Scientists OK Gore's Movie for Accuracy

advertisement
This article is over 14 days old and has been removed by requirement of the Associated Press.
  • 24 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
7.5
{"commentId":181683,"authorDomain":"mvelinder"}

Hopefully this will help quell the attacks against Gore and his film by the right.

As Gore has said, it's not a political issue, it's an issue for all of humanity. The science cannot be refuted, maybe now we can have some real discussion about it.

{"commentId":181683,"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200","authorDomain":"mvelinder"}
  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:41 PM EDT
{"commentId":182043,"authorDomain":"KevinR"}

How can you say that when the U.S. Senate Committee of Enivroment and Public Works questions his claims along with the AP News article you are reading?

http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909

{"commentId":182043,"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200","authorDomain":"KevinR"}
  • 2 votes
#1.1 - Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:03 PM EDT
{"commentId":182053,"authorDomain":"mvelinder"}

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that... thanks for the heads up.

However, the majority of scientists believe that in fact something needs to be done. The governmental side of the issue still looks to be dragging their feet. Thanks for the link proving that point.

{"commentId":182053,"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200","authorDomain":"mvelinder"}
  • 1 vote
#1.2 - Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:12 PM EDT
{"commentId":182214,"authorDomain":"super-structure"}
questions his claims along with the AP News article you are reading?

May we assume you haven't seen the film? The items that have been called into question are very minor and the overall points of the film, along with the research which Gore cites, is all very sound science. As for the Senate Committee memo you linked to, there are a large number of actual climate scientists that do indeed feel that the film's science is right on target.

{"commentId":182214,"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200","authorDomain":"super-structure"}
  • 6 votes
#1.3 - Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:30 PM EDT
Reply
{"commentId":182336,"authorDomain":"gregh"}

Somehow, the Majority Press Release from the US Senate doesn't impress me.

They suggest we check this junk science link.
I never saw anything more scatological: "I care more about the color of my gear shift knob than tons of CO2 emitted by my BMW."

Our "junk science" friends have no faith that bubbles of air trapped in ice cores tell us anything about the concentration of green house gases in the past. They are anti-science know-nothings who think they can manufacture the truth.

If you want to read scientific findings instead of political swift-boating check Jason Coleman's suggested link, or here, or just do as I did and google for "co2 and temperature history". Maybe you will get lucky and find one of the handful of scientists with serious reservations about global warming that the Canadian Free Press is touting.

CO2 is thought to be stored in reservoirs, possibly the ocean which absorbs 80% of the stuff. Warming periods start for reasons such as changing solar intensity due to orbital variations. Then the greenhouse gases are released and amplify the temperature change. Gore was spot-on. He avoided some of the complexity out of deference to his audience, but he's the one who has given the talk over a thousand times.

Whether you agree or are skeptical, you owe to yourself to see the movie and make up your mind based on the facts, not politics.

We are liberating oxygen from fossil fuel reservoirs. It seems reasonable that we might be disrupting world climate because of this, especially since warming has been detected and the effects of retreating glaciers are evident on every continent. It takes a long time to reverse the trend of increasing CO2 and temperature. We ought to get started. This would have the added benefit of reducing demand for foreign oil. It seems like a win-win situation. Must we bicker about everything under the sun?

Here is a nice graph correlating temperature and CO2. Temperature is inferred from the amount of heavy isotope of oxygen in the ice. Higher temperatures cause the water with light oxygen to evaporate faster, thus increasing the concentration of heavy oxygen. Notice that the CO2 concentration is above 350 ppm even thought it never exceeded 300 ppm during the pre-industrial record. I never knew the numbers before seeing the movie and looking stuff up. This is a great time to be alive. We have the Internet at our fingertips and no longer require pundits to tell us what to think.

{"commentId":182336,"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200","authorDomain":"gregh"}
  • 5 votes
Reply#2 - Wed Jun 28, 2006 2:17 AM EDT
{"canLink":false,"threadId":"18619","isPrivate":false}
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
{"threadId":"18619","contentId":"270200"}
Start TrackingStart Tracking
Stop TrackingStop Tracking