Comments on: Al Gore http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/ The official Web log for Great Decisions 2007 Sat, 11 Oct 2008 18:27:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=wordpress-mu-1.0 by: Calvin Jones http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-14 Tue, 27 Mar 2007 18:44:53 +0000 http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-14 Hi Bill, On Gore and the swiftboating: This is easy to see and dispare over the politicsisation of climate change. So gore may not be a perfect 'neutral' messenger for the cause. On the other hand we never had a choice of who takes this message mainstream, Gore stepped up and we are surely greatful that someone did. Also he is moving so fast that I don't think that it is going to detract from his message, the signal to noise ratio is a problem if you don't do much. Gore is doing a lot...still touring, and wait for Live Earth! I love the fact that there is so much momentum behind the subject at the moment, if Live Earth does get permission to be held on Capitol Hill then they will be banging on the whitehouse door. Ok so we would all like a bi-partisan agreement on this but having it as a high priority partisan issue is an improvement on no discussion! Charles, The republicans are so obsessed with attacking Gore that they have had to give him huge exposure to slander him. As for Lomberg, i`m really sorry we don't get to hear more from him, perticularly given his doddgy economic dealings (got to love high pure time discount rates, who values the future anyhow!). Hi Bill,

On Gore and the swiftboating: This is easy to see and dispare over the politicsisation of climate change. So gore may not be a perfect ‘neutral’ messenger for the cause. On the other hand we never had a choice of who takes this message mainstream, Gore stepped up and we are surely greatful that someone did.

Also he is moving so fast that I don’t think that it is going to detract from his message, the signal to noise ratio is a problem if you don’t do much. Gore is doing a lot…still touring, and wait for Live Earth!

I love the fact that there is so much momentum behind the subject at the moment, if Live Earth does get permission to be held on Capitol Hill then they will be banging on the whitehouse door.

Ok so we would all like a bi-partisan agreement on this but having it as a high priority partisan issue is an improvement on no discussion!

Charles,

The republicans are so obsessed with attacking Gore that they have had to give him huge exposure to slander him. As for Lomberg, i`m really sorry we don’t get to hear more from him, perticularly given his doddgy economic dealings (got to love high pure time discount rates, who values the future anyhow!).

]]> by: Bill Hewitt http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-8 Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:40:39 +0000 http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-8 CRH - For the record, I noted Bjorn Lomborg's appearance in my previous post, "Smorgasbord." The post included a link to the House website which contained his written testimony. Further, also for the record, I fully noted The Center for American Progress's "partisan" point of view in the post above. I also noted that I considered their critique rational. Have you seen or read about Senator Inhofe's performance in the afternoon hearing? To be clear, evenhandedness does not mean giving credence to what are slanders or inventions or, for that matter, merely opinions. See the quote cited in my post in the letter to the NY Times from James J. McCarthy, the President-elect of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.      All that being said, I very much appreciate your comment and hope you will come back and give us your perspective. That's really one of the key reasons why FPA has put these blogs out here. CRH - For the record, I noted Bjorn Lomborg’s appearance in my previous post, “Smorgasbord.” The post included a link to the House website which contained his written testimony. Further, also for the record, I fully noted The Center for American Progress’s “partisan” point of view in the post above. I also noted that I considered their critique rational. Have you seen or read about Senator Inhofe’s performance in the afternoon hearing? To be clear, evenhandedness does not mean giving credence to what are slanders or inventions or, for that matter, merely opinions. See the quote cited in my post in the letter to the NY Times from James J. McCarthy, the President-elect of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
     All that being said, I very much appreciate your comment and hope you will come back and give us your perspective. That’s really one of the key reasons why FPA has put these blogs out here.

]]> by: Charles R. Hubert http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-7 Fri, 23 Mar 2007 07:20:37 +0000 http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-7 Much has been made about Al Gore's testimony on global warming before Congress yesterday. Virtually nothing has been written or broadcast about the testimony of Bjorn Lomborg. The reference to Lomborg as "discredited" by sources cited in this blog are nothing more than ad hominem attacks. Not surprising; Center for American Progress and Media Matters can hardly be considered unbiased. This has long been standard operating proceedure for those who find it "inconvenient" to deal with the cogent points made by Lomborg and the incontrovertible data he uses to support them. Here are links to the written statements of both men, submitted in connection with their testimony before the Joint Subcommittee Hearing on Wednesday, March 21: Testimony By The Honorable Al Gore Testimony By Bjørn Lomborg I leave it to readers to determine which makes more sense. It appears that this blog makes no attempt whatsoever at presenting a balanced view on this issue. This is truly unfortunate, given the Foreign Policy Association's stated goal of even-handedness. CRH Much has been made about Al Gore’s testimony on global warming before Congress yesterday. Virtually nothing has been written or broadcast about the testimony of Bjorn Lomborg. The reference to Lomborg as “discredited” by sources cited in this blog are nothing more than ad hominem attacks. Not surprising; Center for American Progress and Media Matters can hardly be considered unbiased. This has long been standard operating proceedure for those who find it “inconvenient” to deal with the cogent points made by Lomborg and the incontrovertible data he uses to support them.

Here are links to the written statements of both men, submitted in connection with their testimony before the Joint Subcommittee Hearing on Wednesday, March 21:
Testimony By The Honorable Al Gore
Testimony By Bjørn Lomborg
I leave it to readers to determine which makes more sense.

It appears that this blog makes no attempt whatsoever at presenting a balanced view on this issue. This is truly unfortunate, given the Foreign Policy Association’s stated goal of even-handedness.

CRH

]]> by: Paul Higgins http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-5 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:03:57 +0000 http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/2007/03/22/al-gore/#comment-5 During the hearings yesterday, Gore offered about a dozen fairly specific proposals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Some will be widely appealing but others will trigger a great deal of debate. It will be interesting to watch how these get presented and discussed. Paul Higgins www.climatepolicy.org During the hearings yesterday, Gore offered about a dozen fairly specific proposals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Some will be widely appealing but others will trigger a great deal of debate. It will be interesting to watch how these get presented and discussed.

Paul Higgins
www.climatepolicy.org

]]>