Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Gore accepts invitation to high tea in Victoria

SCOTT SUTHERLAND

Canadian Press

Latest comment posted at 8:08 PM EDT 31/08/07

University of Victoria students book climate change crusader for September event ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Michael Sharp from Paradise Found, Canada writes:

    High tea in Victoria!

    What would he get in Toronto?
    A smog alert?

    How about Montreal, mind the collapsiong infrastrucrture.

    A visit to St. John's would have the Goracle avoiding bellicose politicians.

    'Would you like an umbrella Mr. Gore?', as he visited Vancouver.

    He won't go to the U of A in Edmonton, we know that's not going to happen.

    And on and on and on, as is my wont.
  2. Michael Sharp from Paradise Found, Canada writes:

    The damndest thing is that for all intents and purposes Victoria didn't get a summer.

    Just a really long spring.

    This Global Cooling sucks.
  3. Andrew Pearson from Montreal, Canada writes: Snake-oil salesman!
  4. John Arthur from Canada writes: A $200 donation to the Sierra Fund would make better sense. Gore is a complete charlatan.
  5. Mary O'Hara from Toronto, Canada writes: A whole generation... brainwashed.
  6. Larry Robinson from white Rock, Canada writes: Michael S - I believe Gore did his 'we're gonna die in ten years' routine for Calgary oil executives last spring - symbiotic corporate relationship.

    Gordon Campbell introducing Al Gore - SlimeFest. Feel yourself choking in the quicksand of eco-politics.

    Forget the global warming/cooling, what the heck is happening to our salmon? And the blackberries are the size of marbles.

    Now, that is a crisis.
  7. Dave Arthurson from United States writes: Mary O'Hara, anthropogenic climate change as a result of increasing CO2 has been discussed and predicted in the scientific literature since 1972.

    Who had the agenda then?

    Who was Sawyer pandering to in 1972 when he published his first (amazingly accurate) predictions in Nature?

    Was it the funding agencies, who likely as not, hadn't given it a second thought? Was it the environmentalist movement, still barely a movement?

    If you're referring to a generation of scientists, scholars and citizens then you'd better change your definition of 'generation' since this one dates back to at least the early 70s, if not earlier (see Tyendall 1861 or Callendar, 1949).
  8. The Dude from Toronto, Canada writes: I think the generation reference is to the Baby Boomers!
  9. James Cyr from Balmertown, Canada writes: I guess it really it true that you can fool a lot of the people most of the time!
  10. Rick Drysdale from Canada writes: All Hail the Gorical

    High tea at UVic.
    Not likely.
  11. Suzieque From Canada from Victoria BC, Canada writes: Well, I guess I won't be coming. Who can afford that kind of money? Only people who can afford to live large, read: Pollute a lot.
  12. Wasabi Jones from Canada writes: I don't think the airport in Victoria is built to accommodate his ego.
  13. Paul Jay from Canada writes: Rightwingers so totally wrong about Iraq? That could have been just a coincidence. But wrong about global warming and Iraq? At the same time? No my friends, conservatives truly are hopeless.
  14. Paul B from Vancouver, Canada writes: May be.... Gore can serve as a Vice President for Mrs. Clinton... It would be awesome!
  15. Mr Fijne from Fight global walarmism!, Canada writes: And why is this supposed to be newsworthy?... unless this is well orchestrated propaganda. If one check Hogan's despicable little yellow star inspired website, one can see that the Globe and Mail is the only Canadian newspaper linked in this global walarmist website that advise the ... Suzuki Foundation. Interesting no? One has also to see that Hogan's collaborators -pun totally intended- are experts in cli.... No, of course not: they are recycled journalists! Debate is over, science is settled? You wish!
  16. bruce weaver from Canada writes: Al Gore was Vice President and by the way did nothing for the environment and when he ran for President took enfironment out of his platform because he needed to win in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. That is a man of high convictions. This guy is a fraud.
  17. J. Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: Paul Jay says 'Rightwingers so totally wrong about Iraq? That could have been just a coincidence. But wrong about global warming and Iraq? At the same time? No my friends, conservatives truly are hopeless.'

    Well, maybe it is you who is wrong about everything, Paul. After all, it has now been revealed that this so-called 'consensus' from the IPCC scientists was a lie all along. But then Gore is involved and he is the biggest scam artist since Jean Chretien.
  18. Let me tell You How It Is from Seattle, Washington, United States writes: Another headline for the G&M as this fascination with American is unbelievable:

    The EXPERT 'Let me tell you how it is' from Seattle has accepted and made reservations for dinner in September at the McDonald's on Granville Street in Vancouver.
  19. Old Folksinger from Canada writes: Tell the Victoria cops to stay out of the washrooms - American politician in town.
  20. K Wong from Victoria, BC, Canada writes: Congrats to the UVic students who achieved their goals. This is truly a wonderful accomplishment. Thank-you!
  21. martha stewart from Canada writes: Article notes that his website warns that we only have 10 years before the sky falls. Counting the preparation time for the movie that must have been written earlier... so now we've only got 8 years!!!

    My how time flies - but not as much as Travelling Al Gore does. The message: Do what I say not what I do. He's no doubt flying to Bali for the December beachside 'conference' too.

    Sure impressed that it only took $120,000 to 'convince' him to fly to Victoria and preach to the fawning converts. I confess, I envy him - what a perfect scam! Even Travelling Dave Suzuki can pull in these kind of dollars.
  22. Mark Lanovaz from B.C., writes: The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Keep scaring the kiddies Gore. I'm not falling for it.

  23. Jake Richardson from kingston, Canada writes: To all the people talking about environmentalists being brainwashed -- the feeling is mutual.
  24. martha stewart from Canada writes: Let me tell You How It Is from Seattle, Washington, United States writes: '[I have] accepted and made reservations for dinner in September at the McDonald's on Granville Street in Vancouver.'

    Marvellous! Why haven't I seen this news on Entertainment Tonight? Its such a thrill that you could visit one of your global franchises... and we have The Gap too!!! But, I'm sorry, excuse me, I beg your pardon, we are thankful but not worthy of both you and Al Gore in a single year!

    P.S. Can I send you a DVD of Canadian Idol or some of our other unique cultural offerings?
  25. martha stewart from Canada writes: Mark Lanovaz from B.C., writes: 'The sky is falling, the sky is falling.'

    From my experience in Victoria, when it appears that the sky is falling it is either rain or seagull sh*t.

    Jake Richardson from kingston writes: 'To all the people talking about environmentalists being brainwashed -- the feeling is mutual.'

    Sounds like you think all 'environmentalists' are identical, and the same for all who criticize some people who call themselves that. Nice black and white, us and them, simplistic view. Just like Bush. Too bad its so completely unrealistic and worse.
  26. Ross G from okanagan, Canada writes: forget all the other garbage going back and forth here...the real story is these 3 students had the cojones to go after a longshot and they got it!

    A rare and great story...we need more of them.
  27. David Simon from Canada writes: I'm sure he's going to travel to Victoria by sail power-or is he going to be his usual hypocritical self?
  28. Yogie Bear from The Forest, Canada writes: Better start up the engines on that jumbo jet Gore so you can be sure to pollute your way to Victoria.

    Thank You
  29. Shawn Bull from Canada writes: I have read all the posts and see two definitive sides. One completely against Gore and the global warming message and those that 100% support that the globe is warming due to man.

    I myself stand in the middle. I believe the globe is waming. I believe it is due to natural warming cycles and human intervention. I do believe that if the world pulled togther and altered their pollution habits and reliance on fossil fuels than we can reduce the current global warming trend.

    I do not believe we are at a tipping point or near a tipping point in the environment. There are defenite warning signs that we need to change our direction in regards to polluting.

    I most certainly do not believe in what Al Gore has to say. His story is one sided with some inaccuracies. This has harmed the pro-global waming side as the other side mistrusts everything they say. Al Gore is also a terrible polluter in his personal life never mind his traveling business life.

    I do not trust Al Gore to lead the gloabl warming charge. We humans are effecing the environmnet but not to the extent that Gore says. Still, we are effecting it and must change our habits or what is being said could happen 400 or 500 hundred years from now.
  30. Rocky Balboa from United States writes: Mr. Gore is not just accepting an invitation to high tea. I have no doubt that he will be getting at least a $50,000 speaking fee. It's amazing to read about so many Canadians fawning over an overweight, American ex-politician, who probably never rides the bus and whose monthly electric bill would rival the annual electric bill of the typical American family. Yes, I know he has his office at home, but does he really need a 10,000 square foot mansion? He is not exactly a poster child for conservation.
  31. gordon davies from Victoria B.C., Canada writes: With the environment & politics being like they , getting my shorts in a knot isn't worth any bellicose reason to come to blows . As I am old enough to read this ploy , cant respond in any rabid negative way.
  32. OAK ! from Canada writes: “It's going to be a ‘green tea' of sorts,” chuckled Justin Yorke, 20, who still can't believe their good fortune in securing the former U.S. vice-president for the Sept. 29 event at Victoria's conference centre.

    Why can't they believe it? I'm sure the guy would come to my house to do a presentation if I paid him enough. This guy will do anything for a buck.
  33. Dick Hurts from Beeton, Canada writes:

    Al Gore REALLY needs to get high.

    .
  34. David E from Canada writes: Yeah, sure.

    Gore's a big phony. The environment sucks. Pollution is good. Climate change is good. Gore's is doing this for a fee and that's bad, though when oil companies and other polluters make much bigger paychecks, that's good . People who support selfless causes are evil. Selfish, greedy egotists are the true saints. And so on.

    -- Conservative 'thinking' 101
  35. Richard Daystrom from Toronto, Canada writes: So is he going to pedal a bike to Victoria?
  36. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    I remember when Gore was fork-lifted around Toronto a few months ago.

    Timed his appearance to coincide with Baird's pollution/GHG plan.

    He harpooned it without reading it (he claimed he was 'briefed' about it). David Suzuki screamed in Baird's face.

    The libs were planning on using the event as a springboard to force an election over Kyoto (and the lack of Kyoto-mania by the CPC).

    Problem was that the LPC did an internal poll and found out that Dion would get demolished in an election.

    Now that Dion has won over the hearts and minds of mainstream Canada with his wildly successful 'getting to know you' Summer Tour, might Gore's plopping in Victoria be a prelude to an election?

    Go for it, Mr. Dion. Canada is ready for an election. Your fate awaits you!
  37. Yogie Bear from The Forest, Canada writes:
    Rocky Balboa from United States writes: Mr. Gore is not just accepting an invitation to high tea. I have no doubt that he will be getting at least a $50,000 speaking fee.

    Rocky, it is $250,000 not 50 grand and he takes no questions.

