First, I must admit Al Gore is a genius. He creates a crisis that will have 2 outcomes which both make him look like a hero. If the world changes as he predicts, Al was the alarmist who informed the world of the problem. If the world does not go through the problems he predicts, he gets credit for helping put the world back on track with his policy changes. In addition, he predicts unpredictable weather patterns during this climate change, giving him credit for Mother Nature's fury. Genius!
The flaw in his theory is the composition of greenhouse gases. The largest component of the greenhouse gases is water vapor. In fact, the CO2 Al Gore claims to be the major factor to global warming is less than 10% and man is only responsible for less than 10% of total CO2 in the atmosphere so that makes man responsible for less than 1% of the total greenhouse gases. Hardly enough to change the climate of the earth. He tells us 1998 was the hottest year in history and the CO2 levels were high. You know what else happened in 1998, El Nino. This weather phenomena caused a lot of precipitation from a lot of water vapor, excess greenhouse gases and a hot globe.
Most of the "Inconvenient Truth" dealt with the suggestive consequences of global warming not proving man is responsible, effectively scaring people. The time the movie did deal with the proving it used faulty data or results from inaccurate cause & effect. When he shows the correlation between CO2 levels and the earth temperature it is very convincing until you realize rising CO2 levels follow the rise in temperatures, meaning the change in the climate causes the rise in CO2 and not vise-versa. Bottom line, although there are signs the earth's surface is heating, the data does not support the conclusion that man is the cause.
Once an idea is placed in one's mind everything then appears to support the hypothesis often ignoring other obvious facts. This week it has been reported that the North Pole has a great chance of totally melting. Obviously Al Gore's global warming has caused this phenom, or did it? I do not know the answer for sure but just last week it was reported (not by the major networks) that volcanic activity has been reported below the North Pole. All that molten lava pouring into the ocean below the pole could not be causing the pole to melt. Right or wrong, it did not support the popular global warming so it did not make the headlines.
It has always been said that you can tell the validity of an argument by watching the conviction of the participants. Al Gore has won a Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for championing global warming but do his actions back up his words. Since his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" his carbon footprint has gone up. So he thinks we all need to become less dependent on fossil fuels while he uses more. The only conviction Al Gore has on the subject is his bank account which has benefited from his global warming campaign.
If you are interested in seeing the other side of "The Inconvenient Truth" I suggest you watch the movie "Global Warming or Global Governance?". I have attached a link to ots website. http://www.globalwarmingglobalgovernance.com/ I found a copy on Ebay for a couple of dollars.
Posts
