Al Gore’s Misrepresentation

Al Gore, left out convenient truths about the earths climate in his so called movie. Al Gore is acting more like a wayward angry child who is throwing a temper tantrum, not getting his way.

In the 1930s and 1950s, the central United States experience two periods of extreme drought. The 1980s and 1990s had ten of the warmest years this century and possibly since the Little Climatic Optimum. Proxy and instrumental data indicate that 1998 was the warmest year globally in 1200 years of Earth history. In the following year, a La Nina developed and global temperatures dropped slightly.

In the 1974 time magazine, printed on their cover that the earth was starting the begining of global cooling era, newsweek did the same in 1975 the following year.

This link is part of the argument

In the 1980s, we were surprised by the first long ice cores from both Greenland and the Antarctic, which gave us 400,000 years of the Earth’s detailed temperature history in their ice layers. We had expected to find the big Ice Ages and the warm interglacial periods like our own. We had not expected to find a moderate, natural 1500-year cycle running through it all, even through the big Ice Ages.

The natural warmings raise Earth’s temperatures 1 to 2 degrees C at the latitude of New York for 400-800 years. The coolings that follow drop our temperatures 1-2 degrees below the mean for a similar length of time.

Since then, scientists have found the 1500-year cycle in tree rings, cave stalagmites and the microfossils of seabed sediments. Prehistoric villages moved up and down the Alps and Andes mountainsides while glaciers worldwide advanced and retreated, all in time with the cycle.

Here is the question will people like Al Gore walk the talk or will he speak out both sides of his mouth?

Will Al Gore give up his vehicles, and his many houses, will set the example for others to follow or is he another two faced environmentalist.

I challenge Mr. Gore to walk the talk !!

LOVING v. VIRGINIA, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)

 

 

388 U.S. 1

LOVING ET UX. v. VIRGINIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 395.
Argued April 10, 1967.
Decided June 12, 1967.

Virginia’s statutory scheme to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications held to violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 4-12.(findlaw)

This case is being widely abused and misconstrued for an argument that does not fit within the parameters of the Loving decision which was about a man and a woman in a inter-racial marriage. Yes the Court does say that marriage is a civil right for the basis of procreation.

No where within the decision does it cover same sex marriage.

here is section 1 of the 14th amendment

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.(findlaw)

The voters’s within each state has granted small certain privileges to couple who marry to procreate this was decided by the legislative bodies in each state that was duly elected.

Certain groups that are now active in trying to have laws overturned by the courts instead of going through the legislative process to have laws amended.

The questions that I have, Is social engineering by fiat of the State Courts the right way to go instead of going the slow route of educating the voters in each state?

Here is a surprising fact that is nobody is stating and I am quite sure it would eliminate most arguments, and that is between the mid 1940’s and the 1950’s were any benefits given to married couples by the States or the Federal Govt. (so from 17763 to around 1950 there were no benefits given to married couples other than wills, ownership of property handed down thru wills.)

• 1. Redefine who is a legal heir in each state, so that it would eliminate any court challenges.
• 2. Power of attorney to be named by the person before they are incapacitated or hospitalized (listing who may visit them while hospitalized short term or longterm), make it legally binding to with stand family disagreements.
• 3. The IRS recognize persons that are single, married, cohabiting couples (heterosexual, or same sex couples) for taxation purposes..
• 4. Apply the rule of benefits evenly by Social Security Administration to singles, married, or cohabiting couples(heterosexual or same sex couples).
• 5. Pensions: The holder designate’s the heir unless married or it can be established that the couple (heterosexual or same sex couples) have been together seven years, or more and a single person would as well pass on their pension to the heir of their choice.

By doing the above it will increase the tax base for both the States and Federal Govt’s.

It also eliminates the marriage debate.

Information was found at Findlaw.com