dmmadde (August 21, 2008 at 10:55 pm)

Gore is a total tool...

sunnydayone (August 21, 2008 at 9:42 pm)

Spot on grastog1313,the warning is there.

greenerguardian (August 21, 2008 at 2:21 pm)

More on Gore and deforestation - Here is one of the commitments asked for on his Alliance For Climate Protection site - "To plant new trees and to join with others in preserving and protecting forests". I think that Gore, like all scientists familiar with anthropogenic global warming, understands the need for forest protection as well as CO2 emissions reduction, but I agree with you that the deforestation issue has not received as much public attention as it deserves.

greenerguardian (August 21, 2008 at 2:06 pm)

holomage - I don't know whether Gore has been addressing deforestation (he may be doing so), but the climate science community has clearly identified it as second only to fossil fuel consumption as a driving force in CO2-mediated global warming. The international community is now developing incentives for nations, particularly in the tropics, to acquire carbon credits by preserving their forests. This does not reduce the need, however, to replace fossil fuels with alternative energy sources.

capemall (August 21, 2008 at 11:42 am)

according to the harris interactive poll from apr 2008 only 32% of members from the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union are confident about our understanding of the archeological climate evidence

holomage (August 21, 2008 at 10:23 am)

For argument's sake, if carbon dioxide really is the cause for global warming, then why the fuck doesn't Mr Gore address the issue of killing the planet's forests, especially the rainforests. Someone needs to go back to school. Fucking chump.

wilbert1755 (August 21, 2008 at 3:54 am)

Maybe it as something to do with the Upside down graph in the AIT?

grastog1313 (August 21, 2008 at 3:00 am)

One good criterion for distinguishing those who understand climate science from those who are ignorant is the claim by the latter that "Gore got it backwards" in assigning causality to the CO2/temperature relationship. In fact, he was completely correct, as documented by extensive evidence (see e.g., Royer, Nature 446:530, 2007). Prehistorically, warming cycles were often initiated by orbital forcing that released CO2 from the oceans after a lag, but the CO2 then sustained warming on its own.

wilbert1755 (August 21, 2008 at 2:52 am)

Now were have we seen that comment before? Before? before? b...

msnbcdnc (August 21, 2008 at 2:52 am)

Yes, Al, the temp and co2 data "fit together" alright. Only the causality is the exact opposite of what you claim in the film.Oooops! Did your cadre of esteemed "scientists" help you on that screw up, too? Perhaps one of the biggest scientific screw ups/hoaxes of the past 50 years - "CO2 drives temps" - right up there with the frauds who claimed they had achieved cold fusion in a bottle.