Quote:Best-selling author Dennis Avery is the next prominent figure to challenge the facts Al Gore is promoting in his global warming crusade. Mr. Avery is co-author of "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years." Both Al Gore and Dennis Avery have New York Times best-selling books on global warming, but with opposite conclusions.

The list of Al Gore detractors continues to grow as his extreme rhetoric and conclusions get dissected by scientists, economists, and researchers. Avery joins Lord Christopher Monckton (former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher advisor), Bjorn Lomborg (Danish economist), author Michael Crichton, Prof. S. Fred Singer (former director of the U.S. National Weather Service), Tim Ball, Ph.D. (historical climatologist), Prof. Ian Clark (University of Ottawa), and Prof. Richard Lindzen (MIT) among others.

Gore claims recent climate change is the result of human activities, and society must give up most of its energy supply to prevent global catastrophe. Conversely, Avery amassed physical evidence of past warming/cooling cycles and experimental evidence demonstrating variations in solar activity affect Earth's constantly varying temperatures.

"My book says our warming is natural, unstoppable -- and not very dangerous anyway," stated Avery.

"These books represent the two leading explanations for the Earth's recent temperature changes-and they conflict. If global warming truly is the most important public policy issue of our day, then it is high time the public got to hear the arguments from both sides matched up against each other," continued Avery.

Gore has refused all debate challengers to date. Joseph Bast, president of The Heartland Institute, noted, "Maybe it's because climate alarmists tend to lose when they debate climate realists. :pwnd: Or because most scientists do not support climate alarmist." The Heartland Institute has run more than $500,000 of ads in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Washington Times promoting a debate.

Gore Refuses to Debate Global Warming Theory

Public debate is a terrible way to debate Science. Typically the person against a particular theory (it doesn't matter what it is) can just throw up a bunch of complaints against it that look like damning damning evidence. The person defending only has so much time to respond to all the questions, but often does not have enough time to present all the evidence and often is left looking like they were ignoring some of the questions when they never had time to get to them.

As for the accusation that it is "high time the public got to hear the arguments from both sides matched up against each other", it is not as if the arguments are secrets. Go out and read the books where the arguments are fully explained. A public debate only allows for a few minutes for each side and full arguments cannot be explored.

the guy that runs junkscience.com has a $100,000 contest to the first person that can actually prove Gore's theory on Global Warming.

a similar wager occurred with a Princeton Scientist who tried to wager Gore $10k a couple months back and he dodged him.

I'm sure the major media will cover these newsworthy stories up for Gore though.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:As for the accusation that it is "high time the public got to hear the arguments from both sides matched up against each other", it is not as if the arguments are secrets. Go out and read the books where the arguments are fully explained. A public debate only allows for a few minutes for each side and full arguments cannot be explored.

the problem is we've been having a 1-sided 'public debate' on this issue, atleast on the major networks and in Hollywood.

all of these scientist like above, it looks to me, are getting pissed off about this stuff and the talking point of a 'consensus' and are starting to fight back finally.

Not to mention, no one wants to be compared to a Holocaust denier.

Has anybody proven god really exists? Not that I am a big believer in global warming, but I agree with B_R on this subject.

mlb Wrote:Has anybody proven god really exists? Not that I am a big believer in global warming, but I agree with B_R on this subject.

Well, if the public isn't the best place to open up a dialogue on the situation, seems someone should tell Al Gore.

mlb Wrote:Has anybody proven god really exists? Not that I am a big believer in global warming, but I agree with B_R on this subject.

Well, if the public isn't the best place to open up a dialogue on the situation, seems someone should tell Al Gore.

RebelKev Wrote:

mlb Wrote:Has anybody proven god really exists? Not that I am a big believer in global warming, but I agree with B_R on this subject.

Well, if the public isn't the best place to open up a dialogue on the situation, seems someone should tell Al Gore.

Ding! Ding! Nobody can tell me that Gore is refusing debates because the "public arena is not the place to debate science." I agree that debates are a horrible venue for scientific discussions, but a "Live Earth" concert on every continent (& MTV! natch) is 100 times worse...

Yeah, like Gore needs to waste his time debating a pinhead like Dennis Avery.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dennis_Avery

Why is it that the ice caps on Mars are melting???

I don't think they started melting until we sent those darn rovers there & started driving them all around. They may not be sporty but they're definately utility vehicles. See, our fault again.

Setting two opposing polemicists on a stage together is generally pretty useless. While "debates" among proponents of different ideas can be informative, but it would still be foolish to use such a thing as the sole basis to form one's opinion.

http://www.environmentalwars.org/

Hey there are about a billion more people on the planet than 100 years ago and probably a billion more bovines. Now calculate your average beer consumption and meat consumption per day, and then figure 2 flatulent moments per beer and one cow emission per steak/burger now multiply that by 400 Million and viola a huge increase in carbon emissions per day. Also people give off an average ambient temperature of 98.6 degrees fahreneheit. So there are a billion more little heaters around the world. So, I say, we should all stop drinking beer and save the planet.

EastStang Wrote:So, I say, we should all stop drinking beer and save the planet.

Then the planet be damned. Can't we just send all the liberals to Mars?

EastStang Wrote:So, I say, we should all stop drinking beer and save the planet.

Then the planet be damned. Can't we just send all the liberals to Mars?

or the Goracle and his followers could quit breathing all at once which would stop their emissions of CO2 when they exhale.

the big advantage to this plan is it would also cure many of the world's other problems and of course we can drink our beer guilt free after all the excess hotair is removed.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:Public debate is a terrible way to debate Science.

I agree with you, but isn't that what Gore has done with his movie, speaking engagements, Live Earth concerts, etc.? From my point of view it is sort of hypocritical to use the media to spread your message, but then not want to use them to debate your message vs. another.

IBD has a great article today about this issue and the propaganda piece Newsweek put out this week.

Chilling Effect

I like the ending of it:

Quote:Nor did Newsweek put a dollar value on the 75 hours of free airtime that corporate cousin NBC gave Al Gore on its various stations, starting with NBC and including CNBC, Bravo, the Sundance Channel, Universal HD and Telemundo. We bet it is more than Exxon's $19 million or CEI's meager $3.6 million annual budget.

It is in fact the high priests of global warming that have had a, uh, chilling effect on free scientific inquiry. Richard Lindzen, a professor of Atmospheric Science at M.I.T., says, "Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves labeled as industry stooges."

In 1633, Galileo Galilei was put on trial "for holding as true a false doctrine taught by many," namely that the earth moved around the sun. In Newsweek's view, Galileo was a "denier" of the accepted "consensus." You know the type — hacks like Copernicus, who disputed the fact that Earth was the center of the universe, or Columbus, who disputed the international consensus that Earth was flat.

Deniers all.

Richard Lindzen is on the payroll of the oil companies.