Remember me
▼ Content

Earth in the Balance, by Al Gore, 1992


Earth in the Balance, by Al Gore, 199227-07-2017 18:13
StarMan
★☆☆☆☆
(88)
We begin on page 3. Gore laments that eight acres worth of prime topsoil "floats" past Memphis every hour. Topsoil does not float. Were President Bush to say such a thing, liberals would howl derisively and cite his stupidity. Liberals excuse away their own verbal gaffes as trivial, and call themselves intelligent.

On page 110, Gore laments the Sacramento River delta sinking about three inches each year, perhaps because it is getting less sediment. So you see, erosion is bad in Memphis (page 3) and India (page 120) , but getting less sediment is bad in California. Liberals have finely tuned their Bad Both Ways dialogue. For example, liberals opine that Third world countries are terrible polluters. They rape and plunder the environment while their citizens barely subsist. America is likewise terrible for precisely the opposite reason - we consume far too much. It is bad both ways, rich or poor, sediment or none.

Page 5: .the concentrations of CO2 were increasing rapidly each year (at Mauna Loa Observatory) "
[Gore calls a .00036 annual increase "rapid." (1.36 ppm / 380)]


P 19: "I was standing in the sun on a hot steel deck. We were anchored..."
[Not exactly. For as Gore said a sentence later, there was nothing but hot dry sand in all directions. The Aral Sea had long since receded from this place, and a stranded boat is not said to be anchored. One anchors only in water. Nobody has a boat anchored in his back yard.]

P 47 "Aficionados of the symphony, for example, recognize a crescendo as the point of maximum instability in a piece of music"

[ I happen to be an aficionado of the symphony, and I know that crescendo means the gradual increase in volume. Nor is a crescendo a point but rather can cover quite a wide range. Maurice Ravel wrote an entire piece in crescendo, called Bolero.]


P 75 Gore condemns "... blind devotion to laissez-faire economics, anti-Irish racism, and anti-Catholic bigotry ...this is from a man who showed his own hateful bigotry with such remarks as "the extra chromosome right wing."

P 119 "A ravenous civilization" [Three yew trees must be cut down to save a woman's life. Are we untitled to do so? No, Al. Let her die. Three trees mean much more than a woman's life to Al Gore and people like him. Incidentally, this hypocrite rides in his private limousine to fly his private jet all around the world, lecturing to everyone else about "ravenous civilization" and cutting back on their carbon footprints.]


P 273 "...today a different form of dysfunction takes the form of ravenous, insatiable consumption"

[This from a billionaire, who lives in a San Francisco mansion, near sea level, which he swears is rapidly rising.....]


Ignore List: Surface Detail, litesong, spot, Into The Night
27-07-2017 19:27
spot
★★★★☆
(1233)
Topsoil does not float but its carried downstream as sediment which is obviously what is meant, this isn't a court you can't change whats actually happening on a clever technicality.
27-07-2017 19:28
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
StarMan wrote:
We begin on page 3. Gore laments that eight acres worth of prime topsoil "floats" past Memphis every hour. Topsoil does not float. Were President Bush to say such a thing, liberals would howl derisively and cite his stupidity. Liberals excuse away their own verbal gaffes as trivial, and call themselves intelligent.

On page 110, Gore laments the Sacramento River delta sinking about three inches each year, perhaps because it is getting less sediment. So you see, erosion is bad in Memphis (page 3) and India (page 120) , but getting less sediment is bad in California. Liberals have finely tuned their Bad Both Ways dialogue. For example, liberals opine that Third world countries are terrible polluters. They rape and plunder the environment while their citizens barely subsist. America is likewise terrible for precisely the opposite reason - we consume far too much. It is bad both ways, rich or poor, sediment or none.

Page 5: .the concentrations of CO2 were increasing rapidly each year (at Mauna Loa Observatory) "
[Gore calls a .00036 annual increase "rapid." (1.36 ppm / 380)]


P 19: "I was standing in the sun on a hot steel deck. We were anchored..."
[Not exactly. For as Gore said a sentence later, there was nothing but hot dry sand in all directions. The Aral Sea had long since receded from this place, and a stranded boat is not said to be anchored. One anchors only in water. Nobody has a boat anchored in his back yard.]

P 47 "Aficionados of the symphony, for example, recognize a crescendo as the point of maximum instability in a piece of music"

[ I happen to be an aficionado of the symphony, and I know that crescendo means the gradual increase in volume. Nor is a crescendo a point but rather can cover quite a wide range. Maurice Ravel wrote an entire piece in crescendo, called Bolero.]


P 75 Gore condemns "... blind devotion to laissez-faire economics, anti-Irish racism, and anti-Catholic bigotry ...this is from a man who showed his own hateful bigotry with such remarks as "the extra chromosome right wing."

P 119 "A ravenous civilization" [Three yew trees must be cut down to save a woman's life. Are we untitled to do so? No, Al. Let her die. Three trees mean much more than a woman's life to Al Gore and people like him. Incidentally, this hypocrite rides in his private limousine to fly his private jet all around the world, lecturing to everyone else about "ravenous civilization" and cutting back on their carbon footprints.]


P 273 "...today a different form of dysfunction takes the form of ravenous, insatiable consumption"

[This from a billionaire, who lives in a San Francisco mansion, near sea level, which he swears is rapidly rising.....]


And New Orleans and it's delta are sinking. I think I see the problem with climate debate. Debates are not about understanding something but are like the last political election, it's about winning and in a debate there is no right or wrong.
And now Into the Night can say temperature can't be measured, it's falsified, etc. ad nauseum. He is debating and is doing so by saying nothing that has a basis in reality. It's comments actually fit the definition of schizophrenia. I didn't mean to say "it's comments", I meant to say his comments.
Also what Gore showed were observations. And everyone will have a different opinion when they observe something.
Am curious, did Gore mention the depleted ground water in the midwest or in California ? For all anyone knows the delta in California is sinking is because of decreased ground water. Phoenix, Az. has dropped 20 ft. since the 1950's because of ground water depletion. With New Orleans the delta it's sitting on is being eroded from within and the sediment it is sitting on is being flushed out into the Gulf of Mexico.
The examples I gave show how the same observation can have 2 different and unrelated causes. Debates do not allow for this as New Orleans and Phoenix would be considered the same situation in a debate with the same cause and effect.


Jim

Unholy Links, please do not worship these as Into the Night does not allow for scientific understanding. Because the 2 situations have different causes they falsify each other, right into the night ? Just trying to save you the effort of saying it once again.

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-central-southern-az/casa-grande/earth-fissures-linked-to-sinking-valley-in-southern-arizona

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-orleans-is-sinking/
27-07-2017 23:17
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10267)
James_ wrote:
And New Orleans and it's delta are sinking.
How do you know? The news agencies are not data. What about sedimentation? What about continental tilt?
James_ wrote:
I think I see the problem with climate debate.
Doubt it.
James_ wrote:
Debates are not about understanding something but are like the last political election, it's about winning and in a debate there is no right or wrong.

This is a compositional error (a fallacy). There are many reasons for debates. One is a lack of understanding of something (like science or math).
James_ wrote:
And now Into the Night can say temperature can't be measured, it's falsified, etc. ad nauseum.
Temperature CAN be measured. The global temperature can't be determined to any useful degree of accuracy.
James_ wrote:
He is debating and is doing so by saying nothing that has a basis in reality.

No, I am saying so because of the math. Specifically the mathematics of statistics.
James_ wrote:
It's comments actually fit the definition of schizophrenia. I didn't mean to say "it's comments", I meant to say his comments.
Now you turn to psychobabble.
James_ wrote:
Also what Gore showed were observations.

No, what Al Gore showed were fabrications designed to look like observations.
James_ wrote:
And everyone will have a different opinion when they observe something.

True. This is because everyone interprets what they observe.
James_ wrote:
Am curious, did Gore mention the depleted ground water in the midwest or in California ?
Does it matter?
James_ wrote:
For all anyone knows the delta in California is sinking is because of decreased ground water.
Which delta are referring to?
James_ wrote:
Phoenix, Az. has dropped 20 ft. since the 1950's because of ground water depletion.

You don't know the altitude of Phoenix to that degree of accuracy. No one does. Phoenix gets most of its water from the Colorado river.
James_ wrote:
With New Orleans the delta it's sitting on is being eroded from within and the sediment it is sitting on is being flushed out into the Gulf of Mexico.

New Orleans is currently about 2 ft below the mean sea level in the area. The land sank due to the draining of nearby swampland.
James_ wrote:
The examples I gave show how the same observation can have 2 different and unrelated causes.

They are NOT the same observation. False equivalence. Observing California and observing New Orleans are TWO observations. They are not the same observation.
James_ wrote:
Debates do not allow for this as New Orleans and Phoenix would be considered the same situation in a debate with the same cause and effect.

Two locations and two observations can certainly have different causes.
James_ wrote:
Unholy Links, please do not worship these as Into the Night does not allow for scientific understanding.

Science is not a Holy Link. Don't treat the internet as an Oracle of Truth.
James_ wrote:
Because the 2 situations have different causes they falsify each other, right into the night ?

You cannot falsify an observation. An observation simply exists, regardless of how it's interpreted.
James_ wrote:
Just trying to save you the effort of saying it once again.
...deleted Holy Links...

You still seem confused.


The Parrot Killer
27-07-2017 23:48
StarMan
★☆☆☆☆
(88)
StarMan wrote:
We begin on page 3. Gore laments that eight acres worth of prime topsoil "floats" past Memphis every hour. Topsoil does not float. Were President Bush to say such a thing, liberals would howl derisively and cite his stupidity. Liberals excuse away their own verbal gaffes as trivial, and call themselves intelligent.


"Unfortunately, little has changed; even now, about eight acres' worth of prime topsoil floats past Memphis every hour."

Gore's ignorance:

How much is "eight acres' worth"? Is it one inch deep? Six inches deep? One foot deep? It is an inane phrase, from a pretend intellectual who flunked out of Vanderbilt Divinity School.

Gore MIGHT HAVE SAID" "[some volume] of topsoil washes past Memphis every hour," but he did not. He said "floats," in ignorant fashion.

Gore MIGHT HAVE REALIZED that absent soil washing downstream, rivers continue to erode the bottom of the river bed, and that many benefits accrue to soil being transported across considerable distances through not only water erosion, but also wind erosion. For example, millions of tons of African sand and topsoil are carried across the Atlantic, to be deposited in the Amazon rain forest, and in the Atlantic ocean, where nourishment is provided to plants and animals from very distant sources.

But superficiality, bias, and ignorance permeate Leftist thinking.


Ignore List: Surface Detail, litesong, spot, Into The Night
28-07-2017 00:02
James_
★★★☆☆
(801)
@Starman,
What else Gore didn't mention is the Ogallala Aquifer going dry. This will increase the amount of erosion and would block the Mississippi if it weren't flushed out into the gulf. And what is the cause of this ? It's too much water being pumped from the aquifer.
Like other countries the U.S. will need to desalinate sea water. Then the aquifer could be replinished. This in turn would help to cool the land around it.

p.s., about 40% of U.S. agriculture comes from aquifers west of the Mississippi River that have been severely depleted. I do have thoughts on desalination but this is a climate change forum.
Edited on 28-07-2017 00:05
28-07-2017 02:32
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
spot wrote:
Topsoil does not float but its carried downstream as sediment which is obviously what is meant, this isn't a court you can't change whats actually happening on a clever technicality.


So now you're telling us what Al Gore meant because obviously he's too stupid to know what he is saying himself.
28-07-2017 02:46
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
James_ wrote:
StarMan wrote:
We begin on page 3. Gore laments that eight acres worth of prime topsoil "floats" past Memphis every hour. Topsoil does not float. Were President Bush to say such a thing, liberals would howl derisively and cite his stupidity. Liberals excuse away their own verbal gaffes as trivial, and call themselves intelligent.

On page 110, Gore laments the Sacramento River delta sinking about three inches each year, perhaps because it is getting less sediment. So you see, erosion is bad in Memphis (page 3) and India (page 120) , but getting less sediment is bad in California. Liberals have finely tuned their Bad Both Ways dialogue. For example, liberals opine that Third world countries are terrible polluters. They rape and plunder the environment while their citizens barely subsist. America is likewise terrible for precisely the opposite reason - we consume far too much. It is bad both ways, rich or poor, sediment or none.