    Thank You
  38. dick brown from missy, Canada writes: Loser individual, now...loser University. I teach my students to refute his pseudo-science instead of indoctrinating them, imagine that, a teacher that actually teaches students to think instead of falling for the left or right claptrap from phonies like Gore.
  39. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Shawn Bull:-- With respect, the other 'side' (nod to martha) wouldn't believe any of it unless it were delivered from on high by a thunderous voice. Not wanting to accept the message, the non-believers set about diminishing the messenger. It's easier, you know.
  40. Interested Observer from Canada writes: Eighteen CEOs of Canada's largest corporations had this to say in an open letter to the Prime Minister of Canada: 'Our organizations accept that a strong response is required to the strengthening evidence in the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We accept the IPCC consensus that climate change raises the risk of severe consequences for human health and security and the environment. We note that Canada is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.' So have the conspirators seized the reigns of industrial power, in addition to infiltrating the U.N., the science academies of every developed nation, and the top research institutes of North America? That just doesn't seem very likely. The reality is that the vast preponderance of scientific opinion accepts that anthropologic human-caused [greenhouse] emissions [AGW] are contributing to warming, There are no peer reviewed papers claiming any flaw in AGW. In fact, papers take it as a given (proven fact) and do not have to justify it. That is what happens when hypothesis is accepted by a consensus and becomes 'proven theory'. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just endured an unprecedented process of vetting and peer-review to produce a document, the veracity of which has been double-checked and endorsed by thousands of the best scientists in the world. Ask yourself what motive the scientific community has to gang up and invent a phoney climate crisis. Compare that to the motives that ExxonMobile or Peabody Coal might have to deny that burning fossil fuels indiscriminately could change irrevocably our existence on the planet.
  41. John Silverman from Canada writes: Good for the students, sounds like a nice event.
  42. Angus S Miskers from Victoria, Canada writes: Now why would I pay $200 smackers to listen to a talking head with no neck parotting some environazi propganda when I can attend a lecture at a real life university by an accomplished scholar on the issue for free? I can get those dainty Empress finger sandwiches any day of the week for a mere $50 (or $25 in non-tourist season).
  43. dick brown from missy, Canada writes: INT OBS...the problem is, the scientists that have refuted Gore and his minions have been vilified and compared to Nazis. When I heard this Nazi anaolgy, I immediatley thought, there must be some serious BS going on here. The Marxist left wing scum simply don't understand the 1st and 2nd law of thermodynamics.
  44. Rick B from Toronto, Canada writes: As the Vic students dine with the Loser of the 2000 US Presidential Election, they may want to ask the Loser about the arrest of his son Al Gore III on drug possession charges and speeding at 100 mph (161 km/h) on the San Diego freeway in his Toyota Prius.

    As a professed expert on the environment, Gore may be able to answer whether such an excessive speed nullifies the Prius' alleged fuel economy benefits.

    They may also want to ask Gore what $ amount of carbon offsets he intends to pay to offset the carbon spewed by the private jet he takes to YYJ airport.

    It's time for the Gore family to begin walking their hyperbolic talk on the environment: father through to son. So far, hypocrisy has been the MO for the Oracle of the environment as he continues his personal reputation reconstruction project after the big L of '00.
  45. Mister J from UVIC Alumni, Canada writes: Way to go, you three!
  46. Mark Lanovaz from B.C., writes: Hey Martha. Just because I don't agree with Gore doesn't make me a Bush supporter. Remember that.
  47. globefan EH from Canada writes: Please, please, let me hope Al Gore can convince Gordon Campbell that in 2007 it is not a good thing for a Victoria, population 345,000 and exploding with new growth to not have sewage treatment. I wouldn't want him to see any floaties on his visit.

    All those boomers and seniors should give some thought to paying higher taxes and take responsibility for looking after the ocean that surrounds Vancouver Island. They should really really consider having sewage treatment, so go to it Al.

    FYI

    Media Release: April 13, 2005

    BC Ignored Evidence in Approving Victoria's Sewage Plan

    VICTORIA, BC – Documents recently obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request show that Joyce Murray, then BC Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection (WLAP) ignored overwhelming evidence on the harmful effects of dumping raw sewage into the ocean when she approved Victoria’s Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP). The approved LWMP allows Victoria to continue pumping over 40 billion litres a year of raw sewage into waters just off Victoria harbour for at least the next 25 years.

  48. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    One other thing--

    We are always trotting in these leftoid American 'celebraties' who are very anti-Conservative/ pro-LPC. Gore, Dean, Moore to name a few.

    The media always gives these people a free pass; often they fawn.

    Now what would happen if a bunch of rightoid Americans started showing up in Canada, dissing the libs/lefties? Imagine Limbaugh or Hannity having a 'Tea' and totally trash-talking Dion's policies.

    Would these guys get the same 'respectful' ride that the media gives the left??

    Bias? What bias??
  49. Mr Fijne from Fight global walarmism!, Canada writes: Interested observer, the no peer reviewed claim is quite rich... and your absolute belief is frightening, naive and gullable. You have never written any scientific paper in order to have that solid belief that peer review is a guarantee of truth! Sometimes it is sometimes not. The spectacular rise of some younger scientists to positions of influence is highly suspect and we all know that horses from specific stables will have much more chances to rise. Does it mean they are all left wing conspiracists? Of course not: if that was that simple... No they are defending the interest of their country, their lab and their own. InterGOVERNMENTAL Panel CC is darn clear... there is at least 23 trillion dollars to be spent by world economies and even a small % of this is worth every compromission with science and truth.
  50. globefan EH from Canada writes: Spicydoc, if Limbaugh and Hannity are prepared to come and debate scientific facts and data on climate change, lets hear them. They can come for tea anytime, I would be curious as to who would be their target market and audience.

    Perhaps they could debate David Suzuki, if they didn't shout a lot, I might even watch.
  51. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    Globefan--

    I wasn't talking about GHG in particular.

    My point was that leftoid American nutbars get the red carpet in Canada, whereas rightoid American nutbars would be run out of town.

    Re GHG-- the effect is real, and is directly related to a country's population and economic prosperity.

    The ideal solution would be to have all 'true believers' do a Jim Jones and lower the human burdon on Mother Earth.

    Of course, we should elect Dion, since he'll ruin the economy and reduce our GHG in a jiff.

    Cheers
  52. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Mr. Fijne:-- If it's (peer-reviewed opposition to CC) similarly quite rich, offer us some examples. The IPCC is on the 'net for anyone to read - surely you can offer those of us who are interested some quality links for the opposing view. Is the problem that there aren't enough bald/grey heads contributing to IPCC? Do you have any factual information about the sudden swarming of youthful scientists to the scene? Finally, if mega-tonnes of money is spent on GW/CC, would this be comparable to the mega-tonnes of money that are spent annually on war materiel with the goal of securing peace? And, if that 'peace' is such a worthy goal, how come profit is being made in its advancement? Or, does the simple fact that profit can be made render that goal (peace) worth pursuing? Just curious.
  53. Bradly Wiebe from ebeiwyldarb, Canada writes: diane, do you really believe that there isn't profit being made on the man-made global warming charade?

    Using your own words, if stopping global warming is such a worthy goal, how come profit is being made in its advancement?
  54. Michael Crowell from Halifax, Canada writes: I would not walk across the street to see or listen to Al Gore. As VP under Clinton he do not sign the Kyoto Accord. They both had ample opportunities but failed to do so.
  55. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    diane--

    a successful war not only secures peace, but dramatically lowers the local population and ruins the economic infrastructure.

    people boo-hoo about Iraq, the remaining Iraqis are easily going to meet their Kyoto targets...
  56. Sceptical Observer from Canada writes: Shawn Bull from Canada writes: I have read all the posts and see two definitive sides. One completely against Gore and the global warming message and those that 100% support that the globe is warming due to man.
    >>>Due to man like Gore himself. How about the false prophet? Could you imagine J*sus living in the Palace and preaching after long night in the night club? I'd rather trust Clinton with his I did not have sex with type statement then this hypocrite. He is like one of those Hollywood stars that one day spend 500K buying luxuries and the next day start shedding their crocodile tears about poverty in Africa. Because it is good promo. The personal example you know. It is not all right/left. It is sometimes about being disgusted with someone hypocrisy.
  57. Scenic Sask! from Canada writes: Yes, young Mr. Jacobson, Victoria is a GREEN CITY (WITH BROWN OUTPUT). This bears repeating.....globefan EH from Canada writes: Please, please, let me hope Al Gore can convince Gordon Campbell that in 2007 it is not a good thing for a Victoria, population 345,000 and exploding with new growth to not have sewage treatment. I wouldn't want him to see any floaties on his visit.

    All those boomers and seniors should give some thought to paying higher taxes and take responsibility for looking after the ocean that surrounds Vancouver Island. They should really really consider having sewage treatment, so go to it Al.

    FYI

    Media Release: April 13, 2005

    BC Ignored Evidence in Approving Victoria's Sewage Plan

    VICTORIA, BC – Documents recently obtained through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request show that Joyce Murray, then BC Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection (WLAP) ignored overwhelming evidence on the harmful effects of dumping raw sewage into the ocean when she approved Victoria’s Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP). The approved LWMP allows Victoria to continue pumping over 40 billion litres a year of raw sewage into waters just off Victoria harbour for at least the next 25 years.
  58. martha stewart from Canada writes: Mark Lanovaz from B.C., writes: 'Hey Martha. Just because I don't agree with Gore doesn't make me a Bush supporter. Remember that.'

    No problem. If you read the second part of my 8:28 post addressed to you (the first part was addressing your comments with what I hoped was humour :-)) that was the point I was trying to make to JR from kingston.

    Some people see the world in simplistic black-white charicatures (when reality is usually gray)... therefore they think that if you disagree with the Kyoto/Gore version of reality, you must automatically support Bush and 'Big Oil,' drive an SUV, hate the planet, and be a hard right wing 'neocon.' In the real world, it is not so simple. I myself think both Bush and Gore are disasters... which makes me a 'commie neocon' I guess.

    If you read many of my posts you will discover that my main theme is deflating extremes and promoting the wisdom of 'gray' truth-in-the-middle thinking. And the so-called 'environmental' movement is now so full of extremist views (backed by false 'facts') that there's no end to it.
  59. Joe Wallach from Russell, Ontario, Canada writes: Aw, come on those of you who feel that Dr. Gore doesn't deserve the invitation, and that the students at UVic don't deserve the 'best'. Dr. Gore, an acknowledged expert on climate behavior and pollution, just went through the motions as a politician to mask his true identity. We need more like him, a dedicated scientist who practices what he preaches by living in an energy efficient cottage in northern Saskatchewan, and traveling by canoe. When he goes from lake to lake, and there are no connecting rivers, he portages his canoe. He learned from the land...Omigosh, have I confused Gore with someone else...anyone else?
  60. Dennis Petruk from Canada writes: Gore is a fraud.

