Print 100 comment(s) - last by The Raven.. on Jun 27 at 11:49 AM

Al Gore, who made hundreds of millions of dollars off promoting his thoughts on "global warming", accused President Obama of having "failed" to act to stop warming.  (Source: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty images)

Mr. Gore, who recently bought his fourth luxury mansion, uses carbon like there's no tomorrow. But he says he's actually "carbon neutral" thanks to carbon credits he buys from his own company.  (Source: coldwell banker previews via real estalker)

White House officials insist Mr. Gore's accusations are untrue and that the President hasn't "failed" to address climate change.  (Source: AP Photo)
Wealthy investor-cum-advocate continues to be one of the global warming movement's noisiest voices

United States President Barack Obama must be feeling a bit like his predecessor, George W. Bush, when it comes to the topic of climate change.  President Bush was criticized by Democrats as being too weak on climate change.  At the same time, more extreme elements of his party criticized his efforts like CAFE revisions for supposedly being too heavy-handed.  Likewise, President Obama has been criticized by Republicans for being to heavy-handed on climate change, but has been criticized by extreme members of his own party for being too weak.

Taking to the pulpit in a rambling 8-page online editorial in the magazine Rolling Stone, former Vice President and Nobel Prize winner Al Gore delivered perhaps the most stinging criticism yet against President Obama.  Entitled "Climate of Denial", Gore speaks on behalf of the latter contingent -- extreme elements of the Democratic party -- in lashing out at the President saying he has "failed" to do his part to advert the climate crisis.

I. A Question of Credibility

It's a widely known fact that Al Gore makes over $100,000 for speaking appearances.  In 2007 Fast Company estimated a speaking date with Mr. Gore would cost you a cool $175,000 USD.

In his global warming "documentary" An Inconvenient Truth, Mr. Gore claims to have given at least 1,000 speeches, meaning that he's likely earned in excess of $100M USD.  And there's the profits from that documentary as well -- Mr. Gore likely earned a tidy cut of the film's almost $50M USD box office gross [source] and $31M USD in DVD sales [source].

That's not too shabby for a man who was once written off as too boring to become president.

And then there's Mr. Gore's alternative energy climate firms such as Kleiner Perkins and Generation Investment Management LLP.  According to reports, Mr. Gore is poised to become the "world's first carbon billionaire", thanks to these investments.

Mr. Gore defends these holdings, stating, "Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country? I am proud of it. I am proud of it."

He's also been forced to defend his palatial living quarters, which are far from carbon-neutral [source].  In 2007 his 20 room, 8 bathroom mansion used as much electricity in a month as the average American household did in a year. The Gore manor also devoured a very sizable amount of natural gas a year.  In 2010 he bought a fourth mansion -- an even more extravagant abode [source].

And that's not to mention the companies private jets that he's used over the years to promote his "anti-warming" efforts [source]. (Mr. Gore contends that he's never owned a jet personally so this doesn't count.)

Faced with ever present criticism over his apparent green hypocrisy, Mr. Gore says he lives "carbon neutral" by purchasing a wealth of carbon credits to offset his lavish lifestyle.  But reports indicate Mr. Gore is really just paying himself -- his credits allegedly come from Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., for which he serves as chairman. [source]

In legal cases justices are supposed to recuse themselves from matters where they have a vested interest.  But Al Gore is no judge and he doesn't seem ready to recuse himself of this debate in which he has a massive vested interest in anytime soon.

Mr. Gore does have the honor of a Nobel Peace Prize, along with United Nations International Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) embattled chairman Rajendra K. Pachauri, for what it's worth, though.

II. Obama -- "Weak" on Climate?

Al Gore attacks Obama in a piece he writes for Rolling Stone he comments:

President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change. After successfully passing his green stimulus package, he did nothing to defend it when Congress decimated its funding.
Without presidential leadership that focuses intensely on making the public aware of the reality we face, nothing will change.

Mr. Gore contends it wouldn't damage the President politically to get "tougher" on climate, writing:

Many political advisers assume that a president has to deal with the world of politics as he finds it, and that it is unwise to risk political capital on an effort to actually lead the country toward a new understanding of the real threats and real opportunities we face. Concentrate on the politics of re-election, they say. Don't take chances.

All that might be completely understandable and make perfect sense in a world where the climate crisis wasn't "real." Those of us who support and admire President Obama understand how difficult the politics of this issue are in the context of the massive opposition to doing anything at all — or even to recognizing that there is a crisis. And assuming that the Republicans come to their senses and avoid nominating a clown, his re-election is likely to involve a hard-fought battle with high stakes for the country.
But in this case, the President has reality on his side. The scientific consensus is far stronger today than at any time in the past. Here is the truth: The Earth is round; Saddam Hussein did not attack us on 9/11; Elvis is dead; Obama was born in the United States; and the climate crisis is real. It is time to act.

The attack sent the White House press department into a panic.  They rushed to point out the 960 metric tons yearly saved by the President's Recovery Act that set "aggressive new joint fuel economy and emissions standards for cars and trucks."

States White House official Clark Stevens in a written response, "The President has been clear since day one that climate change poses a threat domestically and globally, and under his leadership we have taken the most aggressive steps in our country’s history to tackle this challenge."

Mr. Gore dismisses anyone who questions that global warming is real, man-made, and "destroying the climate balance that is essential to the survival of our civilization" as a "polluter" or "idealogue".  It's a strategy that promises huge profits for Mr. Gore -- and one that he claims to firmly believe in from an altruistic perspective as well.

One thing's for sure -- this won't be the last time Mr. Gore will be spotted beating the drum of the global warming movement and noisily opening his mouth as a self-proclaimed expert on climate change.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By DirtyHarry69 on 6/23/2011 7:36:54 AM , Rating: -1
What a suggestive and extremely biased article! What has the fact that Al Gore earns a lot of money have to do with his message? Would you suddenly believe him if he was not rich at all? Shouldn’t Jason Mick disclose how much he earns? Since he would be totally incredible if he would earn more than he needs to live, right?
It seems that most people here are self-proclaimed experts on the subject of climate change. Did all those people spent years studying literature, performing experiments, making calculations? Or did they just read some website somewhere, and just repeat what they have read? Oh my god! There was an ice-age before mankind started to burn fossils? Stop the presses! What a news! All those scientists must be wrong!
Fact is, nobody of us laymen have the knowledge and understanding to judge the research that is being performed on climate change. So unless you want to believe in a global conspiracy that tries to brainwash you, all we can do is have faith in the thousands of researcher who do. And the scientific consensus is that mankind does indeed have a significant influence on the global climate, due to the large quantities of fossils that we burn. Think about it, over the course of millions of years carbon dioxide is stored in oil, and within a century we have burned a significant portion of it….
Most of the controversies that surrounded the science of global warming recently are not more than a storm in a teacup. That a few pages of a 1000+ document contain factual errors, doesn’t mean that everything is wrong. That’s the same logic that people use who try to disprove evolution.

RE: Biased
By Dr of crap on 6/23/2011 8:57:04 AM , Rating: 1
Do you feel lucky punk, well do you?

You made my day!

RE: Biased
By Arsynic on 6/23/2011 9:36:38 AM , Rating: 1
A "scientific consensus" also said that the Earth was the center of the universe! Thanks for "deniers" like Galileo or we'd still be slaves to "consensus" rather than irrefutable scientific facts.

There are no irrefutable scientific facts that prove global warming. The data has been massaged and manipulated.

RE: Biased
By JediJeb on 6/24/2011 9:45:16 AM , Rating: 1
Actually many of us here are scientists or have a science background. I may not be a "Climatologist" but as a Chemist I do know quite a bit about how to interpret data and design experiments.

One big name Global Warming expert gets on the Discovery Channel in a documentary and shows two graphs. Both graphs begin low and rapidly increase in value. One is global temperatures the other is CO2 levels. He makes a big deal about how it shows that CO2 levels are increasing and so are temperatures therefore a rise in CO2 must be causing warming temperatures. What it conveniently does not point out is a simple thing that anyone who studies cause and effect in scientific research should notice first off. That little fact is that his graphs show that global temperatures begin to rise years before the CO2 levels begin to rise. Any scientist worth his degree would interpret that to show that rising temperatures is the driving force behind rising CO2 levels, not the other way around. This guy is honest with showing his true data to the world which I applaud, but because most of his audience does not have a scientific background they do not catch the error in his conclusion based on his research.

Now this is only one set of results for one person's research, yet the pro global warming community embrace him because he is preaching exactly what they want people to hear. This is not to say all of the research is this way or that everyone has made incorrect conclusions, but it makes me wonder about the intentions of the people who use the data to promote policies and if they are making sure all the data stands up to close scrutiny and they are honest about making policy based on accurate data and conclusions or just making policy and picking data that supports it.

"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki