“Everyone knows the former Veep is on Apple’s board, but he’s also on the board’s compensation committee. That raises the odds that he could land on the hot-seat if it turns out that Apple’s stock options ‘irregularities’ are of the sort that lead to civil or even criminal charges. In fact, former members of the comp committee at Mercury Interactive were notified by the SEC in June that they’re likely to face civil charges. With that instance in mind, one SEC expert who requested anonymity says: ‘If there’s a problem at Apple, Gore’s globe is going to be warming.’ Call it An Inconvenient Truth,” Peter Burrows writes for BusinessWeek.
Burrows explains, “I don’t think it will come to that, and here’s why: because this scenario would be based on an unlikely eventuality (that Apple will indeed be found to have fraudulently and massively abused options accounting rules) on top of an another unlikely eventuality (that the government will find the compensation commitee members individually culpable.)”
“Most likely, neither of these stars will line up that way. My hunch is that Apple will finish its internal investigation, make a smallish restatement to earnings that investors will hardly notice, and that will be that. As for unlikely eventuality No. 2, it seems reasonable that the Feds would only charge compensation committee members who played an active role in designing and supporting illegal schemes. And Gore didn’t join Apple’s board until 2003–while the company so far has said it has only found irregularities from the 1997-2001 timeframe,” Burrows writes.
Burrows writes, “So why bother writing the post? Because the fact is that Al Gore is Al Gore, and the possible ramifications–no matter how remote–are just so great. Just think of it: George Bush’s SEC or even DOJ going after a potential Democratic presidential candidate, and the man who many believe beat Bush in 00. Can you imagine the headlines? The partisan rancor, with outraged Liberals accusing the Bushies of Nixonian abuses of power, and Conservatives pointing to more evidence of Democratic ethical emptiness?”
More in the full article here.
Related articles:
Shareholders allege Apple execs reaped ‘millions’ in unlawful profits – August 23, 2006
How options-backdating irregularities can affect your Apple Computer stock – August 23, 2006
Apple’s options imbroglio: Mac-maker granted options at or near key events in company’s history – August 18, 2006
Apple added to Nasdaq’s list of ‘delinquent companies’ – August 18, 2006
Apple unlikely to be delisted by NASDAQ – August 16, 2006
Apple CEO Steve Jobs drawn into stock options scandal – August 15, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – August 11, 2006
As expected, Apple delays quarterly results due to stock-options grants review – August 11, 2006
Some stock options grant decisions were made by Apple board, and potentially, CEO Steve Jobs – August 10, 2006
Disney: no material impact from Pixar options – August 09, 2006
Pixar options draw scrutiny – August 08, 2006
Apple stock options scandal? What scandal? – August 07, 2006
Class action lawsuit over stock options filed against Apple Computer, Inc. – August 04, 2006
Wall Street forgiving of Apple’s stock option irregularities; CEO Jobs unlikely to be terminated – August 04, 2006
Apple’s stock option irregularities escalate into a scandal as world awaits Steve Jobs’ WWDC keynote – August 04, 2006
Apple warns of profit restatement dating back to 2002 – August 04, 2006
Apple loses 3.5% to $67.15 in premarket trading – August 04, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – August 03, 2006
Shareholder’s options suit against Apple alleges ‘striking pattern that could not have been chance’ – July 11, 2006
Apple announces update regarding stock option grants – July 05, 2006
UBS: stock options probe unlikely to hurt Apple – June 30, 2006
Apple joins growing list of companies entangled in stock option ‘irregularities’ – June 29, 2006
Apple to investigate stock option grant ‘irregularities’ made between 1997 and 2001 – June 29, 2006
Okay, people, let’s not get into another political bash here, no matter what side of the aisle you’re on. This is a Mac site.
Yes, keep it about Macs.
Al Gore. I think he’d look good in prison garb….
What’s the chance that Hillary opens her Mail.app and fires off a senatorial email to the SEC to investigate Al Gore.
Rush Limbaugh would have a field day, as would John Kerry, Karl Rove, and Uncle Sam.
Try this for Bush Wackos
Al needs an Inconvenient Lock Box.
“Okay, people, let’s not get into another political bash here, no matter what side of the aisle you’re on. This is a Mac site.”
Oh, I get it, Al Gore may be a hypocritical, nonobjective, lying, and self-serving ignoramus and media whore, but we are constrained to write about these things because this is a Mac site. If Al Gore is above criticism than so should Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, Michael Dell, Sim Wong Hoo, Paul Thurrott, Rob Enderle, Rush Limbaugh, George Bush, Dick Cheney, et al.
Perhaps you are unaware that many, if not most, persons here at MDN have gleefully tolerated and/or encouraged despising and denouncing other people for such villainous behavior as poor coding and substandard diets. Don’t be a hypocrite now and assume the self-righteous position of false modesty, restrained circumspection, and vigilant nonjudgmental deportment when your own come under suspicion of illegal or unethical behavior.
If Al Gore is found guilty of some civil or criminal infraction, it will likely be characterized by many sanctimonious halfwits as:
1. Something done with the best intentions, therefore excusable.
2. A conspiracy by Karl Rove and others, therefore not Al Gore’s fault.
3. An honest mistake, therefore justifiable.
4. An example of bad laws designed to attack virtuous people.
In other words, Al Gore and others like him are not obligated to obey the same laws and regulations as the rest of us, and are free from any personal or professional criticism, judgment, review, or disapproval. Bullshit. Al Gore is a citizen like you and me and everyone else.
“So why bother writing the post?”
You clicked on the story, didn’t you?
