• Twitter
  • Facebook
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.
Opening Arguments

Let's make Al carbon neutral

Oh, please:

Former Vice President Al Gore said his conscience is regularly challenged by a consumerism that contributes to the global warming he has made it his mission to reverse.

"It is so hard for those of us who want to live according to our values," Gore said Monday at the Chautauqua Institution, during the latest in a series of lectures he has given on global warming.

"We're embedded in a culture that makes it so easy to just go with the flow and support a pattern that's horribly destructive," he said. "And so we need to address this personally."

Go ahead and live that carbon-neutral lifestyle, Al. I'll do my part to make sure things even out.

Posted in: Current Affairs


Wed, 07/26/2006 - 6:17am

Not sure what you're saying here, Leo.

-Global warming is a problem.

-Our lifestyles contribute to the problem.

-The path of least resistance is to keep living lifestyles that contribute to the problem.

I'm not on a high horse here. Other than taking advantage of curbside recycling, I'm not particularly making any effort as of yet to live an environmentally friendly lifestyle. But I'm not sure what, exactly, you're being dismissive of in this post.

In your opinion, is one or more of the three statements I made above inaccurate? Or perhaps even if they are all true, you do not believe they warrant the sort of concern evidenced by Mr. Gore?

tim zank
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 6:24am

I can't answer for Leo, but from my perspective pertaining to your three statements, #1 is inaccurate, therefore #2 and #3 don't apply.

Leo Morris
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 7:24am

What Tim said.

Wed, 07/26/2006 - 7:26am

That's certainly logical. The next step would be an argument about whether global warming is or isn't a problem. But, I don't have the time, inclination, or (frankly) the expertise for such an argument at the moment.

Jeff Pruitt
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 8:22am


Neither Tim nor Leo know ANYTHING about global warming I assure you. If they did then they wouldn't make such ridiculous statements. I'm SOOOO tired of running around listening to Republicans spout on about "there's no such thing as global warming". At some point you just have to throw your hands in the air and let the ostriches bury their head. The rest of us will try and fix the problem. But hey, keep listening to the foremost expert on global warming - rush limbaugh - I'm sure he'll lead you down the right path...

Wed, 07/26/2006 - 9:30am

I'm not conceding the point on whether global warming is a problem or not. I'm simply agreeing that Tim & Leo's response is logical within the parameters of the question I asked and clarifies for me, basically, what Leo's beef is with the quoted material about Al Gore.

My understanding is that the scientific evidence strongly supports the hypothesis that global warming is real and that human activity significantly contributes to the problem. But that's just my understanding. I'm not well versed enough in the subject to engage in solid debate on the issue at the moment.

tim zank
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 9:32am

Now Jeff, Don't be hysterical. I don't get my ecological information from Rush, though I'm sure he cites a plethora of experts on the issue just as do the tree hugging, Prius driving, "sky is falling" nutjobs.

Bottom line is, while we all know conservation and taking care of our Earth is a good thing,to use a medical analogy, it's still a tad early on in the diagnosis
to lop off any limbs....

While Big Al loves to make headlines, he still has a hard time making sense.

I know what his next argument could be though, The polluted air limited the oxygen to his brain thereby causing his convoluted method of reasoning.

Now THAT argument I might just buy into.

Jeff Pruitt
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 10:29am

Well, suffice to say that Al Gore is not a climatologist or any other type of scientist. That does not mean he doesn't know what he's talking about. I would venture to say that he knows a lot more than most politicians (or newspaper editors - sorry I had to take another shot at you Leo) do. The only part I can find common ground w/ you on that there still is some debate about how bad the situation is at this point.

Leo Morris
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 10:54am

I'm glad if there is "common ground" on the need to still debate the issue. One of the things that set me off about the global warming alarmists is their continued insistence that "the debate is over." To me, that's always a signal that skepticism is warranted. People who say a debate is over want to preach, not persuade, and they end up with the same kind of faith associated with religion. If "the debate is over," after all, what's the point of considering evidence from both sides?

I like to think my skepticism on the issue is agnosticism more than atheism. I will go so only so far on global warming right now: It has happened (a little over a degree in the last century), mankind probably had something to do with it, its potential effects are unclear but not overly alarming. I can be pulled along by real evidence, which is NOT the "Only a few nutjobs disagree with the overwhelming majority of credible scientists that the Earth is doomed in 10 years if we don't do something!" we usually hear from the global warming types.

Wed, 07/26/2006 - 11:07am

I feel sorry for anyone that still doesn't realize humans are causing climate change. They've been conned by a very effective misinformation campaign.

"...the trick to executing a good PR campaign is twofold: you figure out what people are thinking already; and then you nudge them gently from that position to one that is closer to where you want them to be."

tim zank
Wed, 07/26/2006 - 1:08pm

Cosmos......It's comforting to know you feel sorry for those of us who are too stupid to see things your way.

In my experience, people such as yourself, (condescending in nature) looking down your nose at those with whom you don't agree, are usually the ones spouting the most misinformation with almost religous fervor.

Wed, 07/26/2006 - 3:47pm

Tim... you don't seem to understand that it's not MY "way".

You seem to insist on believing that 2,500 peer-reviewed scientists worldwide are all spouting "misinformation". Like these people: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/558.htm and http://nationalacademies.org/onpi/06072005.pdf

And instead believe misinformation from sources linked to fossil energy and right-wing groups.

For people like you, I agree with Jeff's post above -- I give up, and "let the ostriches bury their head".
Considering the rapidly growing signs of GW, you'll soon have the credibility of "flat-earthers". The focus will shift to mitigation, and adaptation.

Erin Baxter
Wed, 08/02/2006 - 7:17am

The Quote of the Day, said to me this morning over coffee and egs, "if it doesn't affect me in the next 20 minutes, it's not my problem"

Oh gawd I envy the ostrich ;)