2006-07-30 08:36:41 PM screams incomprehensible
that approach worked for Bush, didn't it?

Are you saying Bush looks good?

Michael Douglas seemed a like a pretty good guy in The American President. Maybe we should have him run, too!

Great article...I love comedy!

Bush and Co. are a threat to everything American, and to much of the rest of the world as well. But it isn't the Republicans alone who are screwing us. Al Gore does speak some truth, but very few people are talking about the underlying causes (and our underlying responsibility) for the rise of terrorism and global warming and a host of other ills.

This guy delivers. But he's not running for office.

Schroedinger

Let me guess, you're one of those kids who never took HS physics, and who therefore believe that the sun should generate greater tides than the moon does, since the sun's force of gravity on the earth is so much more powerful?It's not the raw amount that matters, it's the variation. It took hundreds of millions of years for all that carbon to be absorbed underground and bring carbon down to their current levels, and now humankind is undoing the bulk of its work in a matter of centuries.


You say I didn't take high school physics and then post such fanciful bullshiat as that? The tide analogy is way offbase. The solar impact is from radiant heat not gravitational force.

As for the argument you make that it took millions of years to reduce the carbon in the air (i guess you refer to CO2 and not free C molecules), you are correct. The atmospheric CO2 levels are lower than throughout earlier periods of time (millions of years).


Given that the late Ordovician suffered an ice age (with associated mass extinction) while atmospheric CO2 levels were more than 4,000ppm higher than those of today (yes, that's a full order of magnitude higher), levels at which current 'guesstimations' of climate sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 suggest every last skerrick of ice should have been melted off the planet, we admit significant scepticism over simplistic claims of small increment in atmospheric CO2 equating to toasted planet. Granted, continental configuration now is nothing like it was then, Sol's irradiance differs, as do orbits, obliquity, etc., etc. but there is no obvious correlation between atmospheric CO2 and planetary temperature over the last 600 million years, so why would such relatively tiny amounts suddenly become a critical factor now?

This is an excerpt from Steven J Milloy's book about junk science. You'll dimiss it out of hand cause you can't stand differing thought from your own implanted ideas.

Your air of disdain for those that think differently outs you for your mindless and blind following of whatever theory is popular at the time. In the 70's it was the "Coming Ice Age!" scare. Didn't buy that and won't buy this one. Do some independent thinking and learn on your own.

You earth-worshippers got a lot of damn gall to attack other people of faith. You make fun of people who "belive in the invisible man in the sky" yet you worship the planet as if it were a deity.

Last post for me in this thread gotta go to work. I'll burn up about 20 gallons of gas today. Doing my part to keep CO2 in the air. Gotta have something for the trees to breathe ya know.


\Al Gore.... now that's funny!

vulture


How about anyone but Clinton or Bush and anyone associated with their administrations...Its time for new blood in both parties who are neither far left or far right lunatics.

Theres no "left" in America as far as I can see. "Socialist" is a slur word and the Democrats would be a radical right party in most countries.

if Al would reject kyoto as the wrong approach and promise not to sign on to it ever, I would vote for him for president.

/voted for him in 2000

I honestly think a good number of people here would love to see a 3rd term by GWB.

Amazing.

This thread needs more pix of Geddy Lee

Spectrum:

Thank you for your response. But are you seriously saying here that we can detect 1/20th of a degree change in global average surface temperature from ice cores? And in a specific year? That is remarkably precise.

To be honest, I am not sure precisely what the accuracy is for paleotemperature measurement off the top of my head. I know that it uses oxygen isotope ratios, which can be determined to a precision of something like .02%. I also know that isotope decay can be like clockwork, so 1/20th of a degree may not be too far off. But even if it weren't quite that accurate, 1/10th of a degree of accuracy would still be fine, considering that global temperatures generally vary by a few degrees centigrade.

2006-07-31 08:10:32 AM kab
I honestly think a good number of people here would love to see a 3rd term by GWB.

Here? At Fark.com?

Do you get a different site than everyone else when you type in www.fark.com? Fark is the center of the Bush hating universe!

dougske

That's my new favorite haiku, great job dougske!

Too goofy to be
President of anything
Think of the country

Global Warming is a myth.

