I can’t believe the lengths some of you will go to try to defend this guy. He spews out more carbon then probably this board does combined. There is NO QUESTION that he cound have flown commercial jet and held to his scedual, Even better make a point of taking a train, or biking if he was in good enough shape. And as pointed out carbon credits mean nothing - those trees will decay or burn, all carbon will go back into the atmosphere. Al Gore’s buying them is the equivalent of buying a indu\lgence for your sins from the Roman Catholic Church.
Um, you have that backwards, I’m the one in the red shorts.
If a tree is planted sustainably, it will reproduce and create other trees. So even though that particular tree might be dead, its progeny will still be around.
Carbon credits don’t just support tree planting. They also subsidize green energy production and other methods of reducing carbon emissions.
Being “carbon neutral” isn’t perfect, but it’s a big step in the right direction.
If you read my cite above, you’d see that Gore does take commercial flights whenever he can.
Also, remember that when Gore travels somewhere, it isn’t just him. Like anyone of his stature doing the kind of work he does, he probably always has a few staffers with him. He also has a Secret Service detail to think about. If you have 10 or 15 people traveling with you, a private plane may not be all that much more wasteful than a commercial flight.
If Al Gore truly was an effective advocate for CF reduction, an able messenger with a demonstrated ability to sway the masses (which everyone seems to think makes his increased usage okay) then that would be one thing. But he’s not shown the ability to convince others on a meaningful scale to do anything, not near as effective as some true researchers and scientists who, amazingly, can do so without a travelling entourage replete with Secret Service agents. Simply put, Al Gore doesn’t define global warming, but global warming does define his politics. Global warming simply is his justification for staying on the political stage. It’s his one crutch, without which he has zilch to offer.
So he wrote a book. Big deal. Scientifically it was pretty much worthless, just rehash. Were he someone who’d demonstrated a real ability to sway the masses, I think the charge of hypocracy would be easier dismissed. But he obviously doesn’t have that ability, is somewhat of a wanker with regard to perceived genius at global warming expertise compared to those actually in the know and, as such, he just comes across as a politician desperately clinging to an environmental life raft.
What he’s doing isn’t bad, it’s just ineffective and, therefore, may be construed by some as hypocritical.
The last time I checked, George W. Bush was sitting comfortably in the White House. Why isn’t he wearing fatigues and carrying a rifle in Baghdad? How many terrorists has he killed compared to the common soldier?
Yes, it’s a good idea for a leader to set a good example–and Al Gore does that–but not to the point where you undermine your effectiveness as a leader.
A lot of people take commercial airline flights that enable them to move rapidly throughout the country. Perhaps Al Gore could take advantage of the airline industry like so many others.
I realize any discussion about Gore is tainted by those who had a hard on for the Clinton Administration. I admit it, I don’t particularly like the guy, but I never had a rabid hatred of him or Clinton. It does seem a tad bit hypocritical to go on about saving the environment and then turn around and use a means of transportation that causes so much pollution. If he can truck around in a private jet why shouldn’t I drive a Hummer?
Marc
Edit: I’m not going to delete this post, but, I forgot to take into account that Gore was VP at one point in his life. Is the private jet part of his security measures?
Many people in this thread seem convinced that global warming is a serious problem. How did you guys come to that conclusion without Gore’s physical presence?
Psst, lieu, since you seem not to have heard about this, Gore’s more recent foray into publicizing climate-change issues involved making a movie which became the #4 highest-grossing documentary film of all time and has received two Oscar nominations.
I mean, come on, people. If you don’t like Gore, that’s fine (I personally don’t find him very appealing myself, and I’ve disagreed with many of his policies in the past). But trying to pretend that he isn’t actually achieving anything in terms of raising public consciousness on climate change is simply ludicrous.
Whoa. Wow. Egad. Yikes. No, no one is saying that. Except you, in this truly amazing attempt to both move the goal posts and exclude the middle.
Goodness gracious, you’re gonna hurt your neck or something. How about simply stating the obvious. Yes, his actions are hypocritical. But if it has more of a positive influence than negative, the calculation shows that it’s worth it. Now, you’d also have to run the scenario of him doing all he has and can while using 100% commercial transportation. And that, I’d say is a losing proposition for Gore. And that brings us back to the arguments of the Hannitys of the world: to what degree should I be inconvenienced to attempt to change flobal warming? Given that man’s role is almost impossible to determine, one is inclined to do more the more he believe man can demonstrably effect it.
Kimstu, if Mr. Gore has a limited audience of those who would ever take him seriously and consider his motivation to be without partisan agenda, it’s certainly in part his own doing.
For some his movie is factual enough. Not without reason though I’ll continue to prefer quite differet sources.
Ever see the movie Cold Turkey? A tobacco company offers a prize of $25 Million to any town whose entire population can quit smoking for a month. Dick Van Dyke plays the main advocate for winning the prize in his town, a minister who has long since quit smoking and become a fitness nut. In order to gain credibility and share in his neighbors’ pain, he agrees to start smoking again and become re-addicted to nicotine during the preliminary sign-up phase.
You see, right now we are in the advocacy phase, not the action phase, on global warming. The action phase starts, let’s say, in 2010. By 2010, government, industry, religious leaders, cable TV pundits, and every individual should pledge to do their part in reducing emissions. (Just a few days ago I vowed to myself that by 2010, I will buy a hybrid car.) Take your time. Enjoy the next 3 years. Then it’s time to get serious.
Al Gore hasn’t flown or driven a single mile in 2010. If he can go cold turkey after living this supposedly lavish lifestyle, then so can you.
Okay, did the following post only appear in my version of the SDMB? Because a lot of people here seem to be acting like they never saw it:
He does use commercial airlines whenever possible. In his position, it’s not always possible, but he avoids it when he can. To argue that this makes him a hypocrite is frankly ridiculous, unless you want to hold him to such an impossible strict definition of the word that it effectively loses all meaning.
I’m not so sure, the private jet does seem a bit excessive, in the context. Sure he needs to travel, but why couldn’t he use commercial airlines where possible? First class even?
Because he is a political figure who was almost elected the POTUS? That he could very likely be a target of some nut job? Why would it be strange or improper for an active political figure to fly a corporate sponsered private jet?
Can you imagine how much harrasment he would get on a plane? :eek: