Thursday, October 11, 2007

Inside the green house: Gore's 9 lies

So in Briton they want to show An Inconvenient Truth in school.
This lead to a court ruling that many of the claims were raised in “the context of alarmist and exaggeration”. The film may be shown but must be accompanied by a disclaimer... (why show it at all?)

In what is a rare judicial ruling on what children can see in the class-room, Mr Justice Barton was at pains to point out that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.

Now for the legally judged falsehood of An Inconvenient Truth.
The claim that sea levels could rise by 20ft “in the near future” was dismissed as “distinctly alarmist”. Such a rise would take place “only after, and over, millennia”.

A claim that atolls in the Pacific had already been evacuated was supported by “no evidence

while to suggest that two graphs showing carbon dioxide levels and temperatures over the last 650,000 years were an “exact fit” overstated the case.

Mr Gore’s suggestion that the Gulf Stream, that warms up the Atlantic ocean, would shut down was contradicted by the International Panel on Climate Change’s assessment that it was “very unlikely” to happen.

The drying of Lake Chad, the loss of Mount Kilimanjaro’s snows and Hurricane Katrina were all blamed by Mr Gore on climate change but the judge said the scientific community had been unable to find evidence to prove there was a direct link.

The judge also said there was no proof to support a claim that polar bears were drowning while searching for icy habitats melted by global warming. The only drowned polar bears the court was aware of were four that died following a storm.

Similarly, the judge took issue with the former Vice-President of the United States for attributing coral bleaching to climate change. Separating the direct impacts of climate change and other factors was difficult, the judgment concluded.

So Why is it that so many of us on the right were able to make these same point from the beginning, yet so many on the left would dismiss our augments with the blanket claim of "scientific consensus"


Past green house reports:


Shoulda seen it coming
Ah come on now
A bit imposing
San Fran going dry
We're #2
The debate is over?
Let's go see All
So Inconveniently
Extent of deception
Cow farts
Global warming update

No comments: