Climate Change: An Inconvenient Truth

It's a no-brainer if you have no brains. I think capitalism has wormed its way into this one, along with politicians. Ants have no control of the rock they ride tumbling down the hill either. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 11:37

#4

'Ants have no control of the rock they ride tumbling down the hill either.' So what you're saying is that it's not our fault the world is warming up, and therefore we can do nothing to at least try to stop it? Or that it's too late and we should just lie down and take it? I think it's this particular attitude Mr. Gore is trying to address. It is a fantastic documentary; scary, troubling, deeply moving. I have to say I don't look at the world the same way now, or my impact on it.

Thu, 2006-10-05 11:42

#5

Brooklands

RD, you sicken me. That's all.

Thu, 2006-10-05 12:29

#6

bobblehat2023

I'd be interested to see the film. My problem with Gore is that he wrote book on imminent environmental disaster in the early 1990s. He then became Vice President - a position which should involve some degree of power and influence - and spent eight years doing little or nothing to tackle pollution in the US. He then lost the Presidential election and decided he really cared about the environment again. It's one thing to change your mind on an issue - and it's important for thoughful, intelligent people to be open to doing so - but it's very strange to believe strongly in a position at all times apart from the time when you actually have the opportunitiy to do something about it. To some extent, I actually I prefer Bush's 'who gives a ????' line.

Thu, 2006-10-05 14:49

#7

I do sort of agree with RD, but possibly not in the way he meant. Re hisâ€¦ â€œAnts have no control of the rock they ride tumbling down the hill either.â€ â€¦ those ants may indeed affect the condition of the rock to the point where it affects the ants, but they cannot possibly affect the fundamental structure of the rock. The rock will remain a rock, regardless of the existence of the ants, and it will continue to roll down the hill regardless. It is perhaps a bittersweet comfort, however, to think that the planet on which we live (just to move away from the ant/rock metaphor) may become unable to support human life (or do so grudgingly) due to the various forms of pollution and so forth we are spurting at, through and in it, but it will, I believe, recover, as a whole, from our existence (if and when we actually become extinct or as good as), and continue to support some sort of life and happily spin around the sun regardless. However, as I suspect this isnâ€™t really what RD meant, I shall now retreat back to my spreadsheets and have a cup of tea. ~PEPS~ You canâ€™t finish a man till heâ€™s finished his Texan Bar

The All New Pepsoid the Umpteenth!

Thu, 2006-10-05 15:06

#8

I agree to a certain extent about Gore. I guess that's the difference between saying things when you're aspiring to power and then doing them when you're in power. Realpolitik, in a word. Bush's 'Who gives a f**k?' line seems to chime with a lot of people. Easier to ignore the problem or pretend it doesn't exist, rubbish the people who say it does, carry on as you are, and hope someday - probably when you're dead and gone and beyond having to worry about it anyway - that someone will come up with a solution (and hopefully one that doesn't impinge too much on comfortable Western lifestyles and mass urban SUV ownership and cheap flights). Recipe for disaster, if you ask me - but then, what's my word against that of nominally the most powerful man on earth? * stops wagging finger, steps off soapbox *

Thu, 2006-10-05 16:13

#9

yan

Oh dear. Is RD representative of most americans? That's scary if he is. Wow..I had no idea how bushwashed they are. I'm looking forward to seeing the movie. There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Thu, 2006-10-05 16:55

#10

AG>So what you're saying is that it's not our fault the world is warming up, and therefore we can do nothing to at least try to stop it? Or that it's too late and we should just lie down and take it? I think it's this particular attitude Mr. Gore is trying to address. Precisely! The world warmed up without us before, it will do it again. Later it will cool off, and after that it will warm up again. Eventualy, it will be gone and so will we. We're coming out of a mini-ice age...what happens when you come out of an ice age? Things warm up. But there are lots of books and "experts" selling books and politicians sellings books and as we all know Al Gore invented the internet. Spack, if all I have to do to sicken you is post a couple of sentences, you were already sick. Yan, I represent your fear of insignificance if nothing else. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 16:58

#11

'He then became Vice President - a position which should involve some degree of power and influence - and spent eight years doing little or nothing to tackle pollution in the US.' Um, that's not necessarily true. VPs have as much power as the Prez allows them to have, and historically more VPs than not have had little political clout. Dick Cheney is a glaring exception, the reason being that the Prez who appointed him is a witless numbnuts. Clinton and Gore had several disagreements during the years in office, with the end result being that Gore distanced himself from Clinton as much as he could, which of course reduced the amount of influence he had. Also, keep in mind that the Senate AND the House were both Republican controlled during much, if not all, of the Clinton era, which would make it very difficult, indeed, for a left-leaning environmentally-aware, relatively powerless Veep to change much of anything. I think he really comes into himself in this documentary; you can really feel his passion and commitment to it. Surely this was the job he was born to do...

Thu, 2006-10-05 16:59

#12

And RD, you might want to actually SEE the documentary. It *might* change your tune on how 'little' influence we have over weather patterns.

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:06

#13

I've seen the documentary, and about 50 others. I've read about 12 books on it and it hasn't changed my opinion that Global Warming is nothing but a political and commercial issue. Is the world getting warmer? Yep, I'm pretty sure it is. Are we the cause? I'm pretty sure we aren't. What you and I can do to help is quit thinking things into existence and convincing ourselves that we are more important than we really are. For now, try not to poop in the street, it's a health hazard. There will be another book out on this next week, maybe it will say something new. Better go buy it...and don't forget to drink your Ovaltine. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:18

#14

Yeah, AG - that's the extent to which I agree about Gore. I don't think there's usually too much doubt about who's really boss in that relationship. Cheney's probably an exception 'cos he's even more of a basket case than Bush. I guess I'm just a bitter old cynic, but I always think the main priority with any leader once they're in is staying in - so any moves that will disaffect the voters are out. That's why Bush has never signed up to Kyoto and has done little else to address climate change. I can't see Gore running for prez again - he probably has more influence as a maverick figure, anyway. I wonder how quickly Cameron's green paint will fade once he's in. And I can see Tony Blair in about five years' time coming out of the closet and raving on about how the Labour Party needs to return to its socialist roots, reinstating Clause 4, etc. Well, okay - maybe not!

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:22

#15

yan

"Yan, I represent your fear of insignificance if nothing else." I have no fear of being insignificant, RD. What I do fear is the threat of making the lives of my insignificant ascendants unbearable; a few of which may be your own. I feel you consider yourself more important than you really are, RD. eat your words, sunshine ;) There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:30

#16

"Is the world getting warmer? Yep, I'm pretty sure it is. Are we the cause? I'm pretty sure we aren't." What makes you so sure, RD? I'm interested to know. 'Cos to me, it's pretty basic cause and effect stuff. You don't need a science degree. If you increase greenhouse gas emissions as a result of industrial activity at the same time as depleting or reducing the effectiveness of natural counteractive resources (carbon sinks, reflective ice caps, etc) as a side-effect of that industrial activity, there has to be an effect. Keep pissing in a clean lake for long enough, and in a great enough volume, and you'll end up with a lake of piss. Do you mean 'principle cause' or 'subsidiary cause' - or are you saying our activities have no effect at all?

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:39

#17

In a nutshell... We are ants on a rock. We affect our environment to a certain degree, I'll agree with that completely. We can dump chemicals and human waste in the water and it will kill fish and make the water non-potable, blah blah blah...We have to be sanitary, we have to take care of what we do, but as for humans being the cause of global warming, totally preposterous. The average temperature on earth was much warmer in the past, it dipped a few hundred years ago and now it's going back up. It's a cycle, it's always been there. We're riding a rock through space and we have absolutely ZERO control of our destiny in a global sense, no matter how hard we think or wish or pray or sell books about it. Humans will never achieve the type of common-sense needed to amount to anything approaching effective control of the planet. We're ants riding a rock, nothing more. About the best we'll do as a species will be to kill each other off, and for nothing more significant than the misfiring of our collective brain cells. Anectdotally, I would add...anytime a politician takes a "cause" and travels around thumping that cause...one can pretty much be certain it's bullshit. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:49

#18

maddan

RD you have a point, the world has got warmer and colder before without humans doing squat that could effect it. You are, however, completely wrong to be sure about the cause this time (or, rather, what the cause is not). The science of climate change is basically weather forecasting, and weather forecasting is, frankly, rubbish. It is perfectly possible carbon emissions are causing the planet to warm up, and perfectly possible they aint doing squat. The science, such as it is, is so damn complex that I'm betting nobody here is qualified to come to a conclusion. All we can do is trust what we are told, and we are told two different truths (both inconvenient). The way I see it we are left with something very like Pascal's wager. We either do nothing and it maybe makes no difference or mayeb we are doomed; or we do something, and it maybe makes no difference or maybe we save the world.

Thu, 2006-10-05 17:55

#19

There's the rub. My postulate is that we can pretty much think what we want, it doesn't change what really is. We aren't that smart. But, there are books to be sold and cash to be made, so lets go for it. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 18:41

#20

Such cynicism is really very sad to behold. You seem so removed from what is at the core of yourself, and of everyone else. I believe that if there's even the slightest *chance* that what humans are doing is affecting how the planet balances its ecosystems, we are morally responsible to do whatever we can to alter our behaviours, consumption, whatever; not because humans are intrinsically 'important', but because we have to live together on this beautiful little rock.

Thu, 2006-10-05 19:26

#21

yan

RD, Are you suffering from depression? Imagine the outcome if we'd thought the same about cancer, space travel, aids...influenza even!! Influenza... wow...I'm speechless as to your terrible fatalism...do you need some help? There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Thu, 2006-10-05 19:30

#22

Sure, the science is complex - but the basic principles can still be grasped by the average person without too much oversimplification. If a science duffer like me can understand the dynamics of the positive feedback process, the consequences of the reduction of hydroxyl ions in the troposphere, the effects of a reduction of photosynthesis on the production of dimethyl sulphide (a cloud nucleator), the implications that ice cap depletion and ocean warming have in terms of the earth's resistance to UVB rays, etc., etc., then many other people can. As for a definite conclusion... well, the greatest scientific brains on the planet can't come to one. As you say, Maddan, we have to trust what we are told, and choose between the two inconvenient 'truths'. But it's the old thing: whether you're talking about philosophy, politics, religion, art or boy bands - people are usually going to go with an argument that most closely accords with their view of the world and what it's most convenient - financially, morally, politically, aesthetically - for them to believe. The true groundbreakers in any argument like this are the people who, after rationally evaluating all the available evidence, are prepared to accept they may be wrong and to change their lives accordingly. Passivity is easy. All you have to do is nothing.

Thu, 2006-10-05 20:03

#23

maddan

I've said before, I believe the potential dangers of doing nothing, outway the costs of acting.

Thu, 2006-10-05 20:21

#24

bobblehat2023

I'm unconvinced that Gore spent his eight years as VP falling out with Clinton and/or Congress from the left - on climate change or anything else. He distanced himself from Clinton - particularly towards the end of the presidency - because he thought, quite incorrectly, that association with the Lewinsky scandal would lose him votes. In terms of policy Gore's key contribution was to try to get as many public sectors employees as possible off the payroll and lobby on behalf of the Israeli government. This is, of course, a side issue. For me, climate change is where my leftism meets my natural sceptism and opposition to earnestness. There's nothing more tedious for me than a bunch of scientists and politicians telling us we're all going to the dogs and it's all our fault. That said, I support quite a lot of pro-environment measures whether they can actually affect climate change or not. And my suspicion is that - my instincts and prejudices aside - Dan's assessment is probably pretty close to the truth.

Thu, 2006-10-05 20:46

#25

I don't have a problem with environmental activists, so long as they aren't in it for the money or to get elected so their buddies can make a buck. I object to the politicalization and commercialism of the environmental movement. I object to ECO terrorism. I object to many other things, but it doesn't prevent me from being a good steward of the land. Al Gore can go suck a fish for all I care, he's just a Tennessee Good Ole' Boy trying to help his buddies and himself politically. A Democrat version of GWB. He's not that great a guy and even worse politician. I've known all about him for 25 years. You wanna buy his soap, open your wallets and fork it over. Not me. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Thu, 2006-10-05 22:41

#26

Whey-hey... I thought I was a cynic. Gore can be a certified basket-case who slept with his mother into his 30s and gave Bill a bj after Monica had finished for all I care. If he's doing something now which is making people stop and think, then power to his good ole elbow, I says. Sooner that than the populist posturing that sometimes appears to be evident in the likes of Michael Moore.

