Liberal Hypocrisy?

[ucodegen]

how magnanimous of you. oh wait. the name calling started from post 1

I was only hoping it would go away, but it continued.. and it seems you like to continue it..!! I don’t call you self serving, arrogant, bull headed, idiotic or asinine.. or other terms I can think of. No where in any posts do I resort to that, nor do I do it here. It seems though, that you like to name-call.. (NOTE: you did not prove how it was self-serving either – assuming because you said so, it is so? the world operates according to ‘dunkle’s precepts??).

given your *opinion* of carbon offsets and your ignorance of the facts, your post seems pretty meaningless to me.

You have not proven ignorance of the facts, and simply by stating, assume it is proving.. wrong.

as if people can only be sincere if they are extremists. and yet, i bet you think islamic extremists are terrorist nutjobs and not “freedom fighters”.

Non sequitur. Does not follow line of reasoning.. try to prove by innuendo or false ‘example’?

[ucodegen]

@dunkle
It also seems that you like to theatrically quote out of context too.. Initial fragments of full sentences to try to prove things.

[Anonymous]

Ucodegen,

I agree with you that the gratuitous insulting gets old pretty fast. And ineffective – people insult because anonimity grants them a free ride, yet no amount of insulting will cause any real harm to its target. But I digress…

You say: “…the charges are too low per kilowatt ($1359/18414 = $0.0738/kWh). Check your SDG&E bill and see what you pay per kWh (sum it up w/ all the charges)..” – I wonder how Tenessee rates compare to San Diego. Only when you know that relationship any compare is meaningful

Then you say: “I don’t see why Gore, who is holding himself up as an example to follow, is not really walking the walk.”
I’m not sure you have substantiated this claim. You just say he’s not, but on the same vein I would say he is. Until you can prove he’s indeed not carbon neutral, I’d give him the benefit of the doubt.

You also say: “The ‘offset’ accounts is a lot of bull crap”. Why? What kind of proof do you have of this? It’s alright to be skeptical or cynical, but converting pollution into a tradeable “good” is one of the most novel and effective approaches to deal with this problem. If nothing else is doable.What would you do instead? Solar and wind power are not easily scalable, making them economically unfeasible at the moment. Nuclear power while fairly safe is not without its drawbacks and public opinion is not very favorable to it. Coal and oil remain the most effective way to generate energy (alas terribly pernicious to the environment). So short of imposing heavy penalties for polluting, which would open another can of worms, there seems to be no easy solution. In view of this, I really think the offset approach is fairly sound, even with its own drawbacks.

[drunkle]

Submitted by ucodegen on February 28, 2007 – 8:04pm.
how magnanimous of you. oh wait. the name calling started from post 1
I was only hoping it would go away, but it continued.. and it seems you like to continue it..!! I don’t call you self serving, arrogant, bull headed, idiotic or asinine.. or other terms I can think of. No where in any posts do I resort to that, nor do I do it here. It seems though, that you like to name-call.. (NOTE: you did not prove how it was self-serving either – assuming because you said so, it is so? the world operates according to ‘dunkle’s precepts??).

so it’s ok to call people hypocrits without any evidence or rational solely on the basis of prejudice?

whether or not you do, it’s self serving to implicitly support those that share your opinion/point of view while critizing those that dont. that you only now complain about “name calling” while it’s been going on for the entire thread (as well as the prior gw thread) is false sincerity.

You have not proven ignorance of the facts, and simply by stating, assume it is proving.. wrong.

i’m going to assume that you’re saying: “You have not proven ignorance of the facts, and simply by stating (that there are no facts) and assume (that) it is (true) is wrong”

your post is full of supposition. there are essentially no facts in this matter. you have gore’s own “press release” like material in which he makes some claims and you have some numbers from the power company. that’s it. no comparison with equal persons (like, per capita comparison?), no actual data on gore’s energy activities, nothing. pure supposition and speculation.

Non sequitur. Does not follow line of reasoning.. try to prove by innuendo or false ‘example’?

your reasoning that only extremists are sincere is what’s flawed; you demand that gore build a full on solar power station, demolish and rebuild his home into a studio condo, turn into a far left tree hugging hippie replete with pachuli and a rusty schwinn before you even give him the time of day. no sir, you and these others are being unreasonable and absurd. and quite truthfully, at that point of extremism, you and these others would simply pan him off as… yep, you guessed it, an extremist.

[drunkle]

Submitted by ucodegen on February 28, 2007 – 8:07pm.
@dunkle
It also seems that you like to theatrically quote out of context too.. Initial fragments of full sentences to try to prove things.

theatrically? flattery will get you nowhere.

your comments were your own, i merely emphasized the fact that you were posting pure supposition and then used your suppositions to support your conclusion. this is what they call a “circular argument”.

[ucodegen]

You say: “…the charges are too low per kilowatt ($1359/18414 = $0.0738/kWh). Check your SDG&E bill and see what you pay per kWh (sum it up w/ all the charges)..” – I wonder how Tenessee rates compare to San Diego. Only when you know that relationship any compare is meaningful

Very good statement/question.. The San Diego rates are over $0.10/kWh.. and vary from bill to bill… and SDG&E is not 100% green. I also know that Green energy, on average starts at over $0.07/kWh and that is for Wind(the lower priced). I have seem some quotes of lower numbers but there is nothing backing them.. just claims. Add on top power line usage and maintenance charges (about 0.05/kWh approx).. and you are above 0.10/kWh. On average, I have seen stated that Green power is 0.02/kWh more expensive than renewable. This is also why I conditioned the statement with needs to be checked and I would say that he is not. I am not making the statement unequivocal until proven. This is one of those where someone on the board might be able to check.. I’ll have to see if I can get info from my (distant) relatives.

I’m not sure you have substantiated this claim. You just say he’s not, but on the same vein I would say he is. Until you can prove he’s indeed not carbon neutral, I’d give him the benefit of the doubt.

I would have to disagree with you on this. Considering that the consumption is 20x, and the position he is pushing with repect to AGW.. I think he (Gore) has to prove it. He has also not told us which offset he is using (there are several).
http://www.ecobusinesslinks.com/carbon_offset_wind_credits_carbon_reduction.htm

Considering the link I posted earlier has someone whose home array can produce up to 45kWh in one day(net).. I think the figurehead of those fighting AGW and rise up to at least part of the challenge. (Solarwarrior also drives electric cars that are charged by his array). This person, in my opinion, is really carbon neutral.

Converting CO2 emissions (I would not consider it a pollution because lack of C02 can kill plants) to trade-able “good” is definitely novel.. but its effectiveness is questionable. How do you measure effective emissions of a trace gas? What percentage of revenues do these offset companies charge to administrative and marketing? How much of your money that you pay them, actually goes to offsetting the CO2 burden? How effective is the mechanism they are using?

I have priced setting up remote power using (generator, wind and solar) and have a fairly good feel on the costs. The amount that is being charged to offset by these companies is low compared to what is actually required to accomplish it.

Wind power is scalable, solar is (there was a large scale generating system near Barstow, CA). The problem is that cost per kWh is higher than burning fossil fuel.(not to mention lobby effects of fossil fuel cos).

The most effective way to reduce carbon footprint for the immediate short term (outside of conservation), is to use rooftop solar cells on corporate buildings (in SoCal). It drops the heat load on the roof during summer, reducing loads on the buildings Air Conditioners and at the same time generates electricity for the building (not the full building’s supply though). The company sees lower costs on their electric bill. One of the problems I have seen is that the producers of the units are still overcharging ($100 for a simple bracket?? my a**!!) Corporate buildings generally have large flat roofs which favor solar arrays.

The company I work in, is also swapping out all CRTs and replacing them with LCDs (for computers). It reduces power consumption at the same time it reduces heat load that the AC has to deal with (CRTs produce quite a bit of heat).

The solutions are generally simple stuff..

[FutureSDguy]

Al Gore is God to liberals, ucodegen. Did you see how the audience spoke in tongues on Oscar night? They react the same way to criticism the Muslims react to Muhammad being dispicted in cartoons. They are very self-righteous and intolerant of other views. Hence the spittle.

[ucodegen]

@dunkle

your comments were your own, i merely emphasized the fact that you were posting pure supposition and then used your suppositions to support your conclusion. this is what they call a “circular argument”.

I think you need to even check on how to do a circular argument, and why you avoid them..

http://www.essex.ac.uk/myskills/skills/thinking/identifyEvaluateargument.asp#11

[ucodegen]

Al Gore is God to liberals, ucodegen. Did you see how the audience spoke in tongues on Oscar night? They react the same way to criticism the Muslims react to Muhammad being dispicted in cartoons. They are very self-righteous and intolerant of other views. Hence the spittle.

I know, that is why I wear a hazmat uniform when talking to some of these people.. the raw vitrol spewed when you disagree.. And some of it borders on being contrary to the spirit of freedom of speech!!

Interesting thing, one of my more liberal friends commented on how the Oscars looked like such a Gore a**-kiss fest. She was quite taken aback. (She is a organic grown food, power conservation etc nut — not all conservationists/liberals are rabidly blind).

[ucodegen]

your reasoning that only extremists are sincere is what’s flawed; you demand that gore build a full on solar power station, demolish and rebuild his home into a studio condo, turn into a far left tree hugging hippie replete with pachuli and a rusty schwinn before you even give him the time of day.

Said no such thing.. find where I said that.. it is you sir, who are quoting out of context. If you had bothered to check the link, you would have found that the person kept the original house, and built the solar array near the house. He also went way overboard. Kenneth Adelman generates more than 45kWh per day, Gore only needs to do half of that per month. There are simple rooftop installations that can cut ones usage down significantly!!

Also you are insulting me!! I love trees, am a little long in the hair and own a rusty schwinn!!!

[drunkle]

Submitted by ucodegen on February 28, 2007 – 8:43pm.
Said no such thing.. find where I said that.. it is you sir, who are quoting out of context. If you had bothered to check the link, you would have found that the person kept the original house, and built the solar array near the house. He also went way overboard. Kenneth Adelman generates more than 45kWh per day, Gore only needs to do half of that per month. There are simple rooftop installations that can cut ones usage down significantly!!

and yet you use that guy as the standard of measure. even building out half the capacity is a tremendous effort, certainly one not out of question for a man of wealth, but a tremedous effort all the same. (what is gore worth? 500 mil? 500 mil is an awful lot.) still, you don’t even know if it’s even feasible given the location; tenn’s sunlight days compared to california? weather conditions such as tornados, hail, wind?

and how do you know that he’s not buying his electricity from mr solarwarrior? offset accounts are bullshit to you, but if the end result is the same, what’s the big deal? i suppose you expect proponents of conservation have to produce all of their own food and energy before they get to have a voice. again, how magnanimous of you.

and for a guy who said this:

“I am bothered that the ‘debate’ here is on the two websites as opposed to the underlying references. If the underlying references are used, then the quality of the discussion improves because we are dealing direct with research papers (though it is harder and slower to do).”

i find it ever increasingly hard to take what you say as being sincere.

[drunkle]

Submitted by ucodegen on February 28, 2007 – 8:48pm.
@dunkle

your comments were your own, i merely emphasized the fact that you were posting pure supposition and then used your suppositions to support your conclusion. this is what they call a “circular argument”.
I think you need to even check on how to do a circular argument, and why you avoid them..

http://www.essex.ac.uk/myskills/skills/thinking/identifyEvaluateargument…

it’s *drunkle*, as in Dr Unkle.

“i believe al gore does not do as he says he does, he’s a hypocrit. i believe he’s a hypocrit because he does not do as he says he does.”

circular argument, self fulfilling argument, whatever. you’re guilty of it.

[drunkle]

Submitted by ucodegen on February 28, 2007 – 8:57pm.
Al Gore is God to liberals, ucodegen. Did you see how the audience spoke in tongues on Oscar night? They react the same way to criticism the Muslims react to Muhammad being dispicted in cartoons. They are very self-righteous and intolerant of other views. Hence the spittle.

I know, that is why I wear a hazmat uniform when talking to some of these people.. the raw vitrol spewed when you disagree.. And some of it borders on being contrary to the spirit of freedom of speech!!

Interesting thing, one of my more liberal friends commented on how the Oscars looked like such a Gore a**-kiss fest. She was quite taken aback. (She is a organic grown food, power conservation etc nut — not all conservationists/liberals are rabidly blind).

and here we see your false sincerity in full force.

[FutureSDguy]

The typical liberal does NOT believe in freedom of expression (among with all kinds of other rights). They try to emotionally blackmail their opponents by raising such freedoms in public discourse (e.g. “playing a race card”, etc). But when you look under their skin (which is rather thin) you can see that it’s only so they can force their worldview or governement upon others.

Their name-calling and patronizing is a consequence of generations of being out of mainstream thought. Like little children, they have to throw tantrums to get attention.

[greekfire]

The point of the thread was to show general hypocrisy that occurs in politics, in this case on the left. It would be similar to hearing Mark Foley (16 year old page scandal) proselytizing about moral Christian values.

I understand that everyone makes mistakes, but you must also lead by example if you are to get your message across. It’s like an ex-convict that speaks to school children about the consequences that come with breaking the law. It would be a different story if that same ex-convict is still dealing crack rock on the side, however.

Al Gore’s message about being environmentally aware and conserving energy is a good one, it just doesn’t carry nearly as much weight coming from him.

[Author]

Posts