Page 5: .the concentrations of CO2 were increasing rapidly each year (at Mauna Loa Observatory) "
[Gore calls a .00036 annual increase "rapid." (1.36 ppm / 380)]


P 19: "I was standing in the sun on a hot steel deck. We were anchored..."
[Not exactly. For as Gore said a sentence later, there was nothing but hot dry sand in all directions. The Aral Sea had long since receded from this place, and a stranded boat is not said to be anchored. One anchors only in water. Nobody has a boat anchored in his back yard.]

P 47 "Aficionados of the symphony, for example, recognize a crescendo as the point of maximum instability in a piece of music"

[ I happen to be an aficionado of the symphony, and I know that crescendo means the gradual increase in volume. Nor is a crescendo a point but rather can cover quite a wide range. Maurice Ravel wrote an entire piece in crescendo, called Bolero.]


P 75 Gore condemns "... blind devotion to laissez-faire economics, anti-Irish racism, and anti-Catholic bigotry ...this is from a man who showed his own hateful bigotry with such remarks as "the extra chromosome right wing."

P 119 "A ravenous civilization" [Three yew trees must be cut down to save a woman's life. Are we untitled to do so? No, Al. Let her die. Three trees mean much more than a woman's life to Al Gore and people like him. Incidentally, this hypocrite rides in his private limousine to fly his private jet all around the world, lecturing to everyone else about "ravenous civilization" and cutting back on their carbon footprints.]


P 273 "...today a different form of dysfunction takes the form of ravenous, insatiable consumption"

[This from a billionaire, who lives in a San Francisco mansion, near sea level, which he swears is rapidly rising.....]


And New Orleans and it's delta are sinking. I think I see the problem with climate debate. Debates are not about understanding something but are like the last political election, it's about winning and in a debate there is no right or wrong.
And now Into the Night can say temperature can't be measured, it's falsified, etc. ad nauseum. He is debating and is doing so by saying nothing that has a basis in reality. It's comments actually fit the definition of schizophrenia. I didn't mean to say "it's comments", I meant to say his comments.
Also what Gore showed were observations. And everyone will have a different opinion when they observe something.
Am curious, did Gore mention the depleted ground water in the midwest or in California ? For all anyone knows the delta in California is sinking is because of decreased ground water. Phoenix, Az. has dropped 20 ft. since the 1950's because of ground water depletion. With New Orleans the delta it's sitting on is being eroded from within and the sediment it is sitting on is being flushed out into the Gulf of Mexico.
The examples I gave show how the same observation can have 2 different and unrelated causes. Debates do not allow for this as New Orleans and Phoenix would be considered the same situation in a debate with the same cause and effect.


Jim

Unholy Links, please do not worship these as Into the Night does not allow for scientific understanding. Because the 2 situations have different causes they falsify each other, right into the night ? Just trying to save you the effort of saying it once again.

http://www.abc15.com/news/region-central-southern-az/casa-grande/earth-fissures-linked-to-sinking-valley-in-southern-arizona

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-orleans-is-sinking/


I have to agree that the unholy four here are only here to argue - to debate if you will.

That New Orleans is sinking shouldn't be of any surprise. The Mississippi is dammed off so much that the water flow is a percentage of what it was in Mark Twain's time.

The mouth of the Mississippi used to wander around and was never in the same place twice. New Orleans would move from one side of the river to the next and the river cut a new path this way or that.

New Orleans is now not only on the eastern side of the river but some 25 miles from the mouth. And with the fractional flow it isn't likely for the build-up of sediment to move it anywhere.

Gore's book was from 1992 I think. And California was sitting pretty at that time with Republican Pete Wilson being the second Republican in the governors office in a row and the economy chugging right along. Moonbeam Brown is now in office and spending the people's money how he wishes despite law.
28-07-2017 19:22
StarMan
★☆☆☆☆
(88)
Wake wrote:


So now you're (spot) telling us what Al Gore meant because obviously he's too stupid to know what he is saying himself.


Repeatedly. I cited only a small fraction of Al Gore's ignorance. He featured graphs without attribution or sourcing. He demonstrated consummate hypocrisy in telling everybody else how fragile earth is "in the balance" and how we should stop driving and flying around so much, even as he flies and drives around with hypergross excess. But his fawning followers listen uncritically to one of their own, but yet are extremely critical of anything presented by the hated right.

