Big Oil Launches Attack On Al Gore
Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth.
Who is CEI? The Washington Post explains:
The Competitive Enterprise Institute, which widely publicizes its belief that the earth is not warming cataclysmically because of the burning of coal and oil, says Exxon Mobil Corp. is a “major donor” largely as a result of its effort to push that position.
CEI also gets funding from other oil companies through the American Petroleum Institute.
Exxon documents reveal the company gave $270,000 to CEI in 2004 alone. $180,000 of that was earmarked for “global climate change and global climate change outreach.†Exxon has contributed over $1.6 million to CEI since 1998.
CEI’s general counsel Sam Kazman said, “I think what attracted [Exxon] to us was our position on global warming.” CEI’s position? The Institute believes the dangers of global warming are akin “to that of ‘an alien invasion.’â€
Exxon’s spokesperson Tom Cirigliano has explained why the company is so dedicated to funding CEI’s pushback on global warming:
We want to support organizations that are trying to broaden the debate. … There is this whole issue that no one should question the science of global climate change that is ludicrous. That’s the kind of dark-ages thinking that gets you in a lot of trouble.
The science is not questioned because the science behind global warming is indisputable. Science Magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus that the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program concluded that humans are driving the warming trend through greenhouse gas emissions. And the EPA has said that the recent warming trend “is real and has been particularly strong within the past 20 years…due mostly to human activities.”
For the oil industry, Al Gore’s film exposing the truth is perceived as a threat, and they have no shortage of funds to try to distort it.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Go Al .
May 17th, 2006 at 12:53 pmThe sad reality is that in the US, a group like CEI has as much influence as it does.
The scientific community has overwhelmingly reached a consensus on global warming. CEI might as well be spewing that the Earth is flat.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:53 pmGlobal warming exists. There’s not much argument about that. The only real discussion left is wondering whether the cause is from burning fossil fuels, or the emissions from the planet’s inhabitants (which has increased by one-third in the past 20 years).
In any case, there’s a whole lot more free energy on the surface of the planet in the past, and it’s humanity’s fault.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:54 pmThey’ve GOT to get these ads in BEFORE hurricane season starts. After the U.S. is drilled by…say…4 Cat 4s this year, and the ocean approaches temps in the mid to upper 80s in the Gulf, they’d look like fools calling this “alarmist”.
Quick Citgo…you only have a few weeks left!
May 17th, 2006 at 12:56 pmThis is really good news. They are going to get more attention on this topic by spending this kind of money on such obviously self-serving PR. Gore’s message, if not Gore himself, will get heard a lot more.
It is amazing the ability of these people to deny the objective facts. It is almost as if they don’t have to live on the planet too.
May 17th, 2006 at 12:57 pmObviously, there’s truth to Gore’s movie. The oil companies are afraid of being exposed for the corrupt pieces of shit they are.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmHaha Big Oil vs. Al Gore?
Guess which is more hated nowadays?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:03 pmAmericans hate “big oil”. They should understand this and that any attack on Al Gore will produce more hatred of “big oil”.
GO FOR IT YOU “BIG OIL” ASS WIPES
May 17th, 2006 at 1:06 pmF*CK EXXON! Reparations still have not been made to the people from the VALDEZ DISASTER. The UW is helping them sue for at 2 million. the asshole ceo that just stepped down got 450 million severance. BOYCOTT EXXON!!!!!!!!!! anyway you can.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:07 pmThey should be scared. Michael Shermer who is Scientific American’s official “SKEPTIC” and writes a column under that title said he was converted by Al Gore’s movie into an environment activist. It’s in the latest issue (not on the website yet).
He had previously done a conference presentation based on info from one of the global-warming skeptics so this is BIG news and proves that the movie demonstrates quite convincingly the seriousness of the problem.
People seeing this are going to be transformed. This is great news (I haven’t seen it myself, but now I’m eager to go)
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmFolks, you have to check the ads out at
http://streams.cei.org/
You will fall out of your chair laughing. Here’s a quote: “Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution, we call it life!”
They also show some poor sap riding his bike in the snow, as though that’s what we’re trying to force everyone to do. Unreal.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmThis is the exact same tactic that has been used with teaching Intelligent Design in schools.
1. Create a scientific sounding front group.
2. Act like there’s a controversy, which creates a controversy to talk about (very clever).
3. Exploit legitimate scientific debate to enforce the belief that there’s a controversy.
4. Treat established scientifc knowledge as some sort of elitist ivory tower which refuses to accept new ideas, even if those new ideas fail the scientific tests.
The goal of this is to simply put enough doubt in the public’s mind about global warming to enable them to achieve their business goals. Reality doesn’t matter.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:08 pmIf ExxonMobil is so sure that man-made CO2 emission has nothing to do with global warming why can you find this on their website?
FAIRFAX, Va.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–May 16, 2006–ExxonMobil today announced that it has joined the SmartWay Transport(R) Partnership, a voluntary collaboration between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the freight industry designed to increase energy efficiency while significantly reducing emissions that may result in air pollution.
ExxonMobil’s participation in the Carrier category will contribute to the Partnership’s goal of reducing carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide and particulate emissions by improving the environmental performance of freight operations. ExxonMobil operates a fleet of 150 company-owned tanker trucks that deliver gasoline products to many of its Exxon- and Mobil-branded service stations across the U.S.
ExxonMobil Joins U.S. EPA SmartWay Transport(R) Partnership
Why on Earth do they have a goal of reducing carbon dioxide?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:10 pmTypical left-wing speech suppression. If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like, you attack the money to suppress the message. If a rich politician pays for a speech you do like, you ignore the money and embrace the message.
The important point is not who paid, or how muchj. It is which message is true. So far, there is no evidence of anything other than cyclical warming and cooling, and no proof that regulating Amercian greenhouse emissions will have any measurable effect on global climate trends. As far as I’m concerned, Gore’s film is mainly a marketing tool for his new book. Like his past book and his speeches, there is a lot of chicken little nonsense. So why should those who disagree remain silent?
The antidote for offensive speech is more speech - not suppression or paranoid ad hominems.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:12 pmWhat gas stations use Exxon gas?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:12 pmCounter the bastards at CEI by visiting this website
http://climatecrisis.net/seethetruth
See the movie, spread the word and prove CEI wrong. If the movie is a success they will be really really mad and desperate.
So don’t forget to tell everyone you know they have to watch this movie.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:14 pmBlue State Red — RAPTURER - go already would you please?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:15 pmWell, we know who to run for President. The guy they routinely smear is the guy who will NOT be their puppet. No one owns Gore anymore.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:15 pm[…] I wonder why. Do you suppose it’s because he has so much more credibility than Bubble Boy? Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) will unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†The ad, which will be aired in more than a dozen cities across the country, is being released just a week before the May 24th opening (in LA and NYC) of Al Gore’s new movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth. […]
May 17th, 2006 at 1:19 pmBlue State Red,
I don’t think anyone is calling for the suppression of this kind of advertising. We’re just noting that it’s not truthful.
There’s a lot of evidence that this is not cyclical. The scientific community did not reach the consensus it did based on “no evidence”. Think about it.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:19 pmWhat gas stations use Exxon gas?
Not the convenience stores 711 - they sell CITGO gas!!!!1
May 17th, 2006 at 1:22 pmI will be very interested to see this astroturf group’s non-anthropogenic model that accounts for observed climate change over the last two decades.
There isn’t one.
Like evolution, there is no controversy among the scientists. It’s all a bunch of advertising used to manufacture the APPEARANCE of a controversy.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:24 pm.
Typical left-wing speech suppression. If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like …
Yes, I don’t “like” lies. True. Unlike drooling superstitious freaks like you, I don’t need to hide in someone else’s lies.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:26 pm.
…again, which gas stations use Exxon gas???
May 17th, 2006 at 1:30 pmBlue State Red,
The message of CEI is hogwash. Even if it was not funded by ExxonMobil it would still be hogwash because it lacks any scientific truth.
The movie is a promotion for the book?
Idiot. The movie will bring much more money than the book.
And the book will be out earlier than most theaters would be screening the movie. so why don’t you say that the book is the promotion for the movie?
Chicken little? You confuse Gore with Bush, buddy.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:33 pm#14 - The antidote for offensive speech is more speech - not suppression or paranoid ad hominems.
Comment by Blue State Red
No shit, Sherlock. You’re commenting here, aren’t you?
Faiz posted this item to let us know about the latest news. No one is attempting to suppress any speech. Using your own language — this think tank is paying to try to suppress the message in Al Gore’s movie. We just get to respond to it. It’s the American way!
May 17th, 2006 at 1:40 pmand I would suppose the storms in New England will make people THINK again!
in their words “storms of biblical proportions”
May 17th, 2006 at 1:40 pmhas anyone gone to the site and seen these, can you say may day?
we should welcome these debates, because the ads are a joke…they are bring this fight to the forefront?
sweet, lets meet ‘em head on!
just like ther practicallity of creationism is being felt within schools, do we really want to put truthiness ahead of truth…thats a debate that should be met everyday
May 17th, 2006 at 1:44 pmI know global warming exists. It’s been 90+ degrees for the last 4 days, and I live in northern Idaho — this is May for christ’s sake! We haven’t had a decent winter in several years. I keep meaning to buy a new winter coat, but, oh yeah, we haven’t had a decent winter in years! I believe in the science, who needs science to look out your window?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:44 pm“It’s difficult to get a man to understand something when his SALARY depends upon his NOT UNDERSTANDING IT.”
-Upton Sinclair
From the intro on the movie’s web site.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:45 pmI so wish the deniers of global warming would pay attention to the glaciers and the speed at which they are melting. More than 400 polar bears drowned not too long ago. They can swim, but not 50 miles. I wish they would also pay attention to the death of the coral reefs. Coral reefs take hundreds of years to grow…and they are being destroyed at a drastic rate. If they don’t notice it in their own homes, that the climates are just not the same, well I would blame them for not PAYING ATTENTION. and damn them for not caring about this planet. They truly believe there is some Eden somewhere “up there”. I feel so sorry from them that they do NOT RECOGNIZE EDEN RIGHT HERE ON EARTH!
and it would be very arrogant for us to think we can control this planet, it will purge humanity first and morph into something else. Perhaps the cockroaches and rats shall inherit the earth.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:48 pmto that moron redneck in that blue state:
CEI is the same group which denounced Bush for using “dangerous rhetoric”
when he said “American is addicted to oil.”
Who denounced Bush’s proposal for higher fuel economy standards
Who denounced Bush for “making cheap political points about high gas”
and not “promoting policies that will lead to more domestic oil production and lower prices”
So careful when you kiss their collective ass.
If you want ot have some fun watch their ads here
I couldn’t stop laughing while watching them. They are not only stupid but cheesy, sentimental and weak-kneed.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:49 pmZookeeper, Wayne and I know that global warming exists, since our neck of the woods has tornadoes every summer - several years ago a tornado hit the development that Wayne and I both grew up in, near my parents’ house–scary shit! That was the first time our area had gotten hit in about 30 years. Now every time there’s a thunderstorm, it seems, we get tornado watches - in southeastern NY! That was never tornado alley!
May 17th, 2006 at 1:51 pmFunny that supporters of the administration in general so often bring up the now somewhat stale “chicken-little” buzz-phrase.
In Republican world, where everything is topsy-turvy, there must therefore be an inverse chicken-little scenario, where Republican chicken-little is running round the farmyard trying to persuade the animals that the sky is not falling and that it is in the best condition it’s ever been in, even though he has bits of broken, fallen sky sticking out of his face.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:52 pm2 comments:
1. Alan is right (#5). The CEI and its ilk will only self-destruct by spewing the same lies over and over, bringing attention to the truth of global warming.
2. I have a feeling that Blue State Red gets paid by Corporate Oil slimeballs to troll here - probably some amount for every post responding to the troll’s messages of distraction. So I’d say, tag trolls but dont feed them. The attack by CEI proves they know that they are vulnerable. The trolls reinforce the correctness of our position and the vulnerability of theirs when they come here and say demonstrably ridiculous things. First they ridicule, then they fight, then we win.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:53 pm#14 - “If a think tank or industry group pays for speech you don’t like, you attack the money to suppress the message. If a rich politician pays for a speech you do like, you ignore the money and embrace the message.”
You beat me to it! That’s typical right-wing tactics to a “T”.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:54 pmWill Big Oil ever make up its mind? From pushing the Anti-Global Warming Petition in 2000 (do not misconstrue the petition name: this collection of wingnuts from the CEI, AAPG, et al. was signing an anti-Kyoto-treaty, we-don’t-believe-in-global-warming, we-hate-Al-Gore petition), we recently were treated to the “new” philosophy of the AAPG, elucidated by Director Rick Fritz, in the April 2006 issue of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Explorer,:
May 17th, 2006 at 1:56 pmI like how the REVERSED the footage of a massive glaciar falling into the water to prove that other studied are coming up with opposite findings. Do they think that revsersed image helps ANYONE believe their theory?
Of course, they only list TWO scientific studies that support their argument. Funny that the studies that support the global warming theory FAR OUTNUMBER that. We all know that if there are more headlines, you place them all in the frame at the same time, political advertisements do it all the time. So they can’t use the argument that they only had 30 seconds. And anyways, they could trim down a lot of the BS video footage of people on their bikes in the snow if they really needed more time to explaine their side.
