Al Gore said over the weekend that "the planet is in distress and all of the attention is on Paris Hilton." He does have a point, in that the media tends to focus attention on the inconsequential while matters of import are ignored, but I have to take issue that it is a matter of import that the planet is in distress. It would be important, if the planet actually were in distress, but is it?
When you consider that the facts do not support his statements (and here and here, as well), then you have to ask yourself, does Al really believe the planet is in distress? If it was something he truly believed, would he himself be leaving such a large carbon footprint? Wouldn’t someone who was convinced that the planet was in distress scale back, scale down, conserve, and eliminate needless luxuries so that his individual impact on global warming would be as minimal as possible, instead of one of most major?
The science does not agree with Al, and Al himself does not even agree with Al, so if the planet is not in distress, why is Al on this crusade? Is crying wolf merely a tool being wielded to gain 1) attention 2) money 3) power? Al has benefited from his global warming crusade in all three areas, who had lost in all three after the 2000 election.
What is really in distress are the planet’s people, not the planet. The thing that grieves my heart is the attention, money, and power being wasted on the non- issue of global warming, while real children are in real distress, and in real need of deliverance from evil. That would be a crusade worth spending attention, money, and power on, but, we are living in the age of the this world’s kingdoms, and the murder and slavery of children is not trendy enough for compassionate and peace- loving progressives to be concerned about.