[cite]Leeww:[/cite]No it is correctly an ad hominem, you call Gore a hypocrite (he may be for all I know) - that is an ad hominem argument and has no bearing on the science[/b]
the-smiling-buddha What science ? Al Gore is a politician and the scientists at the IPCC don't include this in their scenarios.
I think you are attempting deliberate obfuscation through your muddled conflation of Al Gore as a person and the findings of the IPCC.
Poor technique if you wish to discuss something honestly and openly. :(
Your own view of Al Gore is simply that, your own view, it may be correct, Al Gore is a serial rapist and has a 10 speed derailleur for all I know - but importantly his hypocrisy, electricity bill or his sex life have no bearing on the science - by definition your argument is ad hominem.
Once again for clarity, your personal dislike of Gore (and his hypocrisy) has no bearing on the science of global warming.
[cite]Leeww:[/cite]
and you have yet to enlighten me on the science of ice sheet collapse.
And with that pointless comment I shall bow out of this thread and hand over the reigns to you, best of luck.
I think you are attempting deliberate obfuscation through your muddled conflation of Al Gore as a person and the findings of the IPCC.
Poor technique if you wish to discuss something honestly and openly. :(
Your own view of Al Gore is simply that, your own view, it may be correct, Al Gore is a serial rapist and has a 10 speed derailleur for all I know - but importantly his hypocrisy, electricity bill or his sex life have no bearing on the science - by definition your argument is ad hominem.
Once again for clarity, your personal dislike of Gore (and his hypocrisy) has no bearing on the science of global warming.
And with that pointless comment I shall bow out of this thread and hand over the reigns to you, best of luck.