Al Gore to receive International Emmy

Manbearpig - oh, Adam, you've made my Monday!

It's so funny to me that the science behind global warning appears to be completely irrelevent. How exactly did this become such a political issue? I am a liberal, but science should just be science, man(bearpig).

And with that thought, I am off to work...

EXCELSIOR....!!!!

So, the "Father of the Internet" is also the "Father of Global Warming"...

Adam,

I understand now. It seemed like you were a little frustrated, but if you say you weren't then I simply misunderstood. Like you said, some things get misread and I'm no exception to the "misreading".

Now get going and burn them flags.

Erroneously yours,
erroneous_nick.

Before I even read any of the (rather intense) posts, I was going to come on and say that I think you are hilarious, Adam. No offense, but some of the contributors to this site either 1) suck as writers, or 2) shine thru with a ridiculous amount bias and ignorance (sassone). You, on the other hand, are an amazing writer and a really funny guy. Keep up the good work.

Oh and scott, e-nick brought you to school dude, so I'd just pipe up if I were you.

Yep gotta agree that a guy who lives happily in a small 30 room house deserves an Emmy, for his acting ability. He can afford to pay extra for "green" enerby, but given the limited supply of "green" energy this means someone else can't buy it, so no net savings for the planet.

E-Nick,

I think most readers understand I inject everything with humor, it's just that sometimes that humor is a bit more dry and perhaps not always as obvious.

My reply above was merely to point out how funny it is that I've been labeled as both "liberal" and "conservative." I find that paradox funny, because my brain, for whatever reason, is wired to pick up on those kind of things. My response was not spurred by anger, or frustration, but simply by the fact that my penchant to infuse EVERYTHING I write with humor and sarcasm isn't always met with the reaction I intend. The fact is, all humor can offend someone, and while I've never consciously set out to skewer any group of people, my love of poking playful fun at everyone sometimes gets misread. That's not because readers are stupid, or ignorant, but because we're all human and the Web is a medium where things can easily be misinterpreted.

So no, the "liberal" and "conservative" accusations don't bother me, and I never meant to imply that they did. If an interesting news item comes my way and I find it interesting, or I think my readers will find it interesting, then I'll write about it. That will always trump whatever controversy or accusations may arise from it. And as long as we give you guys this venue to respond to our posts, I think that's just fine.

Best,

Adam

Adam,

Haven't you learned that any time you post an article of a political nature someone's going to have a problem with it? It's either going to be a conservative nut like me calling you a liberal lunatic, or it's going to be the throngs of liberals that frequent this site screaming that you're in be with Fox News and Bush.

If you have a problem with that, I suggest you avoid such articles, otherwise you're asking for conflict almost as directly as you did in your last article about Fox News. So either choose your subjects more carefully or accept that the accusations will continue to fly. You're not going to have it both ways.


Scott W,

"Global warming is agreed upon by the scientific community"? You mean, "some in the scientific community", because it's not everyone. Science isn't a survey, it's about facts, the kind you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. Global warming is real, but what's causing it is the subject of debate because there are not enough hard facts to give that answer. Just because you can find a group of scientists who agree that it might be man-made doesn't make it science. It's just as easy to find groups that disagree that man has any role in it. In fact, many are jumping off the "man-made bandwagon".

I'm old enough to remember the eerily similar global-cooling scare of 30 years ago. It was essentially the same Chicken Little routine we have today with temperatures moving in the opposite direction. And just like today, temperatures were changing. Again, what was causing it wasn't agreed upon then. Today, as then, it's more likely natural climatic fluctuations.

I don't think I'll sway your beliefs, either, but I saying you see "reality as it actually exists" is pompous, arrogant and delusional. Everybody, and that includes you and me, sees the world ("reality", if you like) subjectively. If you believe otherwise, you're lying to yourself. But I digress...

No matter the cause of climate change, it's always a good idea to conserve, reuse and recycle. I dare say most people don't do nearly as much as I, and my family, do (and have been doing for years) to conserve energy and resources.

We've been using compact fluorescent bulbs since they were available in the stores here. They used to cost nearly twenty bucks each, which probably meant it was costing us more in the long run, but we switched and still use exclusively CFs in this house with only a few exceptions.

We dry most of our clothes on clotheslines outside. Since it rains a lot here, we have a couple of them set up inside as well for laundry on rainy days. To be honest, we don't do this solely because of the energy it saves, but because we grew up with clothes dried in this manner and we like it better. Clothes just smell better when they're line-dried and if the habit saves energy, then that's a nice extra.

My city has had one of the country's best and most extensive recycling programs for nearly 20 years. We fully participate in it and always have. We compost all organic vegetable matter and some animal bits like egg shells. This composted material is used to fertilize our huge garden from which we get vegetables to eat nearly year-round. Our "throw-away garbage" is only a fraction of the size of our recycled and composted refuse.

Along with that, my home's gutters are connected to a cistern for collecting the considerable amounts of rain we get. The cistern is used to water the aforementioned garden, our landscaping and fruit trees in the yard. We require no power to accomplish this since it's all gravity-feed. No pesticides or herbicides are used on my property, either.

At the end of April, we're going with a local community service group to plant trees in a nearby park. We do something similar to this three times a year with this group. And most recently, about a year ago I traded in my sedan for a hybrid Prius, which, admittedly, was more about the price of gas since I don't drive much any way because I'm only a half-mile from my office and I take my bike when weather permits.

I may not be "talking Al Gore's talk", but I'm "walking the walk" and have been since long before it was the "in" thing to do. I just happen to disagree that we're having any significant effect on the planet in the way Gore claims, but I'm doing more about it than most of his followers simply because it makes sense.

You call it "snark." I call it "good-natured ribbing." Besides, I'm not a rightwing nut, I'm a crazy liberal:

http://www.tvsquad.com/2007/01/05/hannity-gets-new-gig-on-fox-news/

http://www.tvsquad.com/2007/03/19/is-fox-news-unfair-to-blacks-video/

Basically, I jump back and forth between those two politcial ideologies because I find it much easier to just change my views to match my readers' perceptions.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go stick another "Burn an American flag to stop gay marriage" bumper sticker on my car.

Hugs,

Adam

erroneous_nick, do you believe whatever Fox News tells you? It's already been explained that Gore pays more for his energy because he's chosen to pay for green power (like wind and solar power). He has to pay four extra dollars per 150 kilowatt-hours. With thirty rooms in his house (including two offices), that adds up to a very expensive bill.

I don't imagine Media Matters is your favorite website, but heres a link if you want read it's summary of the story:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200703010008

Also, while it may pain you to hear this, Global Warming is agreed upon in the scientific community. Did you hear about the study from the United Nations? Or are you still mad at them for not supporting our war? Every time someone references a study that 'debunks' global warming, it turns out to be at least partially funded by an oil company. I'm not a big anti-corporation guy, but it just makes sense that they'd try look out for their own interests.

I can't single handedly prove to you that global warming is real, but I have an advantage over you; being a moderate, I don't see the reality I want to see, I see reality as it actually exists. Please avoid posting crazy things.

Gore really has done some phenomenal work. His mastery of half-truths and "consensus" in the absence of actual science is nothing short of magical. It's almost as amazing as his hypocritical purchasing of "carbon offsets" so he can continue to use more energy in a month than most people use in a year.

If he really, truly believes all the things he's saying, he'd be a straightforward energy saver rather than playing a virtual shell game with those laughable offsets. Al Gore doesn't even come close to practicing what he preaches.