Who said this and what is he/she talking about?
“Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.”
If you google the text I bet you can find the context, but you will notice it doesn’t change the fact that the speaker wants to “fix the facts around the policy” so to speak.
Is the speaker:
- George Bush
- Dick Cheney
- Bill Clinton
- Al Gore
- Condi Rice
Highlight below to see who it is:
(highlight)
Al Gore said this. Double standards anyone?
(/highlight)
Click here four the source.
The practice of what Gore euphemistically calls the “over-representation of factual presentations of how dangerous it is” (what I would call Chicken-Little-ism) is nothing new for the scientific community.
Way back in 1968 in the preface to his book The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich predicted that it was all over for humanity – nothing could be done to reverse the process: “In the 1970s the world will undergo famines – hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” I spent most of the 70’s in Germany, so maybe I missed the massive famines he predicted.
Compare this to similar dire predictions of the irreversibility of global warming in the last few months and ask yourself if history isn’t repeating itself.
Here are three examples of the above:
1
2
3
Thanks for the trackback, Spacedark, and for your creative interpretation of the latest quote from the former “next President of the United States.” While you’re at it, perhaps you can elucidate this gem from 1999:
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.[Emphasis added.]
I’d be apt to take Mr. Gore more seriously if he were willing to change his behavior like he’s asking everyone else to. For example, he could give his PowerPoint presentation remotely from a central location instead of flying all over the country (to say nothing of Cannes), burning all that fossil fuel and increasing greenhouse gases.
Perhaps he’s already read the Chicken Little’isms (see links 1, 2, and 3 in my last comment) and decided since we’re all doomed anyway, he might as well go out in style.
Thanks again for visiting our “pathetic” little blog (to quote Clint). I know that Bo agrees with me that you’re welcome to post your comments here any time you like (and that goes for the rest of the PTS gang).
–Spacedark While you’re at it, perhaps you can elucidate–
Spacedark might defecate, he might urinate expectorate or flatulate (sp). Hell most likely he might even lactate but he will never, ever at any time elucidate.
LOL! Oh, and by the way, you did spell (or should I say smell?) flatuate correctly.
They are obsessing over me for some reason. First the post about some basset hound and now this one. I sure do feel loved.
They can read it their way and we can read it ours. If anyone but a liberal or progressive said something like that there would be conspiracy theories all over the place.
I also like how he took my quote out of context and misread the “fix the facts around the policy so to speak” part. Instead of asking for clarification they jumped at the chance to attack me.
Just for clarification, “Fix the facts around the policy” is a line from the Downing Street Memo. My saying, “so to speak” was to tie the two qutations, gore’s and the Bush from the DSM, in the manner that whatever politicians say can and will be distorted to suit the views of those who oppose them.
The multiple choice portion of my post was to show that, in all actuality, that quote could have come from any one of those people, and without knowing the context of the quote differnt people could think the quote came from a wide variety of origins.
The quotations, combined with the multiple choice potion of my post, was to illustrate that semantics are played with words all of the time. Here with the gore quote and also with the downing street memo.
I apoligize, spacedark, for not breaking my post down to a lower comprehension level where you could understand it, but honestly, it wouldn’t matter if I did that, you are going to attack me no matter what.
they jumped at the chance to attack me…
you are going to attack me no matter what.
Tears of a clown, when there’s no one around…
doo doo doo dootie do do do doo doo
What’s your fucking point? Who will Al Gore hurt with this movie, besides the pocketbooks of those hurting the planet?
The memo from Downing Street shows a secret strategy to fix facts to rape a country with the help of a willing partner in the UK.
Gore comes right out and says that he would over-represent FACTS, not fallacies. Its a persuasive piece. Scientists agree with Gore’s findings while MI5 and the CIA were catching the inconsitencies in the evidence for invading Iraq at every turn. You’re as full of lies as Mr. Bush and you spelled a three letter word wrong in the main post.
Thanks for posting.
What’s your fucking point? Who will Al Gore hurt with this movie, besides the pocketbooks of those hurting the planet?
