In the Wall Street Journal, an op-ed takes Gore to task on his need to continue to see only one side of the global warming debate because he has so much invested in the one side, and all his rewards can only come from one side.

Mr. Gore is quite right that his arguments should be judged on their merits, not on his investments. He’s wrong to think his investments are irrelevant, and, even more, that sincerity is dispositive of anything. Sincerity is no substitute for disinterestedness.

Here are a couple questions: When so much of his position and prestige are invested in a predicted climate crisis, is Mr. Gore likely to be open to contrary evidence? Is he likely to be particularly fastidious about whether proposed steps will actually have an effect on global warming if they also happen to benefit his investments?

Ms. Blackburn’s challenge was in a sense late. Mr. Gore long ago jumped over to the side where salesmanship, by whatever means, was the trumping priority. As far back as 1989, he insisted there was “no dispute worthy of recognition” about the danger of manmade climate change. By now, he titularly heads a vast establishment with a stake in one side of the argument.

Notice, for instance, after a decade in which the earth appears to have stopped warming and even cooled, that global warming advocates have rushed to embrace a computer simulation that predicts this cooling (in retrospect, of course) and allows for indefinite future cooling, even while assuring that the world is destined to face disastrous warming anyway. Isn’t this what forecasters of doom have done since time immemorial when their deadlines for doom haven’t been met?

Mr. Gore’s own predictions of a climate catastrophe have not lessened, but every time he opens his mouth, the costs of meeting the emergency become easier and easier to swallow. They aren’t even costs anymore; as he says in his new book, they are “profits.”

All policy salesmanship naturally defaults toward the proposition of huge benefits and negligible costs (i.e., free lunchism). Isn’t that where Al Gore is today?

Mr. Gore notes that he has poured his own money into two climate action nonprofits, but, whatever his self-felt motives, aren’t these nonprofits functionally propaganda arms (i.e., advertising) that benefit his for-profit investments?

via Holman Jenkins: The Economic Uses of Al Gore – WSJ.com.

Like all used car salesmen, Al Gore has a lot full of junk that needs sold. He’s got all his investments wrapped up in the clunkers. If he can’t sell them, he’s rewards will vanish. So what do all used car salesmen do? They smooth talk you and feed you a line of BS to get you to buy their junky cars. Used car salesmen have to convince every person to buy a car though. Unfortunately for us, Al Gore only needs to convince the morons in Washington. Then they force us to buy.

What’s the fastest way to riches? No, it’s not real estate, Carton Sheets. All, you have to do is get the government to force society to buy your BS. This is what Al Gore has done, and he is now heading towards becoming the first billionaire environmentalist. How did he do it? False advertising.

Manmade climate change is said to present humankind with some of its greatest challenges in the planet’s history, not the least of which is an alarming increase in frequency and intensity of natural disasters. Massive flooding, super-powered hurricanes, endless tornado seasons and more have all been said to be the direst of consequences of global warming.

In his movie “An Inconvenient Truth”, Al Gore famously proclaimed that, “Temperature changes are taking place all over the world and that is causing stronger storms.” Standing with Hurricane Katrina as a backdrop, the former vice president issued a cautionary tale of disaster in the making, all due to our irresponsible handling of the atmosphere. As recently as February Mr. Gore was giving a presentation showing flooding, drought and wildfires saying, “This is creating weather-related disasters that are completely unprecedented.”

President Barack Obama, in a town hall meeting in April echoed the Nobel laureate’s comments saying, “You’re now looking at huge, cataclysmic hurricanes, complete changes in weather patterns.” He followed that in September when in a speech before the United Nations he claimed, “More powerful storms and floods threaten every continent.”

But what if you predicted global natural disaster catastrophes and they didn’t happen? Does that invalidate your entire message? This is the conundrum faced by climate change alarmists as many of their predictions begin to fall flat.

via Predictions of climate change induced natural disasters falling flat.

While most private sector companies would be prosecuted for false advertising, Al Gore just changes his marketing a little and moves forward. I’m sure he’s greasing enough palms in Washington to get away with it. The problem is the people are starting to see through Al Gore’s false stories of man made catastrophe. To believe that man has the power to change the climate is nonsense. We are such tiny factors when you think about the oceans, the sun, cosmic radiation, etc.

Recently, a book, Superfreakonimics, argued that if global warming is real, we don’t have to cut back on our CO2 emmissions. Instead, we could cheaply pump sulfur dioxide into the atomosphere to act as a cooling agent. While thinking about humans minipulating the atomosphere sounds crazy to me, it highlights the lie that Al Gore believes we have to do something. If global warming (now called climate change sinces it’s cooling) is really human created, then the solution posed in the Superfreakonimics book would make sense. Humans could do something to fix it. Al Gore doesn’t buy this though. The authors really don’t either. They are just highlighting that we could fix it cheaper than what Al Gore is proposing if this is the real argument being put out by Gore. Al Gore doesn’t really want a solution as proposed in the book. That doesn’t put money into his pocket. He wants a supposed solution in the form of green technology that doesn’t have to prove itself. That puts money in his pocket, and no one can claim it didn’t work.

Gore himself uses more and more energy everyday with his own private jet, a mansion, and oil to slick his hair back. If he truly believed his own BS, he’d be working out of his house over the internet selling his garbage, but instead he’s travelling the world over wining and dining with the political elite, more than likely on the public dime. So if Al Gore isn’t living up to his own standard, then apparently the standard isn’t worth living up to, and Al Gore has been marketing lies. Anyone have a link to the FTC? I want to submit a false advertising complaint.

A must read. Now go read it!

How They Are Turning Off the Lights in America by Edwin X. Berry.