Actually today on Hannity I heard him say that though he believes that most is naturally caused, he won’t rule out that a small part may be man caused.
Not that I can recall right now, but even when they say, OK what if global warming is real, what are we suppose to do? Should we jack up the price of fuel so the poor will freeze, and the middle class has to walk to work? Is it too late already , and we are all doomed (a claim that several liberals have made), so what’s the difference (the part the liberals who claimed we are already doomed leave out).
Their solution to global warming is to deal with it directly if and when it happens, instead of having everyone radically change their lifestyle to that of a 3rd world country.
WHEN it happens? It’s already happening. It’s not something that’s GOING to happen, it’s something that’s already BEEN happening.
I’d like to see Hannity publish a scientific argument for why the vast majority of credentialed climatologists are wrong and that he’s right about the anthropogenic causes of climate change.
Well, here’s the thing. It might be too late to prevent a lot of it, but doing nothing merely ensures that the bad stuff that’s already going to happen…will get worse. ISTM that knowing something can’t be undone, but can get worse, means you have to do what you can so that it doesn’t get worse.
Sure, Gore could reduce his carbon footprint by unplugging from the grid and living off the land in a shack in Montana. But for someone living in the modern world and doing the sort of work Gore does, he’s doing what he can.
In any event, he’s doing a hell of a lot more than Sean Hannity.
Sean Hannity does not fly in a private jet, Al Gore does, but offsets that carbon by planing trees which will release every last molecule of carbon they take in.
Advantage: Sean
I would really like to see a comparison of the amount of CO2 that Al Gore has released compared to the common man.
Was this really necessary, I was really going out of my way to be respectful to ex-vice president Algore, inventor of the internet, Saviour of the planet, and planter of trees.
Sean does not buy into man made global warming as a problem, he is pointing Al Gore’s is a hypocrite.
Sean is consistent on message, Al Gore is not.
It’s not the OP, it’s the response that has gone to super lame, instead of defending Al Gore’s indefensible stance on cutting down carbon emissions while flying a private plane, and other liberals such as John Edwards in Sam Stone’s post #15, you are attacking Sean Hannity who doesn’t even believe in man made global warming and does not deny anyone the right to fly in a private plane nor drive a SUV - if they can buy it themselves (without government help) and who’s message is totally consistent.
The only lame point you have made is that it’s ok because the ends justify the means.
Perhaps you were going out of your way. The purveyors of this childish attack on Mr. Gore certainly are not. Having lost their battle against the concept of AGP, they turn their attention to attacking its purveyors, using any means imaginable. It’s almost as if Gore were the new Saddam, and this is the buildup to 'Operation Iraqi Freedom II." Funny thing how it’s the same people slinging bullshit in this different cause. A reasonable person might well conclude that slinging bullshit is all these people are capable of. As such, I grant them the respect they deserve, nothing more, nothing less.
I can deal with it, but you must deal with the truth no matter ho many time syou use the role eyes emoicon, Sean is consistent on message, Al Gore, and John Edwards are indefeasible hypocrites.
Again you can role your eyes all you want (don’t take that as medical advice), it doesn’t change the fact that the ONLY point in Al Gore and his ilk’s favor is the arugment that the ends justify the means, and yes you are correct the ONLY point your side has was NOT made by you.
Shoot, I was supposed to be the one with the big grammar problems!
Nope, there are several examples already that show that at least Gore can defend himself, you are not correct on that at all (One can make the point they are not doing enough, but it is a lie to say they are indefensible.)
And **dealing with the fact that you were wrong ** means to then accept that Hannity does not have any advantage at all in this discussion, neither do all the other conservative talk radio blow hards.
Unless they are going to remake The attack of THE the Eye monsters (sic), my eyes will not get their dream role, but my oculist told me all the make up will discourage them from that silly idea.
Reading the **Panamajack ** cite shows that it is not a simple “ends justifying the means” situation, it remains lame to say it is.
I think a distinction needs to be made between “hypocritical” and “unjustifiable.”
Is Al Gore being hypocritical? Yes, of course he is.
Is his hypocracy justifiable? Again, of course it is.
Okay, hypothetical time.
What if Al Gore’s hot button topic was saving endangered giraffaphants. Suddenly he’s faced with a scenario where one giraffaphant is holed up in a gas station with a bus load of baby giraffaphants, and the captor has a gun and is threatening to kill all his captives. Now let’s put Al Gore behind a sniper rifle aimed through the gas station window at the crazed adult giraffaphant. Should he take the shot?
Of course he should. He believes that he’ll save more endangered giraffaphants by pulling the trigger. We can expect Sean Hannity to start giving him grief about the hypocracy of killing a giraffaphant when that’s his biggest issue. But the giraffaphant’s death, in Gore’s eyes, is justified.
How you figure? You seem to be arguing that anybody who supports a cause is a hypocrite if s/he isn’t supporting the cause in every possible way during every moment of their lives. But this is silly.
AFAIK, Gore has never made the claim that everybody needs to cut their CO2 emissions as much as possible at all times. He’s simply arguing that we as individuals and a society need to take some eco-friendly steps to reduce our emissions significantly. And he seems to be taking many of those steps in his own life, so I fail to see how he comes out a hypocrite.
Apparently, Gore’s reducing his carbon footprint in some areas and buying carbon offsets in others isn’t enough to convince you that he’s personally sincere about making efforts to reduce carbon emissions. What would be enough to convince you, then? Please give us specific details about what kind of lifestyle you would consider acceptable for Gore to maintain in order for you not to consider him a “hypocrite” on emissions reduction. Include your requirements for maximum square footage of his residence(s), maximum miles traveled by him per year for every applicable mode of travel, and maximum CO2 generated by all other forms of his consumption.
That may turn out to be a last-resort desperate measure if our unchecked carbon emissions end up seriously threatening major, catastrophic climate change. However, it will hopefully not be necessary if we all take some reasonable steps now, as individuals and as a society, to start reducing our emissions and to develop more low-emissions alternatives in the near future. Which, ISTM, is exactly what Gore is doing himself and trying to persuade the rest of us to do.
Unfortunately, many of the people he’s trying to reach seem to be so frantically averse to paying any attention to climate science, or making any modifications to our fossil-fuel use, that they’re desperately trying to change the subject to silly arguments about whether Gore is being a hypocrite if he does a lot of flying. What, you think that if you can prove Gore is a hypocrite then global warming will just go away and you won’t have to worry about it anymore? Dream on, babe.
OK. Suppose we agree that Gore and Edwards are hypocritical. All that means is that they aren’t as effective salesmen as they could be. It doesn’t change the thing that they are trying to promote at all. There is still an overwhelming scientific consensus that we are having a bad effect on the climate.
The same reason bullies pick on smaller kids. Because they are scared of him.
There guy barely won the last two elections and we have six years to figure out there scare tactics, mis-information and outright lies. They are very afraid. They may even have to start talking about real issues instead of practicing character assasination and complaining about who flies what airplane.
