LOOK OVER THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING TWO HOUSES AND SEE IF YOU CAN TELL WHICH BELONGS TO AN ENVIRONMENTALIST.

HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground Water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.) heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

ANSWERS:

HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville,Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W Bush.

So whose house is gentler on the environment? Yet another story you WON'T hear on CNN, CBS,ABC, NBC, MSNBC or read in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Indeed for Mr. Gore is "an inconvenient truth".

I have this image of "Big Al" holding an award close to his chest, back slightly turned, while someone tries to yank it out of his hands. In my mental picture, there's a toddler-like temper tantrum occurring as well.

It isn't often I get to use my favorite smiley! :smile2:

You little devil you....:tongue2:, that was too funny...

re: "While the data doesn't itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it."

Does this mean Big Al will be giving his various prizes back???

I'm just curious... why 'Big Al'? Why not just 'Al'? Or 'Al Gore'?

That type of reference always makes me wince. The same as when people say, "Bubba Clinton", "Teflon Bill", "Shillary", "Bushit", or other names when they don't agree with them or their policies. I guess it's probaby just me, but I don't understand why people find it amusing.

I know... I need to get my sense of humor meter adjusted. Okay... Okay... :smile2:

I love this.. I love this! The article posted by Gadget from DailyTech is sweeping the conservative web. I do, in fact, find the information really interesting and am looking forward to finding out what it all really means in light of the various theories regarding global warming. The part, though, that I'm really grooving on is that Rush Limbaugh is all over it! He is singing about it from the rooftops! He's got it all figured out, sewn up and put to bed (wow.. that's a lot of cliches for one sentence!). My favorite part (from The Manmade Global Warming Hoax Thrives on Faith, Not Facts)...

"As we reported yesterday, more snow and ice cover the northern hemisphere than at any time since 1966. The 12-month-long drop -- now, get this, because this is crucial -- the drop in global temperatures this past year has wiped out one century of warming. We went up one degree Celsius, we think, in 100 years, in one century. In one year, it's been wiped out."

Okay, let me see if I've got this right (because it's "crucial")... The last century of global warming (man-made or natural) has been "wiped out" in 12 months!

I'm sooooo relieved. Whew! Everyone can relax because even if this cooling trend doesn't continue the warming that we have already experienced... has been "wiped out".

Wait. That sounds like something I read about recently. Is "wiped out" the same as "erased"? Hmmm.. where did I read about that? Oh... I know! I know! In that article in the Daily Tech that used information compiled by Anthony Watts. What's that? Anthony Watts never said that the warming of the last century had been erased? Are you sure? Let me check his website. Oh wait a minute... I remember now... that Fat *ss from the Nutty Coast was muttering something about that in an earlier post. Yeah, yeah... he included that statement from Anthony Watts that said that while this cooling trend was anecdotal and does fit in with what others have said about global warming not being man-made that he did not say that one year of cooling had erased or "wiped out" a century of warming. Oh, and that the people at the Daily Tech would take care of that error.

Hmmm... well FoxNews reported it in their online story and even mentioned that Mr. Watts had said it (FOXNews.com - Evidence of Global Cooling - Brit Hume | Special Report). And Rush Limbaugh felt that this information was "crucial".

Whatever.

Anyway... sorry for the silliness. As I've said, this cooling trend may well turn out to be exactly what we all needed to put the fears of man-made global warming to rest. It's a bit too early to know yet, but we will definitely find out within a few short years. It is a bit frustrating, however, when it is being reported erroneously (despite the named source denying it) that all our previous worries about the last century of warming are over. Maybe there are others who believe that it is so... but Fox News and Rush Limbaugh aren't referencing 'them' for their stories; they're referencing Anthony Watts.

Oh, and just so you all know... I'm also still p*ssed that Al Gore used that picture of the polar bear on the ice flow that was taken during the summer.

Have any of you been to Alaska recently? Anyone want to guess what many of the folks up there generally think about global warming?

Maybe all those melting glaciers are actually causing the snow in Iran, or wherever. I'm no expert but it makes sense doesn't it?

For the record, I live in one of those locations mentioned as having an unseasonably cold winter and I must say, au contrare mi amigos. :thumbup:

L8BloomR: You're cool and I respect your approach. Makes me feel that you have a fair and kindly spirit when you post things.

