From: techie@cellar.org (William A Bacon)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,phl.misc,pa.general,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Al Gores "Scintific " proof
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:32:47 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

Part 2 of 3 parts... Where's the Proof???????
   Speculation, wishful thinking, jumping to unwarranted conclusions, and 
reliance on self-serving environmentalists do not contitute scinetific proof. 
For an example of the Gore method, consider his account of a trip he made to 
the Antartic in 1988. He watched as a sample from a glacier revealed 
diffwerences in the annual layers of ice formed over many years. One of the 
individuals in the party claimed that a particular layer was two decades old, 
and he identified it as having formed when "the U.S. Congress passed the 
Clean Air Act."
   Gore gleefully noted that "even a small reduction in the amount of 
pollution " in the United States had affected the environment "in the 
remotest and least acessible place on earth." We are therefore, expected to 
believe that the mere pasage of the Clean air act, not any subsequent 
improvement in the air quality in our nation,was immediately detectable in 
the Antartic's Ice formation.
  It gets worse. About increases in carbon Dioxide in the air, Gore writes, 
"But it is clear that doubling carbon dioxide will in fact increase global 
temperatures andin the process subject us to the risk of catastrophic changes 
in global climate patterens." Realize that thisisn't presented as conjecture, 
but as "fact." How much will temperatures rise? He first insists that drastic 
past climate alterations occurred "during temperature variations of only 1 to 
2 degrees Centigrade," but "today, at the close of the twentith century, we 
are in the process of altering global temperatures by up to three to four 
times that amount."
   The problem here is that most scientists who have been asked about carbon 
dioxide agree that its level is increasing but contend that there is no proof 
whatsoever that the earth is warming because of it. Gore counters that "a 
small number of scientists" argue against his conclusions. But he maintains 
that the "insistence on complte certainty" about global warming is an efort 
to avoid acting "boldly, decisively,comprehensively, and quickly, even before 
we know every last detail about the crisis."
(where is any mention of acting constitutionaly?)
   For some easily accessible details about the supposed global warming 
"crisis," the senator ought to avail himself of the logs containg tens of 
thousands of temperature readings taken all over the earth during the past 
100 years. Their data confirm that there is no global warming or cooling. Or 
he might turn to men like  atmospheric and space physicist Dr. S. Fred 
Singer, who organized a group of scientists to counter Gore style 
environmental radicalism. Calling the Gore thesis "exagerated." Dr. Singer 
says, "It's wrong on many counts, and he should know better because we have 
told him so."
Next In Al Gore's "scintific" proof..... Al's easy answer

------
techie@cellar.org (William A Bacon)
The Cellar BBS - (215) 654-9184
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy:11311 alt.fan.dan-quayle:5459 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:6943