Al Gore
Let’s presume you have not just returned from an interplanetary expedition and have been unable to access any Earth media over the past several years. Then you know that former U.S. Vice President Al Gore has been leading a very public fight to apprise people of the reality and dangers of global warming. The documentary featuring him and his extraordinary slide show, “An Inconvenient Truth”, released last May, has reached millions of people and won him and the filmmaker an Academy Award on February 25. Gore has a website devoted to climate change, AlGore.com, and heads up The Alliance for Climate Protection.
Now Al Gore is a big boy and can take care of himself and so the inevitable backlash, some might call it swift-boating, that has evidently begun will neither surprise nor intimidate him. He may perhaps even welcome it as a further and perhaps brighter spotlight is brought to bear on his concerns and activities.
On March 13, the weekly Science section of the “NY Times” featured this article: From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype by William J. Broad. It quoted a number of researchers as saying that Gore’s message was, in a word, overhyped. Other scientists, as prominent and widely respected as James Hansen and Michael Oppenheimer, defended Gore’s message and work. A storm broke out.
See this from the Center for American Progress the day after the article appeared: Media — New York Times Baselessly Lambasts Gore, Cites Discredited Skeptics. (You have to scroll down the webpage a bit for this item.) See also these letters in response in the Times. For example, the president-elect of the American Association for the Advancement of Science wrote: “…if you feel obligated to publish what are simply opinions, please use the opinion pages rather than the science section.” Ouch. To be entirely fair to the “NY Times,” it must be noted that their coverage of global warming has been broad and generally excellent. I devoted my entry from March 9 to their terrific special section on the Business of Green.
See also this then from the “Wall Street Journal” from March 19: Whose Ox Is Gored? This is starting to get real personal and is coming perilously close to hitting below the belt.
Gore appeared on Capitol Hill yesterday before both Senate and House committees. He delivered cogent testimony. He took both praise and some lumps. But he’s a big boy, as I said. (I know, very big. So he’s put on a few pounds.)
Returning to the Center for American Progress, see also this from them from yesterday: Global Warming - A Hero And A Target. This is, to be sure, a partisan organization, but I think, from my perspective, that they have landed a good number of punches, and all according to the Marquess of Queensbury rules.
March 22nd, 2007 at 4:03 pm
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
March 23rd, 2007 at 2:20 am
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
March 23rd, 2007 at 1:40 pm
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.
March 27th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
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!).