Al Gore to deliver free public lecture at ETSU
Submitted by Admin on February 13, 2009 – 7:38 am10 Comments
JOHNSON CITY (February 10, 2009) – The Honorable Al Gore, 2007 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and 45th Vice President of the United States, will be the keynote speaker for the annual Lamb Lecture at East Tennessee State University on Thursday, March 26, at 7 p.m. in the D.P. Culp University Center’s Martha Street Culp Auditorium.
The event is hosted by ETSU’s College of Public Health as part of its Leading Voices in Public Health Lecture Series. Further details will be provided at a later date.
For more information, or to request special assistance, call (423) 439-4243 .
Contact Information:
University Relations
Phone: 439-4317
Email: univrel@etsu.edu
News Feed
Gores film An Inconvenient Truth is full of lies. Not exaggerations. Not errors.
Lies!
Al Gore air brushed out the little ice age and the medieval warming periods from his graphs in AIT. We wouldn’t want people knowing that the earth was two degrees celsius warmer than it is now during the medieval warming period. Somehow man survived without the use of central cooling. Gore left off the little ice age because he wouldn’t want to demonstrate that the warming trend he talks about began at the end of an ice age.
He also stated that sea lever would rise by 20 feet by the end of the century. Even the UN IPCC (harldy conservative on this issue) estimates only 4 to 36 inches.
Gore also suggested that the Aral Sea has dried up because of global warming. In actuality it has been drained for the irrigation of cotton crops.
Gore claims that for the first time ever, a significant number of polar bears had drowned. First of all, they can swim around fifty miles. Secondly, the researchers at one of America’s most respected think tanks the Competitive Enterprise Institute tracked down the study Gore was quoting and found that only four polar bears had drowned during severe storm conditions.
Furthermore, he quotes a quickly debunked paper suggesting there is a 100% consenus among scientists that athropogenic global warming is real. Here are a few scientists who must have missed the memo:
http://www.hootervillegazette.com/GlobalWarming.html
It is worth noting that a UK Court ruled that AIT contained many errors and should not be shown in public schools without a warning about the errors.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth
I find it interesting that Al Gore talks the talk, but doesn’t walk the walk. He jets around the world in his private plane. He rides around in gas guzzling limousines, and has a compound so wasteful of energy that it needs its own power grid. His houseboat more than likely isn’t that energy efficient either.
I suppose conserving energy and fighting global warming is for the little people. Let the peasants drive the small dangerous energy efficient cars, I’ll drive what I want.
Al Gore was worth about $2 Million Dollars when leaving office and is worth over $100 Million now. He’s laughing all the way to the global warming bank. It’s a pity some are too gullible to see it. As one of my favorite SNL characters might have said “global warming has been bery bery good to him.”
By the way, the flat earthers were the ones who refused to debate. “The debates over, we have a consensus.” Sound familiar? If anyone is a flat earther, it’s Al Gore.
Everyone who has seen An Inconvenient Truth should view The Great Global Warming Swindle in order to get a more balanced view of the true state of the science on this issue.
You may view it by visiting:
http://www.hootervillegazette.com/Videos.html
It is the first video listed.
Happy Viewing,
Dash RIPROCK III
@ Dash – I think you should really take a long look at what you are saying there…what Gore did was to bring awareness to a looming environmental disaster. Climate change is real…but at the time of AIT’s release it was widely considered to be a natural cycle only by politicians and the general public. While Climate Change is a natural cycle, this cycle has never had to deal with humans injecting trillions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere over about a 100 year period. The fact that CO2 levels rise and fall with the global mean temperatures and have (according to the ice records) for the last 650,000 years would seem to show a consistent pattern without human intervention. Now add human intervention and we see CO2 levels at numbers never before seen in any record that humans have access to. Now being that CO2 is a greenhouse gas what effect do you think that would have? Do I care that Gore is making money…good for him. Do I care that the science is off a bit or a couple of things are left out..nope not really …that was the intent. ( Ill explain this statement on down the post).
As for that court case in the UK where a lower court ruled that AIT should not be shown in public schools…well thats had a bit of an update—We were gratified that a UK High Court judge, a layperson with a full docket, found the film worthy enough to be shown in British schools. You can read the article here – FACT CHECK
The whole point of AIT was to get people talking about and debating the issue of global warming…The actual science that was examined in AIT was supposed to have holes in it, so that people would examine it carefully and do thier own research. This happened…and it happened so well that global warming was now being talked about by nearly every human on the planet….Gore did what he set out to do…and that was make Global warming a national and world issue.
