[OldManMac]

Ah, yes, the Dredge the Bottom Report. Big deal. Gore will deal with Dingell just fine. Gore's forgotten more about global warming than Dingell ever knew in the first place. Besides, this is all just showmanship on Dingell's part. Nothing serious is going to get resolved in a 30 minute meeting, other than to show his constituents that he's "doing something."

It's interesting how Dredge always sensationalizes things. "Developing.......blah, blah, blah,........more later,...........blah, blah, blah, . It's a typical sensationalism site that manages quite nicely to hook some in, as it's easier to listen to others than it is to do some research and reach one's own conclusions.

[OldManMac]

It's always easier to call people names, isn't it?

http://news.wired.com/dynamic/storie...MPLATE=DEFAULT

Zoning Rules Thwart Gore's Solar Dreams

By ERIK SCHELZIG
Associated Press Writer

BELLE MEADE, Tenn. (AP) -- Zoning rules in Al Gore's upscale Tennessee neighborhood have prevented the former vice president and environmental activist from installing solar panels on his roof.

Gore bought his multimillion dollar home in 2002 in Belle Meade, an exclusive city encircled by metropolitan Nashville, and he has embarked on an ambitious renovation. But his contractors ran into a legal barrier last summer when they sought to apply for a permit to install solar panels on the roof.

Terry Franklin, Belle Meade's building officer, said the town only allows power generating equipment to be placed on the ground level. "Solar panels are generators," Franklin said.

"We told them they couldn't do it," he said. "They wanted to try anyway, but we convinced them it was something the board wouldn't allow."

A conservative group that disputes the findings about global warming criticized Gore last month, complaining that his home uses too much electricity.

Belle Meade, the nation's fifth-richest town according to the 2000 Census, developed the zoning rules because many of its homes have backup electric generators. The area has several tall trees and residents have discouraged Nashville Electric Service crews from pruning those near power lines. Power outages from falling branches have forced several residents to purchase backup generators.

Gore's contractors had argued that silent solar panels should not be equated with noisy gas- or diesel-powered generators, but they ultimately agreed not to press the issue while the city considered changes to the code.

New rules on April 1 will allow homeowners to install solar panels on their roofs. But there's a caveat: "Solar panels may be installed upon the roof of a building so long as they are not visible from the street or from any adjoining property," according to the ordinance.

Gore's roof does have flat areas where the panels could be placed, Franklin said.

The builders at Gore's home plan to make the application for solar panels once the new ordinance goes into effect.

"We just sort of had to wait until they caught up with things," said Steve Rick, Gore's architect. "I didn't think it was worth fighting because we knew the change was coming."

Gore, who starred in the documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth" about global warming, has been mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2008 although he repeatedly has said he has no plans to join the race.

[itistoday]

That's what happens when you don't research what the other side has to say.

[besson3c]

I still believe that it is completely and utterly counter-productive to shoot the messenger and disregard the message.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

When a huge part of "the message" is blatant hypocrisy, of course "the messenger" can be disregarded.

Funny how I see people saying that respect for an office or someone's standing must be earned (usually when it comes to Bush)- and actually, that sentiment is correct. But here, we're just supposed to take the word of a shameless partisan who considers an opposing viewpoint "balance as bias" merely because he says so.

Riiiiight.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Was that an admission that you're wrong?

greg

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Was that an admission that you're wrong?

No, but thanks for what was pretty much a textbook example of purposefully misinterpreting something in order to reach a desired conclusion.

[Buckaroo]

GORE REFUSES TO TAKE PERSONAL ENERGY ETHICS PLEDGE

.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

WASHINGTON, DC – Former Vice President Al Gore refused to take a “Personal Energy Ethics Pledge” today to consume no more energy than the average American household. The pledge was presented to Gore by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, during today’s global warming hearing.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

When a huge part of "the message" is blatant hypocrisy, of course "the messenger" can be disregarded.

Why? Why aren't we capable of judging the message on its merits alone rather than putting the messenger under a microscope? Sure, it makes the person's point stronger to practice what they preach, but it doesn't falsify their message if they are not living examples of it.

What about Christians that turn out to be into little boys? Does this mean that anything they've ever said about God is completely false?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why? Why aren't we capable of judging the message on its merits alone rather than putting the messenger under a microscope? Sure, it makes the person's point stronger to practice what they preach, but it doesn't falsify their message if they are not living examples of it.

YOU are free to judge his message however you want.
I'M free to do the same, and free to point out his being a hypocrite.

What about Christians that turn out to be into little boys? Does this mean that anything they've ever said about God is completely false?

That's actually a perfect example of EXACTLY the person anyone sane wouldn't trust their kids with, NOR seek religious advice from.

Emphatically, NO, I wouldn't trust a single shred of anything that such a person claims to know, or says about God, when clearly that person living by their own belief system, thinks it's okay to mess with little boys.

[besson3c]

There is a difference between an incident like this making an individual such as this less of an authority versus literally making what they say false.

