Nurturing Our Earth. How Al Gore Has Launched Global Governance.

 
Let's keep it simple.

Al Gore's primary message is simple.

Saving the only known platform for sustainable life in the currently known universe is NOW OUR IRREVOCABLE AND IMMEDIATE RESPONSIBILITY.

Gone are the days of fanciful socio-economic views of utopia - be from the perspective of the communist, the fascist, the modern industrial militarist, the petro-testostero-capitalist, .... whatever.

Dude ... we're about to make any form of human life on this planet impossible.

Dude ... that means no matter how big your yacht is, or how vast your Swiss stash of gold is, you're not going survive either the next ice age, or whatever other catastrophic climactic calamity your stupid avarice catalyzes.

Al Gore is a Global Citizen.

Al Gore needs not to waste his time slumming with the likes of Hilary and McCain.

Al Gore and those capable of understanding the crisis ALL HUMANITY now must solve undoubtedly realize that the days of governance based on any geography other than TOTAL PLANET EARTH geography is fallow, insipid, and doomed to not only failure but the likely eradication of humanity.

It is time for a new governance structure to emerge. It is time for humanity to connect - globally. It is time for the intersection of the human race to generate a global will to preserve life - the fullest diversity of life - and to preserve the only known platform for LIFE in the UNIVERSE - a place called EARTH.

Peace.

•  Huh?

  we're about to make any form of human life on this planet impossible

  Really? Do you think Al would agree with that statement? You need to be a little more reasonable with your predictions.

  by NoBigGovernment on Sun Feb 25, 2007 at 09:59:32 PM PDT

  •  Doubt he'd have any difficulty with ...

    ... that assessment.

    How comfortable are you with the probability of humanity surviving an "ice age" of indeterminate duration.

    Think about it ... longer than it takes you to type a few snarky words ...

    Cheers!

    by understandinglife on Sun Feb 25, 2007 at 10:05:07 PM PDT

    •  Look

      This is a serious issue. Gore just won an Oscar trying to get this country and the world to take this issue seriously.

      But if you run around and say that if we don't do something, all of humanity is going to die, then people are going to stop listening and stop taking you seriously.

      Stick to the science. It's tough to argue that.

      by NoBigGovernment on Sun Feb 25, 2007 at 10:11:58 PM PDT

      •  Oh, you'd be surprised

        I'm currently having a debate with someone who is doing exactly that.

        If we don't do anything, I have a hard time believing the consequences can be downplayed.

        As you said, this is a serious issue.

        by kml on Sun Feb 25, 2007 at 11:08:44 PM PDT

      •  He may well be right...

        * But if you run around and say that if we don't do something, all of humanity is going to die, then people are going to stop listening and stop taking you seriously. *
        Species tend to die out if the climate changes significantly. That's a well-established fact. People love to thing we're something special and will somehow get along, but that's nothing more than wishful thinking.

        If it really gets as bad as it looks now all bets are off.

        by Fischer on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 12:52:23 AM PDT

        •  You mean like in the last ice age

          when all humanity died out?

          We are something special. We do have the ability to adapt and survive. We will not all die.

          Don't get me wrong, it would be horrible, but the end of our species is not in the cards. Many species yes, not ours.

          I'd like to say that your believing we will all die is just

          nothing more than wishful thinking

          , but I don't really believe that what's you meant.

          by NoBigGovernment on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 11:23:04 AM PDT

          •  Funny you should say that...

            ...in fact there seems to be evidence that mankind very nearly died out about 70,000 years ago, presumably as a result of a rather large volcanic eruption (Mt. Toba). Molecular biologists estimated that the population was down to about 20,000 people. That's not much.

            It rather looks like our ancestors were just lucky (it's impossible to know for sure now, though).

            by Fischer on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 04:24:39 PM PDT

            •  Not funny at all

              I'm sure you'd agree, we're smarting and better prepared than we were 70,000 years ago.

              This is my point. You can't go around saying that we are all going to die. It simply isn't true. Now if it were a new ice age you might have an argument, but now there isn't one.

              People simply stop listening to this important discussion when they hear that we're all going to die if we don't act now.

              The issue deserves better than that. People that say things like that do a disservice to the issue.

              by NoBigGovernment on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 08:55:34 PM PDT

              •  From a political discourse point of view...

                you're right (that's why the IPCC report is so upbeat, too). No one likes doom & gloom.

                However, doom & gloom it is. And I'd dispute that we're better prepared to survive than seventy thousand years ago, too. In many ways things today are a lot worse than they were then.

                I am preparing a series of diaries about climate change modelling, model evaluation & interpretation and, eventually, impact of likely changes. There I'll elaborate furter.

                by Fischer on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 07:31:25 AM PDT

      •  I take that seriously because its true

        The course of taking no action at all could easily result in the destruction of 80% of the worlds cities just due to rising sealevels and storm surges let alone the effect of dying oceans, hurricanes, cyclones, the destruction of barrier islands, oportunistic diseases, crop failures caused by unseasonable weather, either too wet or too dry, plagues, famines, nuclear powers engaged in resource wars...think about it a little

        by rktect on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 04:17:05 AM PDT

      •  If you are old enough personal observation

        is sufficient evidence. This country as well as other parts of the world have been concerned about pollution for nearly 100 years. Clean air and water, open spaces, preservation of forests  and agricultural land etc., are  NOT new problems they have dogged us for most of the last century into this one. Even with laws that have been passed to try to control the effects of pollution it hasn't been enough, the situation has gotten progressively worse. It is not just that the Government hasn't done enough, people in general know so little about the planet they rely on for life, until now there has been really no public outcry or concern. It is so much more than getting off gasoline or into car pooling, our whole mindset about this planet has to change and with it how we live our lives.  

        by ghengismom on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 07:19:25 AM PDT

      •  I am a scientist ...

        ... and your silly, self-servicing rant is just that ... a silly, self-servicing rant.

        Got it?

        by understandinglife on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 08:57:29 PM PDT

        •  Then you should know better

          Got it?

          by NoBigGovernment on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 09:02:57 PM PDT

          •  What I've "got" is that ...

            ... you are clueless ... about science, humanity, or the stewardship of the planet.

            That's what I get.

            by understandinglife on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:07:33 PM PDT

  •  If we do nothing then he absolutely would

    The question is what can we do?

    Our government and large corporations would seem to have a lot more ability to make change than we little guys do, think about how much fuel a 24 hour CAP on every carrier group uses, or commercial airlines.

    When you compare that to several hundred million automobiles that might get exchanged first for more fuel efficient cars and then for bicycles and telecommuting, and maybe have that many homes that might recycle or put in better insulation or photovoltaics and wind, ...well, if people conserved a little that might easily buy us another decade.

    Then think about the costs of converting over to alternative energies. It might cost $1,800 trillion dollars worldwide over the next century and most of the bill will and should go to the polluters of the northern hemisphere who use most of the cheap fossil fuels to enjoy rich comfortable lives while others starve.

    We could agree to carbon caps and pay our share...

    by rktect on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 04:13:32 AM PDT

•  By the way:

  * Saving the only known platform for sustainable life in the currently known universe is NOW OUR IRREVOCABLE AND IMMEDIATE RESPONSIBILITY. *
  No, it isn't. We can't destroy (or save) life on earth, no matter how hard we try. It's beyond our powers. If a meterorite the Size of a large island can't wipe out life, what can?

  by Fischer on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 12:55:04 AM PDT

  •  Driving cars with low gas milage

    by rktect on Mon Feb 26, 2007 at 04:18:00 AM PDT