Nominix,
First of all I appreciate your response. Please don’t give Al Gore the benefit of the doubt by suggested he lied to get people talking about the issue. He lied, because as a politician it is second nature to him.
The relationship between CO2 and temperature does exist Nom, but you’ve got the chicken and the egg backwards on this. High temps general cause CO2 to be released from the ocean. I’ll say it again, higher temperatures lead to CO2 release, not the other way around.
Furthermore, I hope you understand that CO2 is not pollution. We exhale CO2. Great little quid pro quo we’ve got going with plants. I wonder if you know that when researchers raise the CO2 levels in green houses by say 15 times what we have now the results are amazing. It makes me sick (and I know you didn’t do this) when people get carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide mixed up.
I think it’s interesting that the general public is never told by Gore or the media about the beneficial effects of CO2. Again, following your theory, perhaps that’s their way of encouraging more debate.
As for the judge in the UK overturning the decision, I wish I could say that I am surprised. The first judge was very specific as to the errors in the film. I haven’t read the overturning judge’s report, but I’ll predict upfront that he or she doesn’t take the errors on one at a time. Gore never does, why should the judge?
Let’s talk about the hockey stick graph in Gore’s film that has been widely discredited. The National Academy of Science agrees. The UN IPCC has total dropped mention of it in their most recent report. Odd since it was once the centerpiece of their theory.
I’d like to discuss the error of Al Gore getting rich. If he’s getting rich selling snake oil, you should care. If he’s getting rich selling a lie that could cause the World Food Organization to feed two million people less per year because of corn supplies being purchased for ethanol, that is important.
Nom (may I call you Nom?), I’m going to ask you to view two movies. The Great Global Warming Swindle which you can find following my instructions above and Global Warming or Global Governance? Both these movies will open your eyes.
Finally, I have a sincere question for you. Al Gore is in favor of the Kyoto agreement. Since China, India, and the old Soviet Union are exempt from it, won’t that just move manufacturing jobs from the UK and USA to these other countries. That wouldn’t reduce CO2 global just move the production from one place to another. I’m not sure how this would help even if I did believe in anthropogenic global warming.
Thanks again for the response. Nice to have a thoughtful response that doesn’t have the F word in it.
Dash
Dash,
First i think it would be good to define lies. One could describe lies as an intent to mislead or to deceive. I don’t believe that Gore set out to mislead or deceive anyone. What he set out to do was to bring about awareness on a subject that he had spent many years researching with other scientists and scientific groups. He started giving a power point presentation going over his research and trying to explain why and how the individual items of research collated to bring about his ultimate conclusions. This then led to an offer of making a movie about his presentation. During this time…he spent HIS money to keep his presentation moving and trying to advocate what he and most of the developed world at the time (except the US) believed to be a looming environmental disaster. In order to justify and prove his point he brought forth the best research at the time on Global Warming interjecting within his presentations HIS conclusions based on the evidence he had available. I do not consider that lying…I consider that trying to make a point. And if he finally started making money off of it…that’s perfectly fine. Had I spent all the money he did over all the years he did it would be nice to finally get a return on it financialy. But to suggest that his ultimate goal was to mislead the general public and then make millions off of decieving everyone sounds more like an Exon Mobile press release than it does a rational interpretation of facts.
Ok now back to other points – I am well aware of the heat rises then CO2 rises argument ill put this into perspective on down.
Now lets also define a pollutant. Anything…and I mean anything can become a pollutant in sufficient quantities. Ill use the following example – Botox…that lovely substance people use to remove wrinkles and add years to their looks. This substance is derived from the most toxic protein known – botulinum toxin, that is produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum.”This is a group of bacteria commonly found in soil and marine sediments worldwide; their spores are often found on the surfaces of fruits and vegetables and in seafood. These rod-shaped organisms grow best in low-oxygen conditions.”
