4 ms·

"A handful of US scientists have made names for themselves by casting doubt on global warming research. In the past, the same people have also downplayed the da

by rick888 16y ago

"A handful of US scientists have made names for themselves by casting doubt on global warming research. In the past, the same people have also downplayed the dangers of passive smoking, acid rain and the ozone hole. In all cases, the tactics are the same: Spread doubt and claim it's too soon to take action." Global warming (global cooling, climate change) is starting to sound like a religion. I always start to question things when: 1) It's about the money. The same people that claim that global warming is a problem are also invested in carbon credits (including Al Gore). Not to mention the fact that governments use it to fill their pockets with billions of dollars in tax revenue (we need a TV, radion, and Human tax because we emit carbon dioxide). 2) Any scientist that even hints at mis-information regarding global warming (and backs it up with stats) is immediately attacked and discredited. 3) Those emails that circulated were pretty damning, yet supports still won't believe it. They falsified information and many universities and organizations came out (before anyone investigated) to admit that yes, they were also using this info. "With his sonorous voice, Fred Singer, 86, sounded like a grandfather explaining the obvious to a dim-witted child." For a minute, I thought this article was on the onion.com

kingkawn 16y ago
Gore's investment in carbon credits was originally part of him trying to put his money where his mouth was, not just pull a fast one on everyone. But you can always find a devil if you look long enough.
- lzw 16y ago
  He invested in a firm whose purpose is in trading a security that has no value currently, but which will be immensely valuable if the government passes laws requiring people to buy them... and for which Al Gore is actively campaigning to get government to pass said laws. This is the very essence of corruption.
  - kingkawn 16y ago
    You're intentionally confusing the genesis of his interest in the topic with the timeline of his investments to make your point. It has nothing to do with corruption. He has publicly discussed his business interests, they are common knowledge, and he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy. Corruption is pushing for changes that benefit you without acknowledging it, or obscuring your intentions.
    - rick888 16y ago
      "It has nothing to do with corruption. He has publicly discussed his business interests, they are common knowledge, and he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy. Corruption is pushing for changes that benefit you without acknowledging it, or obscuring your intentions" Ok, it's not corruption. It's just plain unethical. If Bush had come out and said to the American people that he was going to profit from the Iraq war, would it then make it okay? I guess the next time I'm going to commit a crime or do something unethical, I should let everyone know my intentions. This will make it okay. "he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy" a "case study". Really? Really?? I call a billion dollars in personal profits enforced by the government more than a case study.
      - kingkawn 16y ago
        I'm really not a monumental Gore fan or detractor, but I find your insistence that he's unethical puzzling. Usually the left is decried for not taking business considerations into account. Gore is doing the opposite, and being pilloried here even though he's publicly stated his intentions have been to make investments and start companies that would encourage actual change in the market. He's asking for government intervention because thats a major piece of the puzzle, but not focusing solely on it. I'd think that a reasonable business person would be able to appreciate this effort as holistic. This is the general approach of our era; if there's a vision for the world it had better have a relationship to economy, or it won't amount to much beyond piecemeal charity.
- rick888 16y ago
  "Gore's investment in carbon credits was originally part of him trying to put his money where his mouth was, not just pull a fast one on everyone. But you can always find a devil if you look long enough." so...he's not hiding the fact that he's doing it for the money? Well played Mr. Gore. The point is that he is supporting a push for carbon credit laws in which corporations will be forced to purchase carbon credits from companies that he has funded (and will see a return on the investment). Why again should I listen to a guy that will stand to make a killing from this? I love how the people on the left rail against the pharmaceutical companies for making insane profits, yet when it comes to green energy, look the other way,
powerje 16y ago
Your ridiculous talking points are well overplayed. Let us start with the e-mails - point out where they were "damning" and where information was "falsified", hint: it didn't happen, you're a fish swallowing a hook.
- randallsquared 16y ago
  There were several long discussions about this on this very site at the time, and many of us remember those discussions, so it's going to be difficult to spread FUD about them. Here's a pointer to a bunch of them, in case you missed the whole debacle: http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+climategate http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+c...
  - powerje 16y ago
    The worst things to come out of those emails were scientist getting pissed off about idiots who kept requesting data they were legally obligated not to provide (it was proprietary, if the people wanted certain data they had to buy it themselves), the rest of the data was already freely available. If you believe anything worse than that occurred then I'm sorry you're an idiot.
- rick888 16y ago
  "point out where they were "damning" and where information was "falsified", hint: it didn't happen, you're a fish swallowing a hook." No, you are. You are supporting the push to take money out of your pocket to support the nonsense that is global warming (which has changed names 3 times now).
- davidj 16y ago
  In the source code that they used to 'normalize' the tempatures, there was a variable named -- I kid you not -- FUDGE_FACTOR. Ha!

