9 Lies

Via Not Evil Just Wrong:

Written by K. Daniel Glover
Thursday, 01 October 2009 08:56

Al Gore is the principal prophet of doom in the global warming debate, and the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth is his gospel to true believers. But Gore has misled them.

Two years ago, British High Court Justice Michael Burton characterized Gore’s film as “alarmism and exaggeration in support of his political thesis.” The court, responding to a case filed by a parent, said the film was “one-sided” and could not be shown in British schools unless it contained guidelines to balance Gore’s attempt at “political indoctrination.”

The judge based his decision on nine inaccuracies in the movie. The Gore-loving U.S. media largely ignored the story, but starting premiere night Oct. 18, Americans will hear it in Not Evil Just Wrong. To set the stage, here is a recap of Gore’s claims and why they are flawed:

1. The claim: Melting in Greenland or West Antarctica will cause sea levels to rise up to 20 feet in the near future. The truth: The Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change concluded that sea levels might rise 20 feet over millennia — and it waffled on that prediction. The IPCC envisions a rise of no more than 7 inches to 23 inches by 2100. Gore’s claim is “a very disturbing misstatement of the science,” John Day, who argued the British case, says in Not Evil Just Wrong. The judge said Gore’s point “is not in line with the scientific consensus.

2. The claim: Polar bears are drowning because they have to swim farther to find ice. The truth: Justice Burton noted that the only study citing the drowning of polar bears (four of them) blamed the deaths on a storm, not ice that is melting due to manmade global warming. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, furthermore, found that the current bear population is 20,000-25,000, up from 5,000-10,000 in the 1950s and 1960s. Day says in Not Evil Just Wrong that the appeal to polar bears is “a very clever piece of manipulation.”

3. The claim: Global warming spawned Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The truth: “It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that,” Burton wrote in his ruling. A May 2007 piece in New Scientist refuted the Katrina argument as a “climate myth” because it’s impossible to tie any single weather event to global warming.

4. The claim: Increases in temperature are the result of increases in carbon dioxide. The truth: Burton questioned the two graphs Gore used in An Inconvenient Truth. Gore argued that there is “an exact fit” between temperature and CO2, Burton said, but his graphs didn’t support that conclusion. Recent data also do not support it: The global temperature has been declining for about a decade, even as CO2 levels continue rising.

5. The claim: The snow on Mount Kilimanjaro is melting because of global warming. The truth: The melting has been under way for more than a century — long before SUVs and jumbo jets — and appears to be the result of other causes. Justice Burton noted that scientists agree the melting can’t be blamed primarily on “human-induced climate change.”

6. The claim: Lake Chad is disappearing because of global warming. The truth: Lake Chad is losing water, and humans are contributing to the losses. But the humans in the lake’s immediate vicinity, rather than mankind as a whole using fossil fuels, are to blame. Burton cited factors like population, overgrazing and regional climate variability.

7. The claim: People are being forced to evacuate low-lying Pacific atolls, islands of coral that surround lagoons, because of encroaching ocean waters. The truth: By their very nature, atolls are susceptible to rising sea levels. But Burton said pointedly in his ruling, “There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened.”

8. The claim: Coral reefs are bleaching and putting fish in jeopardy. The truth: In his ruling, Burton emphasized the IPCC’s finding that bleaching could kill coral reefs — if they don’t adapt. A report released this year shows that reefs already are thriving in waters as hot as some people say ocean waters will be 100 years from now. Burton also said it is difficult to separate coral stresses such as over-fishing from any changes in climate.

9. The claim: Global warming could stop the “ocean conveyor,” triggering another ice age in Western Europe. The truth: Once again, Gore’s allies at the IPCC disagree with that argument. Burton cited the panel in concluding that “it is very unlikely that the ocean conveyor … will shut down in the future.” The fact that the scientific understanding of how the conveyor belt works remains unsettled further exposes the flaw in Gore’s claim.

Share

15 Responses to “9 Lies”

  1. Kevin says:

    I attended one of Mr. Gore’s presentations in person. Long before the movie came out, he stressed on all of the points above that the science was still out or being formulated, but that most scientists agree that the trends are worrisome at the least and at most should be considered in making economic and political policy now. He did not say on any of these points that the science was complete. You the clearly the one who is being deception and not Gore.

       1 likes

  2. Ross says:

    @Kevin. That is all well and good but your statements hold no water against what is discussed above. The nine points are the decision of a judge, not the opinion of the author. Going to Gore’s presentation also is all well and good but none of those statements about the science “still out or being formulated” are presented in Gore’s movie which makes the case for this article all the more pertinent to inform people of the facts.

       3 likes

  3. Rob says:

    @Ross… The point here is that Gore exaggerated certain claims, but the claims remain true from the standpoint of existing science. Sea level rise, for instance, the IPCC AR4 projections do not take ice sheet melting into account because the rate of melting has not been adequately quantified. Current projections are based solely on thermal expansion of the oceans as a result of global warming. The 2007 report is essentially the consensus of the science as of about 2005. When the next IPCC report comes out you should be prepared to see a greatly increased projection of sea level rise, much more in line with what Gore claims.

    On point 4, it is rather absurd that this is even at issue. It is the 800 year lag that actually proves the link between CO2 and temperature. And the temperature has NOT been declining for a decade. THAT is an outright lie. Please publish the temperature record that shows this. I can’t find it in any of the data sets (and, yes, I have looked).

    It really doesn’t help your position if you LIE when claiming that someone is lying.

       1 likes

    • Dar Pot says:

      Your statement “It is the 800 year lag that actually proves the link between CO2 and temperature” does not backup Al Gore’s claim that so-called Global Warming is due to man. All the 800 year lag shows is that changes in Global Temperatures eventually result in changes in CO2, whether directly or indirectly.

      Your claim that the “temperature has NOT been declining for a decade” is a Lie shows you are simply taking the Global Warming party line. Had you, yourself, actually analyzed the Global Weather Station Temperature data you would know that the data has been manipulated to make it appear as if the World is warming. For example: Temperature data from Weather Stations located in colder climates was dropped in favor of Temperature data from warmer climates. Can you say “Lemon Picking”?

         2 likes

      • Rob says:

        Dar Pot… 1) I would suggest that you should read Callion 2003 “Timing of atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic temperature changes across Termination III” This is a full explanation of how the relationship between CO2 and temps operate.

        2) The recent Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project has clearly shown that any drop out of recording stations has absolutely no impact on the global temperature record. We now have multiple groups producing global temperature reconstructions all using different methods and they are coming to the exact same conclusion. That, in science, is known as a “robust” conclusion.

           0 likes

    • The IPCC is not a scientific body. It’s a political bureaucracy that doesn’t even have sufficient scientists to back up any claims nor qualified support of sceintists from the global community. Claiming any of their predictions or data is “accurate” is the same as the global warming alrmist in the UK who said by 2011 children in England wouldn’t know what snow is.

         3 likes

  4. Scott says:

    Gore’s biggest lie is, “The debate is over”. That’s funny, I have never witnessed or read about one debate. the only thing that ever happens at a debate is they get cancelled or they don’t show up.

       2 likes

  5. Toni says:

    Kevin,
    You did a good job trying to bring truth and logic to brainwashed minds. Thank you for that. So far for me this “trial” is hearsay anyway. And Al Gore was painting a picture of what he had been taught by highly trained professors and high level schools. These people are just deniers based on their hatred for anything which might place a carbon tax so big oil and big business can continue to profit from fossil fuels and to continue to dump CO2 into the atmosphere with no penalty. These corporations put out this fake data so these unsuspecting people can buy it. Anyway, good for you to even attempt to talk sense to these people. I have learned that it is hopeless. Like people who believe in religion, they believe what they want to believe.

       1 likes

    • paul says:

      Toni,

      You don’t really add much to the debate (although I suppose in your mind, “the debate is OVER!”… ) You statement is rife with logical fallacies: Ad Hominem, questioning motive, appeal to authority, red herrings….

      whatever the outcome of this power struggle amongst conflicting factions over domination of the global economy, one thing is certain. At least one side has exhibited a rather disturbing tendency to descend into blind foaming at the mouth rage at the mere idea that one could possibly disagree with their world view. What’s more surprising is that those who most aggressively attack the other side exhibit a comlete lack of understanding of the scientific principles that they so enthusiastically prosletize. Indeed, when you call your antagonists “true believers” one is inclined to ask whether you are suffering from some form of freudian projection. I suspect a rereading of Hoffer is merited at the very least.

         2 likes

      • Dar Pot says:

        Your statement of “What’s more surprising is that those who most aggressively attack the other side exhibit a comlete lack of understanding of the scientific principles” so appropriately applies to those scientists who have claimed Global Warming is caused by man. Michael Mann and James Hansen completely threw out scientific principles in favor of personal politics and/or the lure of hard cold cash from taxpayer funding.

           1 likes

  6. Steve says:

    It’s not hopeless but we need to see more than the abstract and numbers we need to know the science behind things. Where temperatures have been collected from for example. How much temperature data we actually have. How much temperature data we would actually need. What’s the error? +-2 degrees or +-10.
    I’ve come to the conclusion though that it doesn’t matter much either way since we’re going to keep burning coal regardless but it’s still important to know about. If only because so many people think that climate change is important.

       0 likes

  7. [...] who want to see the science done properly, rather than used as a prop for a cynical politician’s dog and PowerPoint show, this is the smell of [...]

       0 likes

  8. GlobalCHANGE says:

    Al Gore did not lie, he simply addressed scientific facts that are backed by tons of scientific observations. Besides all of the information presented in the inconvenient truth in 2006, mind you, was based on the pollution levels and temperatures of 2006 and back. The information on this page was published in 2009 where the temperatures from there and back coudve been ALOT different than 3 yrs ago. People also need to keep in mind that pollution has gone up severly in just the last few years so it is not accurate to maintain a one sided opinion on the topic when it is changing everyday.

       0 likes

    • Dar Pot says:

      “he simply addressed scientific facts that are backed by tons of scientific observations.”

      Nice try Gore, we are not buying that excuse.
      There never was “scientific facts”; only scientists making global warming claims they could not back up (because they jumped to conclusions) or refused to back up with their work (because they knew they were wrong).

         2 likes

  9. Russell C says:

    Might be worth adding a “10th error” to the movie, about skeptic scientists being corrupted by the fossil fuel industry. It now appears one central point that Gore uses to defend his side – this “10th error” – has huge problems associated with it. See: “Smearing Skeptic Scientists: What did Gore know and when did he know it?”
    http://www.climatedepot.com/a/11168/Climate-Depot-Exclusive-Smearing-Skeptic-Scientists-What-did-Gore-know-and-when-did-he-know-it

       0 likes

Leave a Reply

preload preload preload