebounds. I don't think there is anything mankind could do to undo God's creation...we might not survive, but something will.

True, for you.
Your pop density is 309 per square mile, while ours is 233 per square mile.

We are better off than some though:

District of Columbia 9,378.0 per square mile
New Jersey 1,138.0 per square mile
Rhode Island 1,003.2 per square mile

Aridzona has a population density of 45.2 per sq. mile...the parts I hang around in range from...Pima County (Tucson) has 1088/sq. mi., Cochise County has  18/sq. mi. , Santa Cruz County has 575/sq. mi.