Stange juxtaposition of Al Gore related stories today.
SU to vote on funding Gore, others to speak | Washington University, St Louis
The College Democrats will be appealing for almost $145,000 to pay Al Gore to speak on campus. That is equal to the amount used to fund the eight main speakers last year, including news anchor Soledad O’Brien, PostSecret founder Frank Warren, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales and journalist Nicholas Kristof.
If passed, it would be SU Treasury’s first time allocating more than $100,000 toward one speaker. Last year, it rejected the College Democrats’ appeal for $127,000 to bring TV comedy personality Bill Maher to campus.
Al Gore in 24-hour broadcast to convert climate skeptics
(Reuters) – Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.
“24 Hours of Reality” will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.
…
“There will be 200 new slides arguing the connection between more extreme weather and climate change,” Trewin Restorick, chief executive of the event’s UK partner Global Action Plan, told Reuters on Monday.
“There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from.”
=============
I dunno, trying to convince people by attacking them while at the same time commanding exorbitant speaking fees for your opinion that most of the American public doesn’t see you as an expert in any more, according to this recent Rasmussen poll, doesn’t seem like a plan to “win the future”. It seems more like a plan that will speak to the faithful, bolster Oreskes style stereotypes, and deepen division even more. If Al can’t argue the science anymore (not that he was very good at it in the first place) then I think that this attempt to smear will be seen as desperation.
One thing we probably won’t see from Mr. Gore will be comparative sums between his funding and that of skeptics.
Calling people deniers sure isn’t a good way to start converting them. Perhaps we’ll need to count how many times that offensive word is used in the Gore-a-thon.
h/t to Tom Nelson
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You should check the new Gore videos, from his Climate Reality project:
http://ecotretas.blogspot.com/2011/09/more-climate-nazism.html
Ecotretas
It’s going to be some very interesting 24 hours. Having debunked the Cape Verde and Rio de Janeiro arguments, I just can’t wait to see what more will he be saying in those 200 slides…
“There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from.”
I’m sure there will be a lot of interested sceptics wishing to know the answer to this too – so they can hopefully get a piece of this apparently huge pie. And while Gore’s at it, he can explain where the missing hotspot is too (maybe it’s in the pie).
Ohhh
I believe you should check his new videos… I’ve replied in one comment, but it seems to have been spammed, because of the title on my blog. I believe it will be seen directly below:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q60fA9btksc&w=384&h=246]
Why would anyone watch the has been himself. His snake oil sold well in the past but the world has moved on to worry about jobs and how to pay for the government excess’s worldwide.
Death throws of a dinosaur? As a believer I must bang the drum and dengrate the non believers whilst holding out the hat for donations. Sounds like a revivalist meeting to me.
$145k for Al Gore and $127k for Maher at Wash U? Please remind me, why we are outraged at CEO bonuses?
Who ends up paying these ridiculous speaker fees? The parents and the students themselves, no doubt (and the taxpayers when the students default on their loans). Should we wonder at the extravagant cost of college these days?
Among all these student groups, is there not one wag who will have the guts to say, “OK, but let’s invite The Goracle only if he will agree to a 90-minute debate with Lord Monckton”?
/Mr Lynn
If Al Gore doesn’t get $145,000, Gaia will call him home.
Message fatigue will set in…. ‘Turn off that pesky ad will you!’
Where do I apply to get my “climate sceptic funding”?
I urge everyone to go find the nearest Climate Reality event/festivus/bongparty by entering your zip code here-
http://forms.climaterealityproject.org/page/event/search_simple
The goal of the events? “For 24 hours, we will all live in reality.” That explains a lot. Where are you the rest of the time?
I was shocked to find that Anthony would have to travel to San Fran to attend the nearest event. What happened to the Gaia-caring Chico crowds?
I tried zips for most of my extended family, and discovered that extensive fossil fuel combustion would be involved in any of them attending one of the events.
The Climate Reality website even suggests- “Pick a faraway place or a city near you.”
Is cognitive dissonance part of their reality?
In all fairness $55k of that go towards carbon allowances to offset shipping his tubby self to campus.
I was interested in the “If You Could Ask a Climate scientist One Question….” post over at Climate Progress recently as I wondered what folks would ask. I found the comment in the post
by Icarus says:September 10, 2011 at 11:26 am of interest-
“I would ask this: Hansen’s 1981 projections are matching reality pretty well so far that lead me to – Dr. Hansen’s 1981 Projections compared to Obervations-
http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/1/6/9/7/0/5/1981cfobs-46485264070.jpeg …………..”
I hadn’t seen this graph before. As it’s been a bit over 30 years since it was first published, maybe Al Gore will be presenting an updated version of the graph at his upcoming event.
I assume Dr. Hansen’s estimates (projections/scinarios/etc.) of the growth of fossil fuel usage was a little low compared to what has happened in the last thirty years. It seems to me that if we want to evaluate the 1981 projections we need to look into his implied CO2 sensitivity value used to generate the graph for each of the fossil fuel usage time points by scinario. Maybe Dr. Hansen would be willing to update the fossil fuel usage values from his original estimates ( we have 30 years data now) to the real thing without modifing the original CO2 sensitivity value. Then we could tell is the projections are matching reality well or not.
He won’t debate anybody of note which proves he’s an intellectual coward. Now he’s lowered himself (if that’s possible) to producing slanderous propaganda.
The only good in what he’s doing is, ironically, the actual harm he’s doing to what has clearly become a messianic political movement based on incomplete and often shoddy science.
Does the $145K go to purchase carbon offsets?
Meanwhile, air mass Thursday morning in the plains may challenge some all time coldest so early with end of growing season freeze as far south as Iowa. Another slap in Al’s face from mother nature who reminds him time and time again that he is in la la land about human influence on the weather and climate. You cant make this stuff up. Every time the guy has some kind of event, cold air comes.
Just looking at this disgusting individual makes me want to go up to him and dump a bucket of snake oil on his finely pressed suit.
A word about the funding of Global Action Plan (GAP), Gore’s UK partner:
According to their 2009/10 accounts (available on the UK charities commission website), this so-called charity received 35% of its £3.3M funding from the UK government: Always glad to receive help brainwashing young people into feeling good about paying ever higher green taxes.
Another 26% of their funding came from carbon traders Bank of America.
No vested interests there then!
More details here http://fakecharities.org/2011/02/charity-1026148/
“Former President Al Gore”?
Did I miss something?
Another “bloviator”, John Kenneth (I’m more Keynsien than Keynes…) Galbraith used to charge $7000 a 1/2 hour lecture during his prime of the 1980’s. I found out that his lecture schedule included about 30 personal appearances in 1983. That works out to $210,000 in 1983 monies. Adjusted to $450,000 now. (His Harvard Salary was a mere $70K a year, or $140 now. He oft times would note that he was at best “slightly” upper middle class.)
I guess bloviating amoung the mindless is not such a mindless thing to do income wise. Where’s my GRAVY TRAIN? I can bloviate too!
From the Reuter’s link…
“There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from.”
Assault? That’ll help change their minds! [LOL!]
Fool’s names, like fool’s faces, often appear in public places. The irony I enjoy here is the greatest fool of all taking money from lesser, but useful, fools.
========================================
I cannot be the first to suppose that Gore thinks the rest of us must be funded because he is funded. He must also think that we are a bunch of misguided fakes because he knows he is one.
Peter Bocking once pointed out that if you lit Gore’s hair on fire he would provide enough heat and light for a small English village.
=======================================