I can read something critically no matter who the author is, but unsurprisingly, when I read something from a Walter Williams or a Thomas Sowell or Milton Friedman, it makes sense. It is true. I can rarely if ever find fault with conservative intellectuals, try as I might. With liberals of any stripe, the stupidity jumps out at you like a ship "anchored" miles from the Aral Sea.... like the "point" of crescendo.... like topsoil "floating" by. "Eight acres' worth."


Ignore List: Surface Detail, litesong, spot, Into The Night
28-07-2017 19:54
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
StarMan wrote:
Wake wrote:
So now you're (spot) telling us what Al Gore meant because obviously he's too stupid to know what he is saying himself.


Repeatedly. I cited only a small fraction of Al Gore's ignorance. He featured graphs without attribution or sourcing. He demonstrated consummate hypocrisy in telling everybody else how fragile earth is "in the balance" and how we should stop driving and flying around so much, even as he flies and drives around with hypergross excess. But his fawning followers listen uncritically to one of their own, but yet are extremely critical of anything presented by the hated right.

I can read something critically no matter who the author is, but unsurprisingly, when I read something from a Walter Williams or a Thomas Sowell or Milton Friedman, it makes sense. It is true. I can rarely if ever find fault with conservative intellectuals, try as I might. With liberals of any stripe, the stupidity jumps out at you like a ship "anchored" miles from the Aral Sea.... like the "point" of crescendo.... like topsoil "floating" by. "Eight acres' worth."


This is one of the things that proves you cannot trust a liberal - any liberal. They are willing to lie or misrepresent anything to achieve their goals. But they themselves are not interested in helping personally to achieve any goals. Seeing liberals driving around in the largest SUV's around is normal. Seeing them drive though stop signs and even red stop lights is so common that it almost has become normal.

They have no knowledge of the actual world around them (note litebeer) and yet will go completely out of their way to tell you about it. Spot arguing that Greenland is at least as warm as it was in the Medieval Warm Period is one crying out loud example.

Or having IBdaMann making the most absurd statements. If it never occurred to you why there is so little sediment being moved by rivers that are dammed to the hilt for hydro-electric reasons why wouldn't you actually think about it before writing anything about it? Instead they read some article by a complete fool and repeat it like nothing more that parrots.
28-07-2017 19:57
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1534)
StarMan
With liberals of any stripe, the stupidity jumps out at you like a ship "anchored" miles from the Aral Sea....

With the talk of liberal stupidity and the mention of New Orleans, I had to go dig up this little nugget.



spot-
Into the Night is also has delusions of comptance
Attached image:

28-07-2017 20:15
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10267)
James_ wrote:
@Starman,
What else Gore didn't mention is the Ogallala Aquifer going dry.

Must have slipped his tiny mind.
James_ wrote:
This will increase the amount of erosion

Water erodes faster than wind.
James_ wrote:
and would block the Mississippi

If you block a river, the water just goes around the block. You might even get a lake out of it too.
James_ wrote:
if it weren't flushed out into the gulf.

...so it won't block the river??? Make up your mind!


The Parrot Killer
28-07-2017 20:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(10267)
Wake wrote:
spot wrote:
Topsoil does not float but its carried downstream as sediment which is obviously what is meant, this isn't a court you can't change whats actually happening on a clever technicality.


So now you're telling us what Al Gore meant because obviously he's too stupid to know what he is saying himself.


Sounds plausible to me. I too think Al Gore is too stupid to know what he is saying himself.


The Parrot Killer
29-07-2017 05:52
StarMan
★☆☆☆☆
(88)
GasGuzzler wrote:

With the talk of liberal stupidity and the mention of New Orleans, I had to go dig up this little nugget.


Ghetto fabulous!

"New Orleans will always be a chocolate town." - Mayor of New Orleans


Ignore List: Surface Detail, litesong, spot, Into The Night




Join the debate Earth in the Balance, by Al Gore, 1992:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Great News! Al Roker has Addressed Climate Change for us!221-07-2019 22:18
USS Al Gore601-07-2019 05:59
Is Gore's theory CO2 causes warming false?2731-01-2019 00:19
Hypocrite Gore's Home Uses 21 Times Energy423-10-2018 19:19
Bernie Sanders & Al Gore Discuss Climate Change and Renewables (July 2017)918-12-2017 23:54
Articles
Al Gore: Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech
Al Gore: Hurricane Katrina and Global Warming
Al Gore: Bali speech
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact