Quote:
Originally Posted by hueyii
Ummm... thats a pretty bad analogy. Who is really threatened by Al Gore's movement to clean up our act? Oil companies? Corporate america?
Who has a motive to discredit him?
Are you saying that mankind and the increase of CO2 emmissions has had no adverse effect on our environment?
You think he lied to make money?
Why did the Bush administration stifle its scientists on this topic with threat of being fired?
The peices fall into place very easily for me. Corporate america and the oil lobby felt threatened by this idea. He needed to be stifled. Personally I dont think he lied. I think he promoted what he beleived. I think there is truth that we are contributing to global warming to some degree. Anyone who promotes clean living is ok in my book. I will focus positive energy thier way.
|
those who want to discredit him are searching for truth
Humans have had minimal impact from Co2 emissions, when a volcano erupts they throw more Co2 into the atmosphere than all of the industrial era, does that mean that we cap volcanoes?
Co2 is something plants take in, the more in the air, the faser a plant grows.
Scientists are trying to get the truth out there that Co2 does not cause global warming.
I agree we need to clean up our act, but lets use real facts and not pseudo science to get there
do I think he lied to make money?
Quote:
|
Al Gore defends his extraordinary personal energy usage by telling critics he maintains a "carbon neutral" lifestyle by buying "carbon offsets," but the company that receives his payments turns out to be partly owned and chaired by the former vice president himself
|
why would bush stifle it, people would go against anything he said, (reverse psychology)