The true mark of a shyster is to take advantage of every opportunity to milk a person for money, and especially when emotions and sympathy run high. Christmas is one of those times. I give you exhibit A, Al Gore’s “Climate Reality Project”. I got this in my inbox this morning.
Of course, when you click on that donate button, Al doubles down:
Yes, send money to Al Gore to “end the climate crisis”. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
He has quite a payroll to support, just look at all the employees here
Anybody stupid enough to fall for this, especially on Christmas, deserves everything they are going to get back from Mr. Gore, which as my inbox shows, is nothing but requests for more money. Just look at all the emails I’ve received in the last 30 days:
Al Gore, climate shyster.
UPDATE: In the spirit of Christmas, and for “solving the climate crisis”, I decided to donate, here’s what I’ve sent.
The best part is that Al’s outfit will double that donation.
You can generate and send your own, here:
Send it on Twitter @Algore or to info@climatereality.com
UPDATE2: For anyone who objects to my calling Mr. Gore a “shyster”, consider this.
Years after proving his “Climate 101” video to illustrate warming by CO2 is a complete fabrication, done in post production (because the experiment as designed couldn’t possibly work) it is still on his website, duping people years later. Here’s a screencap from today:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m thinking Al needs another round at the massage parlor.
Isn’t he round enough ??
He’s starting to look like a sumo wrestler, a lot of carbohydrates under that belt… needing a lot more fuel to move it around.
Algore was using outcall masseuses, not parlors.
… a lot of carbonhydrates under his belt…
So glad this fool didn’t become President. Bush was nothing special, but Gore a complete embarrassment.
Sadly the US tax code has been set up to allow leftist rich folks to wash their money by giving it to “not for profits” (aka charitable organizations.) In other words besides government direct expenditure the taxpayers subsidize the such organization like Fat Albert’s.
Al was said to be a sore loser back in 2000. Of course, that term has since been completely redefined just recently.
+10,000
I had beans with onion, chorizo, cheese, Tobasco and garlic for breakfast today. I would like to donate a 2 litre bottle of the resultant rather potent greenhouse gases for Al to store at his house to prevent them from destroying the planet. I am quite sure he can easily match my contribution with his loads of hot air.
I get those copious e-mails, too. I doubt they’d stop if I hit “Unsubscribe”
Never hit “unsubscribe” unless you know the sender is legit. “Unsubscribe” verifies that your email is valid. Unscrupulous people then sell your valid email address over and over and over.
Good advice –
Goid job.
Gore the Syyster….
And don’t forget that Gore’s Inconvenient Truth was taken to court in the UK, and found to have nine fundamental errors in it. As far as I am aware, Gore has never corrected those Inconvenient Falsehoods…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/3310137/Al-Gores-nine-Inconvenient-Untruths.html
R
Where is Al?
If the cold & snowy weather is any indication he could be in highly populated regions.
Because of the Gore Effect, Al should be prevented from imperilling other peoples seasons of joy.
Banished to unpopulated areas,already frozen wastelands.
Who tracks this malicious moocher?
It’s not like this guy is capable of feeling shame.
Went to to his website, scrolled down to see who was covering New Zealand (apparently nobody; I guess it’s the Aussie sheila) then got to the BECOME A CLIMATE REALITY LEADER panel. Easiest “Where’s Wally” I’ve ever struck.
Al Gore a climate shyster?
He’s much more diversified. “Climate shystering” is a relatively new thing for him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/op030797.htm
1. ‘You’re all gonna die!’
2. ‘Only I can save you!’
3. ‘Send money, now!’
‘Climate change’ in 3 easy steps.
The double your money part smells like a kickback fraud scheme.. No way anybody hurting for money is going to do this >> Unless it gets handed right back to them..
The pretend to suppress the global temperature con – game is going to need every $$ it can get to help the top promoters from serving well deserved long prison sentences . If a trillion dollar climate fraud is allowed to happen what’s next ?
Very little difference between Gore and Joel Osteen. Both have mutated peoples spirituality fro personal gain.
For the first time I watched the four plus minute youtube presentation with Bill Nye’s audio. Aside from all the objections noted by Anthony in his response (https://wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-files/gore-and-bill-nye-fail-at-doing-a-simple-co2-experiment/), I noticed another flaw in the experiment as presented in the Nye video. I didn’t read all of the comments in Anthony’s rebuttal post so it’s possible that someone else has pointed out the flaw. In any event, here is the flaw I noticed in the Nye video. First, Nye’s audio accompanying the video.
“…Here’s how. Take two identical bottles and set them side by side. Put a thermometer in each bottle and seal them. Then run a hose from a source of Co2 into one of the bottles. Shine two heat lamps of equal intensity at equal distance onto each one. Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher…”
Second, the flaw. Bill Nye’s words imply the two bottles are sealed. In the video, the tube that directs CO2 into one of the bottles lifts the lid of that bottle on one side breaking “the seal.” The bottles are depicted in six segments–i.e., in six short time intervals with a slightly different camera perspective. In the first extremely short segment (0:58) we see the lid being placed on the bottles without any tubing. In the second segment (1:00 to 1:01) we see the lid lifted and the tube from the CO2 source being inserted into one of the bottles. You can see that one side of the lid is raised. In the third segment (1:01 to 1:03 a closeup of one of the bottles) the “lid tilt” is not as easy to see; but in the fourth segment (1:04 to 1:08) the left side of the lid is obviously higher than the right side of the lid. In the fifth segment (1:08 to 1:09) you see the two bottles side by side with little if any “lid tilt;” but in this segment there is no CO2 tube leading into either bottle. The video then moves away from the bottles to show the behaviors of the two thermometers. This segment of the video lasts until about 1:17 at which point the sixth segment (1:17 to 1:22) begins showing the two bottles with a definite “lid tilt” for one of the bottles.
Why is the “lid tilt” important. Well, if the heat lamps warm the air external to but in the vicinity of the bottles and convection allows the heated air to move into one of the bottles (the CO2 bottle) but not the other bottle (the CO2-less bottle), it’s not surprising in the least that the temperature of the “air” inside the unsealed bottle (convection allowed) rises more rapidly that the temperature of the air in the sealed bottle. So if as one of the responders (Drjazz) to Anthony’s rebuttal claimed the “The experiment was perfomred [sic] live on BBC Newsnight over a year ago. and the result of the live experiment showed a more rapid temperature increase in the CO2 bottle, I suggest the reason is the presence of convection in the CO2 bottle and the absence of convection in the CO2-less bottle.
“Double your money! Double your funds! It’s Double Split, Double Split, Double Split Tongue!”
To AW,
One of your best headlines, eva. Congrats.
Bill Rocks