Well let's be frank ... does this mean that any westerner can't be an environmentalist because their carbon footprint, no matter how environemntally conscious they may be, is going to be so much greater than a third world individual simply by virtue of the society they live in? I'm going to wager than an environmental scientist's carbon footpring is going to be larger than the "average" person as well considering they're probably jet setting all over to research sites, conferences, etc., the fact that they have a higher carbon footprint does not diminish their claims. Similarly, Al Gore is not an "average" person. He can probably do a greater good for the environment by travelling, speaking, and pursuading than he can by riding a bicycle everywhere.

Other than that, I heard the film was actually quite good with him being uncharacteristically charismatic.

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Well let's be frank ... does this mean that any westerner can't be an environmentalist because their carbon footprint, no matter how environemntally conscious they may be, is going to be so much greater than a third world individual simply by virtue of the society they live in? I'm going to wager than an environmental scientist's carbon footpring is going to be larger than the "average" person as well considering they're probably jet setting all over to research sites, conferences, etc., the fact that they have a higher carbon footprint does not diminish their claims. Similarly, Al Gore is not an "average" person. He can probably do a greater good for the environment by travelling, speaking, and pursuading than he can by riding a bicycle everywhere. Other than that, I heard the film was actually quite good with him being uncharacteristically charismatic.

So then conservation only applies to us lesser creatures? God forbid the guy actually practice what he preaches. I understand touring around to make speeches, but there is also some clear-cut hypocrisy going on. Politicians do it every day when they think that rules and laws apply to everyone but themselves (you silly commoners). Gore thrives on fear mongering the same way he accuses the current administartion of doing. The only difference is that in Gore's eyes, the enemy is you. The portrait of a self-hating liberal.

I'm sure the film is 100% better than "The Day After Tomorrow".

Keep on fishing, Drudge:

quote:

The Gores and all the employees of Generation lead a "carbon-neutral" lifestyle, reducing their energy consumption when possible and purchasing so-called offsets available on newly emerging carbon markets. Gore says he and Tipper regularly calculate their home and business energy use - including the carbon cost of his prodigious global travel. Then he purchases offsets equal to the amount of carbon emissions they generate. Last year, for example, Gore and Tipper atoned for their estimated 1 million miles in global air travel by giving money to an Indian solar electric company and a Bulgarian hydroelectric project.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/...gore&topic_set=

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Keep on fishing, Drudge: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/...gore&topic_set=

So then, it's OK to destroy the environment while you preach about protecting it, as long as you cough up enough money to appease the masses and atone for your sins? For all of the noise and hand waving Gore makes about the environment, he should be flying in an air-glider, riding a Segway or at least drive a hybrid in the very least. Or here's an idea--instead of flying back and forth 1000 times, why not just do a big video conference without having to travel and waste fuel?

quote:

Last year, for example, Gore and Tipper atoned for their estimated 1 million miles in global air travel by giving money to an Indian solar electric company and a Bulgarian hydroelectric project.

God forbid he actually reinvest that money in America while he bitches about outsourcing and a record trade deficit. He's a patriot too.

Here's a million bucks, I'm gonna go sink an oil tanker off the coast of the Galapagos Islands. We'll call it a wash.

Last edited by Shakka on May-25-2006 at 19:18

I don't care what Al Gore does, I really want to see this movie. I hope he doesn't play the blame game.

I read in wired that Al Gore contibutes a "carbon excise tax" to some environmental chairable organization to offset the damages/etc by usings planes, suvs, etc, to do what he does and live his lifestyle.

He encourages other millionares to do similar and pay a certain $x amount per carbon emmission or what not....

Forgot the specific term for it, but there it is..



And for the record, I still think Al Gore is a loney, I'm ceral!

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka So then, it's OK to destroy the environment while you preach about protecting it, as long as you cough up enough money to appease the masses and atone for your sins?