Let us also note that both studies are from the same magazine, and both from within only a four month period.
I’ll end this comment with one more link for everyone to look over: Union Of Concerned Scientists On Global Warming
May 17th, 2006 at 1:57 pmAlso… they say we depend on fules that emmit CO2 “to grow our food, move our children, light up our lives.” It is WELL KNOWN that there are alternate sources of energy out there which could be used to power all of that. It’s also interesting to note that the visuals they choose for “light up our lives” is Times Square in NYC. Do we REALLY need all those lights in TImes Square? Of course not. I would have no problem with seeing less, of those rediculous signs.
Yes, C02 is what we breathe out. And yes, it’s what trees turn into oxygyn again. But we are overpowering those trees which create oxygyn from C02. We don’t have enough trees to compinsate for how much C02 is being spewed out!
Environmentalists wouldn’t push for alternate sources of energy if we didn’t think the current situation is hurting us, and enviornmentalists wouldn’t push if they didn’t think alternate sources of energy were possible. They ARE possible, and they have been proven to work.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:02 pm#33 - Jane, that’s amazing, I never would have thought of tornadoes in NY state. Several years ago there was a tornado right on the Clearwater River, and it took out a huge patch of pine trees. It took quite a while to figure out what had actually happened since we’d never had one before. Tornados scare the crap out of me.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:08 pm#39, newname, do you remember when Ronald Reagan stated that ‘trees cause air pollution?!
May 17th, 2006 at 2:09 pm#24 - which stations use Exxon? That’s a multilayered question. The petroleum supply chain is driven by two open spot markets - the one for crude oil and the one for gasoline and other derviatives. The fact is you don’t know whose hands the stuff you pump has been through - even Citgo’s could have come from Exxon.
Simple message - buy from Citgo if you want to avoid giving money to big oil. ALL the profits from Citgo’s operations go back to Venezuela to their national oil company, which in turn goes to the Venezuelan government, which in turn finances any number of social programs for the poor in LA. QED. Search Citgos website for a list of stations near you. Your other choice is to get a bike.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:10 pmeven Citgo’s could have come from Exxon.
Citgo comes from Venezuala (the only reason the US has any interest at all), and Venezuela does not belong to OPEC.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:14 pmWay to Go Al!
#42 thats is what I’m trying to get people to do Buy Citgo Screw Big Facist Oil Companies and the bush cabal
May 17th, 2006 at 2:15 pmCitgo’s profits go to Venezuela. Period. Exxon doesn’t see a dime. This argument has already been debunked.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:17 pmGO GORE!!!!!!! yeah baby!!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 2:18 pmcan you say LANDLSIDE!!!!!?????
May 17th, 2006 at 2:20 pmThis (the rebuttal) is EASY! All president Gore has to do is: Show the before and after picture that he showed on SNL (forget location at the moment).
Then, he says, “let me say that again” and shows the before and after picture again. Fade to black with him saying, “Once more now, for those suffering from myopia, the incredibly obtuse, or all you gluttonous mega oil corporations…
May 17th, 2006 at 2:21 pm#43, nope - Citgo stations buy gasoline on the spot market - they get a decent cut from the Citgo refining operation which refines MOSTLY Venezuelan crude (I say mostly because Venezuelan crude is heavy and sulphury, and not all refineries can handle it). Citgo refineries also buy crude from the spot market.
So at those two points on the chain, the oil or gasoline could be someone elses. However that is not important, the profits from you buying gasoline from a Citgo station (which is all you can affect here anyway), goes to Venezuela - finito Benito.
Oh, and Venezuela is a member of OPEC.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:23 pmHoly crap, CO2 has a press agent? Pretty impressive for a simple gas.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:24 pm“The mainstream media has posed the most serious impediment to Americans and politicians understanding the scientific consensus and knowledge of global warming, Gore said.
A striking slide in the film showed that 0% of a large sample of peer-reviewed scientific studies disputed global warming or its man-made, or anthropogenic, causes. Meanwhile, 53% of media accounts portrayed global warming as a debated issue, according to one study cited in the film.”
Gore May Run Again in 2008 for US President, Warns of Global Warming
May 17th, 2006 at 2:25 pmAs I’m sitting around my wood fire talking with grandkids by candlelight, I picture myself shrugging my shoulders and saying, “Heck, I told everyone I knew we were screwing up, I cut my car mileage down by 75%, upgraded as much as I could around my house, including adding rainwater catches etc etc”. And my grandkids just jump up and yell: “But Grandad, you knew the glaciers were going, you knew you couldn’t go outside in the sun for more than 15 mins without sunscreen, you knew you’d never see a gallon of gas below $3 again - WTF were you thinking? Thanks a lot - hope you enjoyed your party on the Titanic - wish we knew what icebergs looked like though”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:30 pm[…] Read more Attacks […]
May 17th, 2006 at 2:30 pmGlobal warming is in direct relation to human activity.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:33 pmFast food consumption results in production of “farts”…do I need to say more ?
No Humans = No Farts = No global warming.
:)
And “Tell us again how far you could drive in a day? Could you really just go anywhere there was a road?”
And “So you flew on a plane almost every week? Wow”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:33 pmI sailed the seven seas for 35 years, 1945-1998 with some breaks for electronics teaching. In that time, I have seen MASSIVE CHANGES IN THE SIZE AND FEROCITY OF STORMS AND HURRICANES. tHIS IS NO ABERRATION, OR SPIKE. iT IS A TREND. oNE OF THOSE JUNK SCIENTISTS SHILLING FOR BIG OIL STATED THAT THE OCEAN TEMP A/2 MILE DEEP HAD NOT CHANGED. hOW CONVENIENTLY HE FAILS TO NOTE THAT HURRICANES DERIVE THEIR MASSIVE ENERGY FROM THE SURFACE WHICH HAS WARMED ONE DEG f IN RECENT YEARS. wAIT UNTIL THIS HURRICANE STARTS! i PREDICT 5 TO 6 VERY STRONG ONES, AND 4 WILKL HIT THE STATES CAUSING MASSIVE DAMAGE EXCEDDING kATRINA. rEMEMBER, YOU SAW IT HERE.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:41 pmLonesome Chuck, caps lock is usually on the left of your keyboard - I think its stuck.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pmRegarding the influence of movies to our lives, it seems to me that after all the media hype, controversy and debate over Michael Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11″, little changed in the American body politic. George Bush went on to “win” another term as President.
Only now, when his “shock and awe” war is doing to us what he promised to do to them, has the public turned against him to some degree. Which to me only proves that Americans care more about winning and losing than about right and wrong.
