Thoughts on Gore and global warming

[SouthernFriedInfidel]

Had an interesting discussion after church last weekend with a fellow who played Santa at a Chrismas Eve event I attended at a local homeless shelter. We were talking about how change, in general, can be painful, but often necessary. I mentioned the strange (to me) case of people who resist the idea of making changes in humanity's use of fossil fuels to cut into the problem of global warming. This really got "Santa" going. What follows is, as best I can recall, his statements on the subject:

1) When I was in college, I studied climatology, so I know about this subject. We studied the data at hand then, and we determined, based purely on NATURAL, KNOWN PROCESSES, that Earth's climate was going to warm up at the end of the 20th century.

2) There's nothing wrong, per se, with reducing use of natural resources, but what I object to is how Al Gore is trying to scare Americans into this, while he plans to make himself rich through investments in "alternative energy" technologies.

3) Did you know that Mt. St Helen's and other recent volcanic eruptions injected more carbon dioxide and other chemicals into the atmosphere than all of human activity for the entire course of history COMBINED?

At the time, I decided not to challenge his statements, partly because I'm no expert on the subject, mostly because I sensed a good chance that Santa might get a bit emotional, which would have fouled up the evening for many friends. I've been pondering this conversation since then, and have a few ideas on how to respond...

1) I wonder how quantitative his class's analysis of the climate change was, and whether this fellow had actually checked the predictions his class made for accuracy.

2) If scientists knew that such major changes in the climate as we've seen were coming say 30 years ago, why didn't they let US know what to expect? Or maybe try investing in disaster cleanup companies?

Which leads to Al Gore:
3) Are you saying that Al Gore and some other blokes decided that the best way to get filthy rich was to create an alternative energy industry, then artificially CREATE a scare over global warming?

4) did you bother to watch "An Inconvenient Truth"?

5) Have you actually read any recent climatology papers regarding global warming, to get the latest thinking and supporting data from the scientific community?

I dunno... These questions might elicit some interesting responses. Not really sure what to make of this claim about. volcanoes.

[Liv]

The climate change argument (if there even is one) is silly on multiple levels, because even if by some remote chance in Hell, conservatives are right, and climate change is non-existent, or unimportant, or Gore-ish attempt at fear, the process by which we would correct a "imagined" warmed globosphere, is the same things we should be doing as responsible citizens of the world.

There's also considerable evidence if we're to suggest it's even debatable, that if they are wrong then there's a tipping point to which climatic history suggests doomsday-like outcomes if we pass the point of no return. On the other hand, if they're right, and we work real hard to fix this "imagined" threat, and there really is no threat, then, the worse that happens, is NOTHING... except a healthier environment, and less dependence on fossil fuels.

So to me, the only reason to argue against global warming is greed. People are too fearful, they won't be able to drive their honking SUVs, or ride "lone-ranger" in their 76 Trans-Am. God forbid they'd have to car-pool, drive a slower, electric car, or ride public transportation. God forbid companies should have to produce products in a cleaner manner, or that we care more about other species co-habiting on this earth which WILL become extinct if we don't change our ways.

2014ish is said to be the tipping point by many scientists. Fear? Hell yeah, I'm scared out of my gourd, and Santa should be too.