http://tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=764 I would expect his energy usage to above the norm but it seems extremely high.
This has been covered before. 1. Those guys are a group of GOP hit men and tried this after his Academy Award. An AP report after their first release calculated the usage was a little more than half of what they suggested. 2. Gore's house is not your average house... it has an ex-VP who is leading a global effort. He has staff offices in one wing and boatloads of telecom stuff throughout. He also has to have a bunch of extra security measures. His wife is a public person and also has offices and an assistant. He has guest quarters and a commercial kitchen for frequent visitors. Essentially, the house is a combo of home, office, B&B, and a security outpost. 3. Gore pays extra for his power to come from green sources, so that means he intentionally pays more per kwh than most folks and means his usage is carbon neutral. 4. He lives in a part of the country that gets cold in the winter and really hot in the summer... average use in the Nashville area is about twice the national average. 5. The Gores have been retrofitting the house. It now includes solar panels and a number of other improvements.
That's because man-made global warming is a scam. If Al Gore really believed the crap he's been spewing, he'd lead by example. The only green Gore is concerned with is the 100+ mil he's banked since he left office.
^wow, the fact that people would actually post this factual and logical trainwreck of a syllogism, even under an online alias, is somewhat embarrassing to me as a member of homo sapiens.
Ok, then why won't he debate the issue? Why does he fly all over the world in a private jet(that can't be good for his "carbon footprint")? Why does he shut the press out of his speaking engagements? Why does his house use so much energy? What is his reaction to the fact that the earth hasn't gotten warmer in the last 10 years? How about the expectation that the planet will actually cool over the next 10-15 years? What about the numerous inaccuracies in his Oscar-winning "documentary"? What about the 31,000 scientists who've publically come out against the theory(and it is a theory) of man-made global warming? I haven't heard a single answer from Gore, the media, or anyone in the environmental lobby on any of these questions. Instead, this myth of man-made climate change is being used as a convienient boogeyman to push their agenda. For chrissakes, they're even blaming global warming for the salmonella outbreak now.
You haven't heard a single answer because you're obviously not listening and I fear no amount of me explaining would convince you, given the incredibly vapid nature of your initial posting. I leave your attempted edumacation to a more patient soul.
Are you sure you want to trust that 31000 scientist petition, the one with names like "Perry Mason" and "Michael Fox" on it? The one where only required qualification for being a scientist is that you have an undergraduate degree in a scientific field. The one where they talk about having 9000 PHD signatories but the PHD's include mathematicians, Dentists, and medical Doctors. The one with names of people who are dead. Show me a list of 31000 climate specialists who reject global warming.
See? You're not listening. You have a set viewpoint - which happens to be one that is in the distinct minority, which is why you start off your embarrassing rants with the declaration that "man-made global warming is a scam!" I have a pretty set viewpoint too - one difference is that mine is correct and supported by more evidence and yours is generally not. If the consensus among scientists on global warming honestly and truly reversed, I'd be happy to trust tehm and reverse my view as well. For you though, that's not the same, and it's simply a political game. As more and more evidence comes in and the number crackpot GW-deniers dwindles, folks like you just move on to the next third-rate academic or ExxonMobil-sponsored study and say "SEE! SEE! SEE!" That's why it's not worth it.
As opposed to a former Vice President who has no degrees in science? Whose own documentary has numerous inaccuracies? Who's banked a hundred mil on this supposed threat to humanity while not exactly doing much to limit his carbon footprint? Yeah, I'll go with the scientists.
Seriously, as an 18 year old, I laugh at your ignorance and I dont care how old you are but your comment is just plain retarted.
Exactly who decided my viewpoint is the minority? So the thousands of scientists who've come out against man-made global warming are all liars or shills for oil companies? How about John Coleman who founded The Weather Channel and believes it's all a scam? Is that just another "embarrassing rant"? You're right. It's not worth it.
