Al Gore...Wrong Again

[Logan13]

Al Gore...Wrong Again
http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclu...rong_again.htm

On October 14, 1997, Vice President Al Gore said, “For those who argue that global warming is already changing the world’s climate, this year’s El Nino weather front is more than enough evidence”, the audience was told by Gore. In the next day, a report by the San Francisco Chronicle said: “Gore links El Nino to Global Warming”. The Vice President stated at the summit that growing frequency of El Nino episodes could be connected to the gradual heating of the atmosphere caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Ten years later residents in Argentina and Brazil are wondering if this winter will ever end. Buenos Aires recorded this Thursday (November 15th) the lowest November temperature in 90 years. Temperature in the Downtown weather station reached 2.5C. Since records began more than a century ago, only two days had colder lows in November. It was in 1914 (1.6) and 1917 (2.4). And ninety years ago the urban heat island effect was much less pronounced than nowadays. In Brazil's southernmost province Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil temperatures fell to 2.3C. In Sao Joaquim Monday's (Nov., 12) the temperature was -1.2 C with frost.

The culprit is a developing la Nina , a cooling of the water in the eastern Pacific along the South American coast, that some climatologists believe could indicate a return to the la Nina dominated situation that dominated from1947 to 1977. El Ninos, a warming of East Pacific waters. have been more common since then. Some climatologists believe the el Ninos may have caused what the IPCC calls "global warming".

NASA has recently indicated that the circulation of the Arctic Ocean has changed from the counterclockwise circulation of the 1990's to the pre-1990 clockwise circulation which could result in a cooling trend in the Arctic.

Such a shift would be consist with the projected cooling trend mentioned in the previous post.

From an email that I received today:

Help Stop Global Whining!
"A government that is big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take everything you have." - President Ronald Reagan
In the 70's Liberals were trying to scare us into thinking that we were heading toward the next ice age.
Then they said DDT was going to kill us.
Then it was CFC's and the enviroment.
Then Y2K, the world as we know it was going to end.
Continuously, they have subjected us to race and class profiteering.
Liberal hype and lies. When global warming is shown to be false they will never admit to it. They will just move on to next world-ending tragedy. In the Liberal mind, the sky is always falling.
Help Stop Global Whining!

[Johny-too-small]

Owl Gore is a relic. Its becoming obvious why he choose not to run again....

[LawMan018]

Al Gore...Wrong Again
http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclu...rong_again.htm

On October 14, 1997, Vice President Al Gore said, “For those who argue that global warming is already changing the world’s climate, this year’s El Nino weather front is more than enough evidence”, the audience was told by Gore. In the next day, a report by the San Francisco Chronicle said: “Gore links El Nino to Global Warming”. The Vice President stated at the summit that growing frequency of El Nino episodes could be connected to the gradual heating of the atmosphere caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Ten years later residents in Argentina and Brazil are wondering if this winter will ever end. Buenos Aires recorded this Thursday (November 15th) the lowest November temperature in 90 years. Temperature in the Downtown weather station reached 2.5C. Since records began more than a century ago, only two days had colder lows in November. It was in 1914 (1.6) and 1917 (2.4). And ninety years ago the urban heat island effect was much less pronounced than nowadays. In Brazil's southernmost province Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil temperatures fell to 2.3C. In Sao Joaquim Monday's (Nov., 12) the temperature was -1.2 C with frost.

The culprit is a developing la Nina , a cooling of the water in the eastern Pacific along the South American coast, that some climatologists believe could indicate a return to the la Nina dominated situation that dominated from1947 to 1977. El Ninos, a warming of East Pacific waters. have been more common since then. Some climatologists believe the el Ninos may have caused what the IPCC calls "global warming".

NASA has recently indicated that the circulation of the Arctic Ocean has changed from the counterclockwise circulation of the 1990's to the pre-1990 clockwise circulation which could result in a cooling trend in the Arctic.

Such a shift would be consist with the projected cooling trend mentioned in the previous post.

From an email that I received today:

Help Stop Global Whining!
"A government that is big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take everything you have." - President Ronald Reagan
In the 70's Liberals were trying to scare us into thinking that we were heading toward the next ice age.
Then they said DDT was going to kill us.
Then it was CFC's and the enviroment.
Then Y2K, the world as we know it was going to end.
Continuously, they have subjected us to race and class profiteering.
Liberal hype and lies. When global warming is shown to be false they will never admit to it. They will just move on to next world-ending tragedy. In the Liberal mind, the sky is always falling.
Help Stop Global Whining!

Sounds a lot smarter then anything Bush could come up with. And DDT was going to kill us? DDT wasn't harming us it was harming the environment, and killing off our bald eagle population... Oh that's right, Conservatives could care less about the environment and more about their money...

[Kärnfysikern]

Sounds a lot smarter then anything Bush could come up with. And DDT was going to kill us? DDT wasn't harming us it was harming the environment, and killing off our bald eagle population... Oh that's right, Conservatives could care less about the environment and more about their money...

Well the case with DDT isnt that simple. Millions of children has died of malaria because of the DDT ban. If the chooise is betwen saving bald eagles and saving millions of children Il pic children anytime. So in this case its more like environmentalists couldnt care less about human lifes.

[spywizard]

AIDS death toll in Africa may reach 100 million by 2025

[Dizz28]

Well the case with DDT isnt that simple. Millions of children has died of malaria because of the DDT ban. If the chooise is betwen saving bald eagles and saving millions of children Il pic children anytime. So in this case its more like environmentalists couldnt care less about human lifes.

Very true, DDT was the only thing keeping malaria at bay in many of the "3rd world" countries. The ban created mass outbreaks that continue to this day killing millions of people....but of course that doesn't effect good 'ol us here in the US and other more privileged societies

[Tock]

Wikipedia has an interesting article about DDT. In part, it says:

Chronic

• Occupational exposure to DDT was associated with reduced verbal attention, visuomotor speed, sequencing, and with increased neuropsychological and psychiatric symptoms in a dose-response pattern (ie, per year of DDT application) in retired workers aged 55–70 years in Costa Rica. DDT or DDE concentrations were not determined in this study.[35]
• In one 1969 study, 24 cynomolgus monkeys and rhesus monkeys fed up to 16 mg/kg/day of DDT for 130 months were compared to a control group of 17 monkeys. Six animals in the dosed group died, and the study demonstrated "clear evidence of hepatic and CNS toxicity following long-term DDT administration." Although the exposed group developed two malignancies and three benign tumors, compared to zero in the control group, statistically this is still "inconclusive with respect to a carcinogenic effect of DDT in nonhuman primates."[36]
• In another study, humans voluntarily ingested 35 mg of DDT daily for about two years, and were then tracked for several years afterward. Although there was "suggestive evidence of adverse liver effects", no other adverse effects were observed.[37]
• Farmers exposured to DDT occupationally have an increased incidence of non-allergic asthma. [38]
• A study of Native Americans exposed to DDE primarily from eating contaminated fish found that elevated blood DDE levels were associated with an increased incidence of diabetes. These results are consistent with previous studies on diabetes incidence and organochlorine exposure.[39]

Cancer

• The EPA, in 1987 , classified DDT as class B2, a probable human carcinogen based on "Observation of tumors (generally of the liver) in seven studies in various mouse strains and three studies in rats. DDT is structurally similar to other probable carcinogens, such as DDD and DDE." Regarding the human carcinogenicity data, they stated "The existing epidemiological data are inadequate. Autopsy studies relating tissue levels of DDT to cancer incidence have yielded conflicting results. Three studies reported that tissue levels of DDT and DDE were higher in cancer victims than in those dying of other diseases (Casarett et al., 1968; Dacre and Jennings, 1970; Wasserman et al., 1976). In other studies no such relationship was seen (Maier-Bode, 1960; Robinson et al., 1965; Hoffman et al., 1967). Studies of occupationally exposed workers and volunteers have been of insufficient duration to be useful in assessment of the carcinogenicity of DDT to humans."[40]
• A study of malaria workers who handled DDT occupationally found an elevated risk of cancers of the liver and biliary tract. Another study has found a correlation between DDE and liver cancer in white men, but not for women or black men. An association between DDT exposure and pancreatic cancer has been demonstrated in a few studies, but other studies have found no association. Several studies have looked for associations between DDT and multiple myeloma, and testicular, prostate, endometrial, and colorectal cancers, but none conclusively demonstrated any association.[41]

[Kärnfysikern]

I think point number 3 summarises best. The evidende for damage is inconclusive, unless absurde dosages are used on monkies. The monkey dosages would be like me eating 1.6 grams of DDT daily.

Even if DDT is a weak carcinogen it would still save more lifes than it would claim if used to fight malaria.

The bottom line imo is that if african countries decied to use DDT we in the west should not interfere. They are the ones dying and they should decide whats best for them.

[Tock]

Even if DDT is a weak carcinogen it would still save more lifes than it would claim if used to fight malaria.

The bottom line imo is that if african countries decied to use DDT we in the west should not interfere. They are the ones dying and they should decide whats best for them.

True,
True.

[LawMan018]

Save lives... or save the environment... Hm... I think the environment is what we need to continue to have life so... Find an alternate solution that benefits both sides. DDT poisons the environment and saved human lives... Hey!!! We might as well stop recycling and burn our trash or better yet, just throw it in the street... I'm sure some of that trash could benefit a homeless man and be the ticket between life and death for him...

[Kärnfysikern]

Save lives... or save the environment... Hm... I think the environment is what we need to continue to have life so... Find an alternate solution that benefits both sides. DDT poisons the environment and saved human lives... Hey!!! We might as well stop recycling and burn our trash or better yet, just throw it in the street... I'm sure some of that trash could benefit a homeless man and be the ticket between life and death for him...

The thing is that DDT does not threaten any ecosystem and using it only for fighting malaria would have a miniscule effect on the environment. Whatever humans do we will effect the environment in some way, taking a approach that only 0 environmental impact is acceptable would lead us back to the stoneage.