Well, Gore did win in 2000. Who's to believe he couldn't win in 2008?

well i wanted him to win the first go-round, but after he whined and wouldn't let go after the loss (yes, loss, he lost the whole thing, just won the popular vote), after he lost his frickin' mind and screamed about how bush betrayed us and played on our fears, and then came out and said about how he thinks it's okay to lie himself in order to get people to pay attention to global warming (i guess a lie is only important if people die, according to the farkers who argued for him on that) . . . after he did all that, i'd only vote for him over hillary

(mistakes were made in their terms of office but who hasn't made any)

hell, the only reason i wanted him the first time is because he was better than bush--i knew where he stood on things and didn't know where bush stands (part of the reason i hated kerry, the other part was because kerry was worse than anyone that ran yet--didn't know where he stood and when he told you, he'd only tell you something else later)

bush isn't great, he's made a lot of mistakes but he's done a lot of good too . . . i think whether history looks good on him won't be known until twenty years from now but i think the good will outweigh the bad because the war isn't popular but inaction can be far far worse

i want good canidates from both parties, they've both been slipping, because they're worried about pleasing everyone and not taking a stance . . . so here's an idea to the democrats too, if you have an idea, tell us . . . it's this 20/20 hindsight criticism that you have without any forsight /plan to offer that disgusts me . . . more than the simple whining, mudslinging, and outlandish comments

"In the 70's it was the "Coming Ice Age!" scare"

No it wasn't.

One article in Newsweek doesn't make for scientific consensus.

-10 points for strawman obtusity.

HA! HA! Al Gore. You can't be serial.

I thought the SP episode was right on target with that sneaky punk Al Gore.

He's about as good a choice for a 2008 democratic candidate as Hillary Clinton.. though I guess the quality of the candidates does represent that of the party in general..

And don't get me started on the Republicans.

/someone else please vote Libertarian in 2008
//yes the party isn't perfect
///do not be afraid, change is good.

I'm defineately voting for Warner this time around. He is the most electable candidate that will run, who is still somewhat progressive.

That being said, if I were Al Gore, I would run my campaign like a re-election. You voted for me once, and I am asking you to support me again.

/Re-Elect Al Gore in 2008??
//meh, warner/edwards is what I want
///I also want some cake

Feingold 08

IamAwake: In doing so he used more oil than I will in a lifetime of driving.

He also did more good than you will in a lifetime. I get your point but take into consideration that to change anything you have to conform in many other ways. This is why stinky protestors are not taken seriously even though they are often ideal examples of what they protest in support of. I'd rather follow a hypocrate who gets things done.

The_Devil's_Due: Oops

PWN3D.

2006-07-31 01:50:15 AM Confabulat [TotalFark]

I spent three years working in a VA hospital, maroon. I'm pretty sure I know I know more about the topic than you, but please tell me more.

Yes, I am aware that "Free" means taxpayer dollars will fund it. We've spend about half a trillion of them since 2003 killing Iraqis.

Look at that wise spending!


You spent 3 whole years working in a government-run hospital? Good for you...cookie later. I've lived in a country with government-run health care, "maroon" (gad, I thought that tard slang died with Mel Blanc), longer than 3 years even. In fact, my family have worked in hospitals as either doctors or administrators for far longer than yer incredible 3 years...so I'll go ahead and speak from personal experience, if that's okay with you.

Free isn't free when it comes to anything coming from the government. Your war vs universal health care crack is a dog that won't hunt, maroon. War is temporary. Very few government entitlement programs are.

I far prefer spending treasure to fight the war now, over there, that if we did not fight it now and over there, we'd end up fighting later and here. I know concepts such as "planning" and cause and effect are difficult to grasp when you believe in such fairy tales as "free health care" (which apparently given your response means free = $500B...maroon) but thankfully not everyone with a vote is as short-sighted or myopically-configured as you.

Government-run health care is neither all that free nor all that great.

Confabulat: Gore told Rolling Stone, "Right now we are borrowing huge amounts of money from China to buy huge amounts of oil from the most unstable region of the world, and to bring it here and burn it in ways that destroy the habitability of the planet. That is nuts! We have to change every aspect of that."

Hard to argue with that logic.

Well, it's a good thing none of that was going on while he was Vice-President!

Oh, wait. Whoops.

2006-07-31 03:48:36 AM Cerebral Ballsy [TotalFark]

CraigWhenever someone says something patently inane like that I examine their choice of political candidates closely...and then tend to vote for the other guy.

And I'm soooo glad you did. Now I can ride a bike to work and dream of someday owning a cardboard box to live in since I can't afford a home. Thanks for the wise decision, ass.


So, let me get this straight...the reason you ride a bike to work and cannot afford a home is...the government's fault? How so?

Did the government prevent from attending the mandatory public education system? No? Did you apply yourself and receive an education? No? Perhaps you discovered a bit of personal initiative and went out and did something with your life? No? Maybe you went out after all the mandatory education was done and voluntarily got some more? No?

Listen, sport, Kissimmee is just like the rest of the US (I know, until 2 years ago I lived down the road in Tampa). This country gives you all the tools to succeed...you just have to actually decide to do something with those opportunities, quit whining and expecting your rich uncle Sam to come coddle you, get off your whiney ass and go take care of yourself.

Personally, I have a nice home in a decent neighborhood. I've built a family I am most proud of and I continue to work to ensure that it's gets better for us everyday. However, I did not come from a background of privilege. My folks went broke...twice. I went to public school. I went to college on my own dime working a full time job while in school and I got a degree. In short, I busted ass to have what you're blaming the government for not giving you.

Suck it up Nancy. Try not to cry when I tell you this: the world isn't here to cater to you. If you want something you have to actually go get it...and sometimes you won't get it even then. Sometimes [gasp!] you may actually have to accept defeat/rejection and get up and do it again.

But don't expect that voting for guy A over guy B means you get to have the big house, lots of money and never have to worry about your future. Unless you're one of the Democrat fave minorities whom they lie to each election cycle to get votes...in which case, uh...it's all a lie.

/end rant

Yeah, King George beat the shiat out of Gore. It wasn't even a fight. Nope. Certainly not one of the closest races in the history of the nation. Nobody would vote for him again because nobody voted for him the first time.

/interesting that some of the people saying Gore could not win are the same ones saying Lieberman shouldn't be challenged
//interesting? I meant obvious...

Al Gore? A cardboard cut-out would be more effective than the real thing. That's why I'm voting Charles Barkley (screw Alabama, let's put him in the White House)

right....gore is gonna save us all cuz he made a movie recently.

2006-07-31 07:29:14 AMalidade

You say I didn't take high school physics and then post such fanciful bullshiat as that? The tide analogy is way offbase. The solar impact is from radiant heat not gravitational force.

Yes, it's called an "analogy," dude. Specially for providing an example of the principle, "It's not the raw amount that matters, it's the variation." e.g., the sun may provide a greater role in temperature than CO2 does, but since it's variation isn't as much, it can't be adequately used to explain what's happening.

Apparently you never took HS english, either.

As for the argument you make that it took millions of years to reduce the carbon in the air (i guess you refer to CO2 and not free C molecules),

Plants and photosynthetic bacteria absorb carbon dioxide, and release oxygen. Ergo, only the carbon is absorb, which are then converted into hydrocarbons like coal and oil (as opposed to hydrocarbon dioxides) and then burned off.

This is an excerpt from Steven J Milloy's book about junk science.

You mean the same website that blames the ban on DDT for an estimated 13 billion cases of malaria worldwide, twice the world population, yet refuses to acknoweldge that human kind is responsible for global warming?

You'll dimiss it out of hand cause you can't stand differing thought from your own implanted ideas.

Or, because the argument isn't peer reviewed, the guy has no real credentials in the field, the statement is opinionated and barely qualified (what's his standard for determining an "obvious" correlation?), is a paid shill, and his website makes outlandish claims about how a ban on malaria in the last 50 years can result in the infection of twice the world population.

Your air of disdain for those that think differently outs you for your mindless and blind following of whatever theory is popular at the time. In the 70's it was the "Coming Ice Age!"

Myth.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94

You earth-worshippers got a lot of damn gall to attack other people of faith. You make fun of people who "belive in the invisible man in the sky" yet you worship the planet as if it were a deity.