In extremely small doses Botox can be used to treat the following ailments
Cervical dystonia (spasmodic torticollis) (a neuromuscular disorder involving the head and neck)[12]
Blepharospasm (excessive blinking)[13]
Severe primary axillary hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating)[14]
Achalasia(failure of the lower oesophageal sphincter to relax)
Local intradermal injection of BTX-A is helpful in chronic focal painful neuropathies. The analgesic effects are not dependent on changes in muscle tone.[15]
Migraine and other headache disorders, although the evidence is conflicting in this indication[16]
Other uses of botulinum toxin type A that are widely known but not specifically approved by FDA include treatment of:
Pediatric incontinence,[17] incontinence due to overactive bladder,[18] and incontinence due to neurogenic bladder.[19]
Anal fissure[20]
Spastic disorders associated with injury or disease of the central nervous system including trauma, stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, or cerebral palsy
Focal dystonias affecting the limbs, face, jaw, or vocal cords
TMJ pain disorders
Diabetic neuropathy
Wound healing
Excessive salivation
VCD Vocal cord dysfunction a spasming of the vocal cords
Reduction of the Masseter muscle for decreasing the size of the lower jaw
While CO2 isa naturally occurring gas and vital to sustain life…too much of a good thing can be very dangerous. What happens when Humans start injecting huge amounts of CO2 into our atmosphere. Without question the environment will begin to suffer its direct effects long before we do. Gore showed (through the Ice records) that as the global mean temp rises so do levels of CO2. There is about an 800 year gap between the two which to me denotes the vast natural growth of plant life. Since forests are the LUNGS of the earth they breath in all the CO2 (naturally produced by any number of ways including sea life that has died from warming seas)during the growing seasons, and exhales the CO2 during fall and winter months.
However now there is a big problem…since we are down to about 25% of the original forests that once populated the Earth and we are going into a natural cycle of warming and now Humans are on the scene accelerating the production of , and raising the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere to levels that have not been recorded in 650,000 years, what will happen?
There are not enough forests to breathe in the CO2 and give the atmosphere a break and allow for some natural cooling. Now we have accelerated warming because the CO2 remains present in the atmosphere at exaggerated levels and continues to rise. With rises in sea temperatures inevitably you get plants and animals that cant cope with the changes and succumb to them. Eventually this will include Humans. Can the Earth handle the rate of warming? Can the Earth sustain Human populations at modern levels through a natural cycle of warming,( not counting anything Humans have done to date to interfere with the natural cycle to date )? We are about to find out…and all the most current research says that if the earth warms 6 degrees C, Civilization as we know it to be…will be toast and there could, in theory at least, be some humans that survive if we move underground.
It is theorized that the Earth has warmed this much in the past, however there were no Humans around to witness what happened so no one can really know what will happen should the Earth go into such a warming cycle. What we do know is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that by pumping enough of it into our atmosphere you will raise the global mean temperature enough to accelerate the natural warming cycle to the point where it becomes a vicious cycle of warming that the Earth may not be able to handle. Why take the chance. We have already destroyed 75% of our forests so even a natural cycle can be very dangerous. Why exaggerate the effect of having only 25% of our lung capacity by smoking. Any doctor would call you insane and committing suicide for doing that. Doctors make a lot of money for giving out that advice… they are also in a lot of movies and commercials describing the effects of such things…are they lying, are they only out to make money?
I am not …nor will I ever be a proponent of biofuels…they are nothing more than a badly planned stop gap measure and ultimately a scam.
The Kyoto agreement was the only thing out there at the time and was a step in the right direction…not a solution. It was a way to get the world in a single room and start addressing the issue of Global Warming. There are much better ways than carbon trading to get that done but it will take leadership to get those into place and so far the US hasn’t wanted to go there.
We now have a new president thats going to take us there and whether anyone likes it or not we are going to be addressing the issue of global warming and we are going to be doing it quickly. Any argument thus far about AIT is simply moot. Global Warming is happening…Humans are responsible for accellerating and interfering with a natural process that will ultimately lead to catastrophic concequenses should it not be addressed.
Dash, here’s the bottom line:
There are basically two groups: those who believe that climate change is a manmade phenomenon and those how believe it is a naturally occurring phenomenon.
Those who believe it is manmade believe that correcting our behavior may avert catastrophe the likes of which our planet may not survive. Those who believe it is natural think changing our behavior will not affect the outcome. Most of these people also think the outcome is something we and the planet will survive.