Al Gore did beat me in ’00, but i sued his ass and stole the White House away from that city slicker. Always keep a corrupt Supreme Court in your back pocket, my daddy always sez.
Ooops, I guess I wuzn’t supposed to said that, cuz this is a Mac site. Well, bite me me!
Say, why duz my Mac say Dell on it?
Typical, the more heat placed on Al Gore, the more criticism is expressed by his supporters against their common adversaries. I have to conclude that if Al Gore can’t justify his actions he releases his lapdogs to bark loudly at someone else. The Democratic Party strategy must be, “If you can’t defend your integrity and virtue, distract public attention by pointing out the flaws of your political enemies and re-visiting tired and disproven conspiratorial theories.
Just a few questions:
1. Who else sits on that compensation committee?
2. How did individual members vote on individual issues?
3. Who drafts the resolutions?
4. Who advises committee members on the legal aspects? A non-lawyer and even a lawyer not versed in these matters would be hard pressed to see the legal ramifications, especially if “everybody does it”, as it seems.
This is not to defend anyone. I have no opinion on Gore. But I would like to know more on the workings of such committees before judging anybody on it.
Hey, George, why doesn’t Al Gore speak as candidly as you? Is Al having a difficult time getting the right words together? Will his high-priced lawyers speak for him instead? C’mon, George, give Al a call and tell him to post his news and views on MDN. Al Gore said that he invented the internet, surely Al Gore can locate MDN on the web.
Yes, I was at the meeting when stock option irregularities were discussed. I may have approved the stock options deal but I just vote like I’m told. No, I really didn’t understand all that financial mumbo-jumbo. Besides, I was sleeping most of the time. Yeah, yeah, and when I wasn’t sleeping I was distracted by worry about global warming and thinking about the children. Uh, huh. What was the question again?
hagar57:
Excellent points! However, if Al Gore doesn’t understand the specifics of stock options and illegal business transactions, this begs a few questions:
1. How would such a dolt and ethically-challenged person make a better president than George Bush?
2. How could a senator, devoid of such intelligence and understanding, actually vote with a clear conscience on laws dealing with stock options?
3. Are stupidity and ignorance now excuses for approving illegal activity or receiving financial benefit from illegal activity?
4. If Al was absent from the meetings when these issues were discussed, what reason was he receiving a paycheck? I don’t known may occupations that require no work for financial compensation, NCAA Division-I football and basketball starters being the only exception.
From the piece:
“And Gore didn’t join Apple’s board until 2003–while the company so far has said it has only found irregularities from the 1997-2001 timeframe.”
So, what do we really know about this? But, since some folks call him a dolt and a dum-dum-doody head, the case is closed. He certainly must be guilty of something. Good job, “Maczealot”. Your incisive and detailed analysis after an exaustive investigation of the facts really convinced me.
AL GORE = “LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER” What a Lying idiot!!
Certainly the Neo-Con Right wingers will use this info as proof that global warming doesn’t exist.
Gore lies!! He lies!!
Smells like Maczeolot stepped in a turd this morning.
Global Warming is in a 1500 year cycle. The radical political scientists just choose not to look at that data that does not bend to their political cause or dogma. About a year ago, it was found out that ALL the scientists were using” faulty Sun data” and that killed some of the so called facts a lot of the “sky is falling ” radical political scientists use for Global Warming politics. Of course, very , very ,very few have heard about this wrong sun data that skewed overall data that the far left uses to scream that the sky is falling!!!!
Some of you are too young to remember in school years ago , we where ALL worried about the coming ice age and global cooling. When I was in school in the 60’s that was all I heard.
More stupid hype from a frenzied media that apparently has nothing better to do…
And once again, MDN shows its “yellow journalism” side by writing a hit piece that is specifically designed to exploit the political divisions in the readership.
This story says next to nothing new about next to nothing.
Apple’s compensation board might be held responsible, but probably won’t and – even if they were – the alleged “offenses” predate Gore’s involvement.
Can we expect a stream of this kind of bullshit story on the run-up to the mid-terms, because I’m not sure I can stand the smell of hypocrisy from people who support a party that accepted contributions from Ken Lay who was knowingly ripping off literally thousands of investors at the same time.
Wow, not this is a story about absolutely nothing. And another news flash, no, Gore didn’t beat Bush in 2000. Geez, some people obviously have no lives, thanks a lot for that useless information too. Peter Burrows must have had a REALLY slow day at the office yesterday…
“And once again, MDN shows its “yellow journalism” side by writing a hit piece that is specifically designed to exploit the political divisions in the readership.”
Nah, they post it because it’s so damn easy to draw libbie wackos offsides that MDN can’t resist. And from the responses I see so far from you and others, it’s obvious that MDN is right. You leftists really need to learn to relax a little and enjoy life a bit. It would suck to go through life bitching about and hating absolutely everyone and everything like you do.
Mondale, It is always alright if it is a left wing “yellow journalism” ( God knows we have had 30 years of that ), but never alright if it is right wing “yellow journalism”
You guys finally have defiant voice on your views and you can’t take the criticism.
How sweet it is, that a so called liberal bastion Apple , Mac’s and a Mac site that there are so many conservative people voicing up against liberal elitism and snobbery.
Paul D:
Firstly, I suppose that you consider the case is closed when the investigation isn’t complete. As you have pointed out “so far …. irregularities (have during) from the 1997-2001 timeframe” only. Until there is evidence that there were no illegal or unethical activities by Gore during employment with Apple there will always be the suspicion of corruption and culpability. Now, you convince me that “exaustive (sic) investigation of the facts” has been completed.