If this person said that God is a loving God that does great things (or *insert any other standard Christian sentiment*), would this be false?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

There is a difference between an incident like this making an individual such as this less of an authority versus literally making what they say false.

If this person said that God is a loving God that does great things (or *insert any other standard Christian sentiment*), would this be false?

Your argument’s a bit strange. You’re asking a theological question that relies almost entirely on individual interpretation.

Even so, the logic doesn’t jibe.

The more direct correlation would be: do I trust a person who molests kids, to be a childcare authority? Do I want that person as a self-appointed dictator of policy on the care of children?

You see, THAT in this equation would be the issue, not the person’s theological beliefs, or whether whatever they say about any other subject is ever correct or not.

My answer of course would be: of course not. This person has no business what-so-ever dictating policy on childcare, and that is, even IF everyone else really needed to be dictated to by self-anointed blowhards on that or any other subject. (The answer to that, is also no.)

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

No, but thanks for what was pretty much a textbook example of purposefully misinterpreting something in order to reach a desired conclusion.

I wasn't misinterpreting. I was sarcastically pointing out that all your talk about Gore's hypocrisy seems to be slightly misguided.

The more direct correlation would be: do I trust a person who molests kids, to be a childcare authority? Do I want that person as a self-appointed dictator of policy on the care of children?

Doesn't make sense, and it isn't the argument. This thread is about Gore being a "convenient liar" and the "master of hyprocrisy." He isn't a dictator of policy on global warming, or a global warming authority the last time I checked (however much he uses his popular public image as such).

This thread attacks Gore's message by attacking Gore, the man. And let's face it, his message doesn't suffer from such an attack.

GORE REFUSES TO TAKE PERSONAL ENERGY ETHICS PLEDGE

Ridiculous. So now Gore has to sell off his houses and his personal property in order to try and use as much energy as the average $40k-a-year American? So he can't take more than 2 flights a year I suppose?! So. incredibly. stupid.

greg

[besson3c]

Or, you could look at exactly what is said, and decide for yourself whether it is factually sound.

A great many heretics were right, but vilified at the time of them making a claim. Galileo is an example...

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

I wasn't misinterpreting. I was sarcastically pointing out that all your talk about Gore's hypocrisy seems to be slightly misguided.

Gore's a hypocrite. He doesn't practice what he preaches. Your supporting him doesn't change that. Sorry it's so personal for you.

Doesn't make sense, and it isn't the argument.

Follow more closely. Besson asked me if a person being a pedophile was reason enough to discredit them on everything they ever said about religion. I pointed out that in regard to this argument, it's apples and oranges. A person being a pedophile IS reason enough to discredit them on matters of childcare. (See, those things are directly related.)

You may as well ask, does gore being a hypocrite on the environment mean everything he's ever said about God isn't true? Who cares. We're not talking about his religious beliefs, we're talking about his environmental hypocrisy. (Well, actually, they may in fact be the same thing). So on subject, no, he has no automatic right to be taken seriously on that issue.

This thread is about Gore being a "convenient liar" and the "master of hyprocrisy."

Titles he seems to have earned.

He isn't a dictator of policy on global warming, or a global warming authority the last time I checked (however much he uses his popular public image as such).

Absolutely, and for that and MANY other reasons, his opinions on the environment count about as much as Ken Lay's on how to run a legitimate business.

This thread attacks Gore's message by attacking Gore, the man.

So what. Neither is above being called out for what it really is.

So now Gore has to sell off his houses and his personal property in order to try and use as much energy as the average $40k-a-year American? So he can't take more than 2 flights a year I suppose?! So. incredibly. stupid.

Ohhh the horror! eGore being challenged to actually lead by example, and put his money where his fat mouth is, rather than just dictate to everyone else. He's the one running around preaching gloom and doom and the end of the world (crowned by that spectacular bit of downright shameful fear-mongering and ranting today before congress).

Yes, Virginia, its up to him to lead by example if he's so committed to his fire and brimstone cause. Meanwhile, it's not on anyone else to take anything he has to sell with anymore weight than they give a friggen late night snakeoil infomercial. If that's just "boooooo hoooooo" too much for eGore to live up to, then tough.

[tie]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Ohhh the horror! eGore being challenged to actually lead by example, and put his money where his fat mouth is, rather than just dictate to everyone else. He's the one running around preaching gloom and doom and the end of the world (crowned by that spectacular bit of downright shameful fear-mongering and ranting today before congress).

eGore and his fat mouth? Yeah.

I think Gore challenged Congress to act on global warming.

Here's a great quote from Inhofe:

In closing, I will simply say that I find it ironic that the liberals are so openly crafting programs to directly benefit powerful corporations and interest groups at the expense of the poor, elderly and working class.

[tie]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Why do you lie about what I did?

Sorry I caught you on it.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by tie 

eGore and his fat mouth? Yeah.

I think Gore challenged Congress to act on global warming.

Good example of his fat mouth. No one elected him to challenge congress to do squat, and certainly not to dictate diddly-squat to the American public.

Here's a great quote from Inhofe:

Sounds about right. And his challenge to eGore stands.