Aceshardware

Paranoid · Joined: 02 Aug 2007 Posts: 224

"Judge in Britain Outlines 11 of Al Gore’s Lies That Must Be Disclosed to Students in Propaganda Film: An Inconvenient Truth"
http://copiousdissent.blogspot.com/2007/10/judge-in-britain-outlines-11-of-al.html
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth

"In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children."

"1. The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

2. The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

3. The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.

4. The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.

5. The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

6. The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

7. The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

8. The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.

9. The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

10. The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

11. The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim."

So the Nobel Peace Prize committee has been consistent. They awarded it to the terrorist Arafat, an ozone junk scientist, the racist Mandela, the anti-Semite Carter and now to a con artist. The useful idiots will circle the wagons in Gores defense no doubt.

martinw · Joined: 06 Sep 2007 Posts: 139

Since you quote the judge with such approval, I assume you are therefore also ok with the following, which for some inexplicable reason you failed to quote:

Mr Justice Burton said he had no complaint about Gore's central thesis that climate change was happening and was being driven by emissions from humans.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7037671.stm

lux_interior · Joined: 26 Jul 2007 Posts: 252

Hey, there is no need to create several distinct topics about Al Gore and global warming (especially given that *you* created the other topic in the first place and you *already* vomited your anti-Nobel, anti-Mandela, etc. rhetorics over there). The only reason I can see is that you are trying to avoid the arguments which were brought in the other thread.

martinw · Joined: 06 Sep 2007 Posts: 139

lux_interior wrote:

The only reason I can see is that you are trying to avoid the arguments which were brought in the other thread.

I think you're getting close. He rarely responds to any posts showing his misunderstandings, because he doesn't actually understand the issues himself. He is capable of cutting and pasting articles out of right wing websites, but not actually forming his own arguments, so when presented with countering arguments, he falls silent.

P4man · Joined: 26 Jun 2007 Posts: 540

Quote:

"1. The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

Mr. Gore has, for years, relied upon the research of Dr. Lonnie Thompson and his wife Dr. Ellen Mosely Thompson. Dr. Thompson recently received the National Medal of Science and works at the Byrd Polar Research Center. It is not just Kilimanjaro. Every tropical glacier for which we have documented evidence shows that glaciers are retreating. The evidence has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science (2006) as well as IPCC studies. As the movie states, there are other stresses on Kilimanjaro that are contributing to the problem. And this is a very, very important point--fundamental to our understanding of climate change: Global warming exacerbates the stresses that ecosystems (and humans) are already experiencing, such as drought, erosion, rising sea levels, and shifts in extreme weather events.

Quote:

2. The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

Greenhouse gas levels and temperature changes in the ice age signals have a complicated relationship but they do "fit." That is true. There is a much longer explanation. Rather than repeat it here, I will refer you to the more complete description included in the archive of www.realclimate.org.

Quote:

3. The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.

The film is careful not to ascribe any single weather event to climate change. However, in the film Mr. Gore does state, "There have been warnings that hurricanes would get stronger." He based that claim on research published in peer-reviewed journals from Dr. Kerry Emanuel, and several others, who have found a link between an increase in sea surface temperature and an increase in the intensity of hurricanes. Since then, further research has strengthened the science in this area with regards to a link between human-induced climate change and hurricane intensity. Mr. Gore has never addressed the issue of climate change and hurricane frequency.

Quote:

4. The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.

This example is used to illustrate what the models are predicting which is the shift in rainfall across the Sahel region of Africa. As in the previous example, there are multiple stresses upon Lake Chad and again, human-induced climate change can and will make this situation even worse.

Quote:

5. The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

Where there is not enough ice, they are required to swim. The US Minerals Management Service (part of the US Department of Interior) reported new research in December 2005 about increased polar bear mortality due to reduced sea ice. At the same time, a study by the US Geological Survey and the Canadian Wildlife Service was previewed showing a major polar bear population drop (22 percent) in Hudson Bay in Canada--which was also believed to be linked to sea ice decline. Since 2005, more research has emerged in this area. In addition, Arctic sea ice decline was the lowest ever measured for minimum extent in 2007. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is now considering an Endangered Species Listing for the polar bear in part because of the impact that human-induced climate change is having on their habitat.

Quote:

6. The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

Simulations described in the latest IPCC report show a slowdown in the circulation by roughly 30 percent by 2100. Again, there are uncertainties, which were a bit lengthy to describe in a feature film documentary, but the future of the ocean conveyer really depends upon how quickly we take actions now to reduce the pollution that causes global warming. Multiple scientists have claimed that we cannot exclude the possibility of the disruption or shutdown of the Conveyor.

Quote:

7. The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

The IPCC and other scientific bodies have long identified increases in ocean temperatures with the bleaching of coral reefs. Corals are also under stress from other factors like water pollution (agricultural runoff), overfishing, and ocean acidification (another direct impact of the release of carbon dioxide). These stresses have a synergistic effect. As I have made clear earlier, global warming places a further strain on an already burdened ecosystem.

Quote:

8. The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia..

9. The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing

Scientists agree that the melting of Greenland or the West Antarctic ice sheet would raise sea levels around six meters. The movie does not give a timescale for when that melting might occur. There are uncertainties in the scientific community about the timescale, but this uncertainty does not negate the need to seriously consider these scenarios when considering solutions to the climate crisis.

Quote:

10. The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

11. The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim."[/i].

December 6, 2005, The United Nations Environment Program announced that a small community living in the Pacific island chain of Vanuatu had to relocate due to sea level rise. In addition, in 2005, the people of the Carteret atoll in Papua New Guinea announced their imminent evacuation and the government of Tuvalu has asked New Zealand to be ready to evacuate islanders. We acknowledge that the wording of the film here is unfortunate; however, the potential effects of global warming on human displacement as a broader topic is a matter of critical importance, which we believe warrants the attention of the global community. The IPCC estimates that 150 million environmental refugees could exist by the year 2050, due mainly to the effects of coastal flooding, shoreline erosion and agricultural disruption.

See, I can copy paste too.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2007/10/an_inconvenient_truth_team_gor_1.html