Those who move in the circles of public power and influence are always subject to greater scrutiny, this is an occupational hazard and a legitimate consequence of being a politician. The possibility of public exposure for illegal or unethical behavior may keep some villains from seeking public office; however, it is likely that only the most brazen reprobates will attempt to seek public office. Nonetheless, it is important to keep all three branches of government as free of the domination and control of vermin as possible. Besides, we have enough political cynicism and apathy in this country, we don’t need to encourage any more by granting the political elite lifetime immunity from the same laws and regulations they demand common citizens obey nor giving the appearance of exception or exemption from failure to meet legal resposibilities. Consider such discussions a healthy public exercise in keeping the republic as clean and pure as possible.
Secondly, Gore ought to clearly, unequivocally, and publicly state that he is innocent of approving or receiving benefit from all tainted stock options, unless of course he can’t. If you know of any links were Gore claims not to have benefited from these stock options, share them. This would certainly return the shine on his tarnished image as a member of the corporate class.
Thirdly, Apple goofed miserably and monumentally. Al Gore may be justifiably upset that he is now implicated or suspected of bad behavior if he is completely innocent, but don’t blame me for Apple’s blunders or Gore’s bad luck.
Fourthly, I stand by my assessment that Gore is an unintelligent and self-serving hypocrite, irrespective of his participation or nonparticipation in the stock option improprieties at Apple. His guilt or innocence in these stock options won’t change my mind in the least regarding his behavior as a senator, presidential candidate, or public figure.
“Does Apple board member Al Gore have an options problem?”
I hope so.
Steve
The Earth does indeed have a climate cycle, however human activity does appear to be amplifying the effects of that cycle.
As for the potential for a new Ice Age, that is still a possibility: as the Greenland ice sheet melts at an ever increasing rate (as confirmed by NASA scientists earlier this year), the input of freshwater melt is influencing the Gulf Stream by slowing the so-called “conveyor” effect. The effects of this have already been detected in the North Sea.
Alterations in the Gulf Stream and other factors also have the ability to affect the Jetstream, potentially drawing it further south which appears to have happened several times in the last 10 years or so: altering the Jetstream has the ability to make Southern Europe and North Africa drier which will increase the desertification of the Sahara.
These are not theories: they are facts backed up by evidence from scientists from all political persuasions. The fact that the carbon industry is intent on digging up dissenters who will turn up to the opening of an envelope if the price is right doesn’t deflect from those facts and only somebody with the most tenuous grip on reality could deny that the planet’s climate is changing in a way which is not guaranteed to be helpful.
You don’t know the history of the internet. I do. I invented it.
Actually, yellow journalism sucks no matter who is doing it and putting up sensationalist articles that are just designed to increase ad revenue makes MDN no better than Paul Thurrott or Rob Enderle.
Of course, if you think that kind of lib-baiting bullshit furthers the cause of democracy and raises the tone of political debate I’m really happy for all of you. Personally. I’d rather we spoke about substantive issues than personal prejudices, but you’re probably right and we should all relax a little more whilst the world around us goes to hell in a hand basket – after all, our leaders seem to have a good handle on everything.
Steve Jobs for President.
No no no…Steve Jobs for Supreme Pontif.
Actually, nix that…Steve Jobs for God.
New Video iPod coming in 16:9 screen
Update to iTunes coming.
You heard it from me first.
“Smells like Maczeolot stepped in a turd this morning.”
Wow, I wish I said that. the other George, you a genius of the English language, a poet of political wit, and a bard of bold repartee. Would you like to work for me? I need a new Democratic speech writer for 2007. Is it turd or terd, I get so confused, it’s always so hot in here.
More Bullsh*t from the soon to be out of power right. That is unless they steal the election with all of the Windows equipped E-Voting Machines.
http://www.alternet.org/story/40678/
The heat Al Gore is most likely feeling is the hot breath of exposure and defamation breathing down his neck if he is found guilty of financial gain from the stock options deal.
I heard Hezbollah claims they won the 2000 election…
is it too late to impeach gore?
George W. Bush Would NEVER have a problem like this regarding ANY of the companies he worked with.
They ALL went bankrupt!
He’s applying the same business model to the United States. Spend like CRAZY!
A billion $ a day in Iraq. It is suggested that we could be there for 10 to 14 years. You do the math.
Oh yeah, and there was that Al Gore thing – what was it?
“Can you imagine the headlines? The partisan rancor, with outraged Liberals accusing the Bushies of Nixonian abuses of power, and Conservatives pointing to more evidence of Democratic ethical emptiness?”
I always thought it was the other way around: …outraged Liberals accusing Conservaties of unethical/criminal abuses of power, and Conservatives pointing to an apparent lack of morality on the Liberal side of the fence.
By the way, what’s up with the Creative ZEN Player on the right side of this posting box?
——————————————->>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey Maczealot,
I’m with you and some of the others here. If this had been someone from the other side, the BLM would be having a field day.
On that note, I’m willing to wait and see what the investigation uncovers before I call Al a criminal. I have, however, seen more than enough to convince me he’s a hypocrite. Does he still own huge amounts of Occidental Petroleum stock? Does he still use jets to get around and have big limos take him from one wigged-out rant to another? I think so, but maybe someone could shed light.
I personally like my car and until someone finds a fuel that’s as easy to produce, store, use, and find that’s as cheap and powerful as fossil fuels, I’ll keep filling up at Exxon and enjoying life.
One thing you missed though. In your list of people criticized here, I can’t believe you missed Dvorak.
