Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth

[Jocko]

I take it you are conceding the OP is wrong, then?

Yet another incorrect conclusion based on cherrypicked evidence. No wonder Gore's work resonates so strongly with you.

The premise of the OP is that Al Gore's latest effort will be riddled with suspicious data from biased sources. Given his history, and the fact that no one has actually reviewed all the data yet, I think it's a little premature to concede anything, don't you?

 

[Jocko]

You have posted quite a string of posts attacking Gore as a flake, attacking the content of a book that you have not read, and attacking other posters.

Records are speaking volumes for themselves.

Sorry, I should be more respectful of the person responsible for the medium we're now using to communicate. My bad.

 

[Lurker]

Sorry, I should be more respectful of the person responsible for the medium we're now using to communicate. My bad.

Quite bad form to use someone quoted out of context and improperly to make your "joke" work. I presume it was a joke and we were not meant to take anything in it as serious?

Lurker

 

[Ziggurat]

Quite bad form to use someone quoted out of context and improperly to make your "joke" work. I presume it was a joke and we were not meant to take anything in it as serious?

Lurker

I think it was pretty funny. The misquote in question is the "invented" bit - Al Gore never claimed that, only partial responsibility for the creation of the modern internet through spearheading federal funding for it (which is true, he did play a critical role). But since Jocko didn't say anything about Gore having invented the internet, only that he was responsible for it, which really isn't so far from the mark of what Gore said. That Gore has some actual claim to this doesn't keep Jocko's comments from being amusing - so I really don't see any "bad form" here at all, nor does it rely on the common misinterpretation of his statements.

 

[Lurker]

I think it was pretty funny. The misquote in question is the "invented" bit - Al Gore never claimed that, only partial responsibility for the creation of the modern internet through spearheading federal funding for it (which is true, he did play a critical role). But since Jocko didn't say anything about Gore having invented the internet, only that he was responsible for it, which really isn't so far from the mark of what Gore said. That Gore has some actual claim to this doesn't keep Jocko's comments from being amusing - so I really don't see any "bad form" here at all, nor does it rely on the common misinterpretation of his statements.

Eh? I think it does rely on the common misinterpretation to have some level of humor myself but each to their own.

Lurker

 

[Jocko]

Eh? I think it does rely on the common misinterpretation to have some level of humor myself but each to their own.

Lurker

Well, it would if you HAD a sense of humor. Don't blame me for "taking the initiative."

 

[rharbers]

But tell me, what do you call someone who blindly falls in line behind the loudest, stupidest proponent of a cause, even when that proponent has a dreadful track record of accuracy?

A Critic?

 

[varwoche]

Quite bad form to use someone quoted out of context and improperly to make your "joke" work.

Actually, Jocko was putting the thread back on track with the OP. Afterall, it has nothing to do with GW (other than mis-stating reality) and nothing to do with Inconvenient Truth (other than crevice-derived speculation), and essentially boils down to keen political commentary consisting of: "neener, neener, Al Gore is a doofus".

 

[Q-Source]

I just watched Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth". It is worth watching, quite interesting and shocking to say the least. Whether or not Al Gore has a political agenda I don't care, global warming is a fact and the consequences are very real.

The documentary is available in Youtube. It is split in ten segments. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwY4VU7zhsw&mode=related&search=

I highly recommend it. Especially to those who are not familiar with all the fuss about global warming. He ends the film with a quote of Carl Sagan about the pale blue dot.

 

[steverino]

The same reason that when the ice in your Pepsi melts, your cup doesn't overflow.

It doesn't overflow because I just took a sip of it. I was thirsty.

 

[Darth Rotor]

...Yet you see nothing wrong with deciding ahead of time that Gore is "cherrypicking" and that he'll serve up "myths" and "pseudoscience."

Well, as long as you're objective and all...

I hope the book is better than the film, which was decent, and missed being excellent due to its including too much about "Al Gore, me." The film tended to clip, and cut to politics, during the meat of the presentations he was giving. The message ends up, again and again, one briefing slide deep.

Some of the better points made supported the environmental case he was making, but the film was too weighted to politics for politics sake, which was a shame. There was some good stuff for the brain to chew on here and there. Silver lining: the well sent message that the environmental matter is directly tied to politics, and that anyone interested in making a change had to accept that it will be through political process. Being informed is important.

My son and I had a great discussion on the environment, and on politics and propaganda, thanks to that film.

DR

 

[Q-Source]

As an outsider, I didn´t see the film as too weighted to politics. The feeling I got is that the environmental problem that we face is so serious that it overshadows any particular politician or politics.
However, being the US the highest contributor to global warming, I suppose it is an important issue to know about its politics and who is in charge. I wonder how things would have been different if Al Gore had been the President.

 

[Grammatron]

As an outsider, I didn´t see the film as too weighted to politics. The feeling I got is that the environmental problem that we face is so serious that it overshadows any particular politician or politics.
However, being the US the highest contributor to global warming, I suppose it is an important issue to know about its politics and who is in charge. I wonder how things would have been different if Al Gore had been the President.

The same way they changed when he was Vice President.

 

[Darth Rotor]

The same way they changed when he was Vice President.

Check. Congress is the critical mass.

DR

 

[steverino]

Pardon me Beerina! I had a massive doofus attack and misread Arctic for Antarctic.

So you are bi-polar?

 

[steverino]

The same way they changed when he was Vice President.

Great point! All of a sudden it has struck him that a crisis exists? When he was VP, couldn't he have marched into the Oval Office and said, "Um, Mr. President, when you're through with that, um, business under the table with Monica, can you take a look at these charts? Looks like Orlando is gunna' be under water by the time Chelsea is your age."

 

[Gurdur]

I suspect Jocko's point is that bad advocacy is bad advocacy, regardless of the side you're on. When a wingnut promotes a cause you believe in using flawed logic and bad data, it's still a good thing for your own side, in the long run, to smack that person down.

Labeling Gore as a wingnut, using various dismissive tactics even ahead of examining the evidence, is very bad advocacy indeed.

Crichton, BTW, is a stunningly bad advocate; and twisted advocacy is actually a game Crichton likes playing in his novels and elsewhere, whether it's on Japanese and crime in Japan, or on sexual molestation in the workplace, or his diatribes on global warming. He likes taking a contrarian position then selectively picking "evidence" to back up his positions.

 

[steverino]

I wonder how things would have been different if Al Gore had been the President.

Chicago's Sears Tower may (I speculate here, but the structure still stands) have been destroyed by terrorists. Mayor Daley and Bush were extremely aggresive with guarding our beloved building which was targeted by terrorists ad nauseum.

 

[corplinx]

I made so many typos in the opening post that it should have been summarily dismissed as a Nigerian email scam.

 

[Upchurch]

I made so many typos in the opening post that it should have been summarily dismissed as a Nigerian email scam.

scam? Then who did I send my bank account and routing numbers to?