Not only is that comment a complete strawman, but it's also ludicrus even if true. The planet has been proven to exist. The invisible man in the sky has not. You act like believing in something with known existence is more silly than believing in something with unknown exitence.

Which I guess is why you would believe the folks at junkscience.

You libs are funny. You want to march Al Gore, the most effeminate and hollow loser to ever run for president, out all over again. Gore is absolutely convinced that the world is on the brink of the abyss because of global warming. Nevermind that he has no idea what to do about it. Nevermind that he's not even a farking scientist and flunked out of Vanderbilts Divinity School. Nevermind that he sees the internal combustion engine as a greater threat than radical Islam. Nevermind that he is absolutely farked in the head. So yes, please pleas please nominate this man. The bigger the loser, the more you shower your idiotic support. And I hate to ruin the suspense for you....but he'll lose. Again. It what he does best.

Gawdzila: To be honest, I am not sure precisely what the accuracy is for paleotemperature measurement off the top of my head. I know that it uses oxygen isotope ratios, which can be determined to a precision of something like .02%. I also know that isotope decay can be like clockwork, so 1/20th of a degree may not be too far off. But even if it weren't quite that accurate, 1/10th of a degree of accuracy would still be fine, considering that global temperatures generally vary by a few degrees centigrade.

If you are still here and still interested, I looked it up after my last post, and I found that year-to-year temperature data is not preserved in ice sheets. The isotopes used to calculate temperature tend to diffuse over time. The result is a smoothing of the data, and year-to-year variations are completely lost, but long-term measurements are still possible, and quite useful.

The result is that any sample point along the ice core will give you a reading of long-term average temperatures. Climate reconstructions interpret the result as a 300-year moving average, centered on the sample in question, as information has diffused from both older and newer ice.

I also see that it is difficult to accurately date the features of an ice core the deeper you go. Estimates are considered accurate to within a few hundred years to a few thousand years as depth increases. This is not that big an issue, as the sequence is the most important feature preserved, and this gives us a wealth of data.

That's what I learned today, and now I'm done learning.

WAAAAAY too late for the thread... but Gore was a great VP and he'll be a great VP.

You know that things are looking up when even George F. Will says the Dems are going to win in 2008. Of course, Will has a track record for being consistently wrong about every single thing, but still...

Hope Gore runs, to screw over Hillary, because I can't even begin to think about her being president, then I hope the GOP gives them another lesson in the Electoral College. Boo hoo, I won the majority but lost the election. Boo hoo.

I think we need to white wash the whole lot of em' . Gore lost to Bush...how pathetic is that. Then not to be shown up, Kerry loses to Bush even after we are all quite aware what a bumbling moron GWB is. The Dems need to step it up a bit. Run someone that isnt a retard. So far, i see zero promise in anyone even considering running for office.

/im just saying, we need someone who doesnt suck
//dont care which side they come from

I'm voting for Kodos...

simpsonfan
Whoever the republicans get in 2008 can't be any worse than Bush. At least Cheney won't run. With those health problems he would not be a viable candidate. And fortunately Bush can't run for a third term.



My fellow Americans, we have just begun to piss off the rest of the world.

I don't know why I am even posting in this cluster-fark of comments, but what the heck.
First off, people are not going to switch parties because they hate Bush. They hate Bush because he does not stand for the party. Therefore, you will not get many moderate conservatives who voted for Bush to vote for Gore. He is pretty much a mirror image of Bush. Too stupid in the other direction. America wants someone moderate, who can reach across party lines and hopefully do some good for this country.
Al Gore does not seem like the best candidate for bringing America together. His doom and gloom outlook of America, and his non-existent solutions to our problems will not do squat for him in the election.
We want change to move ahead, not backwards. How about we elect the President AND the Vice President? Maybe have both parties in the White House? Although, that would probably just corrupt both parties at the same time. Who knows.
Enough with Al Gore. It really makes the DNC look desperate when they talk over and over about "change" and then prop up an old icon, for the sole reason that he has wide-spread recognition. Don't keep your fingers crossed...

FARK YEAH I'd vote for Gore again. I think he should run with McCain tho.

/just me
//An american in Montreal for the (extended) weekend
///WOOHoO OUTGAMES!!

REAL SHAMAN: Except of course, those scientists that aren't part of your consensus.