He’s sucked harder for longer than almost anyone.
~M
PS- Steve: I’m old enough to remember the horror stories about the coming ice age (barely). And you are absolutely right. These radical scientists have very little to do with science and lots to do with politics. Remember how we were going to run out of water by the mid 80’s or how the average summer temp in the US was going to be 125 by the late 90’s because of the “ozone hole”? Or how about what’s his name Ehrlich who said the earth would be so overcrowded millions upon millions would die of starvation by the 70’s and 80’s. What a crock. We know these scientists find what they want to say then try to “prove” it without science. Look up The Population Bomb on Wikipedia for insight into what 30+ years of facts do to a radical scientist’s “theories”.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0630,sutton,73936,9.html
Steve Jobs = big time Democrat
Anybody with a functioning brain, an education and open eyes could be a NeoCon.
I used to be a Republican.
I didn’t leave the GOP– the GOP left me.
Dubya is to traditional Rupublicanism what a bagpipe is to deer hunting– a worthless impediment, a distractor from the issue at hand and a burden.
Damn new Bluetooth Keyboard
Concerned wrote:
>As for the potential for a new Ice Age, that is still
>possibility: as the Greenland ice sheet melts at an ever
>increasing rate (as confirmed by NASA scientists earlier this
>year), the input of freshwater melt is influencing the Gulf
>Stream by slowing the so-called “conveyor” effect. The effects of
>this have already been detected in the North Sea.
That actually isn’t correct. Outflows from Greenland have increased slightly, mainly due to the influence the the Greenland Ice Cap growing in the interior. The overall mass of the greenland icesheet has actually INCREASED over the last 20 years. That’s a fact, there is a lot of garbage out there in my discipline, you need to read papers, not headlines.
Get Jack Bauer on the line, he’s the only one that can save the vice president and Steve
Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK! Liberals SUCK!
When you read this thread one thing becomes clear. The majority of “Republicans” don’t use logic. They fight like little kids do. They are the monkeys of society.
And oh yeah that Daily Show clip was HILARIOUS!!!!
Reporter: “What was the connection between Iraq and 9-11”
Bush: “Nothing”
Priceless. Sad.
All the Bush supporters follow him BLINDLY.
This one was particularly hilarious: “Global Warming is in a 1500 year cycle.”
Wow, such assurance. Spoken like it is an undeniable fact. I guess the overwhelming majority of highly reputable scientists from all over the world should just quit their day jobs. I had no idea we had a genius of such capacity in the room. It’s ok, Steve KNOWS ALL. Now go sleep tight kids, don’t worry about a thing.
“I didn’t leave the GOP– the GOP left me.”
That’s why I put the quotes around “Republicans” these days. This posse in charge are not true republicans by any stretch of the imagination. It’s sad what they’ve done with the party. Bush isn’t even in charge of this country – he’s just a figure head for an idealistic group of people with a dangerous agenda.
“Climate Scientist” wrote:
– – – – –
“The overall mass of the greenland icesheet has actually INCREASED over the last 20 years. That’s a fact, there is a lot of garbage out there in my discipline, you need to read papers, not headlines.”
– – – – –
Which peer-reviewed papers might you recommend?
It never fails to amaze me how fervent Mac supporters and Microsoft-haters can be raving Dittoheads. (Hell, Ditto himself is a Mac nut.) Being a Mac zealot is all about supporting the high-quality underdog (Apple) over the corrupt, incompetant establishment (Microsoft). Being a right-winger is all about SUPPORTING a corrupt, incompetant establishment!
I’ve heard that Anna was going to be one of the President’s new speechwriters, but her material was considered too intellectual.
Mozfan,
>On that note, I’m willing to wait and see what the investigation uncovers before >I call Al a criminal. I have, however, seen more than enough to convince me >he’s a hypocrite. Does he still own huge amounts of Occidental Petroleum >stock? Does he still use jets to get around and have big limos take him from >one wigged-out rant to another? I think so, but maybe someone could shed >light.
re: Does he still own huge amounts of Occidental Petroleum stock?
No, that was sold from his father’s estate years ago.
re: Does he still use jets to get around and have big limos take him from one wigged-out rant to another?
– Yes on jets, suppose he could take a train or a horse from NY to LA. He does fly commercial, tho, rather than on a private jet.
– Big limos? He did switch to driving a hybrid years ago, not sure what is used to pick him up from the airport.
What “wigged-out rant” might you mean?
If I knew the former Veep was on Apple’s board I would have bought a Dell.
-If I knew the former Veep was on Apple’s board I would have bought a Dell.-
Brilliant, shoot yourself in the foot ’cause you don’t like one guy on the board.
What’s so bad about Al Gore, anyway? Really?
Cubed:
Thanks for the info…
I have to say that I would not begrudge the former VP a jet over a horse.
The emissions are easier to deal with.
As far as the rant, I couldn’t say for sure. I saw him with a beard screaming about something or other on more than one occasion. I have since seen him clean-shaven and not yelling, so it must have been the beard.
I friend of mine at work used to be employed by Oxy and said Gore was still a major stockholder, this was long after his father’s death.
Without more facts I’m willing to believe he may have divested. But I’ll look around and check.
A hybrid is not a limo, granted, but it still burns gas.
And thanks for approaching a rebuttal without resorting to name-calling. It’s always nice to have a grown-up discussion.
~M
PS- Since you know about Gore, did he really claim in a book that what America needs is “$5 a gallon gas”? We’re getting close to finding out if that’s really a good thing, huh?
