Raising his voice almost to a shout, he said climate change was not scientific, political or ideological.
It’s about parting a fool from his money.
Update – Ebay Category JUVENILE FICTION
Raising his voice almost to a shout, he said climate change was not scientific, political or ideological.
It’s about parting a fool from his money.
Update – Ebay Category JUVENILE FICTION
OK, this is too funny for words. The article suggests that he was playing golf with some senior Australian Labour Party type earlier that day. Golf – considered one of the most environmentally wasteful and polluting of all uses of land, what with the pesticides necessary to maintain greens by your hardcore swampy types.
As I keep saying – if these people really believed what they’re saying, they’d live a completely different lifestyle and lead by example. I don’t know why the true believers and enthusiastic converts who hang on their every pronouncement can’t see that.
Oh the Goracle, yawn.
Yeah he had to go to Austrailia to explain why the Antarctic ice sheets are GROWING!
He had to get in his golf game before the glaciers covered over the course. It’s hard to spot your golf ball on a frozen sheet of snow.
Cheers
ROTW?
did china and india suddenly sink 100 meters down and get covered by still more ocean?
no, wait, its global warming at it agin !!! the ice caps of the himalayas and western china all melted overnight !!!
Gosh, the ice is melting in Antarctica just as spring is starting down there! I’m sure that’s never happened before.
I’d just be curious to find out whether he walked the course or rode a cart during his golf outing….any word?
If he rode, that would place his hypocrisy up to a new level.
Probably had sea bass for lunch in the clubhouse too.
Climate change is about big bucks for bozos like Al Gore.
He’s digging himself deeper and deeper, he’s at the point of no return on his way to being crowned the Charlatan of the decade.
One could almost feel sorry for the sheeple getting fleeced for $25,000 but then again maybe not. I’m assuming the Great Goracle walked over to Oz or rowed a boat rather than punch holes in the ozone layer.
Things that make you go mmmm: yesterday while I was sipping a so called energy drink I noticed it was slightly carbonated. Does carbonation involve CO2? Is my carbon foot print now bigger? Would banning Coca Cola world wide help the environment? Beer, thank G*d, gets it’s fizz naturally as does champagne (or Baby Duck?). Lots to ponder, eh.
Climate change is indeed about parting a fool from his money – both within the ‘carbon credit’ scheme of the UN – and as the major source of Al Gore’s personal income.
Why are people so willing to pay to listen to someone preach about the apocalpytic perils of sin and greed? What’s the difference between Gore and any other evangelical ‘Save Yourself by Redemption’ TV preacher – eg Jim Bakker? Both make personal millions out of it; both preach apocalpytic death unless and until you beg (pay) for redemption.
The difference is that TV preachers are more moral than Algore, ET. Given the likes of Jimmy Swaggart and the aformentioned Rev. Bakker, that’s really saying something. ~:D
There’s just so much to love about this. One of my favorite things is Gore’s statement that, if Australia ratified the 2000 Kyoto treaty, “it would be impossible for the United States to withstand the pressure” to join the rest of the world in ratifying Kyoto.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I admire Australia and, in particular, its current government. But Gore’s suggestion that the actions of a country whose population would make it the third most populous state in the USA (behind Texas, just ahead of New York) would cause the USA to ratify a treaty confirms that he is one of the world’s largest fools.
It is truly terrifying to think of what the USA would be like had he been elected President in 2000.
That would make Goricle a “Foolicle”?
It’s interesting to see that the Ausi press …at least this source….. takes the hypocrisy of Gore into account ahead of simply parroting his message.
We could use some of that good sense in our own media.
I wonder how many Labour hacks had their tickets paid for by the taxpayer or by their union membership dues?
Raising his voice almost to a shout, he said climate change was not scientific, political or ideological.
“It’s about survival.”
It never ceases to amaze me how the GW acolytes, who can see a conspiracy in almost everything, fail completely to understand that this whole show is about MONEY, in the GW preachers’ pockets.
I was debating a “green” friend the other day, and when I mentioned the money involved in carbon credits trading, she acted as if she’d never heard of it.
Maybe, like the devoutly religious, GW fans simply filter out the “spam” they don’t want to burst their bubble.
the price of Gore is miniscule to what damage it will do to the economies of the world to implement this crap. cant wait for a cold winter this year so the press can jump on the success of the program. Like a twitch on a horse , the press can only concentrate on one subject at a time.
What amazes me about the whole Kyoto Kult thing;
They do not even try to defend themselves. (drive by trolls do not count)
I mean, like have we ever seen anyone of them on sda telling(trying) their side ??
Same thing at the Globe & Mail. A laughable article is presented. Even the Globe commenters see through the scam and ridicule it to death. But nary a word from some prominent Kult member —- Suzuki’s right hand, or a Dion aide, or a past Chretien “adviser” such as Kinsella. (they signed us on)
A Toronto radio station host asks Suzuki a reasonable question on air — Suzuki walks out, in a huff. (Q not in the script ?)
Indefenceable position ?? Yup. The best they can pony up is “the world is ending, repent, obey and give to the Prophets of Doom. Don’t ask questions.
I think ‘Hayek’s Intellectuals’ article explains why the nut cases have so much sway over the providers.
Ron in Kelowna:
It’s not that the people concerned for the environment can’t foist any arguments upon this right-wing crowd, it’s that they don’t want to waste their time talking to people with nothing but stumps at the end of their necks.
I don’t know if you’ve read any of the comments ’round here, but they’re nothing but Conservative apologetics and ad hominem attacks. Were someone to come forward with an argument for protecting the environment or expressing some concern, he would be laughed at and ridiculed, not debated.
It’s also very typical of Katie to take a quote completely out of context for the lead in this post. It makes we wonder if she actually takes the time to read anything before it goes up.
If an actual environmentalist, such as Patrick Moore, Bjorn Lomborg and others, were to post here and elsewhere they would be welcome. However, they do not even have to defend themselves. Actions speak louder than words.
The actual concern for the environment, such as clean air, water and landscape, is truly admireable. The eco-fanatics are another story.
Hey Brad, John Cross posts here all the time. Nobody tells him off, because he makes an effort to provide FACTS to the conversation. I don’t agree with him due to too many pictures of barbecues next to weather stations, but I respect the way he supports his case.
You on the other hand, are not supporting your “argument” at all. Not surprising, given that its a baseless slur.
You don’t even know what “out of context” means, do you?
Only about as much as you know the meaning of the word “journalism”, Katie. Although you seem to have “partisan hack” down pat.