Fri, 2006-10-06 06:02

#27

Cynic? "There's none deceived but he that trusts." Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Fri, 2006-10-06 09:25

#28

"Trust no one"... as I believe a certain Agent Mulder was wont to opine. However there does seem to be some sense in this "Pascal's Wager" jobbie. ~PEPS~ You canâ€™t finish a man till heâ€™s finished his Texan Bar

The All New Pepsoid the Umpteenth!

Fri, 2006-10-06 09:37

#29

There's nothing wrong with having a healthy scepticism about things, but there's a big difference between scepticism and cynicism. Scepticism implies, 'It may be true. Let's investigate.' Cynicism implies, 'It can't be true, therefore we won't bother to investigate.' Certainly where politicians are concerned, we must absolutely not 'just believe' what Politician X is saying, but to simply dismiss what someone is saying *because* they are or once were politicians, is myopic. Such distrust is part of the reason the world has gotten to the point it has; if no-one *ever* believes what anyone else is saying, how can changes possibly happen? No doubt lemmings don't believe other lemmings as they drop off the edge of the cliff.

Fri, 2006-10-06 09:55

#30

maddan

Lemmings don't drop off the edges of cliffs unless they are pushed. Some people will believe anything.

Fri, 2006-10-06 10:45

#31

Don't lemmings walk off cliffs of their own volition? ~PEPS~ You canâ€™t finish a man till heâ€™s finished his Texan Bar

The All New Pepsoid the Umpteenth!

Fri, 2006-10-06 10:47

#32

Well this doesn't help much... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemmings(link is external) ~PEPS~ You canâ€™t finish a man till heâ€™s finished his Texan Bar

The All New Pepsoid the Umpteenth!

Fri, 2006-10-06 10:51

#33

Nihilism would be more like it with some people, AG. Or, simpler even that that, just complete disinterest. "The world's gonna end one day anyway, and we're all gonna be dead probably before it does, so why give a fuck? All this worrying and wrangling and intellectual wanking is just a complete waste of time, 'cos there's things out there to enjoy." That seems to be the subtext.

Fri, 2006-10-06 11:31

#34

yan

I think the idea is that, by the time our ancestors face their fate, the elite'll have a one way ticket to planet fucktherestofthem. Many will burn. The genetically modified superhumans of our age will advance into the cosmos and re-write history...leaving us out of it. There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed -
Dennett

Fri, 2006-10-06 18:44

#35

I wouldn't go so far as to call myself a Nihilist, but more of a skeptic/realist. Unless somebody has my absolute trust (and that must be hard earned), I don't believe them. I explore the facts for myself, I make an independant judgement. I don't leave it at that, I can change my mind if I get more facts. I make a judgement, a judgment not based on making a dollar or getting a vote, that influence is removed from my judgement. Does it make me correct? Maybe, maybe not. I don't let others do my thinking though. I certainly don't follow herds of cows and I don't do things just to make myself feel warm and fuzzy inside. If the truth appears ugly, I accept the ugly truth and if the truth is nice, I accept the nice. Throw in a little statistical knowledge and experience dealing with politicians, next thing ya know, I'm a complete fuck-wit. I'll still do and think what I feel is best and don't rely on television for knowledge, except maybe cooking shows from time-to-time. Now, if Al Gore had a good recipe, I might listen to him, because you see, I can test that out without hanging with the cows. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/(link is external)

Share your state secrets at...
http://www.amerileaks.org(link is external)

Fri, 2006-10-06 19:54

#36

Jack Cade

For a realist, you're not very realistic. I think you're more of a survivalist, RD. You're pretty happy on your own in the (metaphorical) wilderness and you don't like going anywhere where there are big crowds. It's easier to be that way, I guess, when you don't feel you rely on society for much. I don't like big crowds either - ten to one, it's a fad. But realistically, Dan's arguments stick. Realistically, the chances that millions of cars springing up over the space of a century has made no difference to the climate is nil. Realistically, even if the human race are incapable of saving themselves completely, every act that might sustain a tolerable atmosphere for even a little longer is a worthwhile act - if, that is, you believe all life is precious. Don't claim the realist ground when your arguments are based on fatalism and misanthropism. ~ I'll Show You Tyrants(link is external) * Fuselit(link is external) * The Prowl Log(link is external) * Woe's Woe(link is external)

Sat, 2006-10-07 06:53

#37