Why does Al Gore refuse to debate climate change with "deniers"?
Answer:
When I asked a "Gore disciple" who had given the presentation to a scientific gathering why Kilimanjaro is presented as having lost its snow from 0.7°C of warming in the the last century, when its current day time temperature at 19,000feet is still several degrees below freezing and the greenhouse effect, as described by the IPCC, takes place at night when it is even colder; the answer was "I am not a scientist but the IPCC has 2500 of the worlds leading scientists and they disagree.
I got the same answer when I asked about temperature increases leading CO2 concentration in all of the ice core examples, or how the second law of thermodynamics is violated by the statement of greenhouse warming melting ice sheets, or any of the other fallacies presented in the film.
Political answers to factual questions will not survive a scientific debate.
When one considers that the only "scientific" reference for Gore is is the IPCC "summary for policy makers" that are written by politicians and bureaucrats to inform politicians about the actual IPCC science reports, and the IPCC is a political body of the UN, similar to the body that administered the food for oil program that funneled money into Saddam's palace construction, or the current group responsible for sustainable development that set Zimbabwe as the leader of this initiative; one can only assume that the IPCC is not all that credible as a body, even though the individual scientists that contribute are.
Science is about presenting fact; politics is about deception. Since CO2 is invisible and not a pollutant it makes a very poor "visual" if you are trying to present it as bad for the environment. Gore gets around this by showing steam coming out of cooling towers and chimneys as well as smog polluted cities giving the public the false impression that they are seeing CO2. If this were challenged in a scientific debate, Gore wouldn't even have a political answer to account for deception; perhaps this is why he will not publicly debate the facts.
Because Al Gore is a liar, as he has admitted himself. The only thing he cares about is power.
The only people who bother to question the human contribution to climate change are the people who don't want to accept it.
I can understand that he has probably had enough of trying to convince people that climate change is real and is our fault.
I would consider it a waste of time for him to enter any climate change debates with "deniers" instead he should lobby for more to be done in tackling climate change. The debate is over, climate change is real.
Because he knows that he knows nothing about the subject. He only has an opinion and that is not an appropriate base from which one can engage in a realistic debate.
Prince Algore involving himself in such a debate with a knowledgeable "denier" would be much like going to a gunfight armed with a pea-shooter.
what does "point of view" have to do with global warming? why debate something that is happening. would debating stop it from happening?
Because his concern for the environment is solely to help his career. He flies around in a private jet - I think his "carbon footprint" is significantly larger than your average American's. For Al Gore, going to congress and preaching "you're all killing the earth!" was a tool used to polarize the country, and since people care about the planet they live on, they'll vote for the environmentalists - which in this case happens to be the democratic party more than the republicans. It's all very silly...if they would allow us to drill on our own soil, the price of gas would drop and companies could have more money to then invest in alternative fuel options. oh well.
By the way, since you're on the topic...there is no "scientific proof" or "undeniable evidence" that WE are causing a global climate change. There was a very interesting article in Scientific American? eh - one of those science magazines not to long ago where NASA published some findings that Mars is suffering the same global warming. Since Mars is actually further away from the Sun and has no people on it...that suggests that the Sun's output has increased. That said...I do think we need to rely less upon carbon fuels, it sure as heck can't be good for the environment (or people with asthma) and we're expending all of it quickly.
Added:
This is all retarded...who gives a flying frick what Al Gore does. The consensus of this thread should be that his opinion means nothing. If you want to find out facts then go to NASA, go to JSTOR and look up peer-reviewed articles and develop your own opinion instead of being spoon fed by the damned media. Al Gore is a politician, they can't be trusted.
I have come to the conclusion from my studies that there is a pretty good chance we have some responsibility for global warming and a 100% chance that we will not know in our lifetime whether or not these changes in weather patterns are part of a natural cycle or not.
Engaging deniers of climate change in a debate is a waste of time and resources. Al Gore is doing the right thing: bring the issue to the fore and prescribe measures to combat it. What is left for him to do, and for which I fault him, is to also practise what he preaches, especially if it is true that his mansion in his home town in the State of Tennessee is extravagant on energy consumption. Detractors on climate change, may you live athousand years to see the 'blessings' of your obduracy!!
If a person believes the Earth flat, then there is not much to debate. Until the 1400's, the prevailing human view was that the Earth was flat. God told them.
There will be always be a tiny minority that disagrees even if all the research points otherwise.
He is looking for more and more people who agree with him. I am sure that when his number of followers is at such a high number that he will take these so called nay-syers on for a good debate on the matter. What good is it Sort going to do, I am sure the people he is refusing to debate are going to believe what they want to no matter what kind of evidence is right in front of them. It is sort of like we try not the send juries to decide a court case when we know they know right away how they are going to vote before hearing further evidence.
al gore is a fraud, his whole agenda is based on self interest.
Al Gore said "We must create new ways to engage in a genuine and not manipulative conversation about our future." Global warming is an issue that we hear about all the time... since we all have an interest in creating a habitable planet we should all be in this together. Debating the issue has not been working for scientists... they present models, publish peer reviewed papers, and supply cause and effect relationships. Yet they are often overshadowed by those that spew rhetoric and make unsupported claims to serve there own best interest or political ideals. It does not do any good to try and "debate" with someone who is "arguing". I agree with Al Gore he does not want to debate (or argue)... instead we need to engage in conversation and stop all the name calling and finger pointing.
The debates have been had over the last 20 years. there is nothing more to debate. www.ipcc.ch.
have you ever tried to "debate" with a drug addict or smoker, that their habit is harming them and those around them, and costing us all higher health care bills?
Those addicted to the consumer growth society will take all the evidence & tortured logic the drug pushers will give them. And the drug pushers have bigger advertising bugets, own more media outlets and politicians than anyone suggesting adopting a happy, heatlty, sustainable lifestyle could ever hope to obtain.
Because his view is not scientifically valid in the first place.
Does Ben Bernanke debate federal monetary policy with fringe Marxist conspiracy theorists?
He does not, because the conspiracy theorists have no credibility and don't deserve anyone's time or attention.
Similarly, news organizations, scientists, Al Gore, and even most oil companies will no longer pay any heed to the so-called "deniers" in the face of an overwhelming scientific and economic consensus that climate change is happening.
Because there is no debate. Climate change deniers are like the Flat Earth Society...they insist on keeping their heads firmly up where the light does not shine. Have seen Gore's movie?.he carries with him over 950 peer-reviewed academic studies.the other guys have morons like Micheal Chriton. This is like the tectonic plate "theory" in 1967.geologists were still arguing over whether it was a fact or just a cute idea.it was just a matter of another year or two when it was accepted as a basic fact of Earth Science.
"the debate is over" statement he made fired me up.
Anytime someone uses science (or pseudoscience) and makes an asinine statement like that it's time to prick the ears up and start digging in.
The ignorance and malevolence of Al Gore of "the debate" as I see it is pure propaganda and politics. Nothing more.
"the debate is over" coming from the guy who "invented the internet". Man the guy and his ilk are soakhead ecomarxists veying for one thing POWER, power to control our lives.
Sheep buy it, because they are not informed because of duplicitous media outlets who are willing participants in the ecomarxist propaganda machine.
Big Al they debate is so far from over.
One reason is because it gives the false impression that there is actually a large amount of debate still going on over the theory in the scientific community. If people see scientists like James Hanson, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, and Richard Somerville go out and actively debate hacks like Timothy Ball and Michael Crichton, people will think there's still a great deal of controversy over the basic tenets of the thing, which simply isn't true. The vast majority of climate scientists support the consensus that anthropogenic global warming is real. It's sort of the same reason why Richard Dawkins et al outright refuse to debate creationists, as it gives the impression that there is some dispute left over the idea of evolution though natural selection.
Another reason is that, like you said, Al Gore is not a climate scientist, and probably doesn't want to misrepresent the theory.
because he cant defend his lies
His statement of "I can't answer that, I'm not a scientist." just means that he needs to shut up and sit down. If you want to be the spokesman for it (and what else would you call promoting his movie?) you had darned well better be able to answer the questions that are put forth. Not all of us are mindless dweebs, who will just ingest what he has said as fact. Not to mention that I'm sure you could get any "peer" group to support just about any hair brained idea. These guys get most of their money from government grants. This being the same government that paid for study (by peer group scientists) to determine whether not cows like ketchup!
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: