+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: The Kyra Memorial Spin Room (/forum-540.html)
+---- Thread: NYTIMES Article Calls Gore's Movie Into Question (/thread-233227.html)
Pages: 1 2
NYTIMES Article Calls Gore's Movie Into Question - Ninerfan1 - 03-13-2007 08:53 AM
Time to Cool Down the Hype
Wow, from the NYTimes so Dogger you can't just dismiss it. So much for Gore's movie being "just" facts and data.
Note - Robert al-N, the NYTimes isn't the conservative one.
[quote]Kevin Vranes, a climatologist at the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado, said he sensed a growing backlash against exaggeration. While praising Mr. Gore for
- Ninerfan1 - 03-13-2007 11:03 PM
Not one single comment on this?
- aTxTIGER - 03-14-2007 12:59 AM
i havent seen the movie so maybe someone can call me out, but isnt the movie about climate change. it seems in the article that most of the dissenting views are by a geologist. im not saying hes wrong, just wondering if he is an expert in climatology.
- Rebel - 03-14-2007 02:53 AM
aTxTIGER Wrote:i havent seen the movie so maybe someone can call me out, but isnt the movie about climate change. it seems in the article that most of the dissenting views are by a geologist. im not saying hes wrong, just wondering if he is an expert in climatology.
Who, Gore? If so, no. He's an expert on class warfare.
- aTxTIGER - 03-14-2007 08:28 AM
RebelKev Wrote:aTxTIGER Wrote:i havent seen the movie so maybe someone can call me out, but isnt the movie about climate change. it seems in the article that most of the dissenting views are by a geologist. im not saying hes wrong, just wondering if he is an expert in climatology.
Who, Gore? If so, no. He's an expert on class warfare.
thanks for not actually answering my question. i really appreciate it.
kev, when i first started reading the spin room board, i seemed to agree with you on a lot of points. however, the more i read your posts, the more i wonder if you even care about politics and policy. seems to me all you want to do is run around screaming like a 4 year old instead of having actual dialogue.
you are the brick tamlin of the ncaabbs spin rooms.
LOUD NOISES!!!!!!
- Brookes Owl - 03-14-2007 08:53 AM
aTxTIGER Wrote:i havent seen the movie so maybe someone can call me out, but isnt the movie about climate change. it seems in the article that most of the dissenting views are by a geologist. im not saying hes wrong, just wondering if he is an expert in climatology.I'm not familiar with this particular geologist's work, but to get a picture of historical climate the geological record is important.
- aTxTIGER - 03-14-2007 09:05 AM
Brookes Owl Wrote:aTxTIGER Wrote:i havent seen the movie so maybe someone can call me out, but isnt the movie about climate change. it seems in the article that most of the dissenting views are by a geologist. im not saying hes wrong, just wondering if he is an expert in climatology.I'm not familiar with this particular geologist's work, but to get a picture of historical climate the geological record is important.
thank you very much.
- Bourgeois_Rage - 03-14-2007 09:28 AM
Yeah the geology is one of the best sources we have for what the atmosphere was like during the time the rocks formed.
That said, I don't know about his qualifications to be talking about climate. Plus that doesn't really matter. Citing experts is nothing more than an appeal to authority. Examine the arguments, do they truly hold up? Or do they just sound good?
- OUGwave - 03-14-2007 12:17 PM
All that scientist is saying is that we can't be absolutely certain about the exact manifestations of climate change and the time frames. No kidding.
Ask him whether we should do something to protect ourselves from it, and he'd probably say yes. I would imagine that because he is praising Gore for getting the message out, he is probably in favor of climate change legislation and agrees with the larger point that human activity is probably contributing to global climate change and that its not a good thing.
So probably not the best guy for conservatives to be using to make their point.
What I don't get, and has never explained to me, is how modernizing our economy with far more efficient and far more productive forms of energy with fewer market externalities is a destructive thing for the economy...
Whether you buy the science or not, a non-carbon intensive energy portfolio is still a good thing in the long run, and the government should be pushing the curve on technology to help bring that about purely for economic and national security reasons. Whether or not you agree with the science of global warming -- there should be agreement on the policy objective, which is to be less reliant on oil. The only people against that should be people who work for fossil fuel companies. Every other industry benefits in the long run.
- Ninerfan1 - 03-14-2007 01:02 PM
OUGwave Wrote:So probably not the best guy for conservatives to be using to make their point.
Way to miss the point entirely.
You consumed several posts in the Gore thread defending him, saying that everything in his movie was "facts and data" and that the data spoke for itself. Yet here we have scientists stating, in a NYTimes article no less, what several people have been quoted as saying elsewhere. That Gore's claims are over the top. That his claims are "exaggerated and erroneous." This is clearly stated by the scientist you say "is not the best guy" about the movie, and in very much contradiction to your claims here that
[quote]Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations were
- OUGwave - 03-14-2007 01:18 PM
Ninerfan1 Wrote:[quote="OUGwave"]So probably not the best guy for conservatives to be using to make their point.
Way to miss the point entirely.
You consumed several posts in the Gore thread defending him, saying that everything in his movie was "facts and data" and that the data spoke for itself. Yet here we have scientists stating, in a NYTimes article no less, what several people have been quoted as saying elsewhere. That Gore's claims are over the top. That his claims are "exaggerated and erroneous." This is clearly stated by the scientist you say "is not the best guy" about the movie, and in very much contradiction to your claims here that
[quote]Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations were
- Bourgeois_Rage - 03-14-2007 01:25 PM
This blog post is relevant. The blog is run by climate scientists.
Quote:The first rule when criticizing popular science presentations for inaccuracies should be to double check any 'facts' you use. It is rather ironic then that William Broad's latest piece on Al Gore plays just as loose with them as he accuses Gore of doing.
- Ninerfan1 - 03-14-2007 01:39 PM
OUGwave Wrote:[quote="Ninerfan1"][quote="OUGwave"]So probably not the best guy for conservatives to be using to make their point.
Way to miss the point entirely.
You consumed several posts in the Gore thread defending him, saying that everything in his movie was "facts and data" and that the data spoke for itself. Yet here we have scientists stating, in a NYTimes article no less, what several people have been quoted as saying elsewhere. That Gore's claims are over the top. That his claims are "exaggerated and erroneous." This is clearly stated by the scientist you say "is not the best guy" about the movie, and in very much contradiction to your claims here that
[quote]Dr. Vranes questioned whether his presentations were
- Machiavelli - 03-14-2007 01:49 PM
What the hell does own3d even mean. Own cubed?????
Own in 3-dimension? Well I could own someone in the 4th dimension too. Time and Space. My arguments will hold from here to eternity. I've always wondered what the 3d means. Maybe in the x, y, and z plane? You own them in a way Pathagraius would of appreciated. Someone help me. I already know Niner doesn't know what it means!! ;-)
- Bourgeois_Rage - 03-14-2007 01:53 PM
It's like pwned, but not as good.
It's a humorous take on telling someone that they just lost an argument. I'm sure it originated as a mistake and people copied it to make fun of that guy. Now it is just common internet slang.
- Rebel - 03-14-2007 06:25 PM
aTxTIGER Wrote:thanks for not actually answering my question. i really appreciate it.
kev, when i first started reading the spin room board, i seemed to agree with you on a lot of points. however, the more i read your posts, the more i wonder if you even care about politics and policy. seems to me all you want to do is run around screaming like a 4 year old instead of having actual dialogue.
you are the brick tamlin of the ncaabbs spin rooms.
LOUD NOISES!!!!!!
You asked if Gore was an expert on Climatology. I gave you the answer. What else did you want?
- Bourgeois_Rage - 03-14-2007 07:11 PM
No he asked if the geologist could be an expert in climatology. You turned it around answered the question you wanted answered.
- Rebel - 03-14-2007 07:28 PM
Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:No he asked if the geologist could be an expert in climatology. You turned it around answered the question you wanted answered.
Oh, my bad. I read it wrong. I was high on PCP last night.
- Rebel - 03-14-2007 07:39 PM
....but seriously people, here are some headlines I've gathered:
"Global warming blamed for cockroach migration"
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200703/s1871398.htm
"ABCNEWS Climate Reporter: 'Scientists tell us civilization as we know it is over'"
http://www.summitdaily.com/article/20070313/NEWS/103130045
"VIDEO: John Edwards On Global Warming: 'It'll make world war look like heaven'"
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c68_1173904279&p=1
"TOP TECH BILLIONAIRE: 'I'm scared. I don't think we're going to make it'."
http://www.postchronicle.com/news/entertainment/tittletattle/article_21268842.shtml
"Global Warming makes Jennifer Garner cry"
on, and on, and on, and on, and on. It's like the damn Energizer Bunny. I've never seen a worse case of Chicken Little than this.
- Crewdogz - 03-15-2007 11:09 AM
Global Warming Swindle: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2007/03/15/global_warming_swindle