Al Gore Refuses To Dignify Debate: "It's Not A Matter Of Theory"

Former Vice President Al Gore must not have been too surprised when it happened, but a well-known climate skeptic confronted him at the Wall Street Journal's ECO:nomics forum in Santa Monica. The skeptic, Bjorn Lomborg, is a favorite of conservatives who would rather not spend on the environment. David Sassoon introduced us to Lomborg's stock question in July. Earlier, Jason Linkins decried Lomborg's invited appearance on CNN. Here's what the Wall Street Journal had on the confrontation this week:

[Gore] was challenged by Mr. Lomborg, the Danish skeptical environmentalist who thinks the world would be better off spending more money on health and education issues than curbing carbon emissions.

"I don't mean to corner you, or maybe I do mean to corner you, but would you be willing to have a debate with me on that point?" asked the polo-shirt wearing Dane.

"I want to be polite to you," Mr. Gore responded. But, no. "The scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse. We have long since passed the time when we should pretend this is a 'on the one hand, on the other hand' issue," he said. "It's not a matter of theory or conjecture, for goodness sake," he added.

WATCH Gore's other comments -- including his response to an audience question from T. Boone Pickens:

Comments

[Atac]

The problem is the scientific community has already come to a consensus. One dissenting scientist or two does not mean there is still a debate.

We have proof that the earth is warming at a far faster rate than any time in recent history (like the last few million years). It happens to coincide with the industrial revolution. Natural cycles cannot explain what is happening because scientists have never seen this happen before.

People cannot comprehend time. they think 100 years is a long time. 100 years is NOTHING. 1000 years is nothing. The earth is 4 billion or so years old. People think ,a couple degrees warmer in less than a 100 years isn't a lot. That is huge.

and if you knew anything about science you'd understand why a degree or two can make an enormous difference in our ecology.

And even if you don't believe in global warming, innovation to curb carbon emissions can create new jobs and make our environment cleaner cause we aren't burning fossil fuels.

[aBr1t]

yep let me state that again for you "others"

FOUR BILLION YEARS + i said five but who cares its OLD!! and WE are the new kid on the block...

fact is we are a virus on this planet A NASTY SELF CONSUMING LITTLE VIRUS with NO intention of being friendly to our HOST "the planet"

smart bugs dont Eat the host if they dont have another to live on "flea" jumps ship when the host dies.. tell me what is our next host?

this is not fun time tv we are in DEEP SH#T and if you cant see it, well you just condemed me and my entire liniage to armagedon on a scale that will make u think gods rapture was a slap on the wrist.. and he aint coming to save you kiddo your onw your own JACK

[mulegino]

That's it-we're all just little viruses hanging around and destroying beneficent Mother Gaia. Of course, in Orwellian parlance, "all viruses are equal, but some viruses are more equal than others."

[Myke T]

One dissenting scientist or two, you`re kidding us right, that`s just ridiculous... That`s what the alarmists would like us to believe, but as usual, those just aren`t the facts.


http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6

[pkafin]

You just linked to an site that appears proud to be connected to Senator James Inhofe's blog. Do you realize how silly this makes you look. Inhofe has been one of the loudest dumbest critics of global warming. Nothing he says on the matter is taken seriously by anybody... Here, wait, let me find you some quotes:
----
Inhofe, about the climate scientists assembled by the U.N. in Paris:

INHOFE: These are politicians, these aren't scientists.
----
O'BRIEN: These are leading scientists who make these claims [about global warming] and now say there is a certainty of this human connection. Do you still reject that certainty?

