iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Al Gore On Climate Change Deniers: It's Crucial To 'Win The Conversation'

First Posted: 08/30/11 10:36 AM ET Updated: 10/30/11 06:12 AM ET

In the video below from Mediaite, former Vice President Al Gore suggests that people today need to “win the conversation” against skeptics of climate change in the same way people stood up to racist comments during the civil rights movement.

Speaking with Climate Reality Project’s Alex Bogusky, Gore argues that in some places, even the words “climate change” have become politically incorrect.

Bogusky explains that it is often difficult to stand up to climate change deniers, but Gore says, “it is no more difficult than it was for Southerners to talk about the evils of racism.”

Gore agrees that explaining the science beyond climate change may be more difficult than confronting racism, but says the moral component is the same.

In the same interview, Gore takes on comments by Texas Governor and presidential hopeful Rick Perry, who has been an outspoken critic of climate change scientists. Perry recently said he believes there are "a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling in to their projects."

Gore explains that scientists have previously overturned accepted views, so there’s a “natural respect” for a contrarian impulse in the scientific community. But he argues that comments by Perry and others are totally different. He says, "This is an organized effort to attack the reputation of the scientific community as a whole. To attack their integrity, and to slander them with the lie that they are making up the science in order to make money."

Gore says members of the scientific community did not enter their profession to make money. Nor did they expect to be regularly defending themselves from political attack.

Out of fear of the public supporting "the scientific reality," Gore contends that:

Powerful polluters ... see it as a useful strategy to try to convince the public that the scientists are liars and that they're greedy and they're making stuff up. All in the service of their overarching strategy of creating enough doubt to persuade people that there shouldn't be any sense of urgency about addressing this crisis.

Not all of the candidates for the Republican presidential nomination are as unconvinced of climate change as Perry, however. Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman tweeted several weeks ago that he “trust[s] scientists on global warming.”

The Huffington Post’s Lynne Peeples reported that, according to some scientists, Hurricane Irene might be part of a growing trend of extreme weather events that are linked to climate change.

Over the past two weeks, hundreds of people have been arrested in front of the White House for protesting the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. According to Tar Sands Action leader Bill McKibben, it is expected to be "the largest collective act of civil disobedience in the history of the climate movement."

WATCH:

--



FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

In the video below from Mediaite, former Vice President Al Gore suggests that people today need to “win the conversation” against skeptics of climate change in the same way people stood up to raci...
In the video below from Mediaite, former Vice President Al Gore suggests that people today need to “win the conversation” against skeptics of climate change in the same way people stood up to raci...
Filed by James Gerken  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,344
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (36 total)
03:41 PM on 09/12/2011
Danish scientists' research published in the"Science"journal (August) have conclusively demonstrated that the sun and cosmic rays affect our climate and not carbon dioxide. As a biochemist I see the wonderful effects of carbon dioxide for all creatures on Earth. Without it, and the miraculous photosynthetic reaction, we would have neither food nor oxygen. In all green plants, CO2 combines with the H+ from water to form carbohydrates The 7 billion pelple on Earth consume 2.1 billion kg of carbohydrates every day, and they all contain CO2 from the atmosphere. This CO2 comes from volcanoes, forest fires, burning of fuel oil, and CO2 exhaled by humans and animals. Nature recycles carbon dioxide and there is always a small amount in the atmosphere, but that amount is only 0.038% of the total gases, not enough to have an effect on climate.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
02:27 PM on 09/13/2011
Science Denier Propaganda Claims Yet Another Victim

Dorothy: "Danish scientists­' research published in the"Scienc­e"journal (August) have conclusive­ly demonstrat­ed that the sun and cosmic rays affect our climate and not carbon dioxide."

Wrong - way wrong.

You have no idea as to what you are talking about.

First off the study you are referring to was published in "Nature", not "Science".

Second and more importantly, that CERN study does not say or suggest what you claim it does.

What does that CERN study actually say with respect to cosmic rays and climate change, before it is grossly distorted by science denier propaganda?

CERN:

"We have found that natural rates of atmospheric ionisation caused by cosmic rays can substantially enhance nucleation under the conditions we studied... This result leaves open the possibility that cosmic rays could also influence climate. However, it is premature to conclude that cosmic rays have a significant influence on climate until the additional nucleating vapours have been identified, their ion enhancement measured, and the ultimate effects on clouds have been confirmed."

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2011/downloads/CLOUD_SI_press-briefing_29JUL11.pdf

Moreover there is no viable correlation between cosmic rays and the observed global warming over recent decades, which is to say even if cosmic rays were to someday be shown to affect climate they cannot explain the observed global warming over recent decades.

For example:

http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/1885/2010/acp-10-1885-2010.html
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
02:30 PM on 09/13/2011
Dorothy: "As a biochemist..."

Uh huh.

A biochemist who confuses the journal "Nature" with "Science" and can't even understand what the study says, evidently doesn't understand the Carbon cycle, and is moreover taken in by the science denier "dilution" talking point / lie ("CO2… is only 0.038% of the total gases, not enough to have an effect on climate")?

Imagine that.

Here Dorothy, learn some actual science:

* Greenhouse gases including anthropogenic CO2 -- which is generated mostly by fossil fuel burning -- warm the Earth. Without greenhouse gases the average temperature of the Earth would be below freezing.

* Satellite measurements demonstrate that increasing atmospheric CO2 has increased heat energy retention in the atmosphere­.

* Atmospheric CO2 has increased ~40% since the dawn of the fossil fuel era to the highest level in at least 800,000 years, if not far longer.

* Overwhelming scientific evidence indicates that said increased atmospheric CO2 is due to anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

* There is a strong correlation­­­ between said atmospheric­­­ CO2 increase and said recent warming.

* Known natural forcing agents of historical global warming - including changes in orbital cycles and increases in solar radiative output - cannot explain the bulk of said recent warming. Neither has any scientific theory to explain the bulk of said recent warming other than anthropogenic global warming survived scientific scrutiny.

Again these are all scientific facts. Which is to say:

The scientific evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming is overwhelming.
FoundersFan
right = correct
02:26 PM on 09/09/2011
Al Gore at his very best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMrxC-qEHb8
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chipher
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
11:51 PM on 09/10/2011
"Al Gore at his very best."

Is that the entirety of your rebuttal to more than a century of scientific research? Al Gore accidentally said millions instead of thousands in one of hundreds of interviews and speaking engagements.

That doesn't strike me as a significant problem. Why do you think it is noteworthy?
FoundersFan
right = correct
06:55 AM on 09/11/2011
Ah, but when a conservative misspeaks it's the biggest thing on the face of the Earth. I seeee.
PATOISJAM
reason: strategize: succeed
11:32 AM on 09/09/2011
Al Gore is right on target. So what if his predictions aren't right on target? Not one of us has experienced climate change and its effects before. What is very real is that weather has gone awry.

It is a good idea to get rid of manicured lawns and golf courses. They are big consumers of water and we should be preserving our aquifers. Clean drinkable water will be so expensive that only the pope, politicians and rich people will have it.

Sad how zombie-like people are to the catastrophe facing us.

To be forewarned is to be forearmed but because of constant bickering these is no move to less pollution and a better way of doing things that are essential to sustaining our planet. This is not a new thing though. Men are not made to lead men so they stalemate every which way.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
11:52 PM on 09/10/2011
"So what if his prediction­s aren't right on target?"

What predictions weren't on target?
05:57 AM on 09/08/2011
If we need to fight skeptics as racism - does that mean he thinks that Global Warming is a moral issue and not scientific? Or, does it mean he thinks racism is a scientific issue and not a moral one....

As I can read this article it looks like Mr. Gore likes to stand up against skeptics. When is the last time Mr. Gore has been in the same room as a skeptic? How often has Mr. Gore take any questions from the public the last 10 years? Why does he refuse to even speak to scientists who question the evidence? And I don't mean just anyone who likes to call themselves "Scientists", but Real Scientists who are professors and doctors at respectable US and foreign universities.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
11:31 AM on 09/08/2011
"does that mean he thinks that Global Warming is a moral issue and not scientific ? Or, does it mean he thinks racism is a scientific issue and not a moral one.... "

You say that as if global warming could not be both a scientific issue and a moral issue, which is of course absurd.
02:54 PM on 09/08/2011
Are you for real? Or just trying to be funny? Global Warming is not a matter of a opinion but purely a scientific issue. To say it is a moral question, is just as ridiculous as to announce the weather to be a moral issue.

We may have a different opinion regarding if the weather is good or bad. But if it rains, it rains, regardless your moral issues.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
02:52 PM on 09/08/2011
"does that mean he thinks that Global Warming is a moral issue and not scientific­? Or, does it mean he thinks racism is a scientific issue and not a moral one.... "

You say that as if global warming can't be a moral issue and a scientific issue, which is of course absurd.
09:29 PM on 09/07/2011
More big corporate millions have been spent to discredit Gore than any other man.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
12:18 PM on 09/07/2011
NIPCC Report Lead Author Bob Carter Debunked

NIPCC Report lead author uses Trick to Hide The Incline in global warming, a­s statistician Tamino demonstrates.*

NIPCC Report (Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2011 Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) lead author Bob Carter is a leader of and/or contributor to several of the most prominent organizations that are "skeptical­" of man-made global warming including:

* The Heartland Institute

* The Science & Public Policy Institute (SPPI)

* The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)

* The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)

* The International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC)

Dear Richard2,

Isn't NIPCC Report lead author Bob Carter committing de facto fraud by misrepresenting increasing global temperature data as flat? *

Isn't that like a global warming scam, a climate science hoax, an indefensible lie, etc?

If you disagree again please provide a valid scientific rational to support NIPCC Report lead author Bob Carter's deeply misleading misrepresentation of global warming temperature data over recent decades - thank you.

Please answer the question, Richard2, instead of continuing to run away from it.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
08:34 AM on 09/07/2011
The Other Climate Theory:

"But a few physicists weren't worrying about Al Gore in the 1990s. They were theorizing about another possible factor in climate change: charged subatomic particles from outer space, or "cosmic rays," whose atmospheric levels appear to rise and fall with the weakness or strength of solar winds that deflect them from the earth. These shifts might significantly impact the type and quantity of clouds covering the earth, providing a clue to one of the least-understood but most important questions about climate. Heavenly bodies might be driving long-term weather trends.

The theory has now moved from the corners of climate skepticism to the center of the physical-science universe: CERN, also known as the European Organization for Nuclear Research. At the Franco-Swiss home of the world's most powerful particle accelerator, scientists have been shooting simulated cosmic rays into a cloud chamber to isolate and measure their contribution to cloud formation. CERN's researchers reported last month that in the conditions they've observed so far, these rays appear to be enhancing the formation rates of pre-cloud seeds by up to a factor of 10. Current climate models do not consider any impact of cosmic rays on clouds."- wsj

Al Gore has been decerned.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
B Wood
09:45 AM on 09/07/2011
Have you read CERN's own press release? WSJ, Larry Solomon and the blogs with an agenda have goen well beyond what the research is telling us so far.

Solomon was so flagrant in his misrepresentation that he referenced Kirby's comments from 1998 which frankly were rather boastful compared to his much more subdued comments made recently.

Now instead of referencing the WSJ, how about this link?

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/08/the-cerncloud-results-are-surprisingly-interesting/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richard2
04:34 PM on 09/07/2011
Well, to the general public, the Wall Street Journal is a more credible information source than is realclimate, which has a long history of hostility toward anyone even mildly sceptical of the man-made global warming cult.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canuckhoser
Don't mind the man behind the curtain
12:00 PM on 09/07/2011
So when the lead scientist says the study is inconclusive and at the moment says NOTHING about a cosmic ray "effect", and won't know what the results are for at least 5-10 years...you just proved how gullible you are by Kirkby himself....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBIgp
If I'm wrong, please show me
11:20 PM on 09/06/2011
Al Gore sees deniers a threat to human civilization. Joseph McCarthy saw communists as a threat to human civilization. Al Gore vilifies deniers as shills for the oil companies Joseph McCarthy vilified communists as agents of the Soviet Union. Al Gore Labels anyone who questions any aspect of global warming a "denier". Joseph McCarthy labeled anyone who questioned American foreign policy as a communist. Al Gore implies that "denial" is equivalent to racism. Joseph McCarthy assumed that anyone who sympathized with communism was anti-american. Anyone who questions Al Gores methods is a denier. Anyone who questions Joseph McCarthy's methods was a communist.
Al Gore need to drop his hate-mongering campaign and focus on a plan, with specifics, for reducing c02. It should contain how much it will cost and what will be the benefits. How much energy will we use and where will it come from.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canuckhoser
Don't mind the man behind the curtain
11:47 PM on 09/06/2011
white noise

anyone who engages in a good faith argument need not be shunned. anyone who engages in conspiracies, conflicts of interest and anti-science, need be.

you are mischaracterizing everything he just said. which is typically, the denier playbook
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBIgp
If I'm wrong, please show me
04:27 PM on 09/07/2011
Who decides who is shunned and who isn't? Who is engaging in a conspiracy? What conspiracy? Joseph McCarthy asserted that anyone who wasn't a communist had nothing to fear. Al Gore's strategy is to intimidate people into silence - and THAT is un-democratic.
So what is your plan do reduce c02?
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
12:20 PM on 09/07/2011
"Democracy depends on accurate informatio­n being readily available to the public, and I see people who propagate such disinforma­tion campaigns as enemies of Democracy."

-- Climate scientist and active Republican Dr. Barry Bickmore

http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/about-this-blog/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBIgp
If I'm wrong, please show me
04:18 PM on 09/07/2011
And Joseph McCarthy saw communist sympathizers as a threat to democracy. Misinformation has always be a part of democracy and probably always will be - people are not objective and are often wrong. I've seen plenty of disinformation from the left on nuclear power.

Vilifying people because the disagree with you is a bigger threat to democracy. I don't like it when Republicans do it, I don't like it when Democrats do it.

Al Gore is not going to win the hearts and mind of people with the tactics he is using. He should focus on a plan, with specifics and convince the public.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
04:53 PM on 09/07/2011
"Democracy depends on accurate informatio­­n being readily available to the public, and I see people who propagate such disinforma­­tion campaigns as enemies of Democracy.­"

-- Climate scientist and active Republican Dr. Barry Bickmore

MrBIgp: "Vilifying people because the disagree with you is a bigger threat to democracy."

You seem confused, MrBIgp:

Science denial is not mere "disagreement" - it is the propagation of disinformation and reality denial.

HTH.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
01:07 PM on 09/06/2011
Climate scientist and active Republican Dr. Barry Bickmore:
----------------------------------

I’ve recently been involved with other scientists and scholars in Utah trying to stop the spread of outright lies, half-truths, abuses of data, and distortions about climate change. Much of this disinformation is coming from (or through) some Republican members of the Utah Legislature, and the other Republican (and some Democratic) members have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker...

In addition, I’m a Republican myself, and it galls me that my own party has locally fallen for a bunch of conspiracy theories and scientifically incompetent trash. In my opinion, something has to be done to save the party from disaster in the long run…

Democracy depends on accurate information being readily available to the public, and I see people who propagate such disinformation campaigns as enemies of Democracy.

http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/about-this-blog/
photo
StephenBP
What's he building in there?
10:13 PM on 09/05/2011
The fossil fuel industry needs to keep Americans ignorant in order to get them to continue to purchase as much fossil fuel as possible before it is replaced by other energy sources.

FOX News is fossil fuel directed and is probably the biggest media criminal in this, and in many other ways.

FOX weather miscaster Joe Bastardi tell us that the world is cooling and predicted that Arctic Ice would be returning to more normal levels this year.

But it is not.

The Arctic ice mass is melting fast enough to be on the verge of setting a new record this month.

Do FOX News listerners know about this?

Of Course Not!

Does science matter to the right wing?

Apparently not!

Is denial of global warming on a par with denial of human rights to other races?

