|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
NYT To Al Gore: Cool It On Global Warming Hype
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| NYT To Al Gore: Cool It On Global Warming Hype
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| NCMike06 |
The TRUTH about the Inconvenient Truth....
http://www.cei.org/pdf/5539.pdf
One-Sided
• Never acknowledges the indispensable role of fossil fuels in alleviating hunger
and poverty, extending human life spans, and democratizing consumer goods,
literacy, leisure, and personal mobility.
• Never acknowledges the environmental, health, and economic benefits of climatic
warmth and the ongoing rise in the air’s carbon dioxide (CO2) content.
• Never acknowledges the major role of natural variability in shrinking the snows
of Kilimanjaro and other mountain glaciers.
• Never mentions the 1976 regime shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a natural
ocean cycle, which is a major cause of recent climate change in Alaska.
• Presents a graph tracking CO2 levels and global temperatures during the past
650,000 years, but never mentions the most significant point: Global temperatures
were warmer than the present during each of the past four interglacial periods,
even though CO2 levels were lower.
• Never confronts a key implication of its assumption that climate is highly
sensitive to CO2 emissions—that absent said emissions, global climate would be
rapidly deteriorating into another ice age.
• Neglects to mention that, due to the growth of urban heat islands, U.S. cities and
towns will continually break temperature records, with or without help from
global warming.
• Neglects to mention that global warming could reduce the severity of winter
storms—also called frontal storms because their energy comes from colliding air
masses (fronts)—by decreasing the temperature differential between colliding air
masses.
• Highlights London’s construction of the Thames River flood barrier as evidence
of global warming-induced sea-level rise, but does not mention that London is
sinking two to six times faster than global sea levels are rising.
• Ignores the large role of natural variability in Arctic climate, never mentioning
either that Arctic temperatures during the 1930s equaled or exceeded those of the
late 20th century, or that the Arctic during the early- to mid-Holocene was
significantly warmer than it is today.
• Cites a study that found that the number of recorded wildfires in North America
has increased in recent decades, but not the same study’s finding that the total
area burned decreased by 90 percent since the 1930s.
• Fosters the impression that global warming can only be good for bad things
(algae, ticks) and bad for good things (polar bears, migratory birds)—depicting
nature as a morality play.
• Cites a study by Isabella Velicogna and John Wahr, of the University of
Colorado, that found an overall loss in Antarctic ice mass during 2002-2005, but
ignores a study by University of Missouri professor Curt Davis and colleagues
that found an overall ice mass gain during 1992-2003. Three years worth of data
is too short to tell anything about a trend in a system as vast and complex as
Antarctica.
• Cites a recent study by John Turner of the British Antarctic Survey that found a
0.5° Celsius (C) to 0.7°C per decade wintertime warming trend in the midtroposphere
above Antarctica, as measured by weather balloons, but fails to
mention that the same study found much less warming—about 0.15°C per
decade—at the Antarctic surface, or that NASA satellites, which also measure
troposphere temperatures, show an Antarctic cooling trend of 0.12°C per decade
since November 1978.
• Misanthropically sees “success” not in the fossil fuel energy-based civilization
that has enabled mankind to increase its numbers more than six-fold since the
dawn of the industrial revolution, but in the recent reduction of global population
growth rates.
• Compares Haiti—which suffers from deforestation—unfavorably with
neighboring Dominican Republic—which enjoys lush forest cover—to illustrate
the impact of politics on the environment, but ignores another key implication of
the comparison: Poverty is the environment’s number one enemy.
• Notes that “much forest destruction” and “almost 30%” of annual CO2 emissions
come from “the burning of brushland for subsistence agriculture and wood fires
used for cooking,” but never considers whether fossil fuel energy restrictions
would set back developing countries both economically and environmentally, by
leading to more such burning.
• Neglects to mention the circumstances that make it reasonable rather than
blameworthy for America to be the biggest CO2 emitter: the world’s largest
economy, high per capita incomes, abundant energy resources, markets integrated
across continental distances, and the world’s most mobile population.
• Impugns the motives of so-called global warming skeptics but never
acknowledges the special-interest motivations of those whose research grants,
direct-mail income, industrial policy privileges, regulatory power, prosecutorial
plunder, or political careers depend on keeping the public in a state of fear about
global warming.
• Castigates former White House official Phil Cooney for editing U.S. government
climate change policy documents, without ever considering the scientific merit of
Cooney’s decisions to delete certain passages as “speculative.”
• Waxes enthusiastic about cellulosic ethanol, a product with no commercial
application despite 30 years of government-funded research, and neglects to
mention that corn-based ethanol, a product in commercial use for a century, is still
more costly than regular gasoline despite oil prices exceeding $70 a barrel.
• Misrepresents the major auto companies’ position in their lawsuit to overturn
California’s CO2 emissions law by neglecting to mention that CO2 standards are
de facto fuel economy standards and that federal law prohibits states from
regulating fuel economy.
• Blames Detroit’s financial troubles on the Big Three’s high-volume production of
sport utility vehicles, even though U.S. automakers probably would not exist
today had they been “ahead of their time” and pushed hybrids during the 1990s,
contrary to consumer demand. AIT says nothing about the biggest cause of
Detroit’s falling capitalization—unaffordable payments for employee benefit
packages negotiated decades ago.
• Touts Denmark’s wind farms without mentioning any of the well-known
drawbacks of wind power: cost, intermittency, avian mortality, site depletion, and
scenic degradation.
• Never addresses the obvious criticism that the Kyoto Protocol is all pain for no
gain and that any policies far-reaching enough to noticeably slow warming would
be a “cure” worse than the alleged disease.
• Claims a study by Robert Socolow and Stephen Pacala of Princeton University
shows that “affordable” technologies could reduce U.S. carbon emissions below
1970 levels even though the authors specifically note that their study does not
estimate costs. AIT also neglects to mention that Socolow and Pacala’s study is a
response to a 2002 study by Martin Hoffert of New York University and 17 other
energy experts who concluded that, “CO2 is a combustion product vital to how
civilization is powered; it cannot be regulated away.”
Misleading
• Implies that a two-page photograph of Perito Moreno Glacier in Argentina shows
that the glacier is melting away, even though the glacier’s terminal boundary has
not changed in 90 years.
• Implies that, during the past 650,000 years, changes in carbon dioxide levels
preceded and largely caused changes in global temperature, whereas the causality
mostly runs the other way, with CO2 changes trailing global temperature changes
by hundreds to thousands of years.
• Belittles as ideologically motivated the painstaking and now widely-accepted
methodological critiques by Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph in
Ontario and Steve McIntyre of the Hockey Stick reconstruction of Northern
Hemisphere climate history.