My Dad lives by that to this day. He runs solar panels on his home---he drives economical, older cars....can he afford a new car? Yes, but ask him if he needs one, and the answer will be No, his is working just fine. When he built his larger shed, he reused all the lumber from the old shed first---he is just of a generation that lives in that manner. He had a very successful career---but he has always been conservative with his money, and with the resources available to him. Our thermostat was always set, and left alone, clothes handed down...as little as possible was wasted.

This is not done in our current generations.

That was the main purpose of my post---is that in my opinion---this is NOT something we know enough about. The rate we are making advances, the number of cars on the road, the amount of waste dumped into our oceans, the number of satellites orbiting our earth, are changing SOOOOO fast, it makes learning what we are doing to our planet all but impossible. By the time you gather enough information to get a good idea of how things are---things have changed so drastically the information is obsolete. So they "esitmate" and "predict". Not just the Republicans, and not just the Democrats, everyone...

Yes our resources will likely last our lifetimes...so we can refuse to give up our goodies and let the next generation deal with it. Or we can suck it up, and do what we can to try to help salvage some of the mess we have obviously helped to create.

Kat

We don't even have to go into how, and why we are at war--------but in reality-----our president was sitting in a warm home, not being shot at.....HE did not get Sadam.......any more than he has been able to get Bin Ladin. Our military got Sadam....and lots of them have died in the process.

Bush was at home stuttering and stumbling, same as usual.

Kat

Amen to 1 and 2. Love ya Kat!!

L8BloomR: You're cool and I respect your approach. Makes me feel that you have a fair and kindly spirit when you post things.

Thanks, BJean, I really appreciate that. And I really do think we could have a fun time "discussing" our views in person---too bad we live so far apart!

Well, it's no longer just us right-wing crazies complaining about the mercury in fluorescent bulbs. It's gone mainstream: Shining a light on fluorescent bulbs - Environment - MSNBC.com

Glad to see you agree their "Crazies"

Glad to see you agree their "Crazies"

Do you mean "Glad to see you agree with their crazies" or "Glad to see you agree they're crazies"? I don't know if you're calling the people at MSNBC "crazies" or if you're agreeing with my facetious statement labeling myself a "crazy".

Well, it's no longer just us right-wing crazies complaining about the mercury in fluorescent bulbs. It's gone mainstream: Shining a light on fluorescent bulbs - Environment - MSNBC.com

To my dear "right-wing crazies"...

Thanks a whole heck of a lot for waiting until I had converted all my freakin' lightbulbs (well, all that I could) to these stupid looking things and am now living in a chemical dungeon. Okay, maybe it's not exactly a chemical dungeon, but couldn't you have warned me before I went and spent all that money??? :biggrin2:

Crazies is as Crazies does

To my dear "right-wing crazies"...

Thanks a whole heck of a lot for waiting until I had converted all my freakin' lightbulbs (well, all that I could) to these stupid looking things and am now living in a chemical dungeon. Okay, maybe it's not exactly a chemical dungeon, but couldn't you have warned me before I went and spent all that money??? :biggrin2:

To my dear WestCoastFatGuy:

My apologies for not bringing this information "to light" prior to your purchase of the mercury-laden bulbs. In the future I will attempt to be more proactive on matters of this nature. In the interim, may I suggest that you only listen to right-wing radio and right-wing pundits, and only visit right-wing blogs and right-wing websites. In doing so, you can be confident you will always be right. :shades_smile:

I thought only left-wing crazies complained about mercury. :cheers2:

There are going to be problems with doing right by the environment or, for that matter, even getting a real understanding of what is going on with the environment. This is inevitable for this is a complex issue.

It reminds me a great deal of all the many contradictory advisories that we have received over the years (and will continue to receive) concerning the foods we eat and our own health. We were told that butter was bad and margarine was good and then the news about trans fats came out. We were told that honey was better than sugar. Then we learned that honey was sugar. Brown sugar used to be considered better than white sugar. Salt was pure poison. Low cal sweeteners were a god-send. Yadda, yadda....

Not all the answers which are found will turn out to be the correct ones; this is only because these issues are so complex. That's life, eh.