What does that have to do with Gore preaching use of green energy but failing to use it himself?

 

I don't believe that it has been said by more than one source.

 

Like I said before, even if that's true, it still shouldn't take away from the message.

 

I'm starting to think that only a non-political figure is going to get people to listen to the threat of global warming. Or, it will have to be a Republican.

 

All this talk about him using this publicity to run for President again is a bunch of B.S. He has not done anything to indicate that he wants to run for President since he lost in 2000.

 

 

I agree with your argument completely, and its one I've often used myself in all of these stupid hypocrisy discussions. I just hope that when a right wing christian leader preaching abstinence and fidelity is found with a hooker, you come to his defense in the same way

This reminds me of Michael Moore. He goes around promoting the proletarian, socialist ideology, yet lives in a fancy and luxurious NYC penthouse.

 

Al Gore is a lot different from Michael Moore. His science is solid and backed by the vast majority of the scientific community.

HIS science? I don't know if I believe that. More like he is preaching a stance taken by a large portion of the environmentalists that happen to support his political beliefs.

I'm talking about the science presented in his presentation.

 

Why do you insist on believing that this is all political? Science is not supposed to be political, and he makes that point clear several times in the film/presentation.

This reminds me of Michael Moore. He goes around promoting the proletarian, socialist ideology, yet lives in a fancy and luxurious NYC penthouse.

 

Al Gore is a lot different from Michael Moore. His science is solid and backed by the vast majority of the scientific community.

HIS science? I don't know if I believe that. More like he is preaching a stance taken by a large portion of the environmentalists that happen to support his political beliefs.

 

its the same science he used to build the internets in his basement

I haven't seen the film, but unfortunately environmentalism couldn't be more political.

 

Not if it's based on accurate science.

 

I recommend that you see it for yourself before you jump to conclusions.

I haven't seen the film, but unfortunately environmentalism couldn't be more political.

 

yeah...doing what is right for humanity and for the earth has alot to do with dem's and rep's...uh...no...

I haven't seen the film, but unfortunately environmentalism couldn't be more political.

 

yeah...doing what is right for humanity and for the earth has alot to do with dem's and rep's...uh...no...

I believe most of the stuff the environmentalists advocate aren't right for humanity, but that goes beyond the point of this thread.

then what do you see environmentalists as? just another form of scum sucking lobbyists out for their own interests while ignoring their obligations to the greater good?

I'll have to retract my initial response to this post. I typed it pretty quickly, (I'm in the middle of moving) & when I see who the author of an article is, my initial response is that he's got a bone to pick.

 

And I DO think the author just thinks Gore's message is all tree-hugger hype (which is fine). However if all his claims are true, it's pretty hypocritical.

 

That being said, I would not be shocked to learn that there is much more to it than what the writer is presenting. He says the Gores own 3 homes but attacks them for 2 of them not being green. What about the 3rd? For all I know, maybe the 3rd home is green and they live in it quite a lot. He attacks them for receiving $ from a company that uses a zinc mine on their property, when the company has been cited for dumping issues before. Well when was that? Have they complied? Are they on the straight and narrow now? If so, what's the problem? For all I know that could've been years before Gore even owned the home there. I'd just like to see Gore respond to all this.

 

So I do question whether the writer is giving us the whole story, but if that's all there is to it, then yes it is pretty hypocritical of Gore to not be leading by example. Although by most accounts he's doing a heck of a lot to get the message out, it should definitely start with you.