Bla bla bla bla Al Gore bla bla bla bla bla?

It's called an "ad hominem" attack... a time-tested propaganda technique:

"...replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject."

The special interest minions put it out through media outlets, people find that it supports what they'd like to believe (maybe we don't have to worry about it and don't have to respond), so they pass it on.

Planting trees is not a solution to global warming. If the soil and climate are such that they can survive without help from people (watering and fertilizing), then they will sprout from seeds put there by natural processes (birds, wind and so on) and grow wild anyway. If they cannot grow without watering and fertilizing, then the power used by the pumps in the water system that delivers the water to your tree, and the energy used by the fertilizer suppliers, will just put more CO2 into the air. And after the tree dies of old age and decays, it will releasing the CO2 it absorbed right back into the air. Only reducing use of fossil fuels will make a difference.

Many reason we use it. First, the AGW fanatics would like to show this garbage to every man woman and child, even though they admit it is riddled with inaccuracies and outright lies. It is shown in schools as if it is a documentary, not the fiction that it really is, and children are then asked to write reports on it. Al Gore is also one of the leaders of this movement who constantly puts the USA down and advocates us paying billions to other countries simply because of some unproven theory.

As for using science to argue our point, we do this consistantly. But the only response we get back is the "consensus" arguement. How can someone argue against retarded lies? It is easier and more productive for us to bang our heads against the wall and explain the science to cockroaches. They at least seem to be able to understand the science. And the cockroaches models are more accurate than AGW fanatics to boot.

The reason people bring up Al Gore is simple.

The man who is trying so hard to get other people to change the way they live, is not changing the way he lives.

He uses an enormous amount of energy to live his lifestyle, but wants ordinary people to live in caves.

He does not believe what he says enough to change what he does.

That is the reason we bring him up.

Its like asking Chicken Little why he is not wearing a hardhat.

Anyone who has ever taken anything so simple like high school chemistry would understand the concept of global warming instead of denying it. Gore will be associated with global warming for a long time... especially now that he won that Nobel Peace Prize.

Easy. Because proponents of Global Warming Theory keep saying "watch An Inconvenient Truth".

Because they don't understand the science of global warming. Their disbelief is based on their political ideology (e.g. Liberals are evil, therefore anything Al Gore the Liberal says must be an evil plot), not on their knowledge of science.

Just like in a criminal trial, if a witness says nasty things about the defendent, the defendent will try to make the witness look like an idiot.

because al gore's easy to attack (many tangent issues to attack there - ie. the whole invented the internet thing), whereas the science of global warming is not.

hehehehehe!! That's a funny question!

Probably because they are politically opposed to solutions to global warming and therefore look to that route to deny global warming. Besides, there isn't much scientific evidence suggesting that man ISN'T responsible for a large chunk of global warming, so they can't really go that route!