For years now, an increasing number of scientists have been sounding the alarm about global warming. Yet it was only since gas prices have gone up that sales for gas-guzzlers pushed on the world by the the auto industry have begun to slide.
Likewise, it will take more than Al Gore’s movie to wake up Americans to the enormous threat this is to the world as we know it. Even then, if the Republicans stay in power, corporations and their paid stooges like the CEI will ignore the crisis until the Atlantic Ocean rises to the level of the Oval Office.
May 17th, 2006 at 2:42 pmI wonder how many of the posters above drive cars. In fact HAVE to drive cars, or eat the food thats delivered on 5 mpg trucks. The problem is astronomically bigger than the “asswipe” big oil companies vs Al Gore. What will we do when gas goes to $7 or $10/gal, Which it will? What will we eat when hamburger hits $15 a pound and california oranges are $5 each?
May 17th, 2006 at 2:50 pm#41 Talking about California, California Governators and trees… remember the answer to frequent summer fires, presented from someone right of the spectrum (don’t remember if was Bush, Schwarzenegger or some other lame duck)? Cut the trees.
Next summer? Landslides caused by rains and lack of trees’ roots…
May 17th, 2006 at 2:52 pm#59, Tim thou speakest sooth. Unless you are living the subsistence lifestyle - we’re all at it - eating supermarket food, driving lumps of metal about, lapping the city on the freeway and stopping to get a burger and fries every now and again. More from my future discussions with my grandchildren:
“What’s an orange Grandad?”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:54 pm“Can you remember what bananas taste like?”
The bastards cite two studies.
The first is Recent Ice-Sheet Growth in the Interior of Greenland by
Ola M. Johannessen , Kirill Khvorostovsky , Martin W. Miles , Leonid P. Bobylev
Submitted to Science on May 26, 2005
And they suggest that this study somehow proves that global warming is a hoax. Except that this study actually claims this:
“Efforts to measure changes in the Greenland Ice Sheet from field observations, aircraft and satellite remote sensing – such as altimeters that measure surface height – have improved our knowledge over the past decade. However, there is still no consensus assessment of the overall mass balance of the ice sheet. There is however evidence of melting and thinning in the coastal marginal areas in recent years, as well as indications that large Greenland outlet glaciers can surge, possibly in response to climate.”
http://www.bjerknes.uib.no/ pages.asp?kat=2&id=170&lang=2
Moreover Johanessen et al. did not measure all of the coastal ranges.
In the earlier Science paper, Johanessen et al. found increased snow accumulation on the top of the interior Greenland ice sheet between 1992 and 2003. Above 1500m a.s.l in much of the interior Greenland they estimated an increase of 6.4 ± 0.2 cm/year and below 1500m they observed a decreasing trend of -2.0 ± 0.9 cm/year. Hence, growth in the interior parts and a thinning of the ice nearer the edges. However, Johane
ssen et al. were not able to measure all of the coastal ranges. Indeed, the thinning of the margins and growth in the interior Greenland is an expected response to increased temperatures and more precipitation in a warmer climate. These results present no contradiction to the accelerated sliding near the coasts, but both will affect the ice/snow (fresh water) mass estimate. Whereas the finding of Rignot & Kanagaratnam suggests a larger sink of the frozen Greenland fresh water budget (the ice is dumped into the sea), the snow deposition in Greenland interiors is a source term (increases the amount of frozen fresh water). It does not matter for the general sea level in which form the water exists (liguid or solid/frozen) when it is discharged into the sea: The same mass of liquid water and immersed ice affect the water level equally (Archimede’s principle).
http://www.realclimate.org/ index.php/ archives/ 2006/ 03/ greenland-ice-and-other-glaciers/
I wonder why CEI neglected to mention this in their ad.
The second study is Snowfall-Driven Growth in East Antarctic Ice Sheet Mitigates Recent Sea-Level Rise by Curt H. Davis, Yonghong Li, Joseph R. McConnell, Markus M. Frey, Edward Hanna
Science 24 June 2005
But again this does not deny that global warming leads to rising sea levels.
Rather it says “a gain of this magnitude is enough to slow sea-level rise by
0.12 ± 0.02 millimeters per year.”
Which is still not good.
But if CEI likes Science so much why didn’t they show this study in their ad?
Seasonality and Increasing Frequency of Greenland Glacial Earthquakes Göran Ekström, Meredith Nettles, Victor C. Tsai
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Accelerated Sea-Level Rise from West Antarctica
R. Thomas, E. Rignot, G. Casassa, P. Kanagaratnam, C. Acuña, T. Akins, H. Brecher, E. Frederick,1P. Gogineni, W. Krabill, S. Manizade, H. Ramamoorthy, A. Rivera, R. Russell, J. Sonntag, R. Swift, J. Yungel, J. Zwally
Science 8 October 2004
or this
Paleoclimatic Evidence for Future Ice-Sheet Instability and Rapid Sea-Level Rise
Jonathan T. Overpeck, Bette L. Otto-Bliesner, Gifford H. Miller, Daniel R. Muhs, Richard B. Alley, Jeffrey T. Kiehl
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Measurements of Time-Variable Gravity Show Mass Loss in Antarctica Isabella Velicogna, and John Wahr
Science 24 March 2006
or this
Changes in the Velocity Structure of the Greenland Ice Sheet
May 17th, 2006 at 2:57 pmEric Rignot and Pannir Kanagaratnam
Science 17 February 2006
#60 reminds me of Jared Diamond’s “Collapse” - how advanced, cultured civilizations simply run right off the cliff of existence. Just what was the last man who cut down the last tree on Easter Island thinking? My guess: “I don’t give a crap, I’m going have a big fire and then I’m going to eat your mother - how’d you like that, Grog?”
May 17th, 2006 at 2:57 pm#63 And “I’m sure that the souls of the past kings that inhabit the mohays will grow more palm trees by next summer.”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:00 pmHand Al the Megaphone, and let’s march.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:03 pmBesides the greenhouse gases issue is the greater issue that oil is not a renewable source of energy!! some day it’s going to be all used up. then what? the repugs can call it ‘chicken little’ but i prefer to be called that then ‘big dumb-ass ostrich with your head in the sand’!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:05 pm#64 And the last Californian who pumps the last tank of gasoline into his convertible:
May 17th, 2006 at 3:05 pm“I don’t give a crap, I’m driving to Vegas, baby, 90 miles an hour and when I get there, I’m going to eat your mother - how’d you like that, dude?”
I know global warming exists. It’s been 90+ degrees for the last 4 days, and I live in northern Idaho — this is May for christ’s sake! We haven’t had a decent winter in several years.
This is a perfect example of how the theory of global warming is believed less on scientific grounds than on largely on anecdotal “snapshots of conditions that are isolated as to place and/or time.
We know that climatology and meteorology ar two different sciences. We know that climatology, like geology, requires consideration of the historical record, such as it is, always with the disclaimer that we recognize the limits of our own certainty in interpreting that record.
Thirty years ago the alarmists were predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age. Now the same people are predicting a long and devastating warming of the earth, leading to melting of the polar caps, rising seas and increased cancer from UV rays. Meanwhile, no one can predict the average temperature next week, let alone next year or 50 years from now.
Then there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:06 pmalso…. i say we start up a second presidency. that is just totally ignore the one in the white house and let Al Gore who was cheated out of his presidency start now! He is gonna be plenty busy in 08 so lets give him a jump start!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:08 pm#66 Perfect Storm mac - massive US deficit, climate change screwing up everyone’s ability to get or grow food, peak oil pulling the energy rug out from under all that cheap energy for heating, driving, buying plasma TVs. As my Grandkids are going to say:
“WTF were you thinking Grandad?”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:08 pm#68 Blue State Redcoat - produce your data for your statements and prepare yourself.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:11 pmBSR… okay big dumb ass ostrich with your head in the sand! whatever you say. jeesh!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:12 pmto the moron redneck in that blue state:
No reasonable person was predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth thirty years ago . Especially not Gore.
You should not listen to assholes but to real scientists, like Gore does.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:13 pmBut for that first you should get your head out of Bush’s ass. And I know chicken little wingnuts are just too weak to do that.
“I do not believe that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer…”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:15 pmi say we start up a second presidency. that is just totally ignore the one in the white house and let Al Gore who was cheated out of his presidency start now!
LOLROTFLMAO! This is the best fever swamp fantasy I have read in a long time! Oh, please, say it will be so. I would LOVE to see His Pompousness start up a “second presidency.” He could even film it for “Current TV.” Of course, if he did, no one would see it . . .
May 17th, 2006 at 3:15 pmRedcoat - back up your statements or piss off
May 17th, 2006 at 3:17 pmBSR,,,, better than what we got now!! see you in 2008 baby!!!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pmThen there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
Wow, how toughtful. Too bad that the USA is and has been the bigger source of emissions on the planet since the end of the WWII, at least, and the countries you cite don’t increased their emissions significatively until a few years ago. And, even today, the combined emissions of China and India (over 2 Bilion people) don’t match the emission level of the USA (290 Milion of people).
So, screwing 2 bilion people to the benefit of 0.3 bilion doesn’t seem the wiser way…
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pm[…] Also see ThinkProgress, where I learned about this, and Sourcewatch, which has the low-down on CEI. […]
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 pmBSR…. I will meet you here in 2008 and we will discuss this further.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:21 pm#78 Oh, that was directed to #68, and if you want links to data:
PEW Climate Center
Thay have a LOT of stats to look at.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:22 pmThirty years ago the alarmists were predicting a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age. Now the same people are predicting a long and devastating warming of the earth
Now THAT’s a swamp fever fantasy. George Will has been pushing this fiction hard, and got the smackdown on national TV for it. Keep up your delusions though. Don’t worry, I won’t ask you to actually back up that claim with facts and names, LOL.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:23 pmIncreased cancer from UV rays?
Little boy, that’s the result of stratospheric ozone depletion not global warming. Two different things.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:25 pmDecrease of stratospheric ozone was first reported in 1974 and it was linked to the increasing presence of CFC’s. Thanks to people who are not like you there was a global effort to scale back use of CFC’s and as a result ozone depletion stopped.
Crow’s Nest: “Peak oil right ahead, surrounded by a hurricane brought on by climate change - collision imminent!”
Captain of the Titanic: “No problem, we’ve got oil sands in Canada, what climate change?”
Number 1: “They are still rowdy in steerage sir, a bunch of Indians and Chinese think they deserve to be up here in the First Class cocktail lounge”
Crow’s Nest: “Captain, it appears we’re f***ed, what do we do?”
Captain: “Let’s let some of those darkies and such up from steerage, Number 1, I’m sure we could pin it all on a few of them - see you at the helicopter”
May 17th, 2006 at 3:25 pmIan Murphy over at NRO’s The Corner (2:05 PM) says CEI is using ’scientific studies’ to debunk Al Gore’s claim. Of course, the NRO has never really paid much attention to science, economics, or anything that is serious analysis.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:29 pmBlue State Red,
You are not just stupid you are not even funny.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:30 pmThe problem is that no up-to-date peer-reviewed scientific study denies
May 17th, 2006 at 3:34 pmanthropogenic climate change. So CEI have no choice but to fabricate some.
Time for a revolution, don’t ya think?
May 17th, 2006 at 3:38 pmHey I have a great idea. How about we put all the global warming scientists in a room together, without food or water, for as long as it takes their climate prediciton models to be proven true by actual experience!? No takers? I thought not. Besides, the decomposition of all that useless human flesh might create dangerous emissions!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:38 pmWell alls i’ve got to say is it looks like the shit is finally hitting the fan.Hope Gore does run so we won’t have to put up with head up Bush’s ass Hillary.He’s my president now and has been since 2000.As for BIG OIL the end is near and you can almost feel them starting to panic.As for global warming, i live in Michigan and we haven’t seen a good skiing or snowmobiling season in years and Bush’s interior policies have laid our forests almost barren.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:41 pmBSR… … this bears repeating…..big dumbass ostritch with your head in the sand!!
May 17th, 2006 at 3:43 pm#89 Provided you head for Mauritius and promise to live there the rest of your life, no matter what the sea level does. You put some skin in the game and so will we, asshat.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:46 pm#92 Still waiting for a fact or two to adorn your foaming, redneck diatribe, Redcoat.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pmBlue State Red Moron,
We know that you hate scientists. They are much smarter than you are and you just can’t digest that. That’s why you hate Gore, too.
Look, why don’t you try to read a book or two. Then maybe you would have a higher self-esteem and stop whining.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:48 pmWhy is there no legal remedy? Must we sit and listen to the harmful lies of organizations like CEI as the world crumbles around us?
Can’t we file class action lawsuits demanding that they cease and desist with their lies and misrepresentations, which are clearly defined by the bottom line of oil corporations and have nothing to do with the possibility (albeit slight) chance of the continuance of the human race as a viable species on planet earth?
We need a sustainable development act, which revokes the charter of organizations that actively seek to destroy the environmental factors needed to sustain human (and all biological life-forms). For example, it is against the law to poison a well, isn’t it? It should be against the law to poison the atmosphere with lies about the toxicity that corporations are dumping on us in their race to the bottom of the scum-pool.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:49 pmPeople, don’t waste you time with Bull Shit Red. He probably lives with his mom in a trailer in Alabama somewhere and when he works, which is probably not often, he makes about 8 or 9 bucks an hour. He has no power, and his time is soon coming. He and his kind are on the way out. He knows it, and so do most others that know him. Don’t waste your time.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:51 pmSorry Lex, but the First Amendment not only guarantees free speech but also free lies.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:52 pmThis is my biggest problem with this entire situation: let’s say global warming statistics are off, or incomplete, or too much warning not enough warming to show for it. So what?
What is so incredibly horrible about instituting technology and measures to insure the dilution of pollution into the atmosphere? There is nothing wrong with acting NOW to prevent any further, future polluting of the environment.
The only people who have a problem with enacting rules and regulations to prevent more polluting are the CEOs and executives of the companies that do the most polluting, the lobbyists who make millions pushing pro-pollution measures into Congress, and the Republicans and occasional Democrats who allow those pro-pollution laws to be enacted.
Think about it. If you’re a huge corporation making millions and billions a year, is it really going to kill you to spend money to stop polluting?
Pollution affects the entire planet, the wildlife that lives on it, and all of us in one way or another.
Whether or not we’re having a serious negative climate change within the decade or 50 years from now, or 100 years from now, instituting anti-pollution measures NOW means we’ve started before the problem is out of control and can’t be fixed.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:54 pmWhy is there no legal remedy? Must we sit and listen to the harmful lies of organizations like CEI as the world crumbles around us?
Sure there’s a legal remedy. It’s called amending the Constitution. See, if you get enough people to agree with you, you can change the Constitution - even the First Amendment!
Until then, though, all political speech is legal, whether you like it or not. Except, of course, campaign contributions, which are only legal if they come from approved sources in approved amounts for approved purposes. But hey, what’s a little fudging where the First Amendment is concerned?
May 17th, 2006 at 3:59 pmBrought to you by your gas dollars…Buy more gas and help fund a PR campaign.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:03 pmWhat is so incredibly horrible about instituting technology and measures to insure the dilution of pollution into the atmosphere?
But what if the global warming models are way off, or even flat wrong? If we overcorrect too much in the wrong direction, then the premise of the global warming theory (that is, that human industrial and commercial activitiy is a major cause of global warming, and that regulation of such activity will prevent a global warming meltdown) suggests that we might wind up creating another ice age. Then what would we do? Jeepers, I’m so confused!
May 17th, 2006 at 4:04 pmBSR… your confused and you are a ‘big dumb-ass ostrictch with your head in the sand’
May 17th, 2006 at 4:35 pmBSR….errr….. you are confused and you are a ‘big dumbass ostrich with your head in the sand’
May 17th, 2006 at 4:36 pmBe sure we give big oil what they need Big Al Gore in White House in 2008 to rein in the greedy BASTARDS.FUMIGATE the place and get it ready for honest goverment for a change.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:39 pm#14 Who paid is of the utmost importance. If CEI were an organization that was just dedicated to intellectual honesty and sound science, they wouldn’t have been taking money from Exxon Mobil. $1.6 million from Exxon Mobil! Why not an independent organization?
So far, there is no evidence of anything other than cyclical warming and cooling, and no proof that regulating Amercian greenhouse emissions will have any measurable effect on global climate trends.
First, I don’t think there is any amount of evidence that would suffice for someone who calls the opposing view “typical left-wing speech suppression”. Who’s suppressing speech, anyway? Second, there’s no proof that regulating emissions wouldn’t have a measurable effect on climate trends. But, continuing to do the things that have clearly been shown to cause a greenhouse effect certainly will not alleviate the problem. It would make sense to stop. And, when you say “cyclical warming and cooling”, what kind of cycles are you referring to? When was the last time we had glaciers and arctic ice cover receding at the rate that they are today?
I would love to see the matter debated in public. As a public service, maybe Exxon Mobil would like to sponsor an hourlong boradcast debate between CEI and some real honest-to-goodness climate scientists. And then let the public decide for themselves who’s telling the truth.
At the very least, you and the oil companies and all their buddies in the Republican party seem willing to roll the dice with the fate of the planet. For what? For money, and to show that you’re a badass who isn’t afraid of a little thing like the end of all life as we know it? Play with your own life. Leave the rest of us out of it.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:43 pmRun back through the comments on 5/17/06 - “Blue State Red ” demonstrates why it’s not much fun anymore to debate wingnuts online - like shooting fish ina barrel. mosat of those who can read and write have deserted the Halls Of Idiocy in the last few months.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:48 pm#99 there I was agreeing with Blue State Redcoat there for on one issue and then he went ahead and exercised his 1st Amendment right to make no sense whatsoever in post #101.
And yet in post #68 we have this:
You know I would put post #101 right up there with the “Dammit Bubba, it’s hot outside, must eb that there global warming” kinds of analysis. Still waiting for a fact or two or something that even coherently sounds like a sound opinion from Blue State Redneck
May 17th, 2006 at 4:52 pm[…] Josh Marshall linked to our earlier post on the Competitive Enterprise Institute – a front group funded by big oil – and their attack on Al Gore’s new movie. Josh mentioned he remembered that CEI’s founder, Fred Smith, was on Crossfire years ago talking about how “global warming was actually a good thing because of all the cool new crops we could grow.” […]
May 17th, 2006 at 4:55 pm#106 - just like the numbers of people for whom the statement ‘Dude, I was at Woodstock’ is actually true and not an article of faith now exceeds the numbers of people who were actually at Woodstock by several 100s of %, the number of people who ‘always thought (1) George W. Bush was a malicious, incompetent frat-boy with a god complex (2) invading Iraq had nothing to do with WMD and the GWOT and was always going to end up as a murderous clusterf*** which destryoed America’s reputation’ will vastly outnumber the people who actually DID think (1) and (2) above are correct and have always thought it - even when the aforementioned Two-Pint Caligula was pimping for the Texas Rangers.
May 17th, 2006 at 4:59 pm#68 Then there are the developing economies of China, India and other countries, who have become far more significant producers of greenhouse emissions that the U.S. Personally, I think Al Gore and his chicken little friends should concentrate their efforts on those countries, and leave the American economy alone.
So, I guess you’ve abandoned your other argument, that it’s all a bunch of hooey. Now you’re conceding that greenhouse emissions are the culprit, but we shouldn’t do anything about it, because we’re not the worst offenders? As for the American economy, the oil companies are not exactly helping it out right now. They’re doing well by their own economies, but they’re screwing the rest of the country.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:01 pmThe public has so much negative opinion on big oil, it won’t make any difference what they say about Gore — they are despised.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:04 pmThe fans of Nascar, Hummers, 4X4 races, and other Republican die-hards will buy the bull-poop from the oil companies, but I think this is a loser for big oil.
They should tuck their tails between their legs and slink away to build more refineries for today and develop new sources of renewable fuel for tomorrow. They should make a deal with the auto companies.
