Gore is now super rich from global warming

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

Looks like losing the presidential election was the best thing for hime.

When he left government in early 2001, Gore listed assets of less than $2 million, including homes in suburban Washington and in Tennessee. Gore's wealth was estimated $100 million in 2008.


"Congresswoman,” he added, “if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don’t know me.”

I thought Al Gore didn't give a damn about global warming until he became Vice President and needed an issue to make himself stand out from President Clinton.

For that matter, 30 years ago would be 1979.

I thought the leading climate fear back then was another ice age. Not global warming.

Wrong!

Do you have anything more on this because I remember reading about "The Coming Ice Age" too.

I too await a brilliant refute of the historical record by PGT.

Don't many of you people think that making yourself rich is the ultimate goal in life?

No. For most intelligent people wealth is something which furthers other, more important goals.

A survey of the scientific literature has found that between 1965 and 1979, 44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling. So while predictions of cooling got more media attention, the majority of scientists were predicting warming even then.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ey-predicted-global-cooling-in-the-1970s.html

Not you then.

Remember Acid Rain?

Whatever happened to that?

So, PGT, since global cooling was never really true... Was the depletion of the ozone by aerosols also a myth stirred up by the media?

Yes, Bock that would follow. If you were a total fucking idiot.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225822.300-the-ice-age-that-never-was.html

Some scientists did indeed predict global cooling in the 1970s. And the media ate it up - far disproportionate to the amount of scientific papers on the issue.

Just goes to show you how fear mongering works. The media couldn't sell stories on global warming when temps outside were frigid.

See? It's comments like this that prevent the rest of us from taking anything you say seriously. Now that you've confirmed yet again that you're still only interested in stirring the pot we can go back to ignoring pretty much everything you have to say.

Well I've not been discussing how the media reacts to something. As I posted, the weight of opinion was not with it and good reasons for the trend have since been identified.

It also goes to show just how varied the opinions are. While there may be a majority, there's hardly been a dominating view. Maybe a plurality, but hardly the unanimous consensus many have tried to convince us of.

Please. I’ve quite happily addressed the point about global cooling with a link (OMG!) and everything. But if you think you are getting anything other than short shrift for a comment like “So if A wasn’t true, what about B?” then you’re more stupid than you sound.

Utter non-sequiter since Demiurge's best point was about how the media picked up on it far more than scientists had.
And I’ll paste it again “44 scientific papers predicted warming, 20 were neutral and just 7 predicted cooling”

Now he denies that he is profiting:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...nies_he_is_profiting_from_global_warming.html

"I just put my money where my mouth is." You mean on Hillary's cock?

He puts his money in companies before he publicly talks and creates his own market.

So, are you all admitting that alternative energies are economically viable and not an affront to the free market that thrives on profit?

Yep - and he lies his ass off in the meantime.

Fear sells, and you'll never go broke assuming people want to be part of saving the Earth.

Thank you for the link, but it does support the idea that global cooling was the leading climate fear at the time. Considering it the product of media sensationalism is fair, yet so is considering global warming a product of political sensationalism.

Notice I didn't say the two instances were identical, but both seem fueled by motives less than scientific.

the brainwashing that the schools do to kids over recycling and global warming is absolutely disgusting.

It is almost impossible to deprogram your kids.

A and B in your comment are NOT unrelated, though. And I also have NOT said anything disparaging about your points of view in this thread. Your the first one to resort to that...

You can repeat it all day. It ignores the point and further underscores that you can only parrot yourself.

A fearmongering few can always make a fortune off the crowd. It doesn't make the things they're selling economically viable.

Yeah Gore, here's an asshole that uses more energy than a small country. Fuck him.

No it's not. They wanna wii or PS3? Nope. You cant have it. Bad for the eviroment. Wanna pizza. Nope bad for the enviroment. Nothing but tofu for you junior.
Wanna watch MTV? No can do.
Thirty below outside and you're freezing kiddies? Sorry thermostat stays at 55, put on a sweater.
Oh and forget about getting a ride to the mall or whatever. You and your friends can ride your bikes the 15 miles to get there.
And forget about furniture. Thats killin' the forests and shit, so sit on the bare floor instead(And sleep on it too).
Yeah let's go back to living in the 19th century. I dont think too many kiddies would appreciate that.

Do you try to deprogram what they learn in Maths and English class as well as Science class?