Oh, yeah - those 5 guys, you know, the ones with money from XOM stuffed in their back pockets.

alidade: This is an excerpt from Steven J Milloy's book about junk science. You'll dimiss it out of hand cause you can't stand differing thought from your own implanted ideas.

Steven Milljoy - are you freaking serious? You could not post a more discredited piece of PR shiate.

Obama is not a moderate, unless you consider Barney Frank a right wing nut job. He just ran against a dumb smart nubian in Alan Keyes. He was too smart to listen to his own advisers adn toos tubborn to listen. The IL GOP is in shambles, but Keyes was an idiotic move. Bring back Al Gore. He is the man who got out of Vietnam thanks to dad getting him into divinity school, flunked out and got into law school and flunked out of that one too.

Voramyr takes the prize for first mention of the term "...in the election that MATTERS" of this political season.

*GASP* You MUST vote (name of Dem/Repub Candidate here) because this election MATTERS. Next election you can vote for a decent candidate, or vote third party, or for reform. But this election you must vote for the special interest hack of one of the two parties that have served us so well.

I've heard the same thing for the 7 presidential elections I've been old enough to vote in. Fark that! Oust the incumbents!

Tesseract

1. China makes cheaper goods then elsewhere in the world.
2. US people buy chinese goods using US$
3. China notices they have many US$ from goods sold.
4. What to do with all these dollars since their banking system is still untested and risky?
5. Hey, how about buying US tresurary bonds and bills which have AAA rating and a more stable interst rate, making them some of the safest way to store money.
6. Partisians use this as propaganda to say the US is borrowing "huge amounts of money from China"


When Clinton left office we were in a budget surplus. After Bush took office we very quickly entered a budget deficit. This means that the amount of money we spend as a nation is greater than our income from taxes and any other revenues. How do we manage to pay for things when we spend more than we make? The government issues bonds. China buys an ass-ton of them. We are legally obligated to pay back the value of the bonds over time, with accrued interest.

How exactly is that not borrowing "huge amounts of money from China"?

since when is Blossom a writer?

I really don't think that Gore would be a good choice. Being the president is about having to make difficult, unpopular decissions, then accepting responsibility for the consequences.

Gore has always tryed to "toady up" to all parties. He has changed his supposed views many times, depending upon whom he is attempting to gain support from. Being a leader means doing what needs to be done, not waffling between viewpoints until you pick the least offensive.

Being a leader also means you accept failure or defeat with dignity, not make up stories to try to save yourself or garner pity. No "mysterious chads". No "they cheated, wa wa wa". I'm afraid Gore simply doesn't have the dignity of a leader.

A true leader must also show determination. Gore has repeatedly "wimped out" whenever confronted with adversity. In Vietnam he was wounded superficially, nothing five stitches, a band-aid, and a bottle of Hydrogen Peroxide couldn't fix. Instead, he was awarded a medal and discharged for what amounts to a "boo-boo." (I've had worse playing ping pong). Then, after it was confirmed that neither the majority of americans, nor the specially selected Electoral College supported him, he withdrew to a private retreat (If my memory serves) to stew for several months, instead of going back to Congress to actually do his job.

Another thing, a major sticking point for me, is honesty. We all know that a politician is about as honest as a corpse is alive. But a politician should at least have the _illusion_ of respectable honesty. Gore has failed on that front many times. Blatantly lieing about his experiences in the military and his service record in public office.

I do not know who will run against him, but I know that he is one of the few participants who would be an unmitigated disaster.

As for who should be elected, I'm not sure. I'm almost tempted to support a Libertarian, just because it'll be hilarious when they finally realize that their "plan" for fixing all of america's problems is an unrealistic pipe-dream.

Learned Louisianian: I really don't think that Gore would be a good choice. Being the president is about having to make difficult, unpopular decissions, then accepting responsibility for the consequences.

This post alone give proof to Louisiana's failing school system.

Gore has always tryed to "toady up" to all parties. He has changed his supposed views many times, depending upon whom he is attempting to gain support from. Being a leader means doing what needs to be done, not waffling between viewpoints until you pick the least offensive.

Right, you got links to Gore's Toadying? I seem to recall a touching picture of our president and the leader of Saudia Arabia holding hands.