    Uof Vic students paid handsomely for a fraud to speak and not answer questions.

    This is somehow an accomplishment??

    These are our future leaders?

    God help us!!!
  61. Scenic Sask! from Canada writes: Greenpeace has admitted that if man stopped adding ANY greenhouse gasses the ice-caps would still melt and the water levels would still rise. Climate change is normal and natural. Global warming (man-made) is a money making scare tactic of those like Al Gore (who is poised to reap the $$ in carbon credits his companies are waiting on).
  62. CD W from coldwater, Canada writes: well if the tea sucks, he can always smoke some dope with the dopes.
  63. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: 'the other 'side' (nod to martha) wouldn't believe any of it unless it were delivered from on high by a thunderous voice. Not wanting to accept the message, the non-believers set about diminishing the messenger. It's easier, you know.'

    Hi diane marie - Glad you got my 'side' point. Hope you recognize that your comments apply to both 'sides.' Thus those who question the Gore 'Truth' are labeled 'deniers' - and I'm sure you appreciate the loaded source of that term. Failing that they are accused of being 'paid hacks for Big Oil' or something like that.

    P.S. Saw you tracked down the puffin story but that thread was closed. I know its silly but its the kind of thing that seldom just goes away. What was he thinking???
  64. Old Fart from Edmonton, Canada writes: Victoria is a green city????? Only when they stop piping all their untreated s**t into the ocean!! Hypocrites.
  65. Ernest T Bass from United States writes: Dear Canada, we will be revoking his passport once he enters your country, he's all yours now... :)

    Sincerely,

    The United States.
  66. Sceptical Observer from Canada writes: Old Fart from Edmonton, Canada writes: Victoria is a green city????? Only when they stop piping all their untreated s**t into the ocean!! Hypocrites.
    >>>That's why Mr Gore is a perfect fit.
  67. by jove from Canada writes:
    The carny is back in town.

    The flimflam man himself will preach to the adherents, spreading wisdom and enlightenment -- $500 dollars worth of enlightenment, and hopefully sell some indulgences, carbon credits.

    The devotees will then march back to their domiciles feeling cleansed, and oh so much more self righteous, as they save the world from certain destruction and damnation.

    Amen - and blessed be his name, for his name is that of man - Al.

    Glory glory hallelujah.
  68. Sceptical Observer from Canada writes: Ernest T Bass from United States writes: Dear Canada, we will be revoking his passport once he enters your country, he's all yours now.
    >>>Like we can't throw over the border Jack Layton. Hah! If Gore moves to Victoria, Layton moves to Seattle. This will balance across the border political pollution and no credits will be issued.
  69. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Bradly:-- Perhaps you should read my post once again and make a more concerted effort to understand what I said. Then, you should ask yourself whether your post, which includes the word 'charade', warrants a serious reply.

    martha stewart:-- I would more enthusiastically agree with your post if your final sentence about extreme environmentalism included a comment about extreme denial, evidence of which is easy to find on this thread. The fact is that each 'side' uses extreme terminology to advance its view - 'charlatan' and 'snake-oil salesman' is met with disaster scenarios. Interestingly enough, the name-calling, accusations of hypocrisy, demonization, and character assassination (Prius-driving son, etc.) is found on one side. On the other 'side' one finds (mainly) the advancement of threat scenarios - weather extremes, disaster, human loss, etc. Try as I might, I can't think of a single example, on the environmental side, of the descent into base personal attack. Perhaps you can offer one or some...
  70. Bradly Wiebe from ebeiwyldarb, Canada writes: Diane, I've read enough of your posts to know that nothing you say warrants a serious reply. However, the content of my post stands. If you question the validity of the effort in Afghanistan on the incredibly immature grounds that money is being made on it, then you must also question the GW crowd since the big boys like Gore are also making money on it.
  71. Sceptical Observer from Canada writes: Interesting enough no one of Gore supporters even denies the facts exposing Gore double standards. I guess this is not important. How about the fact that people like Gore and his Hollywood friends actually increase the ecological footprint by showing complete contempt to the principles they seemingly promote. Living in their mansions, promoting exuberant consumption, and preaching about ecological catastrophe.
  72. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    diane marie--

    there was a period about a week or two ago where some troll used your name and posted despicable garbage.

    interestingly, while this was going on, you had some sympathy from your adversaries and 'friends' alike. your posts actually took on a balanced tone. you became readable.

    for some reason you have drifted back into insufferable arrogant snot mode.

    what happened?

    or did the troll buy an insider logo to further his vicious game?
  73. Mr Fijne from Fight global walarmism!, Canada writes: Diane Marie, I would advise a good reading 'Global Warming: Myth or Reality, the erring ways of climatology' Springer, Praxis editor, by climatologist emeritus professor Marcel Leroux. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcel_Leroux
    You would learn about the history of the IPCC and previous conferences leading to its creation, you would learn about atmospheric circulation, about the models and their limitations and you would get numerous references of peered reviewed scientific papers. It's 500 pages but worth it: after this reading you cannot look at the IPCC and the walarmism the same way. Among the fast rising 'stars': Academician Le Treut IPCC, College de France prof Bard, Jean marc Jancovici etc... Marcel Leroux has spent many years measuring and understanding atmospheric circulation in equatorial Africa, his understanding is invaluable.
  74. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - You actually used the word 'denial.' According to my dictionary, denial is the refusal to accept something one knows to be true. People like myself dispute the Gore/Kyoto version of reality because nobody knows that it is true. It is all simply predictions made by computer models of questional worth. Therefore it is not denial. And in case you missed the critical point, the use of this phrase was deliberately chosen because of its association with 'holocaust denial.'

    So, everyone who uses this term to dismiss the legitimate questions about something that is, contrary to popular mythology, not known, is using an unstated personal attack.

    On the other hand, all the high profile characters in this drama are promoting the Gore/Kyoto view so it is only natural that they stand out for public 'demonization' (and glorification) - particularly when they are such absolute and total hypocrites in their own lives. This is not an 'accusation' but rather an objective, demonstrable real world fact. There can be no denial - to use that term properly - of the fact that Gore does preach 'do what I say not what I do.' His trip to Victoria is unnecessary travel, period.
  75. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - Mr. Fijne's post reminded me of something... I don't suppose you ever did read that book I suggested to you long ago ... 'Cloak of Green' by Elaine Dewar. Could no doubt be a great primer to Mr. Fijne's recommendation (which I have not read).
  76. Bob Rollheiser from Canada writes: There's one born evry minute, the profits know this and the university students prove it.
  77. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Mr. Fijne:-- Your reply to my series of questions is to tell me/us to read a 500-page book. I appreciate the recommendation, thank you, but as a reply I find that it leaves something to be desired. For example, you offer an impressive list of so-called CC/GW 'stars', but then don't tell us what it means. Members of many professions become so prominent that their names are recognized outside of their profession - does that automatically mean that their views are to be discounted? The simple point I have tried to make is that detractors of the science of GW/CC say that when people try to make money from mitigating GW/CC, that profit motive proves that there is no basis to GW/CC. Similarly, if a proponent becomes a so-called celebrity, he or she can't possibly have anything valuable to say.
  78. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- I believe that you have told us about Ms. Dewar's book on many occasions.
  79. Fifty cal from Austin, Texas, United States writes: ALL RIGHT! The high priest of the globull warming scheme is coming to spread the Kool-aide. Take heart! All you have to do is stop using toilet paper, electricity, cars and store bought food. Oh, and breathe less. Humans give off about 5 'tonnes' of CO2 whether they like it or not. Going to have to cut down on that population now aren't we?

    BTW CO2 is a BYPRODUCT of 'globull warming', not a CAUSE!
  80. m y from Canada writes: i agree with the comment that Gore is a charlatan. Al Gore is a fraud. He's making millions on this. Hasn't anyone seen through this yet? People here (as in North America in general) are just stupid, you would believe a politician? a politician?! red flags folks....
  81. Michael H from Edmonton, Canada writes: The real story is how Harper and National Defense hired a high profile academic to argue that Canada has no obligation to uphold human rights. See that thread. That is where the real debating should be taking place tonight.
  82. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: m y from Canada:-- Out of curiosity, who else would one believe? Apparently, one shouldn't believe a large number of scientists, from all areas of specialty and the world, who came together to produce a report - not a perfect report, but one which tries to achieve a consensus concerning the questions about GG/CW. And, one is not meant to believe anyone who tries to advance, in lay terms, the conclusions of that report. So, who is one to believe? Any suggestions?
  83. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: The Dude from Toronto, Canada writes: I think the generation reference is to the Baby Boomers!
    --
    Did you know that the baby boomers spanned 2 decades? The older baby boomers are primarily conservative minded people, the younger boomers are liberal minded, give or take a few million on either side. This is why there is a lot of political division as the baby boomers assume the leadership roles in politics. Is this a non-statement? Nope, it is at the heart of every political issue in this era.
  84. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    diane--

    A couple of comments to try to make peace:

    Let's all agree that global warming is happening.

    Let's also agree that Gore is a pompous, egotistical, hypocritical, money-grubbing tub-of-lard.

    There.

    Did I miss anything?

    Time for you to go to the detainee thread where Michael H is accusing Harper of being a torture-groupie.
  85. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: Fifty cal from Austin, Texas, United States writes: BTW CO2 is a BYPRODUCT of 'globull warming', not a CAUSE!
    ----
    Without getting into a long detailed explanation of how the planet regulates it's temperature, CO2 emmissions contribute to the general green-house effect by helping to limit the amount of sunlight (energy) released/reflected back to space. This has the effect of trapping the warmth in the atmoshpere and contributing to the green-house effect.
  86. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes: diane-- Time for you to go to the detainee thread where Michael H is accusing Harper of being a torture-groupie.
    --
    Well then your presense is also needed to help disrupt conversation.
  87. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    Reg--

    I'm way ahead of you ;)
  88. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - m y was not describing 'anyone who tries to advance, in lay terms, the conclusions of that (IPCC) report.' They were specifically referring to Al Gore, a former (actually still current) professional politician with a large vested interest in this issue. (Not just the DVD sales or paid appearances... he even 'buys' his carbon offsets from his own company! Its simply too blatant for words.)

    And BTW, what Al Gore says or shows in his film and what the IPCC report says are two very different things. Guess which one is more scary?

    I would suggest that when you hear hysterical warnings about global warming, remember the hysterical warnings about WMDs. Same basic story, different industrial complex. And if you had read 'Cloak of Green' you would understand where it is coming from.
  89. Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Does anybody here like the smell of air pollution or think that it is good for them? I thought not. Of course we have to change our ways. Yeah it is a drag. But it is time to shut up, grow up and step up.