Assume we go with the first group. We change our behaviors, perhaps at great expense, and we have no global environmental disaster. As with Y2K, we create jobs and new technologies, spur economic growth, and decrease our impact on the environment. Were we right or were we wrong? Who knows? Was Y2K a real threat? Who knows? We worked cooperatively and globally to avert a perceived disaster, but we have no way of determining if that threat was real or imaginary.
Now, assume we go with the second group. We change nothing. What if that second group is wrong? Guess what: we don’t get another chance. We’re done. We’ve proven the first group right, but we have destroyed the only set we have for the experiment. There are no do-overs.
Which choice makes more sense to you?
Sandra,
I’ve heard this argument many times before. In a perfect world, erring on the side of caution would indeed make the most sense. Unfortunately, many around the world are already being hurt by one policy meant to curb global warming.
I too would like to see alternative forms of energy developed. Not because I believe in athropogenic global warming, but because energy independence and national security are inseparable as issues.
I’m sure at this point you’re thinking, “Dash give me one example of people who have been hurt by attempts to curb global warming.” The mandates on ethanol production are the best example of going forward with an idea too quickly without thinking through the possible ramifications. While this doesn’t always make front page news, the rapidly rising cost of food is the direct result of large amounts of corn being purchased for ethanol production. There have already been protests and riots in many countries over this.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2008/03/07/the-growing-food-cost-crisis.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1584204/Soaring-price-of-food-‘leads-to-riots’.html
http://solveclimate.com/blog/20080117/corn-ethanol-boom-us-hunger-worldwide
Are there other factors impacting food prices? Of course there are. I’m sure Gore would even be willing to blame it all on global warming. The point is that the mandates weren’t thought through, and a policy meant to help the world is hurting it.
You brought up the Y2K scare. I’m not sure that applies here because the efforts to prevent it were not so costly as to cause poor people around the world to riot because they could no longer afford food.
A better example for comparison might be the effort to ban DDT. Clealy the first major success by environmentalists inspired by Rachel Carlson’s book Silent Spring. It has been estimated that as many as forty million people have died from malaria because of what was originally done with good intentions.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=E35477CE-FA98-46BB-89AC-FE3CA68BE618
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34823.html
The old saying “look before you leap” still holds true today. Environmentalists in particular might want to heed this time tested piece of wisdom.
Dash RIPROCK III
Hootervillegazette.com
Nominex,
I’m pressed for time this evening, but will return to address your again thoughtful response. I must say, I find this site refreshing.
Dash
So, Dash, because one idea didn’t work we should scuttle the whole concept of reducing global warming?
Sorry. Not buying it. Aaaaaaaannnnnnnnkkkkkkkkk. Try again.
Seems to me that Dash riprock III has well memorized his talking points he got from Sean Hannity. Hey Dash, ever try listening to someone who is not a propaganda agent of the neo-fascist far right?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/obama-helped-fund-carbon-scheme/
http://www.chicagoclimateexchange.com/
http://www.whale.to/a/rumsfeld_h.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=+ME20051026&articleId=1148
http://WWW.INFOWARS.COM
Those links should give ya some stuff to look into. Turn off CNN turn off American Idol and dig for info. After I read that first article I looked into who runs that company they mention , the Chicago Climate Exchange. Its also an Inconvenient truth that The main share holder of the business, North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers. Oh yeah Mr Global Warming himself Al Gore has major stock too! Just like when the swine flue scare a few weeks ago and was all over the news, whats the drug that’s gonna save us Tamiflu. Guess who owns most of the stock in the Company who makes it? Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon is its biggest client. The list goes on. And people wonder where the bailout money went? It stays in the circle of friends. Most scientists with actual credibility, not the UN paid goons, Even say this happens the Earth gets hot then cools off and that Al Gore is full of Poo. Then they are abruptly fired and their data burned. Stop worrying about the penguins and global warming like bad little sheep. Both penguins and the Earth were here long before we came and they will be here long after unless we vaporize the planet, which is of more concern to me than swine flu or Global warming. I’m not a conspiricy theorist although I’m sure someone who’s mad cause I dug this up will say that, well so be it! Feel free to respond @ Hellscowboy404@yahoo.com and yes thats my real e-mail so be Intelligent please!