by rick888 16y ago

kingkawn 16y ago

Gore's investment in carbon credits was originally part of him trying to put his money where his mouth was, not just pull a fast one on everyone. But you can always find a devil if you look long enough.

lzw 16y ago
He invested in a firm whose purpose is in trading a security that has no value currently, but which will be immensely valuable if the government passes laws requiring people to buy them... and for which Al Gore is actively campaigning to get government to pass said laws. This is the very essence of corruption.
- kingkawn 16y ago
  You're intentionally confusing the genesis of his interest in the topic with the timeline of his investments to make your point. It has nothing to do with corruption. He has publicly discussed his business interests, they are common knowledge, and he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy. Corruption is pushing for changes that benefit you without acknowledging it, or obscuring your intentions.
  - rick888 16y ago
    "It has nothing to do with corruption. He has publicly discussed his business interests, they are common knowledge, and he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy. Corruption is pushing for changes that benefit you without acknowledging it, or obscuring your intentions" Ok, it's not corruption. It's just plain unethical. If Bush had come out and said to the American people that he was going to profit from the Iraq war, would it then make it okay? I guess the next time I'm going to commit a crime or do something unethical, I should let everyone know my intentions. This will make it okay. "he is in part using it a case study for the good economic opportunities behind sustainable technology and policy" a "case study". Really? Really?? I call a billion dollars in personal profits enforced by the government more than a case study.
    - kingkawn 16y ago
      I'm really not a monumental Gore fan or detractor, but I find your insistence that he's unethical puzzling. Usually the left is decried for not taking business considerations into account. Gore is doing the opposite, and being pilloried here even though he's publicly stated his intentions have been to make investments and start companies that would encourage actual change in the market. He's asking for government intervention because thats a major piece of the puzzle, but not focusing solely on it. I'd think that a reasonable business person would be able to appreciate this effort as holistic. This is the general approach of our era; if there's a vision for the world it had better have a relationship to economy, or it won't amount to much beyond piecemeal charity.
rick888 16y ago
"Gore's investment in carbon credits was originally part of him trying to put his money where his mouth was, not just pull a fast one on everyone. But you can always find a devil if you look long enough." so...he's not hiding the fact that he's doing it for the money? Well played Mr. Gore. The point is that he is supporting a push for carbon credit laws in which corporations will be forced to purchase carbon credits from companies that he has funded (and will see a return on the investment). Why again should I listen to a guy that will stand to make a killing from this? I love how the people on the left rail against the pharmaceutical companies for making insane profits, yet when it comes to green energy, look the other way,

powerje 16y ago

Your ridiculous talking points are well overplayed. Let us start with the e-mails - point out where they were "damning" and where information was "falsified", hint: it didn't happen, you're a fish swallowing a hook.

randallsquared 16y ago
There were several long discussions about this on this very site at the time, and many of us remember those discussions, so it's going to be difficult to spread FUD about them. Here's a pointer to a bunch of them, in case you missed the whole debacle: http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+climategate http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anews.ycombinator.com+c...
- powerje 16y ago
  The worst things to come out of those emails were scientist getting pissed off about idiots who kept requesting data they were legally obligated not to provide (it was proprietary, if the people wanted certain data they had to buy it themselves), the rest of the data was already freely available. If you believe anything worse than that occurred then I'm sorry you're an idiot.
rick888 16y ago
"point out where they were "damning" and where information was "falsified", hint: it didn't happen, you're a fish swallowing a hook." No, you are. You are supporting the push to take money out of your pocket to support the nonsense that is global warming (which has changed names 3 times now).
davidj 16y ago
In the source code that they used to 'normalize' the tempatures, there was a variable named -- I kid you not -- FUDGE_FACTOR. Ha!