• Cites increases in insurance payments to victims of hurricanes, floods, drought,
tornadoes, wildfires, and other natural disasters as evidence of a global warmingravaged
planet, even though the increases are chiefly due to socioeconomic
factors such as population growth and development in high-risk coastal areas and
cities.
• Distracts readers from the main hurricane problem facing the United States: the
ever-growing concentration of population and wealth in vulnerable coastal
regions, which is partly a consequence of federal flood insurance and other
political subsidies.
• Ignores the societal factors—such as poverty—that typically overwhelm climatic
factors in determining people’s risk of damage or death from hurricanes, floods,
drought, tornadoes, wildfires, and disease.
• Implies that the 2006 tropical cyclone season in Australia was unusually active
and, thus, symptomatic of global warming. In contrast, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) describes the season as “near average.”
• Re-labels as “major floods,” a category defined by physical magnitude, a chart of
“damaging floods,” a category defined by socioeconomic and political criteria.
• Re-labels as “major wildfires,” a category defined by physical magnitude, a chart
of “recorded wildfires,” a category reflecting changes in data collection and
reporting, such as increases in the frequency and scope of satellite monitoring.
• Conflates the Thermohaline Circulation (THC), a convective system primarily
driven by differences in salinity and sea temperatures, with the Gulf Stream, a
wind-driven system energized primarily by the Earth’s spin and the lunar tides,
exaggerating the risk of a big chill in Europe from a weakening of the THC.
• Presents a graph showing the number of annual closings of the Thames River tidal
barriers from 1930 to the present, even though the modern barrier system was
completed in 1982 and became operational in 1984. This apples-to-oranges
comparison conveys the false impression that London faced no serious flood risk
until recent decades.
• Blames global warming for the decline “since the 1960s” of the emperor penguin
population in Antarctica, implying that the penguins are in peril, their numbers
dwindling as the world warms. In fact, the population declined in the 1970s and
has been stable since the late 1980s.
• Implies that a study finding that none of 928 science articles—actually
abstracts—denied a CO2-global warming link, shows that Gore’s apocalyptic
view of global warming is the “consensus” view among scientists.
• Reports that 48 Nobel Prize-winning scientists accused President Bush of
distorting science, without mentioning that the scientists acted as members of a
“527” political advocacy group set up to promote John Kerry’s 2004 campaign for
president.
• Implies that the United States is an environmental laggard because China has
adopted more stringent fuel economy standards, glossing over China’s horrendous
air quality problems.
Exaggerated
• Exaggerates the certainty and hypes the importance of the alleged link between
global warming and the frequency and severity of tropical storms.
• Hypes the importance of NOAA running out of names (21 per year) for Atlantic
hurricanes in 2005, and the fact that some storms continued into December. The
practice of naming storms only goes back to 1953, and hurricane detection
capabilities have improved dramatically since the 1950s, so the “record” number
of named storms in 2005 may be an artifact of the resulting data. Also, Atlantic
hurricanes continued into December in several previous years including 1878,
1887, and 1888.
• Never explains why anyone should be alarmed about the current Arctic warming,
considering that our stone-age ancestors survived—and likely benefited from—
the much stronger and longer Arctic warming known as the Holocene Climate
Optimum.
• Portrays the cracking of the Ward Hunt ice shelf in 2002 as a portent of doom,
even though the shelf was merely a remnant of a much larger Arctic ice formation
that had already lost 90 percent of its area during 1906-1982.
• Claims that polar bears “have been drowning in significant numbers,” but this is
based on a single report that found four drowned polar bears in one month in one
year, following an abrupt storm.
• Claims that global warming is creating “ecological niches” for “invasive alien
species,” never mentioning other, more important factors such as increases in
trade, tourism, and urban heat islands. For example, due to population growth,
Berlin warmed twice as much during 1886-1898 as the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates the entire world
warmed during the 20th century.
• Blames global warming for pine beetle infestations that likely have more to do
with increased forest density and plain old mismanagement.
• Presents a graph suggesting that China’s new fuel economy standards are almost
30 percent more stringent than the current U.S. standards. In fact, the Chinese
standards are only about 5 percent more stringent.
Speculative
• Warns of impending water shortages in Asia due to global warming but does not
check whether there is any correlation between global warming and Eurasian
snow cover (there isn’t). If Tibetan glaciers were to melt, that should increase
water availability in the coming decades.
• Claims that CO2 concentrations in the Holocene never rose above 300 parts per
million (ppm) in pre-industrial times, and that the current level—380 ppm—is
“way above” the range of natural variability. Proxy data (leaf stoma frequency)
indicate that, in the early Holocene, CO2 levels exceeded 330 ppm for centuries
and reached 348 ppm.
• Claims that a Scripps Oceanography Institute study shows that ocean
temperatures during the past 40 years are “way above the range of natural
variability.” Proxy data indicate that the Atlantic Ocean off the West Coast of
Africa was warmer than present during the Medieval Warm Period.
• Blames global warming for the record number of typhoons hitting Japan in 2004.
Local meteorological conditions, not average global temperatures, determine the
trajectory of particular storms, and data going back to 1950 show no correlation
between North Pacific storm activity and global temperatures.
• Blames global warming for the record-breaking 37-inch downpour in Mumbai,
India on July 26, 2005, even though there has been no trend in Mumbai rainfall
for the month of July in 45 years.
• Blames global warming for recent floods in China’s Sichuan and Shandong
provinces, even though far more damaging floods struck those areas in the 19th
and early 20th centuries.
• Blames global warming for the disappearance of Lake Chad, a phenomenon more
likely stemming from a combination of regional climate variability and societal
factors like population increase and overgrazing.
• Claims that global warming is drying out soils all over the world, whereas pan
evaporation studies (which measure the rate of evaporation from open pans of
water) indicate that, in general, the Earth’s surface is becoming wetter.
• Presents one climate model’s projection of increased U.S. drought as authoritative
even though another leading model forecasts increased wetness. Climate model
hydrology forecasts on regional scales are notoriously unreliable. Most of the
United States, outside the Southwest, became wetter during 1925-2003.
• Blames global warming for the severe drought that hit the Amazon in 2005.
However, RealClimate.Org, a web site set up to debunk global warming
“skeptics,” concluded that it is not possible to link the drought to global warming.
• Warns of a positive feedback whereby carbon-induced warming melts tundra,
releasing more CO2 locked up in frozen soils. An alternative scenario is also
plausible: The range of carbon-storing vegetation expands as tundra thaws.
• Claims that global warming endangers polar bears even though polar bear
populations are increasing in Arctic areas where it is warming and declining in
Arctic areas where it is cooling.
• Blames global warming for Alaska’s “drunken trees”—trees rooted in previously
frozen tundra, which sway in all directions as the ice melts—ignoring the possibly
large role of the 1976 PDO shift.