I did find this. It’s from 2000, but it’s the first thing Google came up with.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468
From the linked article:
“Nowhere is Al Gore’s environmental hypocrisy more glaring than when it comes to his relationship with Occidental. While on the one hand talking tough about his “big oil” opponents and waxing poetic about indigenous peoples in his 1992 book “Earth in the Balance,” the Elk Hills sale and other deals show that money has always been more important to Al Gore than ideals.”
~M
Apple fails the “Green Test”. Al Gore’s response, “What? Apple’s not green? No way. I get plenty of green from Apple. In fact, the paychecks are great! This is just another ploy of Karl Rove, right? You know that I’m the most environmentally senstive person ever. Really. Stop laughing, dammit!”
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/apple_flunks_in_greenpeace_environment_testing/
Concerned,
I listen to a show that had a scientist that stated that there is clear evidence out there about the 1500 year cycle that they have from glacier receding data and 3-4 other factors that I can’t remember that he says proves the 1500 year cycle. It is known by all the climate scientists. Some choose to agree, some don’t. The ones who don’t are on the side of Gore’s dogma climate movie. Follow the money and their climate religion. A key well known climate scientist pooh poohed Gore’s facts in the movie.
Addition
I am not saying, nor is the climate scientist saying there is NO global warming. He just said that it far less caused by MAN then the extremist GW scientist say it is. The sun data shows increased sun output that the extremist scientist seem to discount because then it is not all man’s fault, like they seem to want to prove even with evidence to the contrary.
Re- Heroin,
In the Republican Party GW Bush is categorized as a Liberal Republican. You are not Republican, you are a Democrat. Sorry it did not work.
Here you go guys!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/5283278.stm
Here is another guys!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4923504.stm
First global warming was reported to cause Greenland’s glaciers to melt into little, tiny puddles. Now, science says that global warming is causing glaciers to grow in Asia. Al Gore, the Great Wizard, what does your magical crystal ball of prognostication tell you?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/5283278.stm?ls
Chairman: Al Gore, what did you know and when did you know it?
Defense lawyer: Chairman, that is an outrageous accusation. My client doesn’t know a damn thing.
@ Glaciers love global warming! and Steve…
Congratulations for coming up with the thinnest argument ever.
Not even the worst so-called GW alarmist is saying that the Greenland ice-sheet is going to disappear overnight, like some apocalyptic vision in The Day After Tomorrow. What they are saying is that it could happen within a 1000 year range and that it could reach a tipping point within 100 years at which that erosion will be unstoppable.
Also, the fact that some glaciers will flourish under GW conditions is hardly a surprise given that the jetstream is being affected.
Nobody with any realistic knowledge said that global warming will make everywhere on Earth on warmer because what the models say is that the climate will change on a variable basis depending on where you are and some communities will win and some will lose. So what this story says is that if you’re a farmer on the Hindu Kush, you might have a slightly easier time of it – however, what it doesn’t say is that if you’re some poor schmuck living on the coastal plains of Bangladesh, you’d better go and get yourself a new pair of galoshes.
In fact, the models may even be so subtle that some communities will “win” more by receiving more rainfall in Summer months (thus improving their agriculture), but will also “lose” more by being subject to flooding, coastal erosion and other factors.
Our choice now is to probably to develop a different model for energy generation in the next fifty years including hydrogen, nuclear (notice that being responsible from a GW point of view doesn’t have to go hand and hand with kneejerk environmentalism) and renewables (solar/tidal/wind/hydro/wind/etc.) rather than just using every last hydrocarbon resource before our grandchildren wake up and find the lights won’t turn on without them having to sell a kidney because oil is going for $200/barrel. The ultra long-term benefit of so doing is that we then have another fifty years to make sure that China, India and the rest of the G20 have access to the same technology and resources before a “tipping point” is reached.
Of course, if you don’t care about your descendants or anyone else’s, feel free to carry on ignoring the reality and voting for people who don’t want to have take difficult decisions because it might be unpopular.
Hey, you jerks. I didn’t invent the internet so you could make fun of me. Cut it out.
Steve, it’s one thing to say that other theories exist, and another to simply pick one as fact and label all others as junk theories made by “radical political scientists”. It is your absolute assuredness that betrays you as someone who is so emotionally attached to an idea that you no longer hold any validity on the subject. There are many theories, and most scientists are trying to simply find the cause for the sake of humanity. Of course there are SOME scientists that are politically motivated, but one would think with all the oil money floating in this arena that there are at least as many on both sides of the camp promoting because of an agenda. Think about it.
Concerned:
“Realistic knowledge”? You mean wild speculations of future events based on flimsy and contradictory models of imprecise and incomplete data using poorly constructed algorithms, untested assumptions, and preconceived biases.
Your local weatherman cannot accurately predict with reasonable certainty what will occur over the next 10-days. A cursory review of three estimates of weather patterns for my locality showed that none were in total agreement. However, you self-described masterminds seem confident about predicting planetary changes in wind and ocean current patterns, temperature fluctuations, and rates of precipitation from the highest mountain to the lowest valley 10, 50, or 100 years from today. You lunatics and pseudo-scientists want to alter human life as we know it based upon nothing “real” at all except your labile emotions and doomsday psychoses.
You may believe some or all the models of global weather patterns are true, but until these models are tested and proven both accurate and precise, they are nothing more than flawed and fictitious shots in the dark.
Maczealot >
Well, then you carry on down your path – which is probably driving the most profligate, inefficient vehicle you can whilst not bothering to upgrade your domestic appliances for energy efficiency. And I’ll carry on down mine.