Being a leader also means you accept failure or defeat with dignity, not make up stories to try to save yourself or garner pity. No "mysterious chads". No "they cheated, wa wa wa". I'm afraid Gore simply doesn't have the dignity of a leader.

Right, like, 'I will fire anyone found dealing with this CIA information leak,' or, 'We will stay the course in Iraq!', or, 'Major operations in Iraq are over." Uh-huh, sure. Hanging chads or no, Our elections have never been particularly clean, and a man looking out for his and his party's interests in the biggest fight in the land has the right to claim such things. Especially when the Brother of the guy you're running against is governor and their sleep to the top friend is running the elections.

A true leader must also show determination. Gore has repeatedly "wimped out" whenever confronted with adversity. In Vietnam he was wounded superficially, nothing five stitches, a band-aid, and a bottle of Hydrogen Peroxide couldn't fix. Instead, he was awarded a medal and discharged for what amounts to a "boo-boo." (I've had worse playing ping pong). Then, after it was confirmed that neither the majority of americans, nor the specially selected Electoral College supported him, he withdrew to a private retreat (If my memory serves) to stew for several months, instead of going back to Congress to actually do his job.

Ah yes, he was a total wimp. He totally sucked ass by Volunteering to got to Vietnam, man what a LOSER! Especially when his own father COULD HAVE, as a Senator, gotten him out of it, yeah, what a loser to Volunteer to serve your country. I mean, man, look at the Presitgious military service records of the current administration.

Oh, I'm sorry, you'd just jump up and go back to your old job the day after you got denied for the Biggest Promotion in your life!? uhuh, yeah, sure you would.

Another thing, a major sticking point for me, is honesty. We all know that a politician is about as honest as a corpse is alive. But a politician should at least have the _illusion_ of respectable honesty. Gore has failed on that front many times. Blatantly lieing about his experiences in the military and his service record in public office.

You got some proof Bucko? I think you're confusing the two canidates from the 2000 election.

I do not know who will run against him, but I know that he is one of the few participants who would be an unmitigated disaster.

No, he is one of the few participants who will be an actualy challenge to face down.

As for who should be elected, I'm not sure. I'm almost tempted to support a Libertarian, just because it'll be hilarious when they finally realize that their "plan" for fixing all of america's problems is an unrealistic pipe-dream.

You're such a mindless partisan. I may agree with you that the current batch of Libertarian party leaders are not the answer, but that doesn't preclude my thinking that some Libertarian might rise to the challenge and be the best man for the job. One should never preclude a choice for a canidate just because they have a D, R, or some other letter after their name.

generaltimmy: He is the man who got out of Vietnam thanks to dad getting him into divinity school, flunked out and got into law school and flunked out of that one too.


Quoted from Wikipedia:'Education

Gore attended the elite St. Albans School where he ranked 25th (of 51) in his senior class.[5] In preparation for his college applications, Al Gore scored a 1355 on his SAT (625 in verbal and 730 in math). [5] Al Gore's IQ scores, from tests administered at St. Alban's School in 1961 and 1964 (his freshman and senior years) respectively, have been recorded as 133 and 134. [5]

In 1965, Gore enrolled at Harvard College, the only university that he applied to. His roommate (in Dunster House) was actor Tommy Lee Jones. He scored in the lower fifth of the class for two years in a row [6] and, after finding himself bored with his classes in his declared English major, Gore switched majors and worked hard in his government courses and graduated from Harvard in June 1969 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in government. [5] After returning from the military he took religious studies courses at Vanderbilt and then entered the university's law school. He left Vanderbilt without a degree when he left to run for an open seat in Tennessee's 3rd Congressional District in 1976.'

Yeah, he's a total loser. Man, where'd you graduate from? I mean how many people can win an elected office when they, in your words, 'flunk out' to run in a race.

Farking Douchebag Troll.

hope its not too late for this

al gore lies

Pretty interesting.

heyheyjerky: hope its not too late for this

al gore lies

Pretty interesting.


See my previous statement about our current President and his class act ability to tell the truth, or even recognize the Truth when it's staring him in the face.

I'm surprised your NRO article didn't have the line where Gore said he invented the internet, it might have lent more veracity to their claims.