You betcha!
10:18 PM on 09/06/2011
What happened to the Al Gore piece on dirty tar sands oil? Why was it taken down so soon? I contend it was nothing more than an advertising ploy brought to you by Al Gore himself who is a huge stake-holder in Occidental Petroleum (old family money ties to BIG OIL!). See, Algore doesn't mind you using fossil fuels so much as he just doesn't really want you using someone else's fossil fuel. Al wants you to oppose more oil from those OTHER resources (his competitors). That way, crude prices stay nice and high and he makes millions while preaching to you about caring for the climate. Using tar sand oil for such products as asphalt, plastics, paint, lubricants, candles, synthetic rubber, candy, containers, etc., etc., etc., would reduce the demand for Gore's oil from Occidental's Pacific coast platforms and that just wouldn't be acceptable. Occidental's late chairman, Armand Hammer, liked to say that he had Gore's father, Senator Albert Gore, Senior "in my back pocket". My opinion…. Al Gore is The World's Biggest Hypocrite... and Con Man. His credibility is way short of zero. Oh, but he DID invent the internet, right?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
canuckhoser
Don't mind the man behind the curtain
11:48 PM on 09/06/2011
more white noise.

you have posting nothing but slander and distortions of reality. get your gore derangement syndrome in check please
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
12:25 PM on 09/07/2011
"Oh, but he DID invent the internet, right?"

Oh, but you are confused: Gore helped in the creation of the internet.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
09:33 PM on 09/07/2011
I'm so glad the Canadian govt has banned Fox and scrambled their signal. Their law requiring news organizations to tell the truth would do us a world of good here.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MrBIgp
If I'm wrong, please show me
06:36 PM on 09/09/2011
We certainly need censorship. We are too stupid to decide what information to believe, we need a government agency do decide for us. Just one problem, how do you keep fox new from controlling that agency.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
iknowscottyknows
07:48 PM on 09/05/2011
This is simply the latest environmental scare courtesy of the People Are An Evil Virus clump.

Scares of this type are cyclical, like the weather. If you live long enough you'll see dozens.
photo
StephenBP
What's he building in there?
10:00 PM on 09/05/2011
In order for this to be a scare, someone has to be scared.
I'm not scared.
Are you scared?
Do you scare easily?
Are you a child?
Are you afraid to face unpleasant possibilities?
What if the libs and warmers are right?
Then what
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
10:17 AM on 09/06/2011
This is simply the latest science denier campaign courtesy of the Ideology Trumps Science camp.

Denier campaigns like this are predictable, like global warming. If you live long enough you'll see them whenever scientific evidence undermines economic and/or religious ideology.
photo
BluePhantom2
The Blacksmith & the Artist reflected in their art
04:25 PM on 09/05/2011
And stand up to Al Gore as you would any other carnival barker!
09:35 PM on 09/07/2011
So I guess Gore has just been doing this for the fun of it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Exusian
Nature bats last
03:10 PM on 09/05/2011
Hey givem', how many of those 10,000 seats in your stadium are occupied by water vapor?

And what rows are they sitting in?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:28 AM on 09/05/2011
"It's snowing where I live. Therefore, the is no such thing as Global Warming".
You hear that a lot.

There is no better reason to call these Climate Change deniers as flat-earthers, The analogy is perfect. That's what a guy in Kansas sees, as far as his eye can see, that the earth is flat.

That increase levels of CO2 in the upper atmosphere is because of human activity is a demonstrable fact.
That CO2 is a greenhouse gas is a demonstrable fact.

That the rapid increase in global temperature is because of human activity is not and has not been a subject of debate in scientific circles for over thirty years now.

But, if there are still Climate Change deniers, well! perhaps there always be some. Let evolution take care of them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:17 AM on 09/05/2011
I disagree with Al Gore on this one.
One cannot win a conversation/argument against dining tables and flat-earthers.
Let science do its job.

One has to go by this simple fact: throughout history, whenever dogma and religion have challenged science, science has eventually won.

Just focus on science and keep reporting facts.
Those who still believe in flat-earth, will eventually fall off the edge of it.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
07:54 AM on 09/11/2011
"One cannot win a conversati­on/argumen­t against dining tables and flat-earth­ers.... throughout history, whenever dogma and religion have challenged science, science has eventually won."

I see your point, but science wins because it is publicized, taught, and explained.