INHOFE: Oh, definitely. I was on a program yesterday with Art Robinson. [An Oregon chemist and prominent global warming skeptic, who has admitted he has done no direct research on global warming.]......
-----
Inhofe likened former EPA Administrator Carol Browner to Tokyo Rose, and the EPA itself to The Gestapo
--------
several article will further show how completely out of his mind Inhofe is on this (and other) matters :

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2008/01/04/inhofe_report/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=97

HEck, here's site with his quotes about many matters. Almost every single one of them is laughably off base.

http://thinkexist.com/quotes/james_inhofe/1.html

Myke T. It's time for you to find a new spokesman if you want to be taken seriously.
""

[Pharos]

That has been debunked numerous times. Scientists have asked to be removed from that list and been refused. That's your source? You prefer to believe a senator who says a scientist says one thing over that same scientist who says the opposite. Wow, that makes real sense.

[JustAThought56]

MykeT you have not done your research. That is the MINORITY report, and it is ignored by the majority report because it is nothing but neo-con propaganda. The "conference" was actually nothing but a panel discussion, one of over 50, at the International Geologic Conference. The panel discussion had about 400 attendees in 2007, 650 in 2008.

There are a handful of quotes from some scientists who disagree with some aspect of the Stern Review, misrepresentations of things said, and the implication that these are all climatologists speaking is specious. It was a Geologic conference, and the only panel on climatology.

Further, the panel discussed ways to resolve the political issues, NOT the scientific issues.

[PC Contrarian]

The amount of ignorance about climate change doesn't surprise me when combined with the typical arrogance of the left. When a politically correct position is established, it becomes a virtual religious belief. One not to be questioned.

Why did the top Japanese climate scientists declare just last week that this so called consensus is more like astrology than science? Why did the founder of the weather channel call man made global warming the biggest hoax in human history?
Maybe because the average global temperature has gone down, not up, over the last ten years; while CO2 has risen.
Maybe because the polar ice caps on Mars have been melting in sync with ours.

No my friends, there are plenty of scientists who are not on board with Gore. They are reputable and independent. There is no real "consensus" on this; just the marketing of the idea.
For all those who pride yourselves on being intelligent, try googling "global warming skeptics" and allow for the possibility that you may have rushed to judgment on this issue.

We need more honest debates before slowing down the economy further; which is what would result from the "solutions" proposed.

[pkafin]

You are incorrect about many of your points.

There is not a single scientific organization that would agree with you assertion that there is "no real consensus on this".

You, of course, haven't included the names of any of these scientist that you refer to.

Why won't you?

[ZalaK]

"Why did the top Japanese climate scientists declare just last week that this so called consensus is more like astrology than science? Why did the founder of the weather channel call man made global warming the biggest hoax in human history?"

You answered your own questions with your final sentence:

"We need more honest debates before slowing down the economy further; which is what would result from the "solutions" proposed."

As long as global warming threatens the profit margin, oppositional posts will continue to flourish.
It will be interesting in the years ahead, as green technologies expand and create wealth how many concerned citizens on the right will be focused on correct science. I suspect not many, as long as the money is flowing.

[JustAThought56]

You have not done any research. Lomborg agrees with Gore on global warming. He wants to debate the policy for addressing it.

His policy is that the money should be spent now on HIV, malaria and malnutrition, and we should deal with global warming later. His position is a political one, not scientific, and it is not supported by the meta-analysis of the scientific data conducted by the non-partisan Stern Review panel.

Lomborg has made a career out of his perspective and is trying to gain international attention and more book sales by dragging an international figure like Al Gore into it.

[Deadgnome]

He's wrong in saying this isn't debatable. The science is constantly evolving and be debated amongst the scientists. It's an absurd stance from him. I may agree with him on some points, and am glad that he is out making a case for something that should be considered if we plan to extend the longevity of our species, but he is a politician and that complicates matter.

[aBr1t]

I will agree with you here its not about him but lets face it money makes the world go round..

I mean were is the outrage at the people who are ripping us off? were is the outrage at spending (giving) trillions to banks who more or less F#cked up the game and now we are in deep sh#t neways?? So what if he "was" key word there, a polictcian?? do you honeslty think i give a flying monkey WHO says what? the fact is HE is saying something that is "or maybe" true

Would you dance with the devil? becasue ever since the dawn of mankind we have dance with him and his pal god.. on this F#king merry go round we call life a perpetual a$$ rape of bibilcal preportions.. and guess what we are f#king out planet just like the crooks on wallstreet just like everything we do we f#uck up or do a$$ways...

very simple concept here its called ditch money and oil and stop spending zillions on war and tribal wars "bob marley quote" because thats all it is.

