if a politician steps up the plate with a hand full of well respected and unbiased and unfunded (both corporate and government) scientists and shows me bullet proof evidence that humans are destroying the ecosystem on a global scale and that they will be the first to change their lifestyles AND they don't want create a massive global bureaucracy around it subjugating the US to shitty international regulation then i will admit that i was wrong about the entire thing.
So you'd wait not only for bulletproof evidence - which was apparently researched with foodstamps, no less- but for the evidence - which we've already established is bulletproof- to come from a non-hypocritical politician? A politician who's going to change his life for no money should be easy to find after you find those scientists who can live and do research and pay off their student loans by thinking happy thoughts. Good plan, talk about self-fulfilling prophecy. That'll never happen, by design. It's a self contradictory statement. If you could live forever you'd be living on a planet that looks like mars with a lot more buildings long before you find that.
I'll admit that 2+2=4 when you can prove 2+2=1
is a statement with about as much plausibility
Why does the fact that someone uses science for nefarious purposes suddenly make the science invalid? And why does science have to come from a politician? Examine the science. You don't like where the funding comes from for this study? Look like a conflict of interest? Fine, disregard it. Look for other science, for or against. Don't disregard an entire ideology or practice just because there are idiots who promote it. You wouldn't have a whole lot of activities left if you applied that practice to daily life. You could start with
breathing for instance. Not much'd matter after that one.
Here's how we get your proof, either way on the subject. Take the studies done, even just take the studies done before Al Gore was born if you feel like it. Form an opinion. Discuss. You may be wrong with this outdated information, but at least you're considering something other than politics. Fuck politics. If you're going to mindlessly argue, at least have something to back it up, even if you're blatantly wrong at least I can respect that. Otherwise you're just delivering the mail
Al Gore is a jackass is not mutually exclusive to science exists supporting claims he's made.
For the record: I'm Canadian, and Al Gore is too boring to pay attention to. I don't even really know what his views are, and I don't care. I don't need to judge every politician in existance's stance on an issue to form an opinion. I tend to prefer facts, or in lieu of that, I just fuck off and play Meat Boy.