We’ll ignore the fact that a sensible man would want to minimise his (and his family’s) future exposure to risk by playing a cautious long-term game; if you want to use all of the oil and not invest in future energy sources and infrastructure, go ahead – I don’t have children and have no intention of having any, so in forty years it won’t matter to me.
But if I’m right, don’t expect the liberal tree-huggers who follow me to bail your ass or the ass of anyone you care about out of the river because you were warned. Still, you can tell your grandchildren that you stuck to your principles which will be a comfort to them when they’re paying $20.00/gallon in fifty years. Or will you have conveniently forgotten your personal abdication of any responsibility by that time.
Concerned:
You have admitted it now. You and your comrades objective is simply to change social perceptions about energy and energy use, and you are willing to use whatever ludicrous method you can devise to accomplish this goal. If you have to make up some cockamamie pseudo-scientific horror story about floods and freezes, drought and deserts, glaciers and garbanzo beans to frighten or persuade other people to change their lifestyles you prove that you really don’t understand the problem at all. Since you don’t understand the problem, you can’t solve the problem either.
Most humans don’t recognize that there is a finite amount of crude oil in the earth or choose to ignore this fact. Still modern society is powered and lubricated by crude, so what do you propose to replace crude? A more expensive source of energy? Hydrogen? Unlikely to happen. Any way, where will your miracle fuel hydrogen come from? Electrolysis? And where will this electricity come from? Hydroelectric dams flooding thousands of rivers and valleys? Nuclear power plants in every county and township? Coal from strip mines? Wind farms obscuring the horizon? Solar cells in the Arctic? Have you done the math, lad? Apparently not. You don’t understand human nature, economics, or science so it is best that you leave the world’s problems to those that have the brains and the abilities. Economics drives social change, not fear mongering, not wishful thinking, not mumbo-jumbo, not “ecological awareness”.
To prove my point that you don’t have what it takes to face the future, you insinuated that I am a gas-guzzling plunderer of Mother Nature. I drive a vehicle that gets 35 mpg highway, use energy efficient appliances, and actually wear sweater in winter rather than burn fuel. I also hike, hunt, and fish so I appreciate wilderness. I’m also a fan of Mother Earth News, especially the issues from the 70s and through the mid-80’s. So you see, you have a real knack for making “wild speculations … based on flimsy and contradictory models of imprecise and incomplete data using poorly constructed algorithms, untested assumptions, and preconceived biases.”
Maczealot…
It’s a fact that Carbon Dioxide is a greenhouse gas. Or are you denying that.
It’s a fact that there is more Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere now than at any time since the development of industrialised human existence (it’s now kicking in at just over 360 parts/million by volume, as opposed to the figure in the late-40s/early-50s which was around 320 – by contrast, : the curve is now exponential and correlates almost completely with the post-war boom in auto ownership.
Want to know what all of that Carbon Dioxide is going to do in the atmosphere? Go and spend $20 and buy this and this.
I like the fact that the massive injection of CO2 we are currently pumping in as a society may take several thousand years to clear out of the atmosphere (unless you’re going to reforest the Amazon many times over) and that one of the other effects appears to be an increasing acidification of the oceans. So not only do we get more water, we also make potentially make it less useful as a food factory. But of course it’s all scare-mongering.
As for your arguments about hydrogen, electrolysis et al; you are at this point in time correct.
We need to develop efficient, clean ways of generating (not to mention storing and transporting) hydrogen as well as generating electricity – that takes time, money, and political commitment. You also have to be willing to initially approach the development and construction of Generation III+ reactors with a more open mind than ‘old’ nuclear, and you also have to accept that we will have stepping stones from III+ to IV and maybe from IV to fusion.
And if you don’t accept that any of this is feasible, what is the long-term future for the hydro-carbon economy? Exploiting oil sands in Alberta? Cozying up to weasel-like crypto-Soviets in Russia? Hoping that Chavez will hurry up and die before selling the country to China?
Seriously, this isn’t just about combatting global warming. It’s also about continuing economic progress and not becoming entwined with distasteful regimes. Ever heard the line fail to prepare, prepare to fail – that’s the crossroads that the Western economies are at and there is no no-cost option.
A great statement by Mozfan that needs to be repeated
PS- Steve: I’m old enough to remember the horror stories about the coming ice age (barely). And you are absolutely right. These radical scientists have very little to do with science and lots to do with politics. Remember how we were going to run out of water by the mid 80’s or how the average summer temp in the US was going to be 125 by the late 90’s because of the “ozone hole”? Or how about what’s his name Ehrlich who said the earth would be so overcrowded millions upon millions would die of starvation by the 70’s and 80’s. What a crock. We know these scientists find what they want to say then try to “prove” it without science. Look up The Population Bomb on Wikipedia for insight into what 30+ years of facts do to a radical scientist’s “theories”.
The radical left wing scientist have spewed SO MUCH JUNK SCIENCE out there, I can’t believe any of their DOGMA theories that they call science. Who’s science is it. Left wing or right wing. I am in the middle. There has been TO MUCH left wing science that has not come true or has been blown WWWAAYYYYY out of proportion. To be laughable. You left wingers have cried “WOLF” too many times to get a non response. As for me being on the side of oil companies and being a right winger hell no!! I voted for 2 Democrats here in the Socialist State of Minnesota, so I am far from a right winger!!!
What is “left-wing” science when its at home? Come to that, what is “right-wing” science?