Sorry meg_mac, I had pledged not to respond to trolls, but I have relapsed. Climbing back on the wagon…
May 17th, 2006 at 5:10 pmSure this is just the “natural” cycle of things…right? Right Wing Nut Jobs believe that “global warming” is the direct result of the Sun…Also two weeks ago I heard an “official” from the API on the Rush Limberger show actually agree with a caller that “oil” is NOT the remnants of dead plant and animal life, but a natural occurance of the “earth’s crust”(that is such as gold or iron as example)….I only had ONE semester in Organic Chemistry in college…but almost EVERYONE agreed then that oil (petroleum HYDRO-CARBONS) are the end results of fossilized dinoaurs, insects and sea-life(mostly)…but I heard this American Petroleum Institute EXPERT actually tell this dittohead idiot that this snake oil theory actually warranted investigation…if THAT is the case then we better get oil derricks up on the MOON as quickly as possible to reap that NATURAL OCURRANCE of Planetary CRUST!…Will Conservatives STOP grasping for straws here? By the way…
GO AL GO!
May 17th, 2006 at 5:13 pmBlue State Red flaunts his ignorance. He would never go see Al Gore’s movie, because it doesn’t fit his preconceived notions. Hell, he’d rather destroy the standard of living and the climate of America, and have his neighbors’ kids come home in body bags from Iraq FOR NO GODDAMMNED REASON rather than admit he’s wrong.
Note to BSR- you’re being played by a fool by an alcoholic imbecile with a criminal record who’s bankrupted 4 businesses. Every rational poster at this site knows it- you’re a laughingstock.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:20 pm#113 - What does Intelligent Design have to say about climate change? Apart from the occasional Biblical Flood, I mean?
May 17th, 2006 at 5:23 pmI heard one a**hole recently who said that “oil bubbles up out of the center of the earth”. “It’s never going to run out.” What a f**g moron. He probably didn’t go past the second grade like some of these a**hole talk show radio hosts. Do we want to ignore global warming? I don’t think so. Even it if doesn’t turn out to be a problem twenty years from now do we really want to be dumb enough to ignore it and not do something about it?
May 17th, 2006 at 5:27 pmUnfortunately, this is America where Faith trumps Science everytime and proudly so… it seems, so this message will be believed by large numbers of Americans for whom ads are truly a source of “news”.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:28 pmI think the farts from all the 6 billion of people on this planet is also going to be a problem in the future. That doesn’t count cattle and other farm animals. If each person farts a cubic foot of gas a week that would be 6 billion cubic feet of methane. We could light a city. This methane could similarly damage our planet if it isn’t contained and burned.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:32 pmI saw “An Inconvenient Truth” in Chicago. I have been semi-environmental. Not passionate about it, but fairly consistent. The movie alternately awed, terrified, angered and inspired me. I pledged to go back with friends opening night.
The AEI even has a moment in the film. In any event, the media coverage and public attitude in general about the environment are going to be intense and highly politicized soon, I think. I brought some “Inconvenient Truth” 1-page posters into work, and posted one on my cube wall. A day later, someone had posted a really shoddy opinion piece article by Philip Stott, a Global Warming debunker, next to it.
They’re looking to get as many people out to see it on opening night as possible to get it to play deep into rural areas, too. I blogged about the experience at my site, kuniform.org, and posted some Flickr photos of Al Gore, who was there to speak.
May 17th, 2006 at 5:50 pm#116 - Um, sorry, no idea.
May 17th, 2006 at 6:04 pmAre the numbers out of whack again?
[…] Big oil and their record profits as a result of price fixing/gouging/manipulation are attacking Al Gore with billions in order to “prove” what the scientific community has already debunked. […]
May 17th, 2006 at 7:02 pm#111 The “more refineries” argument is a canard. You want to know why we haven’t built new refieries? Because it’s cheaper to expand the old ones. That’s right, if you say “We haven’t built a new refinery in this country since the 1970s” that is true, but if you say we haven’t increased our refining capacity, that is a lie.
Just more Karl Rove word play. We have enough refining capacity, and the solution to our problem is NOT a lack of capacity to burn oil faster.
May 17th, 2006 at 7:47 pm[…] Via Think Progress. CEI also gets funding from other oil companies through the American Petroleum Institute. […]
May 17th, 2006 at 8:01 pmblue state red wins the ULTIMATE SHILL AWARD!
by stepping up to defend the corporate oil interests, bsr has proven he will shill for anybody! even though they will mercilessly and endlessly ream him and the planet, bsr is still willing to get in line and suck the cock of big corporate oil while they belittle him, treat him like a worthless whore, laugh at him and spit in his face.
congratulations, bsr! your ass must really hurt!
May 17th, 2006 at 8:34 pmThe sad thing is that so many Americans are persuaded by 60 secon ads. They no longer read, think or discuss anything. Only what they are told by the MSM or their churches matter.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:37 pmYeah, Rush Limbaugh has been preaching his ignorant BS for so many years, the wingnuts (many of whom like their leader can barely read) are dummied down to the extent that all they can do is wave a flag , and say “ditto, Rush, ditto” while the world crumbles around them. Maybe they like to fantasize about all the riches their capitalist masters are accumulating: or feel proud of having such a fine “christian” as their heroe, Bush, in the White House.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:40 pm“Thank You For Smoking”…was that a documentary?
May 17th, 2006 at 8:42 pmThe “more refineries†argument is a canard. You want to know why we haven’t built new refieries? Because it’s cheaper to expand the old ones. That’s right, if you say “We haven’t built a new refinery in this country since the 1970s†that is true, but if you say we haven’t increased our refining capacity, that is a lie.
Anyway you slice it we are maxed out on our refining capacity and we need more refineries, along with more coastal and ANWR drilling, nuclear energy and solar energy. We especially need more refineries in places that are not vulnerable to hurricanes and tornadoes, so we don’t get weather related shut downs.
May 17th, 2006 at 8:43 pmMostly, we need alternative fuel and the oil companies could begin to think about what they might do about it - if only with the thought that it would be another area where they might reap obscene profits.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:15 pmBSR you left out the perface to your latest rant;
which is;
If I want to be as stupid as I sound and pretent that the energy crisis we face is not real then….
