Why won't Al Gore debate Lord Monckton on global warming? In fact, why does he only preach to the converted?

Maybe he doesn't like pretending to be a scientist, unlike some others. But at least he has respect for real science.

Did you believe the tobacco companies debunking of smoking hazards, too?

Which side of the global warming debate do you think (logically if you can) has an agenda?

Scientists or oil companies?

Edit the only scientists that I know of who have been pressured to voice opinions one way or another are the ones threatened by the Bush administration to "tone down' or deny

their opinions about global warming or lose their government jobs.

It's pointless to argue with someone who believes in a "global warming industry" because I'm sure that you also belieive in a "liberal media" whose sole enterprise is making conservatives and their views look absurd.

As if anyone could get paid for doing no work....

Ok, you've revealed yourself as a Medhead. Now, focus...

First, the being paid for doing nothing was a humorous (granted non-sequitor) reference to how little work is involved in making certain conservative viewpoints look absurd.

Okay, from the Australian Press

US scientists 'pressured' on global warming

Deborah Zabarenko, Washington

February 1, 2007

US SCIENTISTS were pressured to tailor their writings on global warming to fit the Bush Administration's scepticism, in some cases at the behest of a former oil industry lobbyist, a congressional committee has been told.

"Our investigations found high-quality science struggling to get out," Francesca Grifo, of the watchdog group Union of Concerned Scientists, told members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

A survey by the group found that 150 climate scientists experienced political interference in at least 435 incidents over the past five years.

"Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words 'climate change', 'global warming' or other similar terms from a variety of communications," Mr Grifo said.

Rick Piltz, a former US government scientist who said he resigned in 2005 after pressure to soft-pedal findings on global warming, told the committee in prepared testimony that former White House official Phil Cooney took an active role in casting doubt on the consequences of global climate change.

Mr Cooney, who was a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute before becoming chief of staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality, resigned in 2005 to work for oil giant ExxonMobil.

end quote

Two private advocacy groups told a congressional hearing Tuesday that climate scientists at seven government agencies say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming.

The groups presented a survey that shows two in five of the 279 climate scientists who responded to a questionnaire complained that some of their scientific papers had been edited in a way that changed their meaning. Nearly half of the 279 said in response to another question that at some point they had been told to delete reference to "global warming" or "climate change" from a report.

end quote

WASHINGTON - Six former heads of the Environmental Protection Agency — five Republicans and one Democrat — accused the Bush administration Wednesday of neglecting global warming and other environmental problems.

“I don’t think there’s a commitment in this administration,” said Bill Ruckelshaus, who was EPA’s first administrator when the agency opened its doors in 1970 under President Nixon and headed it again under President Reagan in the 1980s.

Russell Train, who succeeded Ruckelshaus in the Nixon and Ford administrations, said slowing the growth of “greenhouse” gases isn’t enough.

end quote

Ok, focus. Al Gore is NOT qualified to debate science.

Scientists make the same salary whether there is global warming or not.

Manufacturers who emit mass quantities of greenhouse gasses wil be harmed, possibly fatally, by regulation.

Oil companies will not be able to charge 3.00 a gallon for their product, when it is not a neccessary commodity for people to get back and forth to work.

There are likely to be companies pursuing alternative energy sources who will have enormous growth, but they are not currently capitalized to the point they could impact public policy on this issue.

And for the record, I don't know one way or another whether there is global warming, what's causing it, etc. But when I do decide that I know something about it, it will be based on what qualified scientists convince me of. and not what one aristocratic snot from Britain OR Tennessee tells me.

Final edit (Hopefully, right)

Yes, I'll condemn it, My whole point is that this should not be a political or economic argument, it should be the focus of unencumbered scientific research. IF it is true, it trumps both politics and economics, and wishing it were not true is not a suitable response. Like I said, I don;t know.

But the weather is getting pretty damned freaky where I live....

Monckton focuses on particular aspects of the science to win debates. When he debates scientists he focuses on aspects that aren't the speciality. Being scientists they are usually unwilling to discuss these aspects (as they leave that up to the experts). If he was honest he won't debate the speciality of the scientist with them ... but avoids this at all cost. In Australia he should debate Dr Karl. Dr Karl is a public scientists willing to debate and argue matters that fall outside the realm of his speciality. He is a well read person. Also to argue someone like Monckton (who is a good public speaker) you need to get a scientists with a personality (who is also a good public speaker) - Dr Karl would give him a good run for his money!

Won't you allow for the benefit of the doubt? I feel that whether or not you believe in it we should do all we can because the alt. doing nothing might lead to catastrophe. What we need is to understand that a large majority of scientists have come to the conclusion that this is a real, that action should be taken. The political climate is such that those on your side will never believe us, and those on my side will never do anything to help you. What we need is to impartially look at the facts, which support Mr Gore in point of fact. What we need here is a Manhattan Project aimed at figuring out what to do about this problem. Doing something is better in my mind, and wiser than doing nothing at all.

What's there to debate? Global Warming is happening whether you believe Al Gore or not. What do you think that's is causing all this radical changes in weather? Al Gore's rhetoric? And The Katrina disaster? Al Gore's lack of converted followers? "Making fools of the unindoctrinated". What that supposed to mean? Do you think that this is all about Al Gore being right and win arguements? This is a GLOBAL PROBLEM! and if you Republ;icans or whatever political party you belong to are "undoctrinated" and want to live in denial that's your problem, but don't go around asking stupid questions in which you are !@#$ "UNINDOCTRINATED". Don't pretend to be sophisticated and try to appear intelligent and superior by asking retorical questions about a subject you had showed , you don't know anything about.

Who is Lord Monckton?

Never heard the name. Does he have any scientific

credibility?

There are a lot of people out there who don't believe

that the earth is getting warmer because it is in

there best interest to not believe that - such as the

oil companies.

Does the fact that Gore isn't debating every person

who disagrees with him invalidate his point?

Considering the 6 billion people on the planet, that's

a pretty tall order.

I have no idea. Perhaps he's a really horrible debater, and doesn't want to misrepresent the science.

But how is what Al Gore does or does not do relevant to anything ever?

Al Gore is just a a politician. He has no scientific expertise. He's no dummy either. He doesn't want to be exposed or look stupid by debating someone who knows what they are talking about. Thus we get the speach to third graders, "our planet has a fever!"

Al Gore is what is known as a true believer,it makes no difference if the belief is false.He is an orthodox and he is doctrinaire:he is unchangeable because of that.He simply will not accept any other point of view,so he declares that it is settled.

He would have gone, but his private jet couldn't take off in the April snow

it's past the point of debate. It is time for action.