An Inconvenient Truth

R. Richard

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jul 24, 2003
Posts
10,382
The inconvenient truth is that Al Gore has found a cause. Not a cause that he wants to live, but a cause he wants to promote. Here is the real truth. Comment?

POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through free market policy solutions, issued a press release late Monday:

Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.

Gore’s mansion, [20-room, eight-bathroom] located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).

In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.

The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.

Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.

Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.

Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.

“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk to walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.

In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.
 
R. Richard said:
The inconvenient truth is that Al Gore has found a cause. Not a cause that he wants to live, but a cause he wants to promote. Here is the real truth. Comment?

POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD

Does Gore represent a more inconvenient truth than Bush does right now? Just curious. :)
 
Yes, let's by all means disregard the lessons of An Inconvenient Truth because Al Gore's home uses more than its fair share of power.
 
shereads said:
Yes, let's by all means disregard the lessons of An Inconvenient Truth because Al Gore's home uses more than its fair share of power.

What lessons? There is quite a bit of scientific debate, when such debate is allowed, about global warming. The latest studies I have seen indicate that methane gas from animals is the major current source of global warming. No one wants to attack that source. Instead, they want to cut back on carbon emissions from machinery. The machinery that powers Gore's home would seem to be a good place to start.
 
R. Richard said:
What lessons? There is quite a bit of scientific debate, when such debate is allowed, about global warming. The latest studies I have seen indicate that methane gas from animals is the major current source of global warming. No one wants to attack that source. Instead, they want to cut back on carbon emissions from machinery. The machinery that powers Gore's home would seem to be a good place to start.

LOL smart ass! And a kiss to both you and Sher for the Lit Academy smart ass awards.
 
R. Richard said:
What lessons? There is quite a bit of scientific debate, when such debate is allowed, about global warming. The latest studies I have seen indicate that methane gas from animals is the major current source of global warming. No one wants to attack that source. Instead, they want to cut back on carbon emissions from machinery. The machinery that powers Gore's home would seem to be a good place to start.

Oh please. The only debate left is what it will take to convince the die-hard hold-outs - and whether the repercussions, if you are wrong, are worth the gamble the rest of us are forced to share.

Al Gore could be the single largest user of fossil fuels in the history of mankind, and the vilest hypocrite on the American political scene since...well...I dunno, name anyone in the Bush administration...And it still wouldn't make an idota of difference in what the vast majority of scientists believe to be true. The fact is, he's devoted a lot of time and resources to creating awareness of a problem that, until recently, was about as popular a topic as cold sores. He's one of the good guys.
 
CharleyH said:
Does Gore represent a more inconvenient truth than Bush does right now? Just curious. :)

Just like a good Democrat. When you get caught fucking up, immediately divert everyones attention to the Republicans and make them the scapegoat. Then when everyone is looking away slip out the back door. And if that tactic doesn't work, start making jokes to take peoples minds off the subject.
 
Jubal_Harshaw said:
Just like a good Democrat. When you get caught fucking up, immediately divert everyones attention to the Republicans and make them the scapegoat. Then when everyone is looking away slip out the back door. And if that tactic doesn't work, start making jokes to take peoples minds off the subject.

Just like a Republican. Rather than accept what the vast majority of the scientific world have determined about global warming, google up some dirt on Al Gore and try to convince people that if he's not single-handedly solving the problem, it must not exist.
 
shereads said:
Oh please. The only debate left is what it will take to convince the die-hard hold-outs - and whether the repercussions, if you are wrong, are worth the gamble the rest of us are forced to share.

Al Gore could be the single largest user of fossil fuels in the history of mankind, and the vilest hypocrite on the American political scene since...well...I dunno, name anyone in the Bush administration...And it still wouldn't make an idota of difference in what the vast majority of scientists believe to be true. The fact is, he's devoted a lot of time and resources to creating awareness of a problem that, until recently, was about as popular a topic as cold sores. He's one of the good guys.
In media relations I saw doctors off to anti smog campaigns in limos and SUVs and to anti-smoking campaigns with a chain pack or five in hand. You are correct Sher, he has invested more time and money in awareness than any of us have.
 
Last edited:
shereads said:
Just like a Republican. Rather than accept what the vast majority of the scientific world have determined about global warming, google up some dirt on Al Gore and try to convince people that if he's not single-handedly solving the problem, it must not exist.
And now you see that both sides are just as crooked. Democracy in action.

I didn't say it. Niether did the Republicans. Another diversionary tactic?

The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization committed to achieving a freer, more prosperous Tennessee through free market policy solutions, issued a press release late Monday:
 
shereads said:
Oh please. The only debate left is what it will take to convince the die-hard hold-outs - and whether the repercussions, if you are wrong, are worth the gamble the rest of us are forced to share.

What about the repercussions if the global warming people are wrong or hypocritical? Europe is not really neeting its global warming goals. India and China are exempted from the Kyoto protocols. But the Kyoto Protocol people want to drive the US into recession for their own political reasons. Is the very real possibility of a US recession worth POSSIBLE very minor reductions in global warming?
 
R. Richard said:
What about the repercussions if the global warming people are wrong or hypocritical? Europe is not really neeting its global warming goals.
Europe is meeting them more than the US or Canada?
 
CharleyH said:
Europe is meeting them more than the US or Canada?

I don't really know. I have seen documents that indicate the Europe is not meeting its Kyoto Protocol goals and that the US is actually reducing CO2 emissions. I don't claim that the data I saw is absolutely correct. I do know that data on something like the Kyoto Protocols is very subject to distortion and outright lies, "because it is something we need to do!"
 
CharleyH said:
In media relations I saw doctors off to anti smog campaigns in limos and SUVs and to anti-smoking campaigns with a chain pack or five in hand. You are correct Sher, he has invested more time and money in awareness than any of us have.

Al Gore investing money in the fight against global warming? You have got to be kidding. Al Gore shows his movie, gives speeches and gets paid for the effort. The money comes from the donors who attend his events.
 
Of course it's Al Gore's home and cow poop. It couldn't possibly be our reckless over-consumption of fossil fuels. Hypocrisy and ignorance are much more inconvenient than truth when it comes to living and surviving in peace with mother nature.
 
R. Richard said:
Al Gore investing money in the fight against global warming? You have got to be kidding. Al Gore shows his movie, gives speeches and gets paid for the effort. The money comes from the donors who attend his events.
Well, how do you know, for sure, RR? Those doctors I spoke of did actually donate to the causes even if they did not practice what they preach. As I asked - what do we do? Probably, not as much.
 
The real truth is that scientists are about evenly split on global warming. Is man really causing it or is it part of a natural cycle? It also depends on what you call a scientist. Not everyone spouting the global warming thing is truly a scientist.

Now. That said I am highly in favor of reducing carbon emissions for two reasons. One to reduce our country's dependence on oil from historically and chronically unstable area. A cheap source of power that didn't rely on fossil fuels would be a boon except for all the people it would put out of work initially.

The second reason is I like to breath clean air and drink clean water. Not too much to argue there.

Global warming. People should worry about global cooling. As has happened many times in the history of the earth. The climate will warm and the ocean currents will stop. When that happens there will be a huge change in our climate. It's going to get cold.

You folks that live south are going to get a lot cooler. Like Illinois and Wisconsin weather. Those of us up north will just deal with the glaciers that come down. It happens in less than a 100 years. One day we're all happily planting our tomatoes, the next we're digging out of the ice.

Frankly, I'm more worried about the sun going nova.

MJL
 
cumallday said:
Of course it's Al Gore's home and cow poop. It couldn't possibly be our reckless over-consumption of fossil fuels. Hypocrisy and ignorance are much more inconvenient than truth when it comes to living and surviving in peace with mother nature.

Al Gore's home is heated, cooled and lighted by consumption of fossil fuels. If Al Gore wants me to 'live in peace with mother nature,' let him start at home.
 
R. Richard said:
I don't really know. I have seen documents that indicate the Europe is not meeting its Kyoto Protocol goals and that the US is actually reducing CO2 emissions. I don't claim that the data I saw is absolutely correct. I do know that data on something like the Kyoto Protocols is very subject to distortion and outright lies, "because it is something we need to do!"
Kyoto? I was especially referring to how Canada's new Government dumped it because of US pressure. What news are you listening to?
 
CharleyH said:
Well, how do you know, for sure, RR? Those doctors I spoke of did actually donate to the causes even if they did not practice what they preach. As I asked - what do we do? Probably, not as much.

Al Gore was and is a fund raiser. He raised money from convicted felons. He raised money from Bhuddist monks [who take a vow of poverty] and then claimed he didn't know it was fund raising. Al Gore, of course, is the man who invented the Internet and who, with his wife was the source for Love Story. If Al Gore's lips are moving and sound is coming, Al Gore is lying. Al Gore is the guy who was so devastated by his sister's death from lung cancer that he had to cash sopping wet checks from his leased tobacco acreage.

Al Gore is a guy who has found a cause. He will make a damn good living off any cause he shills for.

JMNTHO.
 
CharleyH said:
Kyoto? I was especially referring to how Canada's new Government dumped it because of US pressure. What news are you listening to?

I donlt listen to the news. I read items from all sides of the political spectrum and try to extract what very little truth is told.
 
R. Richard said:
Al Gore investing money in the fight against global warming? You have got to be kidding. Al Gore shows his movie, gives speeches and gets paid for the effort. The money comes from the donors who attend his events.

That's a bit cynical, don't you think? And, shouldn't you right-wingers be concerned anyway about the state of God's green Earth? He entrusted it to your care (the Bible tells me so, and it's infallible, of course), yet it seems to me that the most strident anti-green sentiment comes from those on the conservative end of the spectrum.

Republicans, while focused intensely on garnering the vote of a vocal religious minority with what are peripheral issues at best (abortion, gay rights), yet still ignoring the more immediate and pressing matter of good foreign policy, continue to wage successful campaigns against their opponents. I do not understand this, but the Democrats have been far too timid as of late.

The well-documented "ABC" (Anything But Clinton) agenda currently employed by the Bush administration is typical of a party whose members are misguided and inept at best, and bloated and corrupt at worst.
 
Last edited:
Damn. That makes me feel poor. His energy bill was more than my Mortgage AND my energy bills combined.
 
Remember back in the 80's when we were all more worried about a nuclear winter than global warming? With nations like Iran and North Korea working on nuclear weapons, I think that is a frightening possibility.

If you really want a quesy feeling in your stomach at the prospect for the future, look at which countries have nukes, and think about their likelihood of eventually using them. According to wikipedia, France has 350! Now that's scary.
 
I just read something recently that the city of Kyoto can't meet the Kyoto treaty and is considering making the use of cars illegal one day per week. I can't imagine the folks will welcome that with open arms .... but the folks here would probably take up arms at that point!
 
Back
Top