Al Gore to Cash In On Climate Crisis Some More

LMAO! You boys are too funny--especially loved that last paragraph.

I don't see the people yelling about climate change selling there house to live in a cave. There not selling there cars or airplanes to walk. They haven't stopped eating to conserve the energy to plant and harvest the crops.They better not cook there food either. Gee I don't see them doing any of that.They just want to feel they have the power to control other people that is all it about...

Al Gore is an idiot

Maybe stupid ass Al Gore should be riding a bicycle around to warn us about global warming instead of flying in a private 727 jetliner.

These global warming fairy tales are starting to get very boreing. Cap and Trade is just another "Convenient Lie" So hold on to your wallets people.

PLEASE TAKE AL GORE BACK TO THE FUNNY FARM

All proceeds go to the Alliance for Climate Protection, of which Al Gore is founder and chairman. His generosity knows no bounds.

Another book by GORE,WHAT A WASTE OF WOOD ;-(

GREEN HELL by Steve Milloy


Product Description
Everywhere you look, everything is going green. But soon, this trendy green lifestyle wont be voluntaryit will be mandatory. Milloy shows how the government will soon have you under its green thumb. --This text refers to the Audio Cassette edition.

From the Inside Flap
Big Brother Has Turned Green
The environmental movement has cultivated a warm and fuzzy public image, but behind the smiley-face rhetoric of "sustainability" and "conservation" lies a dark agenda. The Greens aim to regulate your behavior, downsize your lifestyle, and invade the most intimate aspects of your personal life.

In this stunning exposé, Steve Milloy unveils the authoritarian impulse underlying the Green crusade. Whether they're demanding that you turn down your thermostat, stop driving your car, or engage in some other senseless act of self-denial, the Greens are envisioning a grim future for you marked by endless privation.
Steamrolling nearly all opposition with its apocalyptic predictions of environmental doom, the Green movement has gained influence throughout American society--from schools and local planning boards to the biggest corporations in the country. And their plans are much more ambitious than you think, says Milloy. What the Greens really seek, with increasing success, is to dictate the very parameters of your daily life--where you can live, what transportation you can use, what you can eat, and even how many children you can have.

Citing the tactics and goals of Green groups as explained by their own activists and leaders, Green Hell demonstrates:

* How Green pressure campaigns threaten the safety of your home and your car, and public health overall
* Why the election of President Obama portends a giant leap forward for coercive Green policies
* Why Greens obstruct the use of all forms of energy--even the renewable sources they tout to the public
* How wealthy Green elites stand to profit fabulously from the restrictions and regulations they seek to impose on the rest of us
* How Green pressure campaigns are hamstringing the military and endangering our national security
* Why big business is not only knuckling under to the Greens, but is aggressively promoting the green agenda to the detriment of its own stockholders
* What you can do to help stop the great Green machine
A one-of-a-kind, comprehensive takedown of the entire environmental movement, Green Hell will open your eyes to a looming threat to our economy, our civil liberties, and the entire American way of life.

Al "The sky is Falling" Gore was challenged to a debate on global warming by a REAL scientist, and pussied out, like the chickenshit that he is. Maybe his new book can explain why the planet has been cooler the last few years. Al Gore is an environmental fascist, and gargatuan hypocrite.

Nation
Livestock owners raise stink: Beware the flatulence tax
The Associated Press
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 12.06.2008
advertisementMONTGOMERY, Ala. — For farmers, this just plain smells: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if the federal government decides to charge fees for air-polluting animals.
Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which they contend is a possible consequence of an Environmental Protection Agency report after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases from motor vehicles amount to air pollution.
"This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, an outspoken opponent of the fees.
EPA officials insisted Friday that the lengthy, highly technical report, which mostly focuses on other sources of air pollution, does not include a proposal to tax livestock.
But the American Farm Bureau Federation said, based on federal agriculture department figures, it would require farms or ranches with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs to pay an annual fee of about $175 for each dairy cow, $87.50 per head of beef cattle and $20 for each hog.
The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 a year.
Sparks said Wednesday he's worried the fee could be extended to chickens and other farm animals and cause more meat to be imported.
"We'll let other countries put food on our tables like they are putting gas in our cars. Other countries don't have the health standards we have," Sparks said.
The farm groups say the fee would apply to farms with livestock operations that emit more than 100 tons of carbon emissions in a year and fall under federal Clean Air Act provisions.
EPA officials said the agency has not taken a position on any of the matters discussed in its response to the Supreme Court ruling.
And John Millett, a spokesman for EPA's air and radiation division, said there has been an oversimplification of the EPA's document "to the point of distortion."
"EPA is not proposing any type of tax on livestock," he said.
The EPA briefly mentions "raising livestock" in its report on ways to regulate greenhouse gases under the provisions of the Clean Air Act.
Paul Schlegel, director of public policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said it determined the possible fees that could be imposed by using Agriculture Department statistics on the amount of greenhouse gases that come from livestock and applied it to the EPA's permitting rules.

WHY ARE WE STILL GIVING THIS MAN CREDENCE?! IT'S BEEN PROVEN THAT THERE IS NO- SUCH-THING-AS-GLOBAL-WARMING- AND THIS ROBOT CONTINUES TO PUSH HIS LIES.
A GREAT WOMAN THAT SAVED HUNDREDS OF JEWISH CHILDREN DURING THE HOLOCAUST WAS DENIED THE NOBLE PRIZE BECAUSE THE SOCIALISTS IN CHARGE DECIDED TO GIVE IT TO AL"THE EARTH HAS A FEVER"GORE-THE BEAUTIFUL WOMAN DIED SHORTLY AFTER.
MAYBE IT WAS THE MERCURY FILLED LIGHT BULBS THAT WE NOW HAVE TO BUY BECAUSE OF GORE THAT DID HER IN.

can anyone prove global warming without a doubt! didnt think so.unless its the extra green it will cost all of us.just like cap and trade may double all utility bills. gore not the only bullshit artist that will profit from this!!

Posted by honestclimate in Carbon Trading.
Tags: climate change, global warming, carbon offsets
trackback
Ads by Google
ICF Green Business
Leader in Environmental & Climate Change Consulting for 30 Years
www.icfi.com/greenbusiness




The Rich and Famous and Carbon Offsets

From Hawaii Reporter, January 22, 2009

It’s OK to have a carbon footprint if you pay enough. You do this by buying carbon offsets. These are used by politicians, environmentalists, movie stars, athletes, and others to claim the impact of their high-consumption lifestyles on the environment can be canceled out by paying someone else to invest in carbon-reducing initiatives, reports Lorrie Goldstein.Many famous people who are for sustainability and against global warming live in many very big houses, drive many very big cars, and fly in private jets. If you travel frequently by air, even on commercial flights, you can’t escape having a huge carbon footprint. Yet many of the most vocal advocates of cutting emissions—politicians, entertainers, environmentalists, journalists, scientists—are continually jetting off to campaign events and conferences and workshops. Are they going to change the way they operate? If not, how are they going to persuade anyone else to cut back emissions, asks John Tierney.

The World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, was ‘carbon neutral,’ despite all the folks flying to attend, because in large part, people donated money to third world countries to plant trees or build hydroelectric dams for electricity.

The Live Earth concerts held in 2007 created a huge carbon footprint on the globe in the name of climate preservation; an estimated 7,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions. This does not include the private jets of all the celebrities who attended or the thousands of people who drove their cars to each concert. An official volume, The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook, presents 77 ‘essential skills for stopping climate change.’ Here are some guidelines from the book: “Let’s say that despite your best efforts, you still have to fly to your best friend’s wedding.