Human race? yea got that right "rat fkn race" more like, ants have more brains than humans "and that includes ME" why do i say me? well im stuck with 6billion single minded idiological crazies who wish to see the end of man kind and are happy to shop as they DO IT.. Pathetic

[JustAThought56]

The debate that he was being challenged to was about the policy for addressing global warming, not the science behind it. The scientist who asked for a debate is just trying to raise his arguments to the national level, noticed Al Gore and an AP reporter was there, and asked for a debate.

The scientist is Bjorn Lombord. His belief is that should we spend the money on malaria, HIV and malnutrition now and deal with global warming later. His position is not supported by the non-partisan meta-analysis of the data called the Stern Review.

[aBr1t]

Now i understand the trend here...!! wow finaly..

The real problem is GOD right? lets look at from this point of view..

God made the earth.. way way back whenever "5billion years ago" or something! then he put plants on the earth got broed ofc, then he made dinos! "well he made single celled bugs first but anywhoos".. then he got even more p1ssed off and thought bahhh ill ditch the dinos, and make someone in my own image and in my own likeness "hence man"...

Now in all that time the earth as we know it has gone through some prettyy interesting times dont you think? not to mention devien intervention from gods son "jeebus"...

Now.. people say well its natural that the earth warms and cools, well yeah thats not the point tho is it really?

The point is HUMANS are not cave men we do not use rocks "flints" to make fire and drag women into caves ect.. we drive cars we have atomic subs we can wipe out nations with a flick of a button "MAD" yes very!.. and some people will honestly HONESTLY sit here and spout about gore "like i care" and money "wallstreet" and beg to differ about what?

scamantics? do you have any clue what you are or why you are infact on this rock?

"self presovation/procreation" try that with no planet smart a$$

[UbiVeritas]

Brit, I think you should wander down to the neighborhood local and have a pint or two of something to calm your nerves.

[fumes]

say abr1t..

you've never read god's diary?

in the very first chapter he goes on about making this whole thing up 6,000 years ago..

and you'll love this part: he did it in ONE WORK WEEK!! no really!! bet you can't do that.

however... he provided no links... lol

[aBr1t]

yes its very much a comic book, hence why we are totaly screwed :)

[KYlawyer]

What do you expect to hear from the Limbautomatons? These are the same troglodytes who say that if the spotted owls and eagles can't adapt to humans, then sc rew them. The same folks who say god gave us the planet to do with as we see fit to hell with the consequences.

Also the same folks who say scr ew the poor, if they can't keep up let 'em die. But when you talk about evolution of life on earth they cream bloody murder about how "Darwinism" is a lie. Funny how completely inconsistent and anti-science they are huh?

[Myke T]

I think it`s great Al gore is the spokesperson for global warming, it just makes it that much more ridiculous. He blames every weather event on his global warming hoax, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis. I`m not left wing or right wing, and I don`t have a radical ideology like many here, but if I were a global warming extremist, I would tell Gore to shut up, and go back to his mansion that uses 17 more times the electricity than the average household does, his private jet, and his huge houseboat, and use the carbon offsets that he buys from himself. The man-made global warming hysteria is big business, and the 100 million dollar man Al Gore knows that better then anyone.

[aBr1t]

i take it that was a rant?

global warming hoax

now can you tell my why its a hoax? please forget Mr gore i want you to tell me why infact its a hoax

can you do that please?

[Javani]

Well, speaking of Al Gore in specific, his use of ice-carbon hockey stick graph to imply increased CO2 causes warming might be one of the most widely cast scientific hoaxes ever.

Then, there is the pseudo-science of "feedbacks" which are necessary because the forcing by increased CO2 alone is miniscule, even from the warming scientists.

