Skip to comments.The Climate for Change [By AL GORE......]
Posted on 11/09/2008 6:04:08 AM PST by Sub-Driver
The Climate for Change By AL GORE
THE inspiring and transformative choice by the American people to elect Barack Obama as our 44th president lays the foundation for another fateful choice that he and we must make this January to begin an emergency rescue of human civilization from the imminent and rapidly growing threat posed by the climate crisis.
The electrifying redemption of Americas revolutionary declaration that all human beings are born equal sets the stage for the renewal of United States leadership in a world that desperately needs to protect its primary endowment: the integrity and livability of the planet.
The world authority on the climate crisis, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, after 20 years of detailed study and four unanimous reports, now says that the evidence is unequivocal. To those who are still tempted to dismiss the increasingly urgent alarms from scientists around the world, ignore the melting of the north polar ice cap and all of the other apocalyptic warnings from the planet itself, and who roll their eyes at the very mention of this existential threat to the future of the human species, please wake up. Our children and grandchildren need you to hear and recognize the truth of our situation, before it is too late.
Here is the good news: the bold steps that are needed to solve the climate crisis are exactly the same steps that ought to be taken in order to solve the economic crisis and the energy security crisis.
Economists across the spectrum including Martin Feldstein and Lawrence Summers agree that large and rapid investments in a jobs-intensive infrastructure initiative is the best way to revive our economy in a quick and sustainable way.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Hey Gore, I’m not listening.
Go back to school and start with Science 101. You’ll surely pass after two or three tries. While you’re there, take the Obamaloon with you.
“The electrifying redemption of Americas revolutionary declaration that all human beings are born equal...”
As opposed to Created Equal?
I might have known that he would crawl back out from under a rock again.
[agree that large and rapid investments in a jobs-intensive infrastructure initiative is the best way to revive our economy in a quick and sustainable way.]
Obama is a one termer if he takes Gore seriously, he will make Carter look like a genius.
These utopian plans are so grandiose as to be capable of bankrupting civilization.
"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.
Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.
If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."
The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation periods. Now look very carefully at the relationship between temps and CO2 levels (the present is on the right hand side of the graph) and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the data indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000-year period actually lagged behind temperature increases ...by an average of 800 years! So it couldn't have been CO2 that got Earth out of these past glaciations. Yet Gore dishonestly and continually claims otherwise. Furthermore, the subsequent CO2 level increases due to dissolved CO2 being released from warming oceans, never did lead to additional warming, the so-called "run-away greenhouse effect" that Al Gore and his friends keep warning us about. In short, there is little if any evidence that CO2 had once led to increased warming during the past 400,000 years. -ETL
"The above chart shows the range of global temperature through the last 500 million years. There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago [Myr]. Carbon dioxide concentrations at that time were about 15 times higher than at present." [also see 180 million years ago, same thing happened]:
So, greenhouse [effect] is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).
Human activities contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.
"The environment is suffering damage that could be irreversible global warming, the greenhouse effect, the melting of the polar ice caps, the rising sea level, hurricanes with terrible social occurrences that will shake life on this planet."
"I believe this idea has a strong connection with reality. I don't think we have much time. Fidel Castro said in one of his speeches I read not so long ago, 'tomorrow could be too late, let's do now what we need to do'."
"I believe it is time that we take up with courage and clarity a political, social, collective and ideological offensive across the world a real offensive that permits us to move progressively, over the next years, the next decades, leaving behind the perverse, destructive, destroyer, capitalist model and go forward in constructing the socialist model to avoid barbarism and beyond that the annihilation of life on this planet."
--Hugo Chavez, at the 16th World Festival of Youth and Students, held in Caracas on August 8-15, 2005
Of the many goofy ideas that could take down this nation if truly implemented this “save the world” thing may be the worst. If Hussein is the ideologue he appears to be we may well see some loon like Gore as “climate czar” or heading up the EPA with unprecedented power handed over by congress and the executive to impose regulations that will wreck the economy. And it will be done in a self-righteous manner that will brook no dissent or even debate.
My hope is that things rarely turn out as bad (or good) as they appear and that the worst case scenario will not happen. But I think we can count on “save the world” democrats to mess things up to some extent.
NICE CATCH! I guess when you manufacture an “earth worshiping religion” out of BS, it would be hard to accept a Creator... Al Gore is such a loser.
GORE'S LAW: Arrogance + idiocy = lunacy
begin an emergency rescue of human civilization from the imminent and rapidly growing threat posed by the climate crisis.
It just gets worse and worse every day and Obama hasn’t even taken office yet. The (intended I think) result of the proposed initiatives already expressed by incoming Obama supporters and soon to be administrators will absolutely destroy the world economy. Prosperity brings peace with the occasional small war like Iraq and Afghanistan popping up. Economic depression will bring on another world war.
The Gorbocon, is trying to remind the Bambicon that there were promises made and he expects to collect very soon. He will be one PO’ed huckster if he gets cut out of “the change”. After all, he invented hope and change along with global warming, and the internet. It’s not fair that he got trumped by Soros and the credit crash.
“Our children and grandchildren need you to hear and recognize the truth of our situation, before it is too late.”
What I wrote a while back after hearing this one too many times:
Gas keeps rising, now being over $4.00. And the Senate (which the democrats are the majority in right now) is now voting on cap-and-trade legislation, which Europe is doing and they’re now paying $8 to $9 a gallon. And you want to know what the funny thing is; we have the means to alleviate the oil shortage right in our own backyards...but the same Senate that could be jacking prices up even more just recently killed a bill that would have allowed drilling in ANWR and offshore. And why? Because global warming is all the rave and “we need to protect our childrens’ future!”
I swear, whenever someone comes to me with that BS excuse in defense of the “throw caution to the wind, do whatever it takes solutions” to global warming, I want to just break their jaw. Tell me, what kind of future will our children have if gas is so high that people are spending more money on it than on necessities like food, clothing, the rent or house payment, and even medical care? What kind future are we going to give our children if the government is allowed to take our money and look into just about every aspect of our lives in the name of “environmental protection”, which is starting to look less and less like the noble goal it’s portrayed as and more like a political grab for more power.
What about my future? What about the the future of those of us who have worked hard to get where we are now and just aren’t about to throw it all away for the future of people who aren’t even born and whose rights to a future do not trump ours? Call me cruel or heartless if you want (another reason I don’t much appreciate global warming; anyone who disagrees with it in the slightest is considered a criminal) but I don’t see how “protecting our childrens’ future” justifies taking away mine. Does a person who probably hasn’t been born, hasn’t worked a day to provide for theirself, hasn’t taken responsiblity for their own welfare, somehow matter more in the world than I do (not saying I matter more, but I certainly don’t matter less)?
And before any environmentalist comes to me and starts railing on me for not believing in global warming; I don’t so much disbelieve as I am skeptical about it. It wouldn’t be the first time the government’s just invented a crisis to justify grabbing more power and so far, that’s what’s been being done in response to global warming. I wonder if global warming would be such an issue if politicians couldn’t use it for a campaign booster. And even if I did believe in global warming, I still wouldn’t support any bill that would squealch individual liberties or threaten our economy. I seriously doubt global warming is such a threat that it requires us to turn our country into an environmental dictatorship.
And just look at what solutions are being done in response to the big bad global warming: domestic oil production is being denied because “we need to look for alternative, renewable energy sources”, which probably aren’t going to be invented overnight, so we’re stuck with rising fuel prices, rising energy prices, rising food prices, etc (anybody besides me not surprised to hear that the miracle fuel ethanol is now being considered worse for the environment than our current fuels?); a treaty that will not only violate American soverignty and raise taxes, but apparently won’t solve the global warming problem since the biggest polluter in the world is exempt from the rules (makes it even harder to believe in the “noble” goals of environmentalists); more government control over people’s lives by way of controlling their energy appliances; and now, what pretty much amounts to a rationing system for fuel that will probably do little more than make it even more expensive.
I sometimes hope this global warming threat turns out to be for real; not just for my sake, but for the sake of the people screwing up my life with their solutions and their “we need to protect our childrens’ future” justifications. Because if it isn’t and the only future we secure for our children (and ourselves) is a screwed up economy, high taxes, loss of freedoms, and all the other wonderful things that look like they’re going to happen, then there’s going to be big trouble in America.
global warming, the greenhouse effect, the melting of the polar ice caps, the rising sea level, hurricanes with terrible social occurrences that will shake life on this planet.”
Note to Hugo. The recent hurricane season was one of the quietest on record.
This is just gibberish. The grid is above ground and has to remain that way for lots of reasons, not just cost. By the "smart" aspect I assume he means the grid would tell you that your A/C is running on expensive peak power from somewhere far away or local natural gas. In that case you would simply sit and sweat or you would crank the A/C in the morning (thus wasting energy) because the "smart" grid would raise your rates (possibly a lot) later in the day.