You’re dumping 3,000 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and you’re wracked with guilt about your contribution to global warming. Relax, you can throw money at the problem. Go online, find a company that sells clean energy credits, and buy enough to make up for the greenhouse gases your trip created.” The book goes on to state that you must choose your offsets carefully and points out that trains are the most ecologically low-impact way to cover long distances. How many celebrities take Amtrak? And speaking of celebrities and their eco-friendliness, let’s look at a few.

Celebrities

Al Gore, academy award winner and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, has to be high up on the list. Bruce Nussbaum notes, “Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy. Gore’s mansion, (20-rooms, eight-bathrooms) located in Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES). The average household in American consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average. Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year. In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.”

Like a good citizen, Gore buys carbon offsets to assuage his high energy lifestyle, and this is good. But here’s the rub. He buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management, a company he co-founded and serves as chairman. Through this company, he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe. As co-founder and chairman of the firm, Gore presumably draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he ‘buys’ his ‘carbon offsets’ from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself.

Madonna, who was the main attraction at the London Live Earth concert owns a collection of fuel-guzzling cars, including a Mercedes Maybach, two Range Rovers, Audi A8s and a Mini Cooper S. She flies everywhere in her private jet and her Confessions tour produced 440 tons of carbon dioxide in four months last year. This was just the flights between the countries, not taking into account the truckloads of equipment needed, the power to stage such a show and the transport of all the thousands of fans getting to the gigs.

John Travolta says, “Everyone can do their bit. Global warming is a very valid issue—we have to think about alternative methods of fuel.” Travolta once starred in a movie about bringing industrial polluters to justice. But in real life he has probably the biggest carbon footprint of any Hollywood star. He parks his personal Boeing 707 on his front lawn—next to his three Gulfstream jets and a Lear jet. Rather appropriately, he has called his home Jumboair.’

The Red Hot Chili Peppers produced 220 tons of carbon dioxide with their private jet alone over six months on their last world tour which was 42 dates.

All this prompts Ginny Buckley and Max Flint to ask, “Is the hot air emitted by celebrities when they spout ecological platitudes a greenhouse gas?”

Enron and Lehman Brothers

There’s big money to be made in the carbon business. Enron and Lehman Brothers are two examples. Ken Lay became a celebrated corporate executive praised for his ‘21st century’ business visions. But Enron’s internal memos, leaked to reporters during its bankruptcy scandal, revealed other motivations. Christine MacDonald in her book, Green, Inc., notes that Lay had two meetings with President Bill Clinton and Vice-President Al Gore on a treaty capping carbon emissions. An internal Enron memo predicted this would ‘do more to promote Enron’s business than almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States.’ MacDonald adds, “Enron also had plans for using its support among environmentalists, who cooed over Lay.”

Lehman Brothers was at the forefront of the vast trade created by the new worldwide regulatory system to ‘fight climate change’ by curbing emissions of carbon dioxide. Jane Orient notes, “In 2007 they released a long and highly publicized report about climate change in which they preached about decarbonization, trying to make their investors keep getting high profits from the Kyoto carbon trade scheme and the support of huge public subventions. They recommended to their investors what they considered a central value of the carbon ton 50 years into the future. All of this of course, with the applause of the usual choir of politicians, the entire media, and the Greens.”

Thousands of green militants have been using the Lehman report as a proof of global warming and impending chaos. The report is the basis for policies on climate change in Spain, Argentina, and several other countries, it is used by economy professors playing climatologists, and by newspaper editorialists. Yet in spite of their ability to predict the climate 50-100 years ahead, they couldn’t predict their own bankruptcy.

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?46b4a943-c45b-4e00-8737-e26cd39edae7

WSJ: Environmentalists Block Alternative Energy: http://blog.teammitch.com/blog/_archives/2008/8/18/3844369.html

Feinstein seeks block solar power from desert land
March 21st, 2009 By KEVIN FREKING , Associated Press Writer Enlarge
In this Friday, July 22, 2005 file photo, a rainbow forms in rainy skies over State Highway 178 between Death Valley National Park and the town of Shoshone, Calif. More than 500,000 acres in the Mojave Desert would be off-limits to wind or solar energy production under legislation Sen. Dianne Feinstein intends to introduce. The land is coveted by companies seeking to develop alternative energy, setting up a potential clash with one of the more powerful members of Congress. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon)

(AP) -- California's Mojave Desert may seem ideally suited for solar energy production, but concern over what several proposed projects might do to the aesthetics of the region and its tortoise population is setting up a potential clash between conservationists and companies seeking to develop renewable energy.