No crisis, no money.

[kevenseven]

Actually, all that you write is a lie.

Gore speaks of climate change. Weather is something else to discuss.

The climate IS changing, due to human industrial activity.

[mulegino]

You raise a good point. When the "deniers" point to extreme cold weather, they are ridiculed with the " weather is not the same as climate change" mantra. When the "global warming catastrophists" point to other severe weather events, this is "indisputable evidence that global warming is occuring."

[aBr1t]

I hate making long posts only to find they never get posted!!! "rant"

Just wanted to make an observation!

The people who are looking at this from a stand point of "well what if we are wrong".. seem to take the time to atleast say something to add to the "debate" then we get the dittoheads who post one lines are very insulting "to me" as in "wow can you really be that dumb"... then we get the people who just pass on by and make some random commets like roflaamooooooo.

age rage? hmm ill say 18-23? at best and that was me being nice...

So please lets talk about the sun vs earth vs mars, lets talk about natural process's..

Because ill come back at you with facts, not about mars "look its on nasa" well im sure it is sunshine but the fact no humans live on mars is kinda silly dont you think?

but then again some people voted for GWB so what do i know?... WMD anyone? sounds about as looney as GW seems to people who HAVE BRAINS..

[Hallucinocynic]

Empiricists will always be hounded by dogmatists, rubes and Luddites.

[AngieMom57]

"...the term Luddite has been used derisively to describe anyone opposed to technological progress and technological change..."

Thanks, live and learn.

[toje]

Gore is a coward. Eric Holder should prosecute.

[aBr1t]

Automatons are back i see, how nice now i have something to poke

Gore - thats all i need to hear to understand one thing

you are a Tro//Bot aka Dittohead :D

[AngieMom57]

The association with T.Boone Pickens is in want of philanthropic energy.

[OswegoKayaker]

Thank you Al for telling us like it is. Much like Rachel Carson did long ago in "Silent Spring." No one wanted to hear her either. Too profitable to change ways, and who cared that the birds were dying and even our eagles were on the endangered list. She turned out to be right. We really couldn't afford all the cancer that the pesticide DDT was causing. Of course the big chemical companies called her a lunatic, of course she turned out to be correct. We will never know how many beneficial insects, animals and people died because of this one chemical. It was probably one of the first time the chemical companies were called out for genetic damage. She was so far ahead of her time -- and Al Gore is right on time -- if we listen. It won't be a silent spring this time, it could be a silent earth. People rose up and demanded a change then and I hope they have the courage to stand up now -- even through economic hardship and say "ENOUGH!" now. Let's stop debating what is inconvenient and start doing something to fix it.

[AngieMom57]

Thank you for taking the time to remind me of Rachel Carson and how corrupt money can make or break even "the good guy/gal."

Stay diligent.
Stay sober.
Stay mindful.

[grooveygrover]

Why is it bad to err on the side of caution , or even the earth?
being the devil's advocate say there is no real problem but we change our ways just in case there is, why is that such an awful thing?
I think the naysayers are just afraid of change.....
And they want to beat up on Al Gore

[aBr1t]

why?

reason is simple Gore = I dont like him, followed by "dittohead nonesens"

very easy to spot.

you know like one plus one = two

i hate gore + nonsense = your answer , and can be summed up in one word "dittohead" :)
Hope that helps but then again its abit pointless talking to robots ; 0

[UbiVeritas]

Well then everyone should convert to Christianity because if there is a hell, the implications for your eternal soul of NOT converting are too horrible to imagine.

[MGhamma]

The only significant debate would be between scientists with opposing views on this subject. Good luck with that.

[AngieMom57]

IMHO it would be like debating the pros and cons of child abuse.

Being responsible with our waste, any form of pollution, is just common sense. Unless you are a corporation and have no sense. hummmmm

[ZalaK]

Wise comments!