The same lack of knowledge that tells him the north pole is melting when it is not, seems to influence his policy choices. At best this will be a huge waste of money.
No it wasn't. It was about average for the 90's and 00's.
note: thanks to Right Wing Assault who corrected me on the other thread.
The inmates have indeed taken over the asylum.
Go back to school and start with Science 101. Youll surely pass after two or three tries.
I do not think someone who actually flunked divinity could manage that.
Well, yes, Mr. President, I accept the position of “climate czar”,thank you. Oh,uh, by the way, I have the perfect company to use for...
No need to apologize. Most folks think just like you. When they think of hurricanes they generally tend to limit it to storms that directly affect us.
I have been saying this for years and everybody I know thought I was just crazy for thinking it. Some are just now waking up to the truth, but with Obama in as Pres., it's probably too late.
AGW, Climate Change, et. al. are nothing more than Trojan horses for totalitarian control of the USA.
Once they have us freezing to death in the winter, sweating to death in the summer, walking to work (if we have a job), and having to shop every day at the empty supermarket like the Soviets used to do, they will have achieved their Utopian goal.
Did he just kill Kyoto?
“We need to replace it next year in Copenhagen.”
It’s -5 this morning again, over a month of this Global stuff. The weatherman has been promising warmer (+20) for several days, so maybe this Algore globarama will do it.
The SKY is FALLING! The SKY is FALLING, send me MONEY and I will save you alll.......
Oh great, the cause of global warming is water. Now we all have to live in a desert as they tax us for taking a pi$$.
Now that it is getting colder due to the lack of sunspots, are they going to demand we nuke our own sun to warm things up? You figure a way to make money at it, they will do it.
If you look at the chart below, you will see that sunspot activity (during solar maxes--the individual peaks) has been relatively high since about 1900 and almost non-existent for the period between about 1625 and 1725. This period is known as the Maunder (sunspot) Minimum or "Little Ice Age".
From BBC News [yr: 2004]:
"A new  analysis shows that the Sun is more active now than it has been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years. Scientists based at the Institute for Astronomy in Zurich used ice cores from Greenland to construct a picture of our star's activity in the past. They say that over the last century the number of sunspots rose at the same time that the Earth's climate became steadily warmer."..."In particular, it has been noted that between about 1645 and 1715, few sunspots were seen on the Sun's surface. This period is called the Maunder Minimum after the English astronomer who studied it. It coincided with a spell of prolonged cold weather often referred to as the "Little Ice Age". Solar scientists strongly suspect there is a link between the two events - but the exact mechanism remains elusive."
It's really hard to imagine how this little ball of fire could have any impact on our climate at all.
But the main arguments being made for a solar-climate connection is not so much to do with the heat of the Sun but rather with its magnetic cycles. When the Sun is more magnetically active (typically around the peak of the 11 year sunspot cycle --we are a few yrs away at the moment), the Sun's magnetic field is better able to deflect away incoming galactic cosmic rays (highly energetic charged particles coming from outside the solar system). The GCRs are thought to help in the formation of low-level cumulus clouds -the type of clouds that BLOCK sunlight and help cool the Earth. So when the Sun's MF is acting up (not like now -the next sunspot max is expected in about 2012), less GCRs reach the Earth's atmosphere, less low level sunlight-blocking clouds form, and more sunlight gets through to warm the Earth's surface...naturally. Clouds are basically made up of tiny water droplets. When minute particles in the atmosphere become ionized by incoming GCRs they become very 'attractive' to water molecules, in a purely chemical sense of the word. The process by which the Sun's increased magnetic field would deflect incoming cosmic rays is very similar to the way magnetic fields steer electrons in a cathode ray tube or electrons and other charged particles around the ring of a subatomic particle accelerator.-ETL
There's a relatively new book out on the subject titled The Chilling Stars. It's written by one of the top scientists advancing the theory (Henrik Svensmark).
And here is the website for the place where he does his research:
2008: "The Center for Sun-Climate Research at the DNSC investigates the connection between variations in the intensity of cosmic rays and climatic changes on Earth. This field of research has been given the name 'cosmoclimatology'"..."Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because the Sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays coming from the Galaxy, before they can reach the Earth." :
100,000-Year Climate Pattern Linked To Sun's Magnetic Cycles:
ScienceDaily (Jun. 7, 2002) HANOVER, N.H.
