Tis is a college paper someone wrote to discredit Al Gore's Inconvienient Truth---honestly, this info engrages me----how dare Gore make such false statements or half-truths and then get pissy when people want to know more than what he shows? I thought you would all like this.

------------------

http://teamkaizengames.com/kblog.php

I wrote 2 blogs (was supposed to be 1, but the 2nd is a minor correction) on this just update fyi

------------------

When data can be used to formulate a formula what is the inconvenient truth.

p.s. I do not condone environmental irresponsibility.

------------------
Howdy all! Check out http://art.twobrotherssoftware.com/shs.html, my latest CD.

If you ain't in the forums, you in the againstums :)

quote:

---

Originally posted by kenman:
I think a lot of us here can understand this. You can really just take whatever data you would like to formulate the equation. How many different equations can be used to define (0,0) (1,-3) (2,-4). This set does not necessarily mean a declining pattern, but the data shows that it could be. (X^2-4X)

When data can be used to formulate a formula what is the inconvenient truth.

p.s. I do not condone environmental irresponsibility.

---

Agreed---like my 8th grade math teacher said, 'Statistics don't lie but liars use statistics'

------------------

and yes totally agreed, we still need to be responsible with our enviroment

------------------
Heart of a Warrior

quote:

---

Originally posted by PFC:
for some reason the first link doesn't work for me but the second one does...

and yes totally agreed, we still need to be responsible with our enviroment

---

Yep

LOL We have wind farms here in Great Falls. Why? Because, according to the Guniess Book Of Records we are the windiest city in the USA and like the 2nd windiest on the planet (if I remember correctly some random city in tibet beats us or something)----it can get intense here hehe!

I agree totally we should be environmentally responsible, and I am one of those people who REFUSES to be liberal or conservative (both imo request you give up independent thought, which I believe to be against God since he gave you a brain to use)---but I HIGHLY doubt Al Gore is concerned about the environment--he is concerned with how much power and money he has-----and I will bet you 10-1, just like how many leaders seemed great at first then have a popularity fall, people will eventually see his true colors, hopefully before he gets too much from them.

------------------

God has given us this planet to be responsible for, and to use, for the good of all mankind.

That being enough said. . .

A maybe less inconvienient truth!

------------------
Howdy all! Check out http://art.twobrotherssoftware.com/shs.html, my latest CD.

If you ain't in the forums, you in the againstums :)

quote:

---

Originally posted by zookey:
I agree totally we should be environmentally responsible, and I am one of those people who REFUSES to be liberal or conservative (both imo request you give up independent thought, which I believe to be against God since he gave you a brain to use)

---

Well I believe in more of matching an idealogical perspective with someone's core beliefs, not the other way around. I don't think you should label it, but try to describe or match the perspective best you can. After all we all have our own beliefs, and it's not wrong to define them.

Like I used to think I was conservative, but when you look at the current definition of it that would mean I would be for big government in social areas but when it comes to businesses I would want the government to leave them alone.

In reality I believe in more government on social issues (protecting alot of the Christian values) but I also believe in more business regulation in areas like the environment and outsourcing. Which would mean I am more of a protectionist (or a 18th century conservative). But I am not a *complete* protectionist, like I am not so much on taxing a business' money but I am more worried about how that business got their money.

[This message has been edited by Lava (edited November 05, 2007).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lava:
Well I believe in more of matching an idealogical perspective with someone's core beliefs, not the other way around. I don't think you should label it, but try to describe or match the perspective best you can. After all we all have our own beliefs, and it's not wrong to define them.

Like I used to think I was conservative, but when you look at the current definition of it that would mean I would be for big government in social areas but when it comes to businesses I would want the government to leave them alone.

In reality I believe in more government on social issues (protecting alot of the Christian values) but I also believe in more business regulation in areas like the environment and outsourcing. Which would mean I am more of a protectionist (or a 18th century conservative). But I am not a *complete* protectionist, like I am not so much on taxing a business' money but I am more worried about how that business got their money.

[This message has been edited by Lava (edited November 05, 2007).]

---

I understand that Hehe I am using the popular definition. I think most people today who tout their liberalness or conservativeness are just happy to let an ego-mass make the decisions for them though and they will violently attack anyone who is different---which is why I have an aversion to both

(Edit: by understand I mean agree--figured I should clarify hehe!)

------------------

[This message has been edited by zookey (edited November 05, 2007).]

------------------
+---------+
|steveth45|
+---------+

quote:

---

Originally posted by steveth45:
Regardless of the sensationalism, the effects of global pollution are indeed troublesome. Most of the world, including the US, gets most of their power from burning coal. This is bad, no matter how you spin the facts. We need alternative power, and we need it yesterday. I don't think that the ice caps are in danger of melting in a couple decades, but I can't imagine that the long term effects of putting all that CO2 into the atmosphere is going to be good. We have stewardship of this planet, and right now we aren't doing a very good job. Jesus may come back tonight or in 300 years, so we should plan for both.

---

I agree with searching for more energy--but people doing so also need to realize your average person can't go out and buy a hybrid right now--and most options are either ultra expensive, don't produce a realistic amount of power (as the lady said in the report in my first post) or both---we need to find something that is way clean, inexpensive and usable---maybe tax credits should be given to those who upgrade? Anyways, from what I was told Japan uses a cleaner form of gas compared to us--but here it is illegal because it is considered racing grade fuel--the guy that told me that said it is because a lot of US laws that pertain to cars are very old laws that don't take such things into effect, and the result is Japanese cars put out less emissions and are way more effecient--when compared to cars of their calibur in the US (so not comparing a Toyota to a SUV--comparing a Japanese Toyota to an American Toyota)--that is something we should look at....

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by steveth45:
Regardless of the sensationalism, the effects of global pollution are indeed troublesome. Most of the world, including the US, gets most of their power from burning coal. This is bad, no matter how you spin the facts. We need alternative power, and we need it yesterday. I don't think that the ice caps are in danger of melting in a couple decades, but I can't imagine that the long term effects of putting all that CO2 into the atmosphere is going to be good. We have stewardship of this planet, and right now we aren't doing a very good job. Jesus may come back tonight or in 300 years, so we should plan for both.

---

Like the linked-in report says, CO2 does not cause warming, rather it is released as a consequence of warming. In fact, the rise in atmospheric CO2 is most likely to allow for more plant growth, since plants take in CO2, so those who would love to see this planet absolutely carpeted in plant growth should be cheering on the release of more CO2—not screaming in terror over it.

Gore has no clue what he's talking about. The science does not back up his statements. All he's doing is trying to induce a panic to further some agenda all his own, so we should all stop listening to him. If we would all just ignore him, he would go away—and nothing bad that we would ever have a prayer of preventing would happen anyway.

The man's a fruitloop; he's a kook; he's a nut! Stop listening to him.

Jesus is in control—not us, or any of us. Jesus is in control and He is not losing His grip, so don't lose yours.

------------------
Never Forget to Pray!

"...prayer itself is an art which only the Holy Ghost can teach us. He is the giver of all prayer. Pray for prayer---pray till you can pray; pray to be helped to pray, and give not up praying because you cannot pray, for it is when you think you cannot pray that you are most praying. Sometimes when you have no sort of comfort in your supplications, it is then that your heart---all broken and cast down---is really wrestling and truly prevailing with the Most High."
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, from the pamphlet, "Effective Prayer"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tallbill:

Jesus is in control—not us, or any of us. Jesus is in control and He is not losing His grip, so don't lose yours.

---

Perfect statement Can't beat that!

------------------