Al Gore’s movie isn’t the subject of this post. Al Gore’s hypocrisy is the subject as well as the distorted semantics that people’s quotes can be twisted into.
Gore comes right out and says that he would over-represent FACTS, not fallacies.
Define “over represent facts.” Next, define facts. If it is not ok to over-represent what Bush thought were facts (something I don’t dispute that he did, btw) then why is it ok for Gore to over represent facts?
The memo from Downing Street shows a secret strategy to fix facts to rape a country with the help of a willing partner in the UK.
Your point is?
Scientists agree with Gore’s findings while MI5 and the CIA were catching the inconsitencies in the evidence for invading Iraq at every turn.
There are other scientists out there who say the opposite about Gore’s findings. The CIA and MI5 should have checked themselves and not given the wrong info to our leaders prior to the war in Iraq.
you spelled a three letter word wrong in the main post.
No I didn’t. I checked it before and 4 times just now, by proofreading and with a spell checker. Besides, if you have to dig deep and point out spelling errors then I don’t really care much for what you have to say. I am not a journalist and I don’t pretend to be.
for, not four
*polishes 3rd grade spelling bee trophy*
Your post was quite dishonest and amounts to a
schoolyard bully bellowing “so what” when scolded
for his misdeeds.
The best thing to do is to stand by and let
the teacher take care of you.
Now whose class are you in?
Miss Buddha, no couldn’t be.
Mr Jesus?
You seem like one of Mr Jesus’s students.
for, not four
Ahh well then, good catch.
Your post was quite dishonest and amounts to a schoolyard bully bellowing “so what” when scolded
for his misdeeds.
Thanks for your opnion.
Honestly I don’t care if I am dishonest or not. Liberals are dihonest when they quote the DSM and say Bush lied, I am going to be dishonest and call BS when people like Gore try to act all high and mighty then are guilty of the same behavior of those they denounce, in one way or the other. I know being dishonest about this stuff isn’t the right thing to do and I shouldn’t lower myself to the liberal’s level, but sometimes being dishonest is the only language liberals understand. I might as well beat them at their own game if they refuse to play by the rules.
“…Liberals are dihonest when they quote the DSM and say Bush lied.” – bodacious
Gretzky is denied! Caught in the open net!
There’s a sourced list here:
http://www.failureisimpossible.com/needtoknow/lies.htm
“Honestly I don’t care if I am dishonest or not.” – bodacious
You should really put this at the top of your blog, so people know right away that you are full of crap. You may get a few more hits just from the controversy. A Republican who admits that he is, in fact, a liar. Just like Ollie North, wow.
Hey, you’re not a failure at all.
You used Al Gore as an example of someone who doesn’t play by the rules. See ANYTHING wrong with that? Heh, the freakin’ irony is thicker than melted parmesan “checked it four times.”
Since there’s no real discourse here, just a bunch of trolls rubbing eachothers’ tummies, I’ll not return.
You should call this place “the bridge” like where the trolls hang out. Cool idea, eh?
Anonymous said… for, not four
*polishes 3rd grade spelling bee trophy*
I think you need to learn the difference between spelling errors and usage errors. Four is spelled correctly but just not used correctly. Is that the sound of tarnish reappearing on that trophy?
…you spelled a three letter word wrong in the main post.
I think it was Lawrence Peter who said, “You don’t go to a tennis match to see if the lines are straight.”
I wish we could all focus a little more. Bo is correct in his observation that the topic of his original post is Mr. Gore’s hypocricy. Why does everything have to come back to “Bush Lied, People Died” and “you’re a poo-poo head”?
Does anyone care to comment on the track record of environmentalist
alarmism, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”?
What about the possibility of Gore using his creation, the Internet, to get out his PowerPoint presentation, as opposed to flying all over the place, using up precious fossil fuel and contributing to global warming?
What about the possibility that factors other than evil human behavior are at play? Can anyone explain why the polar ice caps on Mars are melting at about the same rate as those on Earth?
Focus, people, focus!
looks like lil’ bow-wow was the first to make reference to “Bush Lied” – Nice straw man, I think I’ll name him Kip.
Sorry I didn’t catch this sooner.
Gretzky is denied! Caught in the open net!
There’s a sourced list here:
http://www.failureisimpossible.com/needtoknow/lies.htm
I like how the first link I clicked on leads to liberalslant.com Yah, that site isn’t biased one bit /sarcasm.
I refuse to argue this point further because you are not objective. I can’t see the similarties between how Gore is “over representing” the fact on global warming and Bush over representing the facts on the Iraq war than you are lost, a hypocrit, and even more dishonest than I am, which, I have come to expect from liberals.
I also conclude that because you refuse to argue even your own points and keep changing the subject you are talking out of your ass, know that you are talking out of your ass, are embarassed that you are talking out of your ass, and are cowering from your own hideousness. That is pure speculation of course, but I think I know a coward when I see one.
You should really put this at the top of your blog, so people know right away that you are full of crap. You may get a few more hits just from the controversy. A Republican who admits that he is, in fact, a liar. Just like Ollie North, wow.
I couldn’t put just what you quoted at the top of my page because that is a quote out of context. I don’t mind being dishonest when I have to be, but I don’t want to be dishonest all the time, like liberals.
Since there’s no real discourse here, just a bunch of trolls rubbing eachothers’ tummies, I’ll not return.
You should call this place “the bridge” like where the trolls hang out. Cool idea, eh?
We can’t troll our own site.
If you want a clear cut example of liberal dishonesty follow the link posted by anonymous above and you will find lots of them, but here is one I like:
“In a press conference in September 2002, six months before the invasion of Iraq, President Bush said, “you can’t distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror… they’re both equally as bad, and equally as evil, and equally as destructive.”
In September of 2004, Mr. Bush said: “We’ve had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September 11th.” Though he added that “there’s no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties,” the statement seemingly belied earlier assertions that Saddam and al Qaeda were “equally bad.”
The Sept. 11 commission found there was no evidence Saddam was linked to the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.”
Bush comes right out and says Saddam had no link to 9/11 but did have links to Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. However, liberals everywhere distort the facts and play semantics with Bush’s words and equate Al-Qaeda with 9/11, like the two terms and synonymous. Just because Saddam had links with Al-Qaeda does not mean Saddam had a hand in the 9/11 attacks, Bush has said so, but liberals twist and make it look like Bush did say that.
Saddam had links to Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.
Does anyone care to comment on the track record of environmentalist
alarmism, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”?
What about the possibility of Gore using his creation, the Internet, to get out his PowerPoint presentation, as opposed to flying all over the place, using up precious fossil fuel and contributing to global warming?
What about the possibility that factors other than evil human behavior are at play? Can anyone explain why the polar ice caps on Mars are melting at about the same rate as those on Earth?
I guess not.
Administration and its allies linking Sadaam to Al-Q and/or 9-11 from all sorts of sources.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1881740.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/29/hayes.911/index.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/15/101721.shtml
Administration and its allies linking Sadaam to Al-Q and/or 9-11 from all sorts of sources.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1881740.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/29/hayes.911/index.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/9/15/101721.shtml
Suddenly george tenant, a gop congressman, and the britich intelligence are Administration officials?
Seriously thought, what is your point with posting those links?
Maybe you missed my point. I plainly said Saddam had links to Al-Qaeda. I don’t dispute that Bush and a lot of other people said there were terror links. Congress even said there were terror links between saddam and al-qaeda as a justification for the Iraq war in ther war resolution. However, unlike what you would have people believe, Al-Qaeda != 9/11.
Curious, you’ll have to give some kind of sources as you’ve proven yourself to be mistaken in this very thread. I couldn’t possibly trust your science “facts.” Especially when bodacious tells abrasive anonymous that he is willfully dishonest and none of you will call him on it. Ya know, “Hey man, isn’t that lying. You’re breaking a commandment. I’ll pray for you.” etc.
See you’ve mis-stated Gore’s famous internet gaff.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
Then you’re just wrong about his “Power Point Presentation.”
He uses Apple’s Keynote, everyone knows that. Truthfully, the story was posted late this week, not yer fault.
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/articles/2006/05/inconvenienttruth/
I’m off to cook supper – I’ll check back in a bit.
Here’s one of my favorite speakers on the subject of global warming.
http://www.opednews.com/hartmann0104_global_warming_could_lead_to_ice_age.htm
I never posted anything that said AlQ wasn’t responsible for 9-11, so don’t try and lump me in with all that mess.
Rumsfeld and Bush have both stated, there were no links to Saddam and AlQ.
Just Google that and you’ll see I’m right.
I’m tired of feeding you links.
What would ya call that?
A flip-flop?
I never posted anything that said AlQ wasn’t responsible for 9-11, so don’t try and lump me in with all that mess.
I never said you said such things…
Rumsfeld and Bush have both stated, there were no links to Saddam and AlQ.
I think you are being misleading and dishonest here. Bush has said there were no links between Saddam and 9/11, but Bush has said there were links between Saddam and Al-Qaeda.
What would ya call that?
You being dishonest.
I think these two some good quotes as far as this Iraq, Al-qaeda thing:
“There was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida. This administration never said that the 9-11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaida. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida, for example, Iraqi intelligence agents met with (Osama) bin Laden, the head of al-Qaida in Sudan.” — President George W. Bush
“There was no question in our minds that there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. We have found no relationship whatever between Iraq and 9/11.” — Thomas Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission
Referee Jack,
Re the Mars ice caps – Do you trust space.com?
Could this be a possible explanation?
Re Al Gore “creating” the Internet – take a closer look at the quote from your own snopes.com link, then re-read what I said in both my references to Gore and the Internet. If you believe that “invent” and “create” is a distinction without a difference, you’re in good company. But I was very careful not to misquote him.
Re Power Point v. Apple Keynote – you missed my point entirely. Wouldn’t it be more environmentally responsible for him to sit at his home computer and give his presentation remotely, rather than flying from city to city (or even country to country)?
In light of the “factual presentations” I “over-represented,” perhaps Mr. Gore could have expressed himself this way:
“Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an under-representation of factual presentations on how unaffected by human activity it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.”
Dick Cheney said there was a connection on meet the press.
How do you know Gore doesn’t do a heap of his presentations teleconference style?
His movie does just that.
If you’re that unfamiliar with the mechanics of global warming, I refer you to Captain Planet and the Planeteers and Gore’s movie.
Dick Cheney said there was a connection on meet the press.
Source please.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3080244/
he says no, but then he makes a paragraph worth of bullshit connections… tries to have it both ways and russert lets him do it
he connects iraq and al-quaeda, but stops short of connecting 9-11
its pretty obvious what he was doing
Thanks for the link and for post your thoughts.
If you’re that unfamiliar with the mechanics of global warming, I refer you to Captain Planet and the Planeteers and Gore’s movie.
If you’re unfamiliar with credible alternative explanations of global warming, I refer you to the links I posted above.
If you’re unfamiliar with the agenda of at least some of the environmentalist gloom-and-doomers, I refer you here.
Good point, though, about the movie saving the planet from Gore’s future globetrotting, if he can only contain himself.
BTW, back in January, Mr. Gore predicted we only have 10 years before it’s all over. If you want to check back with me in 9 years and 235 days, one of us can say, “I told you so!”
In the meantime, Rush Limbaugh has posted this Countdown Clock to follow the progress of our destruction.
The same Rush Limbaugh who said: “friends, there are more acres of rainforest today than when the pilgrims landed on plymouth rock.”
just go right on believing that
http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/ May I make a suggestion to find a good reference to Global Warming! Paid for by your Tax Dollars and if you feel shortchanged apply for a refund on your taxes, I can tell you now it will be pocket change. If you are interested, I think it is the height of superciliousness for man to think he can purposely change the weather, I.e. “State of Fear,” Michael Crichton.
Further, there is a big rock headed our way just as happened to the dinosaurs 70 million years ago.