Ads by Google
How 2 Build Solar Panels - SolarPanelKits.BuildSolarPanels.net
Reduce Home Energy Bills up to 95% We Tested 7 "Kits" =>Only 2 Worked!

Solar Panel Installers - www.CoolerPlanet.com/Solar
40% Off California Solar Panel Projects. Sign Up for a Free Quote.



Nineteen companies have submitted applications to build solar or wind facilities on a parcel of 500,000 desert acres, but Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Friday such development would violate the spirit of what conservationists had intended when they donated much of the land to the public.

Feinstein said Friday she intends to push legislation that would turn the land into a national monument, which would allow for existing uses to continue while preventing future development.

The Wildlands Conservancy orchestrated the government's purchase of the land between 1999-2004. It negotiated a discount sale from the real estate arm of the former Santa Fe and Southern Pacific Railroad and then contributed $40 million to help pay for the purchase. David Myers, the conservancy's executive director, said the solar projects would do great harm to the region's desert tortoise population.

"It would destroy the entire Mojave Desert ecosystem," said David Myers, executive director of The Wildlands Conservancy.

Feinstein said the lands in question were donated or purchased with the intent that they would be protected forever. But the Bureau of Land Management considers the land now open to all types of development, except mining. That policy led the state to consider large swaths of the land for future renewable energy production.

"This is unacceptable," Feinstein said in a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. "I urge you to direct the BLM to suspend any further consideration of leases to develop former railroad lands for renewable energy or for any other purpose."

In a speech last year, Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger complained about environmental concerns slowing down the approval of solar plants in California.

"If we cannot put solar power plants in the Mojave desert, I don't know where the hell we can put it," Schwarzenegger said at Yale University.


Ads by Google
Solar Energy - www.CaliforniaSolarInstallers.com
Save Up To 45% On Solar with Rebates, Incentives & Tax Credits.

How 2 Build Solar Panels? - How2BuildSolarPanels.com
We Tested 9 Kits... Just 2 Worked! Slash Your Home Energy Bills by 90%



But Karen Douglas, chairman of the California Energy Commission, said Feinstein's proposal could be a "win-win" for energy and conservation. The governor's office said Douglas was speaking on the administration's behalf.

"The opportunity we see in the Feinstein bill is to jump-start our own efforts to find the best sites for development and to come up with a broader conservation plan that mitigates the impact of the development," Douglas said.

Douglas said that if the national monument lines were drawn without consideration of renewable energy then a conflict was likely, but it's early enough in the planning process that she's confident the state will be able to get more solar and wind projects up and running without hurting the environment.

"We think we can do both," Douglas said. "We think this is an opportunity to accelerate both."

Greg Miller of the Bureau of Land Management said there are 14 solar energy and five wind energy projects that have submitted applications seeking to develop on what's referred to as the former Catellus lands. None of the projects are close to being approved, he said.

The land lies in the southeast corner of California, between the existing Mojave National Preserve on the north and Joshua Tree National Park on the south.

"They all have to go through a rigorous environmental analysis now," Miller said. "It will be at best close to two years out before we get some of these grants approved."

Feinstein's spokesman, Gil Duran, said the senator looks forward to working with the governor and the Interior Department on the issue.

"There's plenty of room in America's deserts for the bold expansion of renewable energy projects," Duran said.

People who question the very EXISTENCE and the SERIOUSNESS of global warming are either ignorant, or foolish, or given to hiding their heads in the sand. It clearly IS real --- and if you don't believe that, try watching the EUROPEAN environmentalists documentary expedition to Greenland that is currently being aired on LINK TV.