Ehrlich’s future-vision wasn’t right-wing or left-wing science; it was just bad science. And it was bad science because it failed to acknowledge the effect of Borlaug’s Green Revolution work amongst its many flaws.
There is a difference between one man positing a vision of the future based on some personal agenda (i.e. flogging a sensationalist book) and real science. If there wasn’t, von Däniken would be a scientist, God knows, if you wanted to stretch a point, even L. Ron Hubbard could be a scientist (as opposed to being a bunko artist).
True science is based on observation and research, and the problem that the climate change naysayers have is that real science has decades of evidence.
Of course, arguing these points in the US can be a problem; there’s no point in having these debates when the country still seems to be arguing about the science of evolution (presumably that’s left-wing science, given that right-wingers seem to want to own the creationist/ID side of the argument) or stem-cell research (more left-wing nonsense I suppose).
G-spank wrote.
When you read this thread one thing becomes clear. The majority of “Republicans” don’t use logic. They fight like little kids do. They are the monkeys of society.
Sorry, liberals use emotion for thinking that is why they have a bleeding heart and seem to always be on the side of petafiles, mass murders, mass murdering communist dictators, rapists, man to boy rapists and the scum of society. The right wingers have Ken Lie and the oil companies. You pick your brethren constituency. Having the scum of the earth as your constituency is not logical.
Then Clinton’s” kid clan ” leaving the White House on their exit with screwed up paper files,, wiped out hard drives, popped the “w” keys off key board, and wrote on walls, amounting $12,000 in damage. The GAO has all of it documented and photographed and the Clinton’s stole White House furniture too boot.
Yep, Republicans are kids. Shit!
The funny thing is I use to be a hard line Democrat when I was younger. Now look at my posts. I am a Joe Liberman Democrat and you see what the waco side of my old party did to him. You think Bush is an idiot ( I do too) but the Democratic party of Nancy Polocy and Howard Dean are just as stupid if not more then “W” is.
Concerned:
Grasping at straws, again? Your overly simplistic understanding of things is rather annoying, considering that you have chosen the path of arguing from the points of desperation and ignorance. In addition, because you can’t seem to stick to the topics that you have presented and defend them, it shows that you have little faith and understanding in what you believe. So, let me crush your pitiable rationalizations and move on to intelligent discussions with thoughtful individuals.
Correlation does not imply causality. This is a fundamental scientific point of analysis that even the most pubescent scientist learns and understands, but you fail to comprehend. There are many other natural phenomenon that influence global temperatures including methane, sulfur gases, dust, solar radiation cycles, oceanographic (El Nino) cycles, etc. that you have conveniently ignored or deliberately excluded from your argument. Since you have singled out carbon dioxide as the sole culprit in global warming, explain how a 60-fold increase in carbon dioxide over the century has resulted in a mere 0.5 to 1 degree centigrade increase in average air temperature? Even the most moronic statistician can see that the relationship between carbon dioxide and air temperature is poorly correlated.
In addition, the methods of collecting the temperature data that you cherish have come under serious question. Your pathetic group of bungling pseudo-scientists have “cherry picked” data from urbanized areas which skew the data. Most fear mongering data come from observations taken in heavily populated and urbanized areas of the world where concrete, asphalt, and high-rise buildings generate their own peculiar micro-climates unrelated to surrounding rural and wilderness environments. Also, let’s not forget that other sources of atmospheric and oceanographic data have been excluded by you wackos because these data conflict with your precious preconceived biases. For example, stratospheric data from 1950 to 1964 show a clear trend in decreasing air temperatures even when most vehicles on the planet were belching far more green house gases than today.
As I said previously, unless and until your models of global warming are both accurate and precise and useful for urban and rural areas of both hemispheres of the globe they are nothing more than fiction masqueraded as reality. Face it, your beloved faith has fatal flaws.
Concerned, because you have conceded that the farce of global warming is your ploy only to extend the time to deplete current petroleum reserves, will you now admit that people like you who lie can’t be trusted?
Concerned, because you have shown that your interest in exploiting energy resources is primarily political and has little to do with actually developing new energy resources, will you now admit that you haven’t a clue how to solve the problem technologically?
“Then Clinton’s” kid clan ” leaving the White House on their exit with screwed up paper files,, wiped out hard drives, popped the “w” keys off key board, and wrote on walls, amounting $12,000 in damage. The GAO has all of it documented and photographed and the Clinton’s stole White House furniture too boot.”
sorry Steve, that was a Fox News beatup of a bunch of rumours put out by staffers. It was never substantiated. When they were asked to prove the claims, or show receipts of damage estimates, they dropped the investigation. Essentially, it was all just PR.
I’m surprised that you remember the PR and not the subsequent repudiations. Well, I guess in your case, the PR did its job nicely, it convinced you.
Sorry, McGherkinstein Jones,
It was talked about between key democrats ” Carvil and his Repub wife as fact. Dick Morris also commented about that it was fact. Bush forced them to drop it. He wanted nothing to do with the kids stuff right when he came into office. Many other Dems talked about it as fact and defended their friends.
hrm…very well
Can’t say, I’d know what these key Democrats knew.
I just favoured the beat up interpretation when reported because its was hard to undertand what the motive was for vandalism. What did they hope to gain? Whereas for the bushies, there’s plenty to gain by beating it up. Puts the Dems in a bad light, improves their own cudos.
there was a roman saying that when two stories have similar evidence the next line of attack is to consider “who benefits”, and for me it was the Bushies every time.
But if, as you seem to be implying, that the evidence is harder in favour of the vandalism, then I guess there’s no need to appeal to “who benfits”. and we must accept a rather strange and senseless act.
Kinda glad that sort of thing doesn’t happen in Australia.
Maczealot…
If I send you some money, will you go and get a clue.
1) Temperature readings are correlated between both ground-based readings and satellite-based (microwave sounder) readings. Guess what, they agree with each other. Multi-proxy studies that analyse multiple factors including tree-ring growth and isotopic analysis of glacier-based snowfall, and mineral deposition in corals and stalactite/stalagmites have been cross-referenced. Guess what? They all agree as well!
2) These measurements are based on rolling five-year averages, whilst elements like ENSO extremes (El Niño/La Niña) have for the most part never lasted long enough to impose any long-term distortion to what is an an almost unbroken line of temperature rise.
Since 1980, the rolling five-year temperature anomaly has increased from around +0.05 degrees centigrade to around +0.50 degrees centigrade whilst there have been both short-term peaks (coinciding with El Niño years) and troughs (coinciding with La Niña years) outside that average trend.
The 1998 El Niño extreme coincided with a peak +0.80 degree anomaly whilst, in 1985, an external event (possibly a volcano eruption in Colombia) followed by a La Niña extreme resulted in a -0.2 degree trough.
Between 1950 and 2000, 28 years were classic La Niña years or neutral years where the ocean temperature (eastern tropical Pacific) was below normal and 22 years were classic El Niño years or years where the ocean temperature was above normal. ENSO extremes are not self-generating as they are themselves the result of climactic events relating to a weakened (Niño) or strengthened (Niña) trade winds, however they are part of a climate ‘feedback’ loop in as much as ENSO events have the ability to amplify the original atmospheric pressure gradient issues that caused them.
3) Go and get the data and plot your own graphs: watch in wonder as the global temperature rise begins just after the turn of the 20th Century and continues practically unabated for the next 100 years.
Gasp at how long WWII and the ensuing recovery appears to have halted climate change for around 15 years to 1955 (makes sense considering most of Europe was shut for rebuilding and Japan was still working out its industrial future) and then – following a five year spike in the early Sixties was flattened out by around 12 years where La Niña events dominated. Then watch as – following the Seventies fuel crisis and the growth in consumer spending – global temperatures go on a 30 year rampage.
Why? Partially because many of us now have multi-car families, but also because we just can’t stop buying (and therefore having to power) electrical widgets. Don’t believe me. Between 1980 and 2000, the G7 group of industrialised economies registered a 40.7% increase in electricity consumption when measured by kilowatt-hours/capita (the only statistically fair way to do it).
Thankfully, most of those countries managed to do this whilst still decreasing their Carbon Dioxide emissions/capita. Ignoring the fact that some parties don’t seem to have a record of what they pumped out in 1980 (step forward Fritz) or that some parties were starting from a ridiculously high base (how, in the name of reason, do Americans pump out 19.7 metric tonnes of CO2 per head in a single year? I’ll tell you how most of it happens: over 7 tonnes from coal-generated electricity and nearly 8.8 tonnes from petroleum consumption [these are Federal Government stats]), what’s more worrying is that some other countries have dramatically increased their per capita CO2 emissions in that period.
Who and how much? Australia recorded a 31.8% rise between 1980 and 1999, Ireland nearly 46% and New Zealand around 44%. My personal favourite is Malta – a 225% rise in emissions per head.
You could argue that these figures are seven years old and that the curve may have flattened out or that these countries were moving towards convergence with other countries. Certainly that’s true with Ireland, New Zealand and Malta. But Australia appears to be vying with the United States for sootiest industrialised nation (as opposed to most profligate nation overall which goes to some of the Gulf states, some of whom are getting close to three figure numbers) with 18.6 metric tonnes per person.
Want more info? Go read a book.
And all your figures are a grain of sand on a large beach and not Stonehenge . 1500 year cycle Remember.
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articles/2004/sept_16_04.htm
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/sudden-cooling-of-world-oceans-revealed-by-new-research
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496781/posts
It seems that climate change, during the Holocene at least, was driven by solar variability. The Mann et al Hockey Stick did not fully take into account the MWP (1C warmer than present) or the LIA, which now appear to have been global events. This recent spell of increased solar activity linked to mild terrestrial warming may be coming to a fairly abrupt end. One of the longer solar cycles, one that has been fairly predictable over the past few millennia or so,the 166 year cycle and its 83 year harmonic, is approaching a phase where we can expect to need our thermal vest … should be tangible in a couple of decades or three, but as always with an irregular variable star we need to keep looking to see if the cycle’s integrity is holding good. The stage of that cycle we are approaching fast is almost identical to phase our Sun was in for the Little Ice Age of 1645 – 1715, when the River Thames froze over repeatedly in winter, we’re talking metres of ice not inches. I’m betting on a new LIA around 2030.
Comment by Paul Biggs — September 26, 2005 @ 9:11 am
Wow, regurgitating Gleissberg/Landscheidt almost verbatim as if it’s original thinking. How thrilling.
If your second-hand theory – which was partially promoted by someone who believed that astrology was a “science” which warranted redemption (thus immediately calling his credibility into question) – is correct, then we should be well into the lower part of the next Gleissberg cycle by now; after all, we’re only 24 years (or about halfway into the slide) from a projected minima in a 166-year cycle. And yet, here I am, having cold showers in August (sometimes twice in a day) for the second year running which is only really funny when you realise that I’m not living in a climate that previously required that kind of behaviour.
If you’re right, I’m OK – I love real winters; but if you’re wrong, are we really going to complacently waste twenty years without at least taking some precautions?