G1223, on Mar 8 2007, 09:32 AM, said:
Sorry I am trying to get over laughing at LA LA Lands finest going on about their "Carbon Neutral" Ocars aAwards. I guess they must hve bought up the part unused by the homelss of LA. After all the Limos (Known for their being green friendly ability)and the amount of other pollution give off by the ELITE.
If you're going to diss people, at least get your facts straight. Becoming carbon neutral cannot be achieved by buying carbon credits. Being carbon neutral has to do with offsetting your carbon emissions through carbon offsetting, for example planting a sufficient number of trees, buying green energy certificates (such as those issued for wind power), or helping poor people to buy energy efficient appliances, light bulbs, and insulation. [I'd rather people focused on reducing their carbon emissions instead of offsetting them though.] Also, a lot of the Hollywood types drive Priuses or other hybrids (although part of the reason for that is that in Hollywood it's getting to the point where driving a Prius is de rigueur). Although I really don't see your point here; AFAIK, very few people in Hollywood have asked people to reduce their carbon emissions. Those who haven't asked others to reduce their carbon emissions and go around driving Hummers aren't being hypocritical, just short sighted.
It makes one wonder how much more BS can we count on getting from the fawning mantra chanting 'leaders' of the green crowd.
Can you name three people who have asked others to reduce or offset their carbon emissions and have not done the same? BTW, Al Gore has installed solar panels for his house so he doesn't qualify.
It was odd that the Producer of A Inconvient Lie after being caught on the fact she was flying around in a Private jet rather than going commercail and there by reducing her 'footprint' promised to reduce such things.
Someone who flies a private jet can reduce her carbon footprint without switching to flying commercial. One way is the aforementioned carbon offsetting. She could also install solar panels at her house, purchase green energy, or switch to a hybrid car. Even keeping it to 65 mph when she's driving or reducing the amount of heat and air conditioning she uses would reduce her carbon footprint. BTW, if you wish to claim that Al Gore is lying about global warming it falls upon you to provide the proof. Ideally, the evidence you provide would be at least as compelling as the follwing
Scientists have found the first unequivocal link between man-made greenhouse gases and a dramatic heating of the Earth's oceans.
The researchers - many funded by the US government - have seen what they describe as a "stunning" correlation between a rise in ocean temperature over the past 40 years and pollution of the atmosphere.
The study destroys a central argument of global warming sceptics within the Bush administration - that climate change could be a natural phenomenon. It should convince US president George Bush to drop his objections to the Kyoto treaty on climate change, the scientists say.
Tim Barnett, a marine physicist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, said: "We've got a serious problem. The debate is no longer: 'Is there a global warming signal?' The debate now is: 'What are we going to do about it?'"
The findings are crucial because much of the evidence of a warmer world has until now been from air temperatures, but it is the oceans that are the driving force behind Earth's climate.
Dr Barnett said: "Over the past 40 years there has been considerable warming of the planetary system and approximately 90 percent of that warming has gone directly into the oceans."
He told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington: "We defined a 'fingerprint' of ocean warming. Each of the oceans warmed differently at different depths and constitutes a fingerprint which you can look for. We had several computer simulations, for instance one for natural variability: could the climate system just do this on its own? The answer was no.
"We looked at the possibility that solar changes or volcanic effects could have caused the warming - not a chance. What just absolutely nailed it was greenhouse warming."
The study involved scientists from the US department of energy, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as the Met Office's Hadley Centre.
They analysed more than seven million recordings of ocean temperature from around the world, along with about two million readings of sea salinity, and compared the rise in temperatures at different depths to predictions made by two computer simulations of global warming.
"Two models, one from here and one from England, got the observed warming almost exactly. In fact we were stunned by the degree of similarity," Dr Barnett said.
"The models are right. So when a politician stands up and says 'the uncertainty in all these simulations start to question whether we can believe in these models', that argument is no longer tenable."
To repeat: The models for natural variability, solar changes, and volcanic effects strongly rejected these as primary causes for the warming trend. Moreover, the research teams independently created two computer simulations that are among the best available for modeling warming from greenhouse gases, and both correlated stunningly well with the observed warming of the oceans.
Edited by Solar Wind, 08 March 2007 - 11:02 AM.