Well if we're to believe what the article says, then the point is that he isn't destroying the environment at all: whatever pollution he is responsible for, he balances out by investing an commensurable amount of money into some environment friendly scheme. Whether or not that means he is responsible for no net pollution whatsoever is another matter, but you can hardly accuse him of not practicing what he preaches.

quote:

For all of the noise and hand waving Gore makes about the environment, he should be flying in an air-glider, riding a Segway or at least drive a hybrid in the very least. Or here's an idea--instead of flying back and forth 1000 times, why not just do a big video conference without having to travel and waste fuel?

That's a pretty specious argument, and I think you know it. Saying that you can't be an environmentalist if you fly in a plane is a bit like saying that you can't be a capitalist unless you own a factory or that you can't be a Christian unless you give away all your possessions to the poor. There's a difference between practically pushing towards an ideal and impractically trying to institute an absolute ideal in one immediate go. Within reason, I don't see anything hypocritical about being passionate about the preservation of the enviroment and flying in planes from time to time.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus I read in wired

Yeah you did - maybe about 2 posts up from yours?

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Whether or not that means he is responsible for no net pollution whatsoever is another matter, but you can hardly accuse him of not practicing what he preaches.

NET pollution? Come on, that's a rationalization if ever there was one. Talk in absolutes. Regardless of whether he's buying pollution credits to "offset" his own pollution, his absolute contribution to the destruction of the environment is much greater than that of you or me, while all the while he's preaching about as vehemently of any of the most vocal protestors out there from PETA to Moveon.org.

It's fine for him to get his point across, but wouldn't it be more pragmatic to find ways to address the masses without having to incur massive environmental damage? Isn't that what this is about in that we (as a culture) are so into material excess (what with our SUVs and such) that we are hurting our environment at an accelerated rate? The least he could do is lead by example rather than try to rationalize his pathetic attempts to garner attention for himself by jetsetting around the world and telling everyone they're going to die in a Cat 6 hurricane this year? (and that it's George Bush's fault, no less).

Net pollution is for industries and factories that must produce output and whose role in the economy is much more vital. Applying that standard to Al Gore is silly.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Yeah you did - maybe about 2 posts up from yours?

Hehe, guess thats what I get for skipping over to many posts...
But, no I'm wired subscriber.. though his artcile was so boring and stupid drawing on false conclusions that I stopped reading it a couple pages in.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka So then conservation only applies to us lesser creatures? God forbid the guy actually practice what he preaches. I understand touring around to make speeches, but there is also some clear-cut hypocrisy going on. Politicians do it every day when they think that rules and laws apply to everyone but themselves (you silly commoners). Gore thrives on fear mongering the same way he accuses the current administartion of doing. The only difference is that in Gore's eyes, the enemy is you. The portrait of a self-hating liberal. I'm sure the film is 100% better than "The Day After Tomorrow".

No of course conservation doesn't solely apply to orindary people. The point is that context matters. Yes from an absolute perspective the guy is producing far more greenhouse gasses than you or I. But to what end is he producing green house gasses? Is he driving a hummer a block away to the grocery store? Is he jet-setting around everywhere to support a reckless, wild lascivious lifestyle? From a relative perspective Al Gore's contribution to green house gasses is virtually non-existant. He's going to do far more to curb greenhouse gasses by convincing the elecorate and the masses as a whole that it is a problem, thereby affecting those that matter the most: the public and governments.

Like I said before, an environmental scientist probably burns a crapload of carbon by travelling to the poles for research ... therefore can we rightly criticize him for his "hypocrisy"? A consultant who travels every week for a job can still be an environmentalists despite the fact that he creates more carbon than an "average" individual. Context and common sense ...

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Yes from an absolute perspective the guy is producing far more greenhouse gasses than you or I.

right, i get it, but what is his point then if the movie's premise is for all of us to reduce our lifestyle for the sake of a CO2 footprint and neglect the fact that he himself can prove that it is possible as filthy a polluter he has been to be CO2 nuetral? which is it?...or is it a ploy?

i honestly don't know, and my personal opinion of Gore aside, it sounds duplicitous.