[NCRDIBULL]

Gore is looking more like Rush ... Now if only he would act like him and debate

[Grannyover70]

People who call Al Gore names, even though he has the respect of over 3000 scientists worldwide as well as being respected by millions of people, have a problem.

You do not want to change your way of living and will grab on to what one or two people who, with no evidence, want to dispute the facts. They, and you, don't want to be bothered with finding out the truth, you just want to belittle someone and have an excuse for your actions.

But whatever you want to hide from, you can't change the fact that we have to wean ourselves from foreign oil. No matter how much drilling we do in the U.S. we only have 3% of the world's oil, if we drilled everywhere you can mention. (T. Boone Pickens' information). We use 25% of the world's supply of oil. Sooner or later our price for foreign oil will be astronimacal as these countries want more money and we are unprepared.

For those of you wanting to quote the Bible you surely know that in Genesis, God gave man dominion over the earth. That means we are to take care of it. Not destroy or pollute it. That is our command since we are the ones who supposedly have the brains.

You also need to quit listening to Fox News. It causes brains to turn to mush.

[sickofit1]

Well, apparently YOU listen to Fox News.........your comments sound VERY mushy!!

[aBr1t]

well apparently he took the time to type more than one line and can atleast give some information other than tryin to be a spotty witty little nerd, well infact i take the word nerd back that would mean you have some logic flowing in you...

guess i was right when i said people who post one lines are nothing but automotons

Beg to differ? mr mushy? or are you sickofit yet?

[JustAThought56]

Thank you, you make some excellent observations and the data you cite is sound.

[jackpinesavage]

The simple fact of the matter is that we will have to eat, breathe, and drink whatever we put into the environment. It is a matter of waste, not a metaphysical issue of gigantic proportions. Al Gore does a terrible job of framing the issue...whether he does so on purpose is anybody's guess.

Second, we are not capable of destroying Life or the planet. Our egocentric view of the world is a fundamental mover in creating the problem; i fail to see how it will help us solve the problem.

There have been times when the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have been significantly higher than the most harrowing predictions of global warming...yet the Earth kept right on living and spinning. We may succeed in making the planet inhospitable for humans and a great many of the species with whom we currently share the planet. To which i say, philosophically, "So what?" Something else will rise to take our places. As it always has been, so it always will be.

Deal with the situation as it is, a matter of waste. If we're half as evolved as we think ourselves to be, we'll find a way to mimic the way in which nature works...closed loop with no such thing as waste.

[Pharos]

"Second, we are not capable of destroying Life or the planet." Why would you believe that?
What do you mean by waste? Define it please.

[aBr1t]

Deal with the situation as it is, a matter of waste. If we're half as evolved as we think ourselves to be, we'll find a way to mimic the way in which nature works...closed loop with no such thing as waste.

yep correct and what effect does that "waste" have, i mean you say we have no way to destroy life on this planet? hmm

care to look up mars or venus? because that is what happens when 1 you got no water and 2 what happens with run away green house gases..

this is not a debate its a out right joke... OH lets debate if we are totaly scewing our planet!!

How many oil spills? how much highly radio isotopes do we put in the earth shall i keep going?

and you want to tell me that "life" oh because its not humans its ok? wtf an inept thing to say, your post shows how so far up your own ar$e you infact ARE.

GOOD DAY SIR and dont let the OZONE hit you on the way out.

[jackpinesavage]

Because both are much larger than humanity. Both existed before humans, both will exist in some form after we're gone, regardless of how we go out.

Waste is whatever's left-over from doing work. Carbon is left-over from compounds that we mine for the hydrogen to burn; when the carbon is released it combines with oxygen...and global warming begins. The plastic bottle that we drank some necessary for life functioning water out of is waste because it's left over.

From a plant's eye view, oxygen is waste. But in the mostly closed loop of natural systems, something turns one form of life's waste into the raw material for it's own life. The cow breathes the oxygen, eats some grass and takes a dump. The waste from the cow gets used by plants to make some more waste for the cow to live on...ad infinatum.