Or try going out to Colorado and beholding FOR YOURSELVES the ecological devastation being wrought nowadays by the PINE BARK BEETLE and the (several) fungi it carries --- that are WIPING OUT ALL THE TREES, and are now APPROACHING ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK (from the southwest). The "ascendancy" of the beetle is associated with the steady pattern of RECORD-HIGHER-AND-HIGHER coldest winter temperatures at that highest-altitude-in-the-whole-national-park-system visitors center along that high scenic road through the park. THE BEETLES ARE ABLE TO SURVIVE THROUGH THE COLDEST TIMES OF THE (WARMER) WINTERS (and so the pestilence spreads).

My purpose in referring to this example is to make the point that the EFFECTS are actually MANY and VARIED --- and are NOT limited to Polar Bears and Penguins and the Inuit in far-off Greenland. People are going to be INCREASINGLY SURPRISED TO FIND THEM MORE AND MORE FREQUENTLY, AS TIME GOES ON, "HITTING MUCH CLOSER TO HOME". (If BEETLES can survive more abundantly, SO CAN MOSQUITOES --- and MALARIA!)

What is REALLY at issue, though, is NOT the FACT that the Earth is getting steadily warmer. Rather, what has become some kind of "Red/Blue Debate political football" is the question of whether or not all of that is "really our fault" --- as though THAT is somehow all that actually matters!

Al Gore and many others believe the problem derives from "our" burning of fossil fuels for the last 150 years, resulting in the release of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere. Now CO2 is, to be sure, NOT a POLLUTANT --- being, after all, in effect BREATHED IN BY PLANTS as the "other half" of the "Grand Balance of Nature" Carbon Cycle, whereby plants and animals provide each other with oxygen and carbon dioxide. But a LARGE POWER PLANT is NOT MERELY ANOTHER ANIMAL, and has, by comparison, a HUGE "METABOLISM".

And when the “natural” balance of things is MARKEDLY SHIFTED, the excess of CO2, which is a "greenhouse gas", acts to "trap" more of the sun's easily-INcoming LIGHT energy that ends up being converted (by quantum-mechanical interactions with the atoms comprising the Earth’s surface) to HEAT --- to which that gas is OPAQUE, so that the HEAT is “bottled up” and cannot re-radiate off freely back out into space! And so the Earth gets HOTTER --- the infamous global warming that drives more intense HURRICANES and other storms, and MELTS THE POLAR ICECAPS, which by some estimates could perhaps FLOOD OUT UP TO A THIRD OF ALL HUMANITY that tends to concentrate along seacoasts.

Now the magnitude of the “human activity” contribution to that whole balance shift is debated by some. But even if there ARE indeed other, NATURAL processes afoot that ALSO contribute to the same problem, “WE” HAVE NO BUSINESS ADDING TO IT --- at ANY level! What “we” ACTUALLY need to be doing is TO ASSUME INTELLIGENT MANAGERIAL CONTROL of the whole planetary energy input/output balance! Accomplishing THAT sort of thing would involve implementing TECHNOLOGICAL schemes to ADD “OUR” OWN OZONE to the ultraviolet shield layer (which actually consists of ONLY A FEW THOUSAND TONS OF MATERIAL world-wide!) as might be needed, and/or perhaps to contrive to increase the population of REFLECTIVE ICE CRYSTALS INJECTED INTO THE STRATOSPHERE by all those high-flying aircraft.

People very much need to GET REAL about this whole subject.

HEAT OF THE MOMENT
Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening
Temperatures dropping, fewer hurricanes, arctic ice growing, polar bear population up

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 22, 2009
9:56 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

WASHINGTON – This may come as bad news for Al Gore.

The modest global warming trend has stopped – maybe even reversed itself.

And it's not just the record low temperatures experienced in much of the world this winter.

For at least the last five years, global temperatures have been falling, according to tracking performed by Roy Spencer, the climatologist formerly of NASA.

"Global warming" was going to bring more and more horrific hurricanes, climate change scientists and the politicians who subscribed to their theories said. But since 2005, only one major hurricane has struck North America.

A new study by Florida State University researcher Ryan Maue shows worldwide cyclone activity – typhoons, as well as hurricanes – has reached at least a 30-year low.

Two more studies – one by the Leibniz Institute of Marine Science and the Max Planck Institute of Meteorology in Germany and another by the University of Wisconsin – predict a slowing, or even a reversal of warming, for at least the next 10 to 20 years.

The Arctic sea ice has grown more on a percentage basis this winter than it has since 1979.

The number of polar bears has risen 25 percent in the past decade. There are 15,000 of them in the Arctic now, where 10 years ago there were 12,000.

"The most recent global warming that began in 1977 is over, and the Earth has entered a new phase of global cooling," says Don Easterbrook, professor of geology at Western Washington University in Bellingham, confidently. He maintains a switch in Pacific Ocean currents "assures about three decades of global cooling. New solar data showing unusual absence of sun spots and changes in the sun’s magnetic field suggest ... the present episode of global cooling may be more severe than the cooling of 1945 to 1977."

Climatologist Joe D’Aleo of the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, says new data "show that in five of the last seven decades since World War II, including this one, global temperatures have cooled while carbon dioxide has continued to rise."

"The data suggest cooling not warming in Earth's future," he says.

To view charts and read full article with referenced documents:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

"In the 1970s concerned environmentalists like Stephen Schneider of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado feared a return to another ice age due to manmade atmospheric pollution blocking out the sun.

Since about 1940 the global climate did in fact appear to be cooling. Then a funny thing happened-- sometime in the late 1970s temperature declines slowed to a halt and ground-based recording stations during the 1980s and 1990s began reading small but steady increases in near-surface temperatures. Fears of "global cooling" then changed suddenly to "global warming,"-- the cited cause:


manmade atmospheric pollution causing a runaway greenhouse effect.





What does geologic history have to offer in sorting through the confusion?


Quite a bit, actually.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"If 'ice age' is used to refer to long, generally cool, intervals during which glaciers advance and retreat, we are still in one today. Our modern climate represents a very short, warm period between glacial advances." Illinois State Museum



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Periods of Earth warming and cooling occur in cycles. This is well understood, as is the fact that small-scale cycles of about 40 years exist within larger-scale cycles of 400 years, which in turn exist inside still larger scale cycles of 20,000 years, and so on.
______

A Matter of Opinion
Has manmade pollution in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases caused a runaway Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming?

Before joining the mantra, consider the following:


Compiled by R.S. Bradley and J.A. Eddy based on J.T. Houghton et al., Climate Change: The IPCC Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990 and published in EarthQuest, vo. 1, 1991. Courtesy of Thomas Crowley, Remembrance of Things Past: Greenhouse Lessons from the Geologic Record 1. The idea that man-made pollution is responsible for global warming is not supported by historical fact. The period known as the Holocene Maximum is a good example-- so-named because it was the hottest period in human history. The interesting thing is this period occurred approximately 7500 to 4000 years B.P. (before present)-- long before humans invented industrial pollution.


Figure 1
2. CO2 in our atmosphere has been increasing steadily for the last 18,000 years-- long before humans invented smokestacks ( Figure 1). Unless you count campfires and intestinal gas, man played no role in the pre-industrial increases."

see frank a few facts from christy means a little more came from people that study global warming.but i think ill go hide my pig from epa just in case!!

Thanks, Christy, for enlightening Frank. As I told you in another blog, a new study by scientists measuring the melting of polar ice caps by "climate change" reports that we should be measuring them by thousands of years, not hundreds, because the rise in sea level is changed that slowly.

But at least Al Gore is making money off this. What other way does he have to make money? Lots of people (read friends of Obama) will be making billions if Cap and Trade goes through. Google "profitting from Cap and Trade" and see for yourself.