irena sendler

[DanielNicolai]

Worst thing about this is that so many people still think that Al Gore is full of it. Irena Sendler is a known hero and worker who actually put herself in serious danger and eventually paid for it with her capture and torture. All Al ever did was get Green Peace to be more obnoxious than normal.

[VisionOfLehi]

I've never heard of Irena.

And that saddens me. For what she's done I should've heard of her a long time ago.

[john doe]

Originally Posted by HEthePrimate

While I certainly agree that Irena Sendler is deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize, so are many people, and everybody can't win it. Al Gore is a good man who's done good work, and there's no point in begrudging him the honor. Maybe people can petition for Irena Sendler to win the Nobel Peace Prize another year?

HEP

I gotta admit, I laughed out loud when I read that. Are you serious????

[HEthePrimate]

Originally Posted by Truegrits

Although "worldly" acknowledgment is nice, the work/sacrifice of Irena Sendler is known by ONE of much more import. HF is a much better judge of ones works and worth than any other. She will not be overlooked.

Agreed. However, it is appropriate to acknowledge our fellow beings' acts of heroism and show our gratitude. I hope Irena Sendler gets the recognition she deserves.

[HEthePrimate]

Originally Posted by john doe

I gotta admit, I laughed out loud when I read that. Are you serious????

Glad I could amuse you but yes, I'm serious. Some of us think global warming is a serious issue. I also think it's sad that people would use the story of a saintly woman like Irena Sendler for such a trivial purpose as attacking Al Gore. If you disagree with Al Gore that's fine, but I think it would be better to argue the merits of his case rather than resort to all the ad hominem stuff.

HEP

[john doe]

Originally Posted by HEthePrimate

Glad I could amuse you but yes, I'm serious. Some of us think global warming is a serious issue. I also think it's sad that people would use the story of a saintly woman like Irena Sendler for such a trivial purpose as attacking Al Gore. If you disagree with Al Gore that's fine, but I think it would be better to argue the merits of his case rather than resort to all the ad hominem stuff.

HEP

Here's the problem as I see it. Global warming, if it indeed is currently happening, (and it apparently has not been happening for the last 8+ years now, temps have stabilized lately) has not been proven to be man-caused. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Natural events dump much more 'harmful' gases into the atmosphere than cars do annually. Global warming has been going on for eons, long before man appeared here. And guess what? Global cooling has been going on for just as long as global warming!

If Al Gore actually believed all the drivel he keeps spewing, why doesn't he make any conscious effort to curb his own use of the earth's resources? last I heard he still flies around in a private jet, and his 'small home' has no landmark energy-saving devices installed in it. He doesn't even believe the garbage he tries to convince you of.

It's all a shell game about money. It's about separating you and the rest of us from our money. The sad part is, they're going to get it, either through taxing us into oblivion or guilting us into giving money to the corporations they have set up to take it. Carbon credits, anyone?

And the really sad part of it is, if you happen to disagree with the foregone conclusions, or want to see more actual evidence of human-caused global warming, then you must be really stupid for not seeing it or just a troublemaker. The thinking has been done for you, all you have to do now is pay up.

[Loudmouth_Mormon]

Originally Posted by HEthePrimate

I also think it's sad that people would use the story of a saintly woman like Irena Sendler for such a trivial purpose as attacking Al Gore.

Actually, I thought it was Al Gore that used the Nobel Peace Prize process to forward his socialist environmentalist agenda.

Evidence: You can't have a discussion of the Nobel Peace Prize without the conversation turning to global warming.

LM

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Loudmouth_Mormon

Actually, I thought it was Al Gore that used the Nobel Peace Prize process to forward his socialist environmentalist agenda.

Evidence: You can't have a discussion of the Nobel Peace Prize without the conversation turning to global warming.

LM

Al Gore is a hypocrite. His company, Generation Investment Management came up with the 21 century ponzy scheme of "carbon emission offset" credits that has taken in million of dollars in "offsets" allegedly designed to reduce the CO2 foot print of certain companies.

"Give me money and I will plant trees" with no verifiable mechanisms and a shady accounting, to say the least. All he does is blowing his own horn and lining his own pocket while singing the hymn of global warming. UK-based with accounts in Luxembourg. Right.

I'll drop it right here for now before my blood preasure goes up.

[WANDERER]

I'm not a fan of Al Gore...however I'd like to think that kids will still be able to catch tadpoles in creeks for many years to come. I have no doubt someone will think we need to be taxed to pay for hybrid cars and green electricity....they will try anyway....however I don't think there will be a tremendous amount of support for increased taxes ; ). As for green electricity and carbon offsetting I think it will have to be competitive enough in the market place...in a stressed economy some things will always come second before the family food budget. Doing things better means doing things better. Environmentally good and cheap! Otherwise it's being sustained by an environmental cost (money comes from using resources doh!).

I can see the point in having a nice environment. You don't have to be a global warming advocate or an Al Gore fan in order to support that. Reduced carbon is worth doing I would think. The debate is about *how* not whether we should do it...is that correct?I don't care who gets the nobel peace prize...the value is in what they did not the gong.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by WANDERER

I can see the point in having a nice environment. You don't have to be a global warming advocate or an Al Gore fan in order to support that. Reduced carbon is worth doing I would think. The debate is about *how* not whether we should do it...is that correct?I don't care who gets the nobel peace prize...the value is in what they did not the gong.

I agree with you on this last point.

It makes absolutely no sense, however, to push US-based business to the brink of bankruptcy with ever more stringent environmental laws when developing countries do absolutely nothing to curb pollution. That is why the US refused to sign the Kioto Protocol.

It does make sense to protect the environment but it has to be a worldwide effort. That level of support and required cooperation has never existed in the history of humanity, even when the world had been on the eve of extinction. I seriously doubt we'll come together over an issue as intangible and highly debated as global warming.

I hope to be proven wrong, though.