What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
561 Comments
- HuangFeng, on 11/03/2009, -36/+97@Madrigalian; Bagos1; Snuph; ChoosyMother
So reading this article, all you gentlemen have extracted is that Gore is making money. Somehow investing in what you believe in is wrong. Putting all your effort and resources behind what you think is a neglected issue is wrong? Certainly making profit from these investments is wrong because profit is inherently wrong? Are you guys a bunch of commies</s>? Or are you saying that where profit is involved that there can be no honesty? Because *that* is a nasty extra sharp two edged sword you'd be playing with, right there.
"Critics, mostly on the political right [...] say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first carbon billionaire"
... so?
Hold on ... Marc Morano (and senator Inhofe) are used as sources of authority? Seriously.
FTA:
“I believe that the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it,” Mr. Gore said, adding that he had put “every penny” he has made from his investments into the Alliance for Climate Protection.
“And, Congresswoman,” he added, “if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don’t know me.”
This article is an awesome example of information presented mostly neutrally that readers can pour their personal biases over, one way or the other, and come away feeling reinforced with their position. - alexanderwhite, on 11/03/2009, -29/+85At least Gore puts his money where his mouth is.
- swmbuk, on 11/03/2009, -11/+62My god, its officially happened, Digg comments have gone the way of YouTube, farewell everyone.
- spokenrope, on 11/03/2009, -33/+83The fact that Gore makes money promoting environmental awareness doesn't make him less correct about climate change.
- Madrigalian, on 11/03/2009, -30/+77"The deal appeared to pay off in a big way last week, when the Energy Department announced $3.4 billion in smart grid grants. Of the total, more than $560 million went to utilities with which Silver Spring has contracts. Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr. Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years."
- RevLoki, on 11/03/2009, -9/+45Oh, Hai Drudge Report!
- WasabiBomb, on 11/03/2009, -21/+56One of the biggest complaints we hear about preventing global warming is "But it'll cost too much!"
The point of the movie, "An Inconvenient Truth", is that it IS possible to prevent global warming AND make money doing so. But now people who never actually saw the movie are saying that Gore's a hypocrite for making money off of trying to prevent global warming. - sousademiami, on 11/03/2009, -27/+60Oh my gosh!!! I can't believe he would dare invest in a cause he believes in!!! It's so wrong!!!
- Bagos1, on 11/03/2009, -80/+112Looks like all of Al's pr is finally going to hit paydirt. How much more proof do people need to see to know that this is all about money.....taxing a carbon based organism for carbon.....wonderfull scheme.
- flip2trip, on 11/03/2009, -28/+56No he doesn't. His house uses more electricity than most neighborhoods. He rides in private jets to his functions and uses big gas-guzzling suv's (which he has left running outside) to get to his little presentations. He's all about the money, period.
- AgeofMastery, on 11/03/2009, -23/+50And if he had invested in traditional energy companies you would all be calling him a hypocrite. But how dare he invest in something he believes in, backing up your beliefs with your money is just EVIL!
- ChuckDees, on 11/03/2009, -20/+43Its funny to see right wingers complain about investing and making profits.
- greenfyre, on 11/03/2009, -52/+75Notice how everyone tries so hard to pretend that the fact that Gore _might_ money is somehow relevant to the actual climate science
http://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~prall/climate/climate ...
which is idiotic
HEY, Deniers, does the fact that your Dr makes money "prove" that the entire field of medicine is a hoax? How about engineering? I hear some of them are paid, obviously the field is a hoax, right? - Kungfumantis239, on 11/03/2009, -27/+48God forbid Gore tries to make some of his money back. Normally, Right wingers would be all for it, but since it's a democrat, he's a liar and a cheat.
To all you Global Warming deniers, you're gonna be the idiots that are saying "we should have listened!"
Global Warming isn't a fairy tale. It's real, and it's no longer a future problem. It is happening now, examples?
How about the biggest fire in California's history just this year? How about that MASSIVE sand storm that hit Sydney a few months ago? How about the growing desertification of the Sahara(that's in Africa, you tools.)
The point is, there's plenty of evidence, you all just need to stop shoving your head in the sand going lalalalalalala.
I really hate what Digg has become. - Indyanna, on 11/03/2009, -37/+57...and he's trying to put our money where his mouth is.
- mlvassallo, on 11/03/2009, -19/+38Where were you guys when Haliburton and Cheney did this, oh, 6 or so years ago? Last time I checked Gore is a private citizen now and Cheney was the VP of the Free World... As a private citizen you can invest money in anything you like. If he were a current member of congress or still the VP or even the POTUS then we would have some serious issues.
Or we wouldn't... because Cheney got away without a scratch... - TigerStar337, on 11/03/2009, -4/+22China is investing over 100 billion in smart grid technologies. Good Luck USA!
http://theenergycollective.com/TheEnergyCollective ... - govsucks, on 11/03/2009, -5/+20Government taking billions from people and giving it to companies that Gore owns or is invested in is NOT the free market nor anything even close. I would be FINE with Gore making money if PEOPLE gave him money of their own free will but that isn't the case is it? Government is TAKING the money from people willing or unwilling and giving it to tis particular group of people. Nothing free or voluntary about that sir.
- askantik, on 11/03/2009, -15/+29What's funny is that, number 1, he's a private citizen now-- neither scientist or politician, so it's not like he has to live up to any "standard" or do what people think he should be doing. Secondly, what's the big deal that he's investing in the ***** he has been saying will be the future? And finally, the single most important point that 95% of people pissed how AGW is a "myth" don't get:
Al Gore is not the only person talking about global warming. People are like, "Al Gore is full of *****." Ok, what about the 5 million other respectable scientists (remember Gore is not a scientist) who say the same thing (or that the problem is even more grave than what Gore says)? What about the FAO and the EPA and James Hansen? What about the IPCC?
Seriously, you can spend all your life trying to bash Gore and even if you dig up some story about how he ***** monkeys, that doesn't discredit the giant amounts of science and the loads of credible people that stand behind it. - spfldnet, on 11/03/2009, -14/+27Just because he had the foresight to invest in green technology and then went out to promote it. He didn't do anything different than anyone else in business. The headline on this article alone is yellow journalism.
- govsucks, on 11/03/2009, -2/+14"So giving billions to companies (oil, defense, etc) is ok - but giving a slice of those monies to alternative energy companies is wrong?"
Giving money to oil companies = WRONG
Government giving ANY money to ANY company = WRONG
Government spending money for a common defense of our liberty and properties = Constitutionally legal function of the state.
Government INVADING other nations = WRONG.....WHO they pay for their horrible operations is ***** chump change at that point. Stop government from invading other nations and you eliminate the defense company subsidies immediately. Our nation should only defend itself. It should never start a fight and always finish them.
Government sucks. Its isn't a mantra its a ***** fact. They are the destroyer of creativity the enslaver of mankind. Unless constantly restrained with law they become horrible mob creatures that have been responsible for pretty much every war and every death involved in those wars.
The rich long ago figured out how to make you service them. They call themselves your servants and take your property in the name of the common good and you go along towed by your heart strings. - DooM, on 11/03/2009, -10/+22Scientists get grants to investigate things. It's not like climate change is the only area of scientific research - they would get paid the same money if they discovered it wasn't real that they get paid to discover that it IS. The rest of the natural universe still exists and there's plenty of science to do in other areas and plenty of money to be made.
- WasabiBomb, on 11/03/2009, -8/+20So why do you trust the people who say that global warming isn't happening, or isn't our fault? They're the ones making money off of the whole situation RIGHT NOW.
- galanz, on 11/03/2009, -1/+12"And if he had invested in traditional energy companies you would all be calling him a hypocrite. "
Where do you think he made his money in the first place?
He was an oil man first. Ever hear of Occidental Petroleum? - nofreedom4theUS, on 11/03/2009, -5/+16Yea, like calling someone racist for questioning the president's choices or calling people teabaggers or birthers. At least these people have real questions that are unanswered. Gore is just a spokeperson for his own wallet and everyone lapped it up. WE have to be more green while pharma companys are dumping in the oceans, coal companies are making this "clean coal" nonsense, etc.? Gore is the joke...he starts a company then goes around fear mongering to make people invest.
- WasabiBomb, on 11/03/2009, -14/+25How about all those people who make money RIGHT NOW off of denying that global warming isn't real? Why do you trust them and insist that global warming is some huge, global conspiracy? What's more likely- big business denying global warming so that they can continue to profit, or a global conspiracy of scientists and researchers all agreeing to fudge the numbers?
Occam's Razor: "All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the right one." The simplest solution in this case is that we've got a few, large companies protecting their profits by denying global warming. Asking climatologists worldwide to fake data simply doesn't hold water. - Juice7, on 11/03/2009, -11/+21He repeats that line every time he's confronted with this and it's obviously been resonating. It's one thing if he invests in what he's promoting, it's another if the government is going to make him a billionaire because of his investments.
- HuangFeng, on 11/03/2009, -19/+29I certainly did not see any of that information in the NYT article. I'm sure you have plenty of citations for this, care to share? Let's start with Gore "buying" Hansen, how was that done? How much did he pay? When was this done? Who originally made this accusation? What is their evidence? Do these accusers have ulterior motives, or adversely affected vested interests?
- greenfyre, on 11/03/2009, -37/+47I need you to say something rational about the actual science, which has nothing to do with Gore
Here is a list of the 2907 most frequently cited authors of climate research with links to their work (10s of thousands of papers)
http://www.eecg.utoronto.ca/~prall/climate/climate ...
Pls tell us which of those studies are wrong, how they are wrong, and how that makes all of the other 10s of thousands wrong too. - drmangrum, on 11/03/2009, -6/+15I don't have a problem with him making profits. That's the capitalist way. However, I *DO* have a problem with him making profits by trying to scare people through misrepresentation of facts and outright lying. I do have a problem with someone with extremely power friends in government making and bending laws so that he can turn a profit from the fear he generates.
That's called corruption.
This is no different than oil companies and market analysts telling people that heating oil will be scarce over the winter and they should stock up now just so they can inflate prices and profits. - shark72, on 11/03/2009, -3/+12As it happens, I was watching Fox News in a hotel a few years back when they covered the launch of Al Gore's venture fund. "Would YOU invest in a fund run by AL GORE?!!" the Aryan Blonde Fox Host Clone asked rhetorically for the pre-commercial teaser, using the same incredulous tone one might use to ask if you'd pay to see Carrot Top in a broadway revival of Equus.
Looks like the right-wing spin machine was wrong on this one. And now they're trying to make up for it. - greenfyre, on 11/03/2009, -23/+32Pointing out that you're a bunch of inconsistent hypoccrits? nothing new there.
So you can't refute any of the facts I reference? thank you for admitting that. - V1ruk, on 11/03/2009, -20/+29Well, as profit is a motive in our capitalist society, we can't really expect him to not try and make a buck off this, and at least he's profiting off of our advancement as a species, instead of our self destructive tendencies.
- AndrewDavies, on 11/03/2009, -7/+16He's just putting his money where his mouth is.
What's he supposed to do? Not invest in companies with technology he thinks is a good idea?
ps. greenfyre - Right on! - Neurath, on 11/03/2009, -0/+9I guess Gore must be an evil SOB.
Imagine investing your money in something to combat global warming. Smells like capitalism to me.
What is more amazing is that so many see no problem with the CEO of Chevron making tens of millions, but will disparage someone who is investing in technology to clean things up.
I also like the way this was posted with a headline very different from what the NY Times had. Nice way to frame the discussion. - SteveMTyler, on 11/03/2009, -0/+9maybe he should bicycle commute to washington DC from tennesee
- avengingturnip, on 11/03/2009, -6/+14Science is not about consensus and never has been. Peer review is about submitting a person's work for criticism. It is not synonym for consensus at all. Science is about learning the mysteries behind nature and natural processes. It is about observation and experimentation. Papers may be the currency of professional academics seeking tenure and funding but they are only a proxy for real science. Real science is a quest for knowledge and understanding. It is not about pushing a political or economic ideology.
- DooM, on 11/03/2009, -5/+13Here's where you're off base, Logicexe. THOSE cases are based on existing, well-established interests that pay for studies to support their business interests (e.g., Big Tobacco funding studies that show there is no evidence that putting smoke and toxins in your lungs causes any problems) what you're asking me to believe is that Al Gore sank millions of dollars of investment into something that he knows isn't true because he was POSITIVE that he could fool everyone long enough for that investment to pay off. That just doesn't make any kind of sense and it has absolutely no mirror to the examples you're talking about.
- HappyScrappy, on 11/03/2009, -1/+9Yeah, yeah, the same righties who were incensed that T. Boone Pickens wanted to make money off alternative energy too. they accused him of running a complex scheme to acquire water rights.
If try to make money by profiting off the dead soldiers we have to send to protect our oil interests, you're A-OK, but if you are on the other side, you're a profiteer off government policies. - AgeofMastery, on 11/03/2009, -10/+18What's wrong with somebody putting his money into something he believes in?
- AgeofMastery, on 11/03/2009, -2/+10Gore became an activist after he left office. Chaney was getting a five million a year "pension" from Halliburton while in office, and while they were getting no bid contracts from the government.
Even you should be able to see the difference - confoundedjoe, on 11/03/2009, -8/+15(Most)Scientists get money for doing science. When you do science you develop a hypothesis and test it. Then you publish the results. You still publish even if you prove the opposite. It's not like you get money only for proving one hypothesis to be true, unless you are working for the fossil fuel industry and they want evidence against climate change.
- obrien317, on 11/03/2009, -1/+8What do you think he did, pay off the 95% of scientists out there that say we're up ***** creek? Really sheeple? I mean people.
- opticwind, on 11/03/2009, -1/+8Well I figure, if he's actually helping the environment enough, there's worse ways to become rich.
- greenfyre, on 11/03/2009, -19/+26Gore did not "buy" anyone ... it is the Deniers who are bought and paid for industry shills
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/denier-vs-skeptic/# ...
including several who used to lobby for the tobacco industry
http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/08/19/where-th ... - VitriolAndAngst, on 11/03/2009, -0/+7Thank god this article came up.
We need to protect America from being a leader in the Green Revolution -- we don't need those stinking hippy jobs. We need more automated oil processing factories so that we have fewer jobs.
And it only helps that we haven't had any gasoline refineries built in 25 years -- keeps up that good, non-hippy profit margin. - Cerin, on 11/03/2009, -2/+9In other words:
1. Spend 10 years researching environmental science.
2. Use that knowledge to wisely invest in hot new technologies.
3. Profit!
4. Get labeled an evil scumbag by political opponents, who ironically are also huge capitalists. - WasabiBomb, on 11/03/2009, -8/+15Whether the movie is inaccurate or not doesn't affect the situation, @Landthatilove.
Just keep sending Exxon your money. I'm sure they appreciate your efforts. - VitriolAndAngst, on 11/03/2009, -1/+8" if you'd pay to see Carrot Top in a broadway revival of Equus."
Just Thanks!
Now you've given the Bush family the knowledge of how to break the 7th seal that can unleash the four horsemen of the Apocalypse. - veganroofer, on 11/03/2009, -8/+15I can rest assure that most, if not all the funding for that list of 2907 authors of climate research with links to their work came from grant money that depended on a pro man made global warming conclusion. If the conclusion is determined before the research, it is tainted science.
Also, if Gore cared about the environment so much, why did the Secret Service and the Connecticut River Joint Commission direct Pacific Gas & Electric to
unleash approximately 4 billion gallons of water into the Connecticut River so Gore's rowboat
wouldn't get stuck during a 4-mile photo opportunity? This was all done during a time of drought in New Hampshire. -
Show 51 - 100 of 573 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is