Thanks to new calculations by a Dartmouth geochemist, scientists are now looking at the earth's climate history in a new light. Mukul Sharma, Assistant Professor of Earth Sciences at Dartmouth, examined existing sets of geophysical data and noticed something remarkable: the sun's magnetic activity is varying in 100,000-year cycles, a much longer time span than previously thought, and this solar activity, in turn, may likely cause the 100,000-year climate cycles on earth. This research helps scientists understand past climate trends and prepare for future ones.
From a well-referenced wikipedia.com column (see wiki link for ref 14):
"Sunspot numbers over the past 11,400 years have been reconstructed using dendrochronologically dated radiocarbon concentrations. The level of solar activity during the past 70 years is exceptional the last period of similar magnitude occurred over 8,000 years ago. The Sun was at a similarly high level of magnetic activity for only ~10% of the past 11,400 years, and almost all of the earlier high-activity periods were shorter than the present episode."
 ^Solanki, Sami K.; Usoskin, Ilya G.; Kromer, Bernd; Schüssler, Manfred & Beer, Jürg (2004), Unusual activity of the Sun during recent decades compared to the previous 11,000 years, Nature 431: 10841087, doi:10.1038/nature02995, . Retrieved on 17 April 2007 , "11,000 Year Sunspot Number Reconstruction". Global Change Master Directory. Retrieved on 2005-03-11.
"Reconstruction of solar activity over 11,400 years. Period of equally high activity over 8,000 years ago marked.
Present period is on [the right]. Values since 1900 not shown."
Even at a time where there is a global financial crisis, he ignores it to spew blather about a non--> problem...
I must have read a different article! I was completely creeped out by what appeared to be ALGORE quoting Abraham Lincoln and possibly complimenting Richard Nixon as an energy visionary:
“As Abraham Lincoln said during Americas darkest hour, The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. In our present case, thinking anew requires discarding an outdated and fatally flawed definition of the problem we face.
Thirty-five years ago this past week, President Richard Nixon created Project Independence, which set a national goal that, within seven years, the United States would develop the potential to meet our own energy needs without depending on any foreign energy sources. His statement came three weeks after the Arab oil embargo had sent prices skyrocketing and woke America to the dangers of dependence on foreign oil. And not coincidentally it came only three years after United States domestic oil production had peaked.
At the time, the United States imported less than a third of its oil from foreign countries. Yet today, after all six of the presidents succeeding Nixon repeated some version of his goal, our dependence has doubled from one-third to nearly two-thirds and many feel that global oil production is at or near its peak.”
Dark days when ALGORE is quoting & complimenting Republicans.
if he takes Gore seriously, he will make Carter look like a genius.
You misunderestimate him! He has already accomplished that mission.
The inmates have indeed taken over the asylum.
Yes, and they are busily mounting it on wheels to transport it to the nearest seaport where it will be loaded on huge barges for transport to the Mariana trench where it will be dumped into the deepest waters on the Earth. Is there NO way to stop this idiocy?
Gotta find a way to trap Gore and Senator Imoffe in an elevator for 3 hours.
All true, but as of right now, NO sunspots last I heard. Unusual isn’t it. Going to be one COLD winter.
The Sun is just now (finally) moving out of the ‘minimum’ phase for its 11-year sunspot cycle. Max is supposed be around 2011 or 2012. However, the cycle, at max, for the past 60 or so years (ie, during the increased warming phase) has had a remarkably high level of activity. I think it’s still up in the air, in terms of predictions, as to whether this next cycle (cycle 24) is going to be above normal or not.
Thanks for the info. I find this very interesting.
"The sun is waking up and winking at us today," says Wainwright.
The "smile" is a filament of plasma connecting the two magnetic poles of sunspot 1008. Magnetograms of the active region reveal a N-S polarity characteristic of Solar Cycle 24: this is a new-cycle sunspot. The appearance of 1008 continues a recent trend of increasing new-cycle sunspot counts, which began in Oct. 2008. Solar activity is on the rise
Nov 12, 2008: New-cycle sunspot 1008 is growing rapidly. The sun is purple today because the picture was taken through a violet Calcium-K filter, which reveals bright magnetic froth around sunspots. Photo credit: David Leong of Hong Kong
See spaceweather.com for Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008:
More current images from NASA's SOHO, in higher electromagnetic frequencies:
Magnetogram (black and white areas denote regions of opposing magnetic polarity):