May 17th, 2006 at 9:24 pmbackwash state red,
drill, drill, drill. rape, rape, rape. deplete, deplete, deplete. depend, depend, depend.
repeat.
sure, a new refinery is being built. biggest ever. in port arthur texas on the gulf of mexico, right about where hurricane rita hit last year.
sure, let’s cluelessly (or shamelessly) cling to the idea that “peak oil” doesn’t exist.
sure, let’s drill in the anwr, and subsequently ship the majority of that oil to asian countries (destination china, japan and india - the true plan for anwr oil).
sure, let’s shill for oil companies, like exxonmobil, who still owes about $6.5 billion in damages from the exxon valdez oil spill (17 years ago now)…and also made ALMOST 6 TIMES THAT MUCH in profit alone last year. simply their profits from the 3rd quarter alone - you remember, when katrina and rita hit, and oil refining capacity was so “tight” - would’ve covered those damages.
sure, let’s suck the cocks of oil company executives so they can make obscene profits while america’s debt increases and our children and grandchildren are left with no resources, a shell of a planet and a number followed by 12 ZEROS that they are expected to pay off.
sure, that’s a great plan for america you have there, backwash.
HOW DOES IT FEEL TO BE THE ULTIMATE SHILL, BSR?
May 17th, 2006 at 9:29 pmI have not been to a movie theater in 4 years. I will go see this movie 4 yes no less than four times. Once for myself and 3 times for those that died in New Orleans. This will be my memorial to them. From one white trash midwestern boy to a city that was murdered while I watched from 3000 miles away. I will not watch there commercials, I will not allow them to lie in debates with nothing to back up there statements and I will always remember New Orleans a city that died so that America would awaken. Hollywood you want me to go see movies??? Make films that matter, tell me the truth and tell stories like these instead of crap about rich people living in Manhattan and there daily dating woes while people all over this nation TRULY struggle everyday in moving and amazing ways just to survive.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:31 pmNot having seen Al’s movie, I hope it comes to the conclusion that the main source of carbon dioxide and methane pollution is the growth of the far right in this country.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:33 pmExxon’s position on global warming is a crime–just ask Swiss Re or Munich Re about the rates they will be charging companies that are not managing carbon output. Exxon will be facing greater liability claims that simply the Exxon Valdez once connections are made to the corporation for these criminal actions.
May 17th, 2006 at 9:49 pmWhen will Exxon’s shareholders realize their long term assets are at risk of losing their value and that their company is ignoring their fiduciary responsibility.
Paying scientific prostitutes like Richard Lindzen and Patrick Michaels is a crime against humanity.
Blue State Red is correct on one count. In the 70’s there was serious research and discussion regarding increased particulate pollution of the stratosphere acting to reduce the amount of solar gain in the lower atmosphere. The primary cause: human activity, especially large scale slash and burn activity in the rain forests. However, there was concurrent research and discussion regarding the greenhouse effect of CO2 from said burning and fossil fuel use. The conclusions were inconclusive, primarily along the lines of computational capabilities simply are not being powerful enough to manage the variables. Remember, this was pretty early in the computer age - the tiny chip in a baby’s moo toy today has more capacity than a roomful of 1970 blinkin’ boxes. Climatology has progressed exponentially. Along with the mathematics of chaotic non-linear systems such as weather. Pretty much looks like we’re headed for a hot spell. Whether or not accellerated by human activity. General advice when the boat is sinking…bail water OUT of the boat, not INTO the boat.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:05 pmI guess you could say, Gore has been EXXONERATED!
May 17th, 2006 at 10:14 pmBlue State Red
You are an ignorant slut.
You are so poorly informed. Turn off fox news.
Get on the “internets” and do a search for “gobal warming scientific evidence”
When the movie comes out go see it.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:20 pmThen report back here with your tail between your legs and provide a big apology to the humans who do care about things other than just ourselves.
[…] According to Progressive Blog Site, Think Progress, CEI, plans to unveil two 60-second TV ads focusing on what it calls “global warming alarmism and the call by some environmental groups and politicians to reduce fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions.†[…]
May 17th, 2006 at 10:23 pmIf you go to CEI’s website, their environmental “expert” is some little dweeb named Myron Ebrell, who has NO SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND WHATSOEVER. He has a economics degree. What a JOKE.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:26 pmWho exactly ” predict[ed] a long and devastating cooling of the earth, leading to a new ice age?”
I can remember seeing a movie in science class (more than 30 years ago, actually) warning about global warming, though that term wasn’t used then. But I vividly remember the remark that a rise in the earth’s atmosphere of 2 or 3 degrees could melt the polar ice caps.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:28 pmCEI claims global warming is a myth. Yea, right. And cigarettes aren’t addictive and don’t cause cancer.
Amazing how the oil companies can’t lower gas prices due to “market pressure” and yet they have tons of cash to throw around on TV time spreading their misinformation.
And our soldiers are dying for the profits they’re pocketing. You’d think they would help pay for the funerals and medical care instead of phony science stunts.
May 17th, 2006 at 10:49 pmAnother sad fact is that these types of lobby groups are not just confined to the US. Australia which I have read has greater carbon emissions per capita than the US due to its heavy reliance on Coal fired electricity (The Weather Makers, Tim Flannery). An oraganisation known as the Levossier Group has been set up to achieve the same ends for the Australian coal industry.
May 18th, 2006 at 12:02 amI feel that many of these comments assaulting Exxon and their lobby simply do not consider the fact that this is simply politics as usual. The attacks of the environmentalist/global warming lobby (not to mention market-controlled gas prices) have set public opinion against energy corporations like Exxon to the point that they need to retaliate with something to make themselves look good. I disagree with your allegedly scientific position that global warming is happening, but I would be far more likely to listen if you were talking science rather than saying “it is indisputable.” I would even read bad science far sooner that I would watch a movie (of all things) made by a politician (of all people) filled with “worst case scenario” predictions presented as definite facts. Hope you like the film. Does popcorn cause global warming?
May 18th, 2006 at 12:26 amYou would think that when it comes to the only home mankind has ever known, mankind would err on the side of caution in keeping it habitable for future generations. But Noooooo! If we can’t get an asteroid to trash the place for us, let’s do it ourselves! Nuclear annihilation is so-o 80’s. Let’s get Big Oil to do it for us! Why wait for the Anti-Christ to raze this joint? Let’s just give everybody on the planet a Hummer. In 20 years, 30 years tops, we will have sucked all the oil from the teat of Mother Earth. By then when the spy satellites look down to check on everybody, they won’t be able to see a thing! Mother Earth will look just like her cousin, the planet Venus. And mankind, having taking its cue from that original ‘Scorch Earther’ himself, Adolf Hitler, will have turned our once lovely abode into one big toasty oven. Extra crispy anybody?
May 18th, 2006 at 12:29 amwaaaaaaaaa. poor exxon. quick, defend them so no one can cut into their 36 BILLION DOLLAR PROFIT from last year.
cave, have you been living in a cave? have you noticed anything in the news recently, say, about glacier melt, or the shrinking polar ice caps, or rising sea levels? these things aren’t beholden to science, they are a matter of public record - photographical, meteorological, oceanographic record. i don’t need