    Cynicism is the refuge of the cowardly and lazy. The rest of us will keep trying to make the world a better place -- because that is what grownups do.
  90. Michael H from Edmonton, Canada writes: Everytime that I read these threads on global warming, I see a few things. First, it doesn't matter what peer-reviewed work is cited in support of GW and its relationship to increased CO2, those who don't like the message will never believe it. They will rely upon the small number of critics, credible (and I do think that Leroux has some credibility on the matter) or not. They will ignore peer reviewed research. Indeed, most of you probably don't have access to peer-reviewed research because you would have to pay on a per article basis. Even Leroux's book, 2006, is outdated. This field is moving fast. The newest and most accurate model to date wasn't even in existence when he wrote his book. It was published in Science a few weeks ago. I follow this subject regularly. There must have been a dozen papers published in Science on the subject this year alone. The Journal of Climate is another journal where a lot of this research is published. The American Association for the Advancement of Science, which represents one of the largest groups of scientists anywhere and is beyond reproach in its standards, has come out with very explicit statements on the validity of the problem. It doesn't matter, the same group of people will always be citing what fits their pre-conceived bias.

    I, for one, am tired of arguing the case. Of course there are limitations to existing models. That doesn't make them wrong. The most important publication on the subject this year was published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society A by Lockwood and Frohlich. It demonstrates that all alternative models that have been proposed to explain recent warming do not fit the data. End of story (to date).
  91. martha stewart from Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom from Calgary writes: 'Does anybody here like the smell of air pollution or think that it is good for them? I thought not. Of course we have to change our ways. Yeah it is a drag. But it is time to shut up, grow up and step up.'

    Sounds great to me but that is not what Al Gore is talking about. If he was he would be more credible.

    You wrote: 'Cynicism is the refuge of the cowardly and lazy.'

    How silly. As Bill Maher once asked, what's the opposite of cynicism? Ever seen a cynical sheep?

    You wrote: 'The rest of us will keep trying to make the world a better place -- because that is what grownups do.'

    Even sillier. Us and them and all that. And anyhow who sees Gore for what he is not making the world a better place. You jump to very simplistic solutions... almost child-like really. Real grownups know better.
  92. Matthew Rockall from Mission, Canada writes: Once more into the breach dear friends... For such a representative example of the left-wing bias in the damned liberal media, the GM seems to be a hotbed of right-wing anti-global warming nutcases. Get it into your heads! The debate is over. Knowing or unknowing, you are pawns of those industries that will see reduced profits from regulations inhibiting carbon emissions. Like them, I notice you have now moved to arguing the sub-issues: the relative impact of natural cycles, the extent of the warming expected, the timeframe, or the relative inadequacies of the leaders from the pro-AGW camp. Unfortunately, these side issues continue to act as foils to delay progress toward reasonable responses that could impact oil-industry profits. I am sure you see yourselves as free thinkers, not subject to the delusions of the masses; noble and smarter than the average bear. Well, wrongo buckos! You're the point-men and women set up as stooges in the agenda-setting efforts of the multi-nationals playing a rearguard action against changes in the status quo; a status quo where oil companies are enjoying record profits and peak sales. Hell, they even have enough power to start wars and run the most powerful country in the world. Why not fight change at every turn? In short, you are a bunch of deluded schmucks! Hopefully, all you get is a vote, and like me, the chance to vent your impotent ramblings on the Globe and Mail discussion forum.
  93. Mike Hawk from Y, Canada writes: Matthew, go to bed thinking you're right.
  94. spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes:

    Matthew Rockall:

    '...like me, the chance to vent your impotent ramblings...'

    Not me, buddy. Cialis makes me all-powerful!
  95. Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Martha - nothing childlike about taking the bus, riding my bike and driving a very small hybrid car. I also recycle, use biodegradeable soap and cleaners, eat and drink organic local food etc. etc. That's what I am talking about being a grownup. Meanwhile you have probably chosen to do nothing while you make cynical comments.

    See. It is simple -- very. Only the greedy and lazy try to make it seem more complicated than it is. Pollution stinks and makes us sick. Simple. So we must pollute less - nothing fancy. Gore has a simple message because this is a simple problem with obvious solutions. Only corporate rule tries to make it seem so fancy.
  96. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: 'Yogie Bear from The Forest @ 9:35pm writes, Rocky, it is $250,000 not 50 grand and he takes no questions.'--- Actually Gore's doing to events the same evening, taking in a cool $320,000 for a couple hours work!
  97. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: spicydoc retrofitted from Canada writes: Not me, buddy. Cialis makes me all-powerful!
    --
    Holy set-me-up batman, spicy! LOL :-). But I just can't bring myself to say it..
  98. J. Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom asks 'Does anybody here like the smell of air pollution or think that it is good for them?' CO2 is not air pollution. The pollutant is Al Gore.
  99. Sceptical Observer from Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom from Calgary, Canada writes: Martha - nothing childlike about taking the bus, riding my bike and driving a very small hybrid car. I also recycle, use biodegradeable soap and cleaners, eat and drink organic local food etc. etc. That's what I am talking about being a grownup. Meanwhile you have probably chosen to do nothing while you make cynical comments.
    >>>I do. And I believe that the solution is in avoiding being the consumerist slave. But it has nothing to do with Gore. He is a hypocrite and a liar. If his message is so simple why he and his Hollywood friends don't show us the way. He is the corporate servant disguised as the prophet. I dare him to live like you do. Otherwise what is the point?
  100. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: . Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom asks 'Does anybody here like the smell of air pollution or think that it is good for them?'
    ----
    Your right about this Luft!
    The pollutant is Al Gore.
    ----
    But the jury's still out on this!
    CO2 is not air pollution.
    ----

    Scroll up and read my post on the effect of CO2 on the atmosphere. Tell me what you think if you care to respond. Insults are not allowed.
  101. Michael H from Edmonton, Canada writes: Definition of pollution: 'Pollution: The presence of matter or energy whose nature, location or quantity produces undesired environmental effects'. Changing ecosystems (an undesirable environmental effect) fits the bill. CO2, when present at levels where these changes occur, can be considered pollution. Ozone can also be generated naturally. Will you also argue that ground-level ozone is not a form of pollution?
  102. martha stewart from Canada writes: Vickky Angstrom from Calgary - I'm delighted that you have taken those personal actions in your life. Good for you. Actions always speak louder than words.

    My problem is that you jump to the conclusion that 'you have probably chosen to do nothing while you make cynical comments.'

    Why? Because I criticize a pompous, polluting, hypocritical self-serving windbag like Al Gore? How utterly simplistic. You think like Bush (either with us or against us). And according to your 'logic,' he's far too simple to be lazy or greedy or represent 'corporate rule'! LOL!!!

    And BTW, your assumption about my life is so far from the truth that it is beyond ridiculous (and has been since the last energy crisis 30 years ago). But I'll skip the self-righteous laundry list of how we live our lives. That would only make it too complicated for you.
  103. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- Perhaps its time to take another moonlight stroll and listen to the coyotes...
  104. Michael H from Edmonton, Canada writes: Fifty cal from Austin, Texas says 'CO2 is a byproduct not a cause...'. You are right on the first point and wrong on the second. That's what makes the current situation dangerous. As temperature warms, the ability of the ocean to dissolve CO2 is reduced and CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Hence, in the past, during natural warming cycles, CO2 could show a slight lag behind the initial increase in temperatures. CO2 is also a greenhouse gas, retaining heat in the lower atmosphere. Thus, it has the potential for a self-reinforcing cycle. Technically, we should be in a very slow but steady progression towards an iceage (natural cycle).
  105. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- Perhaps its time to take another moonlight stroll and listen to the coyotes...
    ---
    Crickets work too. My dog is a coyote. Australian version.
  106. martha stewart from Canada writes: Michael H - Are you suggesting that all changes to ecosystems are 'undesirable effects'? And if you are, are you suggesting that ecosystem health can only be assessed by what is desirable by humans? And if you are, which humans? When? The change of the prairie ecosystem to wheat fields was desirable for most humans but not for all, etc. I think you have stepped off a philosophical cliff. Change is constant whether it is 'desirable' or not. The status quo is always transient.
  107. Some Guy from Canada writes: Again, I see a whole bunch of play the man instead of the ball. I'm issuing a whole bunch of red cards here.

    Again, I really don't care about Al Gore and his grandstanding. 600 people at $200 each means he's making $120 000 and not $250 000 or $320 000, and that is only if the Empress is giving the tea and water cress sandwiches away. (If you ever visit the Empress, BTW, try their curry, not the tea. their recipe is 100 years old and is scrumptious.) Bill Clinton hit town this spring and played to a crowd in the 10 000 plus range at more bucks per ticket.

    While there are a few sceptics in the scientific community, the overwhelming consensus is in for AGW. The only question is do we act in time to moderate the effects, or do we leave our children with a legacy which will cause them to curse our names. I will not live to see any of the worst effects of this but over the last decade I have reduced my CO2 emissions by about 2 tonnes per year. I'll try to do better with time.
  108. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - Well, its cloudy but warm, the window is open, and there's no coyotes howling so far. More fun here listening to self-righteous simplicity and black-white thinking.
  109. martha stewart from Canada writes: Oops. Just read my last post... pardon me folks, that only refers to a couple of posters, and my posts to them should make it obvious who they were. My apologies to everyone else.
  110. Some Guy from Canada writes: Hi Martha, so far cougars haven't made it over to the Island yet, unless you count the ones on the bar stools in Big Bad John's. It is a warm night and I have the front door open and a fan running to cool the place.
  111. Michael Sharp from The Salish Sea BC, Canada writes:

    Dick Hurts from Beeton, Canada writes: 'Al Gore REALLY needs to get high.'

    'Welcome to Victoria Mr. Gore. Would you like some BC bud hashish?'

    'I thought you might.'

    'Mind the GHGs.'
  112. Michael Sharp from The Salish Sea BC, Canada writes:

    High tea at the Empress.

    I've done it.
    Cucumber sandwiches with the crusts cut off.
    Earl Gray.
    Nanaimo bars.

    The whole ball of wax.

    Here we have a one Mr. Gore, he of the stolen election (t's all Bush's fault) taking in the last word in cultural experiences.
    Look and see A
    l enjoy and reminisce on the glory days of the English empire.
    The sun never sets.

    Like that really happens.

    Ya wanna know what really goes on in Victoria?

    I'm your boy.

    Please, have a seat.
  113. Michael Sharp from The Salish Sea BC, Canada writes:

    I'm hoping Mr. Gore can convince me that the rather lacklustre summer we have had in Victoria is an anamoly or is it indicative of global cooling, as he himself asserts?

    So what's with the fleece in August, Al?

    Tell me more.
  114. Michael Sharp from The Salish Sea BC, Canada writes:

    I'm mortified.

    Al Gore at the Empress.

    I'm feeling suicidal.

    Call Emergency Mental Health.

    I'm circling the drain.