• Blames rising CO2 levels for recent declines in Arctic sea ice, ignoring the
potentially large role of natural variability. AIT never mentions that wind pattern
shifts may account for much of the observed changes in sea ice, or that the
Canadian Arctic Archipelago had considerably less sea ice during the early
Holocene.
• Warns that meltwater from Greenland could disrupt the Atlantic thermohaline
circulation based on research indicating that a major disruption occurred 8,200
years ago when a giant ice dam burst in North America, allowing two lakes to
drain rapidly into the sea. AIT does not mention that the lakes injected more than
100,000 cubic kilometers of freshwater into the sea, whereas Greenland ice melt
contributes only a few hundred cubic kilometers a year.
• Warns that global warming is destroying coral reefs, even though today’s main
reef builders evolved and thrived during periods substantially warmer than the
present.
• Warns that a doubling of pre-industrial CO2 levels to 560 ppm will so acidify
seawater that all optimal areas for coral reef construction will disappear by 2050.
This is not plausible. Coral calcification rates have increased as ocean
temperatures and CO2 levels have risen, and today’s main reef builders evolved
and thrived during the Mesozoic Period, when atmospheric CO2 levels hovered
above 1,000 ppm for 150 million years and exceeded 2,000 ppm for several
million years.
• Links global warming to toxic algae bloom outbreaks in the Baltic Sea that can be
entirely explained by record-high phosphorus levels, record-low nitrogen-tophosphorus
levels, and local meteorological conditions.
• Asserts without evidence that global warming is causing more tick-borne disease
(TBD). A 2004 study by Oxford University professor Sarah Randolph found no
relationship between climate change and TBD in Europe.
• Blames global warming for the resurgence of malaria in Kenya, even though
several studies have found no climate link and attribute the problem to decreased
spraying of homes with DDT, anti-malarial drug resistance, and incompetent
public health programs.
• Insinuates that global warming is a factor in the emergence of some 30 “new”
diseases over the last three decades, but cites no supporting research or evidence.
• Blames global warming for the decline “since the 1960s” of the emperor penguin
population in Antarctica based on a speculative assessment by two researchers
that warm sea temperatures in the 1970s reduced the birds’ main food source. An
equally plausible explanation is that Antarctic ecotourism, which became popular
in the 1970s, disturbed the rookeries.
• Warns of “significant and alarming structural changes” in the submarine base of
West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS), but does not tell us what those changes are or
why they are “significant and alarming.” The melting and retreat of the WAIS
“grounding line” has been going on since the early Holocene. At the rate of retreat
observed in the late 1990s, the WAIS should disappear in about 7,000 years.
• Warns that vertical water tunnels (“moulins”) are lubricating the Greenland Ice
Sheet, increasing the risk that it will “slide” into the sea. Summertime glacier flow
acceleration associated with moulins is tiny. Moulins in numbers equal to or
surpassing those observed today probably occurred in the first half of the 20th
century, when Greenland was as warm as or warmer than the past decade, with no
major loss of grounded ice.
• Presents 10 pages of before-and-after “photographs” showing what 20 feet of sea
level rise would do to the world’s major coastal communities. There is no credible
evidence of an impending collapse of the great ice sheets. We do have fairly good
data on ice mass balance changes and their effects on sea level. NASA scientist
Jay Zwally and colleagues found a combined Greenland/Antarctica ice-loss-sealevel-
rise equivalent of 0.05 mm per year during 1992-2002. At that rate, it would
take a full millennium to raise sea level by just 5 cm.
• Forecasts an increase in U.S. renewable energy production during 1990-2030
more than twice that projected by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Wrong
• Claims that glaciologist Lonnie Thompson’s reconstruction of climate history
proves the Medieval Warm Period was “tiny” compared to the warming observed
in recent decades. It doesn’t. Four of Thompson’s six ice cores indicate the
Medieval Warm Period was as warm as or warmer than any recent decade.
• Calls carbon dioxide the “most important greenhouse gas.” Water vapor is the
leading contributor to the greenhouse effect.
• Claims that Venus is too hot and Mars too cold to support life due to differences
in atmospheric CO2 concentrations (they are nearly identical), rather than
differences in atmospheric densities and distances from the Sun (both huge).
• Claims that scientists have validated the “hockey stick” reconstruction of
Northern Hemisphere temperature history, according to which the 1990s were
likely the warmest decade of the past millennium and 1998 the warmest year. It is
now widely acknowledged that the hockey stick was built on a flawed
methodology and inappropriate data. Scientists continue to debate whether the
Medieval Warm period was warmer than recent decades.
• Assumes that CO2 levels are increasing at roughly 1 percent annually. The actual
rate is half that.
• Assumes a linear relationship between CO2 levels and global temperatures,
whereas the actual CO2-warming effect is logarithmic, meaning that the next 100-
ppm increase in CO2 levels adds only half as much heat as the previous 100-ppm
increase. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
As if set off by a timer...AB posts the mediamatters lies/attacks against the scientists/statisticians who debunk the religion of global alarmism...Just another case of not being able to rebutt the facts, so in typical mediamatters form....attack the messenger.
The statement above attacks AB for "attacking the messenger"
The statement below attacks another messenger.
And why don't you list the qualifications of AlGore?
AB..Proud member of the Global Alarmist cult. |
Do consistancy and logic hold any meaning at all for you? |
|
|
| Psychomike |
Damn NC Mike that's the HBomb of facts!
They'll ignore them all. |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Do consistancy and logic hold any meaning at all for you? |
Please explain how asking for someone's qualifications is an attack>????? Please be specific |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
You really have a serious mental problem. Can you at least TRY to stay in the same universe as the topic being discussed?
You have been shown more than enough evidence that the sources you are basing your opinion on are lying and misrepresenting the science. That is a choice YOU are making to believe discredited liars and oil industry schills.
Still waiting for this imaginary Gore quote.
Still waiting for you to defend with facts these people you use as sources or the debunked "science" they repeat over and over and over.....
Take a ritalin and try to stay on topic, idiot. |
|
|
| zimmie |
| Poor AB....another day getting schooled here...you'd think he'd learn...but that beanie cap of his never seems to fit |
|
|
| Psychomike |
I like how they just ignore all the statements against their position but demand each and every thought of theirs get answered.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Hippiecrites. |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Anyone notice that NCMoron says those are "lies" about his sources, but can't ever seem to disprove any of those "lies".......
It's funny how the only people who claim there are so many "errors" in the Gore film are the same discredited oil whores you use for all your climate change information........
Maybe you can find another "petition" of "scientists" including characters from M.A.S.H. or members of the Spice Girls?
You are a living joke. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
Please explain how asking for someone's qualifications is an attack>????? Please be specific |
That's funny!!!
