Tuesday, November 03, 2009

Money and Gore

It is nice to see a leftist rag like the New York Times finally admit that Al Gore is making a fortune from Global Warming. However, I don't think it detracts from his message, any more than Global Warming sceptics lose credibility when they have oil company investments. While it might paint their messages in a different light, it does not take away from the inherent truth or lies contained therein.

The political tactic of "killing the messenger" does not work in scientific debates. Even if a person has an ulterior motive, their message must be taken at face value, and must be refuted on it's own value or lack thereof.

You don't need to attack Gore to debunk the Global Warming theory, which is still ignoring several important factors:

1. It fails to account for how changes in the sun impact our atmosphere. We have seen a correlation between sunspots and the Earth's temperature. Yet Global Warming theory places carbon dioxide as a more important factor on the Earth's atmosphere than our planet's PRIMARY source of heat?

2. During the period of the dinosaurs, Earth's atmosphere contained larger concentrations of carbon dioxide than it currently does, yet both flora and fauna flourished. If Global Warming is so horrible for the Earth, then how do they account for this?

You don't need to attack Al Gore to find the holes in his message.


William R. Barker said...

I have nothing against Al Gore capitalist making money; it's the WAY he makes money - mainly off profits from GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS - that bothers me.

Gore is to Capitalism as Charlie Rangel is to Good Government.


EdMcGon said...

If we didn't have a silly government that believes this Global Warming nonsense, we wouldn't be talking about government contracts, would we? ;)

William R. Barker said...

If you haven't already read this...




P.S. - Remember me trying to explain the evils of ethanol back on RT?