This post is another example of how logic and consistancy hold no meaning for you.
Here's how, because I'm quite sure you'll miss it if I don't point it out for you.
You ask me to "please be specific" while asking me a question that's so incredibly vague, the possible answers are practically endless....
What are Al Gore's qualifications for what?
For being a spokesman for the scientific community?
I would think his experience as a lawmaker and public speaker would more than qualify him for that. Not to mention the fact that he was championing thier cause in congress when no one else was.
For being an astronaut?
Probably not the best guy for that job.
If you're asking about his qualifications for something else, well, you'll have to be a little more specific, if you please.......
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| zimmie |
Ass Boil at the SternFanNetwork Learning Center |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
Ass Boil at the SternFanNetwork Learning Center |
zimmie, you're another poster that amuses the hell out of me, and I'll tell you why:
Your signature and attitude project intellectual superiority, while your posts themselves are completely barren of anything even approaching superior intellect.
Maybe it's a joke, and maybe not, either way, it's pretty funny. :D |
|
|
| zimmie |
Classic absurdity......Al Gore produces more global warming than everyone here put together...he's a cartoon character who is the epitome of "do as I say, not as I do" The classic example of a limousine liberal.
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
That's funny!!!
This post is another example of how logic and consistancy hold no meaning for you.
Here's how, because I'm quite sure you'll miss it if I don't point it out for you.
You ask me to "please be specific" while asking me a question that's so incredibly vague, the possible answers are practically endless....
What are Al Gore's qualifications for what?
For being a spokesman for the scientific community?
I would think his experience as a lawmaker and public speaker would more than qualify him for that. Not to mention the fact that he was championing thier cause in congress when no one else was.
For being an astronaut?
Probably not the best guy for that job.
If you're asking about his qualifications for something else, well, you'll have to be a little more specific, if you please.......
:rolleyes: |
|
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
Classic absurdity......Al Gore produces more global warming than everyone here put together...he's a cartoon character who is the epitome of "do as I say, not as I do" The classic example of a limousine liberal. |
case in point ^ |
|
|
| NCMike06 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
That's funny!!!
This post is another example of how logic and consistancy hold no meaning for you.
Here's how, because I'm quite sure you'll miss it if I don't point it out for you.
You ask me to "please be specific" while asking me a question that's so incredibly vague, the possible answers are practically endless....
What are Al Gore's qualifications for what?
For being a spokesman for the scientific community?
I would think his experience as a lawmaker and public speaker would more than qualify him for that. Not to mention the fact that he was championing thier cause in congress when no one else was.
For being an astronaut?
Probably not the best guy for that job.
If you're asking about his qualifications for something else, well, you'll have to be a little more specific, if you please.......
:rolleyes: |
First of all, I didn't ask YOU to list his qualifications...so your diatribe concerning its supposed vagueness is irrelevant. I asked you to explain how the question, (And why don't you list the qualifications of AlGore?) is an attack?? I asked you to be specific in explaining how asking about Gore's qualifications is an attack. THe fact that you dodged the question says it all. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06
First of all, I didn't ask YOU to list his qualifications...so your diatribe concerning its supposed vagueness is irrelevant. I asked you to explain how the question, (And why don't you list the qualifications of AlGore?) is an attack?? I asked you to be specific in explaining how asking about Gore's qualifications is an attack. THe fact that you dodged the question says it all. |
You know his qualifications as well as anyone else does. Stop playing ignorant.
The question is a thinly veiled attack on his credibility, and you pretend to not know that.
That type of disingenuousness is what I find so repugnant about the right.
Why do you want a list of his qualifications that goes beyond what you already know?
Do you think that maybe he has a degree in climatology?
Do you think that maybe he's learned in the ways of core sample studies?
What are hoping to find out by asking that question? |
|
|
| zimmie |
THE HEAT IS ON
Gore's 'carbon offsets' paid to firm he owns
Critics say justification for energy-rich lifestyle serves as way for former VP to profit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 2, 2007
4:13 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Al Gore's Nashville mansion (PajamasMedia.com)
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.
Gore has built a "green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms," writes blogger Dan Riehl.
Gore has described the lifestyle he and his wife Tipper live as "carbon neutral," meaning he tries to offset any energy usage, including plane flights and car trips, by "purchasing verifiable reductions in CO2 elsewhere."
But it turns out he pays for his extra-large carbon footprint through Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., for which he serves as chairman. The company was established to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating "global warming," reports blogger Bill Hobbs.
Generation Investment Management's U.S. branch is headed by a former Gore staffer and fund-raiser, Peter S. Knight, who once was the target of probes by the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.
Hobbs points out Gore stands to make a lot of money from his promotion of the alleged "global warming" threat, which is disputed by many mainstream scientists.
"In other words, he 'buys' his 'carbon offsets' from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself," Hobbs writes. "To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy 'carbon offsets' through Generation Investment Management – he buys stocks."
As WND reported, Gore, whose film warning of a coming cataclysm due to man-made "global warming" won two Oscars, has a mansion in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville that consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, citing data from the Nashville Electric Service.
The think tanks says since the release of Gore's film, the former presidential candidate's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kilowatt-hours per month in 2005, to 18,400 per month in 2006. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
THE HEAT IS ON
Gore's 'carbon offsets' paid to firm he owns
Critics say justification for energy-rich lifestyle serves as way for former VP to profit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 2, 2007
4:13 p.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Al Gore's Nashville mansion (PajamasMedia.com)
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.
Gore has built a "green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms," writes blogger Dan Riehl.
Gore has described the lifestyle he and his wife Tipper live as "carbon neutral," meaning he tries to offset any energy usage, including plane flights and car trips, by "purchasing verifiable reductions in CO2 elsewhere."
But it turns out he pays for his extra-large carbon footprint through Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., for which he serves as chairman. The company was established to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating "global warming," reports blogger Bill Hobbs.
Generation Investment Management's U.S. branch is headed by a former Gore staffer and fund-raiser, Peter S. Knight, who once was the target of probes by the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice.
Hobbs points out Gore stands to make a lot of money from his promotion of the alleged "global warming" threat, which is disputed by many mainstream scientists.
"In other words, he 'buys' his 'carbon offsets' from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself," Hobbs writes. "To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy 'carbon offsets' through Generation Investment Management – he buys stocks."
As WND reported, Gore, whose film warning of a coming cataclysm due to man-made "global warming" won two Oscars, has a mansion in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville that consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, citing data from the Nashville Electric Service.
The think tanks says since the release of Gore's film, the former presidential candidate's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kilowatt-hours per month in 2005, to 18,400 per month in 2006. |
How dare him.
Investing in, and then patronizing a company.
How can he live with himself? |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
I like how they just ignore all the statements against their position but demand each and every thought of theirs get answered.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Hippiecrites. |
You're right, Mike. I didn't "respond" to any of your original post...... I mean it's not like your sources were exposed as liars or anything!
Just keep on truckin', idiot! |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Quote: Originally posted by zimmie
Poor AB....another day getting schooled here...you'd think he'd learn...but that beanie cap of his never seems to fit |
Hey, it's "secret agent" zimmie!
Just what this thread needs! |
|
|
| Psychomike |
| I do not believe the Democrats and the government should be involved in this study at all. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
I do not believe the Democrats and the government should be involved in this study at all. |
No, they should sit back and allow the Bush White House to hire Oil company shills to rewrite EPA reports.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Psychomike |
Bush has already given in to you guys.
yet you still hate him.
go figure. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
Bush has already given in to you guys.
yet you still hate him.
go figure. |
I don't hate him.
Don't even know him.
I happen to think he's an incredibly shitty president, and a sorry excuse for a man, but I don't hate him.
I do hate you, though. :) |
|
|
| Psychomike |
Perhaps I can offer a medical explanation for why Al Gore simply doesn't feel that he should be judged by standards of behavior applicable to everyone else. On the basis of his actions and writings over many years my guess is that Mr. Gore suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
OH HELL YEAH! This also explains his followers acting like he is a cult leader and those that question him must be bullied and attacked!
But there's more:
The latest Al Gore flap concerns the extravagant electricity and natural gas consumption at the former vice president's mansion in Nashville. Last year, electricity consumption there--one of several homes owned by Gore--was more than 20 times that of the average American household.
As many pundits have noted, this appears to be yet another example of hypocrisy on the part of Gore, who has plenty to say to everyone else about energy conservation.
Recall, for example, his impassioned address to the Democratic National Convention in 1996 when he vowed to fight the tobacco industry to his last breath because 12 years earlier his sister had died from lung cancer. In 1988, however, while campaigning for the nomination for president, Mr. Gore had been telling tobacco farmers (in a Southern accent much thicker than was ever heard from him in Washington) that he was practically one of them, that he had tenderly held the young plants in his own two hands, had their interests at heart, and so on.
Perhaps I can offer a medical explanation for why Al Gore simply doesn't feel that he should be judged by standards of behavior applicable to everyone else. On the basis of his actions and writings over many years my guess is that Mr. Gore suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
The criteria for this diagnosis, as described in the psychiatrist's bible, the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders," include a "pervasive pattern of grandiosity [in fantasy or behavior], need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts," as indicated by the following:
"A grandiose sense of self-importance [e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements]."
Mr. Gore regularly demonstrates his grandiosity. Who can forget his notorious claim that he had been instrumental in creating the Internet? But far more serious and complex are his delusions about issues of technology and environmentalism, such as his repeated endorsement of anti-technology tracts and criticism of technological advances while a congressman, senator and vice president. His writings generally place science and technology at odds with "the natural world" and, by inference, with the well-being and progress of mankind. More on this below.
- "Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty or ideal love; believes that he or she is `special' and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people [or institutions]."
These sorts of fantasies run riot in Mr. Gore's book "Earth in the Balance," in which he assumes that he, alone, has divined the solutions to the world's problems and the bold and dramatic measures that await the education and enlightenment of the public. When he was vice president, Mr. Gore and his staff of true believers attempted to purge the federal government of any dissension or challenge to his view of policy, in a way reminiscent of the worst paranoid excesses of the Nixon administration. Vexed by people who weren't sufficiently "special," Gore simply got rid of them.
- "Requires excessive admiration."
With the exception of the past six years, a politician for virtually his entire adult life who surrounded himself with sycophants--need one say more?
- "Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others ... shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes."
While a senator, Mr. Gore was notorious for his rudeness and insolence during hearings. A favorite trick--which I experienced first-hand--was to pose a question and as the witness began to answer, Gore would begin a whispered conversation with another committee member or a staffer. If the witness paused in order that the senator not miss the response, Mr. Gore would instruct him to continue, then resume his private conversation, leaving no ambiguity: Not only is your testimony unimportant, I won't even pay you the courtesy of pretending to listen to it. Gore's patronizing, apocalyptic and overwrought "Earth in the Balance" provides numerous illustrations of many of these diagnostic criteria, and thereby offers disturbing insights into its disturbed author. In it, Gore trashes the empirical nature of science for disconnecting man from nature. "But for the separation of science and religion," he laments, "we might not be pumping so much gaseous chemical waste into the atmosphere and threatening the destruction of the Earth's climate balance." But for the separation of science and religion, we would still be burdened with the notion that the sun and the planets revolve around the Earth. It is with good reason historians call the last epoch when religion dominated science the Dark Ages.
It gets worse. Throughout the book, Gore employs the metaphor that those who believe in technological advances are as sinister, and polluters are as evil, as the perpetrators of the World War II Holocaust. He accuses Americans of being dysfunctional because we've developed "an apparent obsession with inauthentic substitutes for direct experience with real life," such as "Astroturf, air conditioning and fluorescent lights ... Walkman and Watchman, entertainment cocoons, frozen food for the microwave oven," and so on. Makes you wonder why he bothered to create the Internet. People who suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder are tough to be around. They make terrible bosses, unbearable in-laws and insufferable neighbors. That's why I don't want Al Gore to be president--or to live next door to me.
----------
Henry I. Miller, a physician and fellow at the Hoover Institution, was a U.S. government official from 1977 to 1994.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ack=1&cset=true
Finally we can understand St. Jimmy, AssBoil and the like! |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
Perhaps I can offer a medical explanation for why Al Gore simply doesn't feel that he should be judged by standards of behavior applicable to everyone else. On the basis of his actions and writings over many years my guess is that Mr. Gore suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
OH HELL YEAH! This also explains his followers acting like he is a cult leader and those that question him must be bullied and attacked!
But there's more:
The latest Al Gore flap concerns the extravagant electricity and natural gas consumption at the former vice president's mansion in Nashville. Last year, electricity consumption there--one of several homes owned by Gore--was more than 20 times that of the average American household.
As many pundits have noted, this appears to be yet another example of hypocrisy on the part of Gore, who has plenty to say to everyone else about energy conservation.
Recall, for example, his impassioned address to the Democratic National Convention in 1996 when he vowed to fight the tobacco industry to his last breath because 12 years earlier his sister had died from lung cancer. In 1988, however, while campaigning for the nomination for president, Mr. Gore had been telling tobacco farmers (in a Southern accent much thicker than was ever heard from him in Washington) that he was practically one of them, that he had tenderly held the young plants in his own two hands, had their interests at heart, and so on.
Perhaps I can offer a medical explanation for why Al Gore simply doesn't feel that he should be judged by standards of behavior applicable to everyone else. On the basis of his actions and writings over many years my guess is that Mr. Gore suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
The criteria for this diagnosis, as described in the psychiatrist's bible, the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders," include a "pervasive pattern of grandiosity [in fantasy or behavior], need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts," as indicated by the following:
"A grandiose sense of self-importance [e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements]."
Mr. Gore regularly demonstrates his grandiosity. Who can forget his notorious claim that he had been instrumental in creating the Internet? But far more serious and complex are his delusions about issues of technology and environmentalism, such as his repeated endorsement of anti-technology tracts and criticism of technological advances while a congressman, senator and vice president. His writings generally place science and technology at odds with "the natural world" and, by inference, with the well-being and progress of mankind. More on this below.
- "Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty or ideal love; believes that he or she is `special' and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people [or institutions]."
These sorts of fantasies run riot in Mr. Gore's book "Earth in the Balance," in which he assumes that he, alone, has divined the solutions to the world's problems and the bold and dramatic measures that await the education and enlightenment of the public. When he was vice president, Mr. Gore and his staff of true believers attempted to purge the federal government of any dissension or challenge to his view of policy, in a way reminiscent of the worst paranoid excesses of the Nixon administration. Vexed by people who weren't sufficiently "special," Gore simply got rid of them.
- "Requires excessive admiration."
With the exception of the past six years, a politician for virtually his entire adult life who surrounded himself with sycophants--need one say more?
- "Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others ... shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes."
While a senator, Mr. Gore was notorious for his rudeness and insolence during hearings. A favorite trick--which I experienced first-hand--was to pose a question and as the witness began to answer, Gore would begin a whispered conversation with another committee member or a staffer. If the witness paused in order that the senator not miss the response, Mr. Gore would instruct him to continue, then resume his private conversation, leaving no ambiguity: Not only is your testimony unimportant, I won't even pay you the courtesy of pretending to listen to it. Gore's patronizing, apocalyptic and overwrought "Earth in the Balance" provides numerous illustrations of many of these diagnostic criteria, and thereby offers disturbing insights into its disturbed author. In it, Gore trashes the empirical nature of science for disconnecting man from nature. "But for the separation of science and religion," he laments, "we might not be pumping so much gaseous chemical waste into the atmosphere and threatening the destruction of the Earth's climate balance." But for the separation of science and religion, we would still be burdened with the notion that the sun and the planets revolve around the Earth. It is with good reason historians call the last epoch when religion dominated science the Dark Ages.
It gets worse. Throughout the book, Gore employs the metaphor that those who believe in technological advances are as sinister, and polluters are as evil, as the perpetrators of the World War II Holocaust. He accuses Americans of being dysfunctional because we've developed "an apparent obsession with inauthentic substitutes for direct experience with real life," such as "Astroturf, air conditioning and fluorescent lights ... Walkman and Watchman, entertainment cocoons, frozen food for the microwave oven," and so on. Makes you wonder why he bothered to create the Internet. People who suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder are tough to be around. They make terrible bosses, unbearable in-laws and insufferable neighbors. That's why I don't want Al Gore to be president--or to live next door to me.
----------
Henry I. Miller, a physician and fellow at the Hoover Institution, was a U.S. government official from 1977 to 1994.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...ack=1&cset=true
Finally we can understand St. Jimmy, AssBoil and the like! |
Yeah, umm, this "U.S. Government official" sounds completely objective. Especially when he repeats the internet lie yet again. Why doesn't he just take what's left of his credibility and shit on it?
Is this like when Bill Frist diagnosed Terry Schiavo by watching a videotape?
(BTW, for you history buffs out there, Frist was absolutely 100% wrong. He's really quite a doctor, and a comparable legislator.) |
|
|
| Psychomike |
| I wonder if the St Jimmys, Ass Boils and the like are the same ones that freak out about groups like the Scientologists, while ignoring the fact that their behavior is cultlike? |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
I wonder if the St Jimmys, Ass Boils and the like are the same ones that freak out about groups like the Scientologists, while ignoring the fact that their behavior is cultlike? |
What is this stick up your ass with scientology?
Who gives a fuck about it? I mean, besides you?
Did your old lady run off with one of those guys or something? |
|
|
| Psychomike |
Well judging the responses I got when I defended Scientology, loads of people care. You seem to think, as part of your narcissistic personality disorder, that if you don't no one else does either.
You fill a half page up with what could be summed up by LOL.
But at least now we know why. Seek help. |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
Well judging the responses I got when I defended Scientology, loads of people care. You seem to think, as part of your narcissistic personality disorder, that if you don't no one else does either.
You fill a half page up with what could be summed up by LOL.
But at least now we know why. Seek help. |
I filled up the half-page QUOTING YOU!!!!
That's classic. Thanks for the laugh. :D |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Still waiting for Mike to answer ANY of the questions he has been asked....
He is like a Jonestown meth addict, plowing ahead....... |
|
|
| Psychomike |
So Assboil says he doesn't have to answer me or NC Mikes posts, but we had better answer him. St Jimmy doesn't question what I mean by trusting corporations over government, and is so shocked by a view different than his he resorts to stupid laugh comments.
Ego maniacs, completely blind to what they are saying. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
So Assboil says he doesn't have to answer me or NC Mikes posts, but we had better answer him. St Jimmy doesn't question what I mean by trusting corporations over government, and is so shocked by a view different than his he resorts to stupid laugh comments.
Ego maniacs, completely blind to what they are saying. |
btw - trusting corporations OR gov't is an issue you might want to get looked into |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
So Assboil says he doesn't have to answer me or NC Mikes posts, but we had better answer him. St Jimmy doesn't question what I mean by trusting corporations over government, and is so shocked by a view different than his he resorts to stupid laugh comments.
Ego maniacs, completely blind to what they are saying. |
Hey, you made a funny.
Don't blame me.
Tell me something, mike - if you become unhappy with how your new corporate masters are running things, what course of action do you have? |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Hey, you made a funny.
Don't blame me.
Tell me something, mike - if you become unhappy with how your new corporate masters are running things, what course of action do you have? |
vote em out! oh..... |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
So Assboil says he doesn't have to answer me or NC Mikes posts, but we had better answer him. St Jimmy doesn't question what I mean by trusting corporations over government, and is so shocked by a view different than his he resorts to stupid laugh comments.
Ego maniacs, completely blind to what they are saying. |
Dear fuckface,
I know your brain is fried from years of self congratulatory behavior and drug abuse, but if you read your OWN thread you will see that I responded to your ORIGINAL post with facts that you have yet to address. And every attempt so far to get your silly ass to address them has been met with more of your schizophrenic babbling....
Please direct me to the post where you responded to my exposing of your sources, or kindly go fuck yourself with a garden weasel. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Tell me something, mike - if you become unhappy with how your new corporate masters are running things, what course of action do you have? |
*Flush*
:crapper:
"If you catch me, I'll give you a pot full of Bullshit!":
StoneTroll
LYING Member
Off His Rocker
Posting Frequency_______
Spamming Like a MoFo... |
|
|
| Psychomike |
I have the same course of action any consumer has.
I can get a different product.
DUH.
Imagine if instead of the state and Assboil and St Jimmy demanding you send a kid to the school near you- schools had to compete to get students?
I bet they would get rid of bad teachers and principals so fast your head would be spinning!
:beer: |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
[QUOTE=Fdubya247]"If you catch me, I'll give you a pot full of Bullshit!":
:D |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
I have the same course of action any consumer has.
I can get a different product.
DUH.
Imagine if instead of the state and Assboil and St Jimmy demanding you send a kid to the school near you- schools had to compete to get students?
I bet they would get rid of bad teachers and principals so fast your head would be spinning!
:beer: |
Understood.
It's because of the competition.
The same sort of competition that exists in say,..... the petroleum industry.
Because we all know that when gas at exxon gets too expensive for you, you can go to mobil, and get the cheap stuff, right?
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Psychomike |
| I only wish we had used Iraq to break OPEC..... sigh |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
I only wish we had used Iraq to break OPEC..... sigh |
Yes, the myriad of wasted opportunities in Iraq would just about fill the fucking Grand Canyon.
That has nothing to do with what we're discussing here, you psychopath.
Try to rub your remaining brain cells together and stay focused - what possible reasoning could you have for trusting a corporation any farther than you could throw it? |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Hey retardmike, they tried privatizing schools here in Philly and you know what they found?
Kids schooled in the private schools did no better on any subjects than kids from public schools.
So given that results are the same, I will choose not to send kids to corporations when THEIR only goal is to turn a profit.....
But I'm not suprised that YOU back it. The stamp of approval of you and NCMoron is the surest sign of failure for anything. |
|
|
| Psychomike |
They tried privatizing because around 40 schools had completely failed in teaching kids and were considered disasters.
They had failed because they were run by the government.
The Guv rushed thru a bill to privatize them, the union went insane, and after the first test results the unions declared the takeover a failure.
If it isn't fixed immediately - its a failure and should go back to the disaster mode it was?
Oh please.
Meanwhile in cities that have done this without the government rush, its been fine. |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Wow. That's a very complicated explanation for a simple concept.
The private schools did no better than public schools.
They studied it for years.
Any more excuses? |
|
|
| SaintJimmy |
Quote: Originally posted by Ass Boil
Wow. That's a very complicated explanation for a simple concept.
The private schools did no better than public schools.
They studied it for years.
Any more excuses? |
Maybe, just maybe, the problem lies with the overwhelming majority of parents who think that the school's job is to raise thier fucking children for them.
You think maybe that could be it? |
|
|
| Psychomike |
Danish scientist: Global warming is a myth
COPENHAGEN, Denmark, March 15 (UPI) -- A Danish scientist said the idea of a "global temperature" and global warming is more political than scientific.
University of Copenhagen Professor Bjarne Andresen has analyzed the topic in collaboration with Canadian Professors Christopher Essex from the University of Western Ontario and Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph.
It is generally assumed the Earth's atmosphere and oceans have grown warmer during the recent 50 years because of an upward trend in the so-called global temperature, which is the result of complex calculations and averaging of air temperature measurements taken around the world.
"It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth," said Andresen, an expert on thermodynamics. "A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate".
He says the currently used method of determining the global temperature -- and any conclusion drawn from it -- is more political than scientific.
The argument is presented in the Journal of Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Scienc...5-012154-7403r/ |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy
Maybe, just maybe, the problem lies with the overwhelming majority of parents who think that the school's job is to raise thier fucking children for them.
You think maybe that could be it? |
AMEN.
Parents think that it is the school's responsibility to ensure their children are educated. I guarantee if an uneducated 25 year old who can't support themselves isn't going to be living at their 3rd grade teacher's house.
I spent a few years working as a teachers aid in LAUSD. One inner-city middle school and one elementary magnet school, so I've seen both extremes.
At back to school night, a lot more parents at the magnet school. Barely any at the inner city school. |
|
|
| Psychomike |
A while back a pal of mine was telling me that Catholics no longer fought science and I was pleasently surprised.
Two days ago I was on the el and sat next to a woman reading a Catholic Psychology book! I was stunned and started glancing at the cover.
It said PSYCHOLOGY FOR THE CATHOLIC. On the back was written, " How you can help people according to God's Plan".
WHAT!
I mention this because as you know I think liberalism no longer exists as a political stance, but has become a religion.
I am a pagan and as one know that religious people like to attack, destroy and misuse Science as a matter of course. I think it is really important for pagans to protect science and scientists when liberals come knocking.
Just as people sat on rooftops waiting for the government to come save them during Katrina, Johnson Rod, as the water rose and swept them away, people have been trained to "just let the government do it" when it comes to education.
We are reaping what we have sown. Sad to say. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by johnsonrod
AMEN.
Parents think that it is the school's responsibility to ensure their children are educated. I guarantee if an uneducated 25 year old who can't support themselves isn't going to be living at their 3rd grade teacher's house.
I spent a few years working as a teachers aid in LAUSD. One inner-city middle school and one elementary magnet school, so I've seen both extremes.
At back to school night, a lot more parents at the magnet school. Barely any at the inner city school. |
:bigclap:
I'm tired of those parents who show up at the school to have a 'meeting' with the teacher to scream at them that their kid got a D or an F in class, and how come the teacher doesn't slow the class down a bit so their kid can learn....
Fucking rediculous... kids like this back in the 50's were placed in "SPECIAL" Classes and forced to ride the "short bus".....
Now we pass these idiot children through the system and let them out into the workforce as educated, because their parents cottled them their whole life
And eventually they come on this board an act like morons *COUGH*DUDE-HERE*COUGH* |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
:bigclap:
I'm tired of those parents who show up at the school to have a 'meeting' with the teacher to scream at them that their kid got a D or an F in class, and how come the teacher doesn't slow the class down a bit so their kid can learn....
Fucking rediculous... kids like this back in the 50's were placed in "SPECIAL" Classes and forced to ride the "short bus".....
Now we pass these idiot children through the system and let them out into the workforce as educated, because their parents cottled them their whole life
And eventually they come on this board an act like morons *COUGH*DUDE-HERE*COUGH* |
Yeah, my wife is a teacher and she has those meetings with those parents all the time.
My Wife: Your child is failing 8th grade history
Parent: You are not doing your job.
Wife: Your child is in 8th grade and cannot read a word beyond two syllables. That is functional illiteracy. If you cant read the textbook, it is hard to do well in any subject.
Parent: This is the first I've heard of this!!!!!!!! Its not true LALALALALALALALA
And so it goes. |
|
|
| Psychomike |
One of my girlfriends teaches special kids. This year they mixed them in with the regular kids as part of a new program.
The kids are getting the shit beat out of them everyday.
Sometimes the schools fail, too. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
One of my girlfriends teaches special kids. This year they mixed them in with the regular kids as part of a new program.
The kids are getting the shit beat out of them everyday.
Sometimes the schools fail, too. |
Hey, you don't need to tell me, I had an actual racist teacher in 6th grade....
Schools aren't completely faultless... but Parents will do whatever it takes to shirk their responsibility on other people when at all possible these days...
and it's fucking disgusting... no one takes responsibility for their kids... well, ok not NO ONE but you get what I'm saying |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
One of my girlfriends teaches special kids. This year they mixed them in with the regular kids as part of a new program.
The kids are getting the shit beat out of them everyday.
Sometimes the schools fail, too. |
Oh yeah, you bet. Social promotion and a lack of discipline on the bad apples is terrible on the kids as well.
There should be no such thing as an illiterate 8th grader passing any subject. Everybody just passes the buck now.
My wife has been ordered by the principal on several occasions to give minimum passing grades to students that were failing in the class miserably, like 30% type failing.
It is a disgrace. People need to ask why we need more and more money per student just so they can perform like kids did 30 years ago. |
|
|
| Oz |
| anyone else getting the feeling that anyone that considers themselves a scientist is piping up on this to get in the paper? seems like there is nobody they won't publish |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Hey, you don't need to tell me, I had an actual racist teacher in 6th grade....
Schools aren't completely faultless... but Parents will do whatever it takes to shirk their responsibility on other people when at all possible these days...
and it's fucking disgusting... no one takes responsibility for their kids... well, ok not NO ONE but you get what I'm saying |
I have a personal theory on this. Just a conclusion I keep coming to. Let me know what you think.
In a way you can blame American culture.
This is a country where a high school dropout, as long as they have ambition and/or talent in something, say plumbing or electric wiring, can make a six figure income. So, you dont necessarily have to be educated past a certain point to be moderately successful.
Maybe this is also contributing to the problem. I dont know. Maybe that theory is full of shit.
Your thoughts? |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by johnsonrod
I have a personal theory on this. Just a conclusion I keep coming to. Let me know what you think.
In a way you can blame American culture.
This is a country where a high school dropout, as long as they have ambition and/or talent in something, say plumbing or electric wiring, can make a six figure income. So, you dont necessarily have to be educated past a certain point to be moderately successful.
Maybe this is also contributing to the problem. I dont know. Maybe that theory is full of shit.
Your thoughts? |
isn't the idea to become successful no matter what the odds? so what if they drop out and learn a trade? :scratch: |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by johnsonrod
I have a personal theory on this. Just a conclusion I keep coming to. Let me know what you think.
In a way you can blame American culture.
This is a country where a high school dropout, as long as they have ambition and/or talent in something, say plumbing or electric wiring, can make a six figure income. So, you dont necessarily have to be educated past a certain point to be moderately successful.
Maybe this is also contributing to the problem. I dont know. Maybe that theory is full of shit.
Your thoughts? |
I think the Baby Boomers were lazy people... and they grew up during an era of lots of promiscuous sex and drugs. They didn't have a lot of ambition growing up and that lack of ambition has carried into the Generation X era. Now the Gen X'ers are listening to grunge music and growing up with parents who barely make it by in their perspective jobs, lots of the baby boomers are in professional business type jobs or trade jobs such as you mentioned. The Gen X'ers are now growing up after watching years of MTV and smoking pot and having kids of their own, the Gen Y'ers don't really have a chance.
I think the real issue is that everyone is just fucking lazy, in an age where Day Care costs a fucking arm and a leg these days, it's easier to 'pass the buck' as you say to the Day Care provider or the School Teacher for why their kids are fucking up.
As a Generation X'er, in my younger years, I blamed my parents for not letting me do things and such. Now that I am grown up, I realize my parents did everything they could to give me and my sister the best life we could have. I'm finding issues finding my own ambition in life and trying to find my own career choice, and rather than blame my parents, I can honestly say it's ALL my fault. |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
isn't the idea to become successful no matter what the odds? so what if they drop out and learn a trade? :scratch: |
To a point yes. But:
1. As a taxpayer, that makes me a consumer of that product(education). It should be a decent product.
2. I have no problem with them learning a trade rather than reading Shakespeare. We should fund trades more aggresively.
Europe does this. It works there. Some places tried it here right after WW2. Lets just say that many many parents had a problem with their child being diagnosed with blue-collar-idis and diverted from traditional study due to a score on an aptitude test at age 14.
Complex issue. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
isn't the idea to become successful no matter what the odds? so what if they drop out and learn a trade? :scratch: |
Sure it is... but we're just having a discussion on why people today get 'pushed' through our school system....
Our school system is failing us... Our nation is one of the lower educated nations in the world..... |
|
|
| johnsonrod |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Sure it is... but we're just having a discussion on why people today get 'pushed' through our school system....
Our school system is failing us... Our nation is one of the lower educated nations in the world..... |
Yup. We are a joke compared to almost if not all other industrialised nation in almost every subject. |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Sure it is... but we're just having a discussion on why people today get 'pushed' through our school system....
Our school system is failing us... Our nation is one of the lower educated nations in the world..... |
ah I see, then I don't care as much - carry on ;) |
|
|
| Psychomike |
I think a 30% failure rate- and those kids passing- is horrible.
State run schools seem to be in more trouble than I thought.
They can't fire the bad teachers because of the unions. Principals have to push passing the students- so they don't get fired.
Which brings us back to global warming. As soon as these issues become political- EVERYONE SEEMS TO SUFFER. |
|
|
| Ass Boil |
Quote: Originally posted by Psychomike
One of my girlfriends teaches special kids. This year they mixed them in with the regular kids as part of a new program.
The kids are getting the shit beat out of them everyday.
Sometimes the schools fail, too. |
Whatever, Cassanova. I find it hard to believe anyone can spend 30 consecutive seconds in your presence without setting up a barbecue in their bathroom....
Anyone who feels they need to constantly tell everyone how great they are is only trying to convince themself. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
ah I see, then I don't care as much - carry on ;) |
You should care... not caring is how our kids get fucked in school. I hope for your sake you take an active role in your kid's lives. I thank my parents for doing it as much as they did, today. |
|
|
|
|
|
