An Inconvenient Truth

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Al Gore has created a way to profit from an alleged global catastrophe.[1][2]

An Inconvenient Truth is a global warming "schlockumentary," released in 2005, and made into a prize-winning film narrated by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. The film provides a one-sided account of the anthropogenic global warming theory, giving all the arguments in favor of supporting the sort of "greenhouse gas" reductions required by the Kyoto Protocol. An Inconvenient Truth ignores the evidence that atmospheric temperature is cyclical in nature and has gone up and down continuously over the course of many thousands of years. (see climate cycles).

According to the Madison, Wisconsin Capital Times, Reid Bryson, founding chairman of the department of meteorology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and of the Institute for Environmental Studies, now known as the Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies and also known as the father of scientific climatology considers global warming a bunch of hooey. Reid said, "Don't make me throw's not science..." [3]

Reid said,

There is a lot of money to be made in this," he added. "If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.[4]

Author Noel Sheppard cites a new study in Science Magazine [5] written by a group of scientists including two members of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration that refutes this central contention in Al Gores "schlockumentary" that the "apparition called global warming is responsible for an upsurge in hurricane activity and intensity," including the Hurricane Katrina disaster.[6]

Scientific inaccuracies in the film

Copied verbatim from the Chicago Sun-Times (except for the last example[7])

Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, have been refuted by science, both before and after he made them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.

Gore claim Peer-reviewed science
Gore claims that the Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains.
Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine.
Gore claims global warming is causing more tornadoes. Yet the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in February that there has been no scientific link established between global warming and tornadoes.
Gore claims global warming is causing more frequent and severe hurricanes. However, hurricane expert Chris Landsea published a study on May 1 documenting that hurricane activity is no higher now than in decades past. Hurricane expert William Gray reported just a few days earlier, on April 27, that the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. Atlantic coast has declined in the past 40 years. Hurricane scientists reported in the April 18 Geophysical Research Letters that global warming enhances wind shear, which will prevent a significant increase in future hurricane activity.
Gore claims global warming is causing an expansion of African deserts. However, the Sept. 16, 2002, issue of New Scientist reports, Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat . . . making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa.
Gore argues Greenland is in rapid meltdown, and that this threatens to raise sea levels by 20 feet. But according to a 2005 study in the Journal of Glaciology, the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins and growing inland, with a small overall mass gain. In late 2006, researchers at the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the past two decades were the coldest for Greenland since the 1910s. In 2016, a study finds ice isn't being lost from Greenland's interior [8]
Gore claims the Antarctic ice sheet is melting because of global warming. Yet the Jan. 14, 2002, issue of Nature magazine reported Antarctica as a whole has been dramatically cooling for decades. More recently, scientists reported in the September 2006 issue of the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A: Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, that satellite measurements of the Antarctic ice sheet showed significant growth between 1992 and 2003. And the U.N. Climate Change panel reported in February 2007 that Antarctica is unlikely to lose any ice mass during the remainder of the century.
Gore claims that polar bears were drowning while searching for icy habitats melted by global warming. The British High Court in making a determination if Al Gore's 'documentary' should be shown in secondary schools found that the only drowned polar bears the court was aware of were four that died following a storm.

35 Errors Discovered

Inconvenient Truth watch.jpg

Global warming critic Christopher Monckton released a report called 35 Inconvenient Truths, which described 35 gross errors and exaggerations found within Gore's film. Some of the errors are directly contradicted by the IPCC.[9]

British lawsuit and High Court ruling

On October 10, 2007, Mr. Justice Barton, a judge for the London High Court, ruled on a lawsuit filed by a parent against the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families over the film being shown in public schools.[10] In the ruling, the judge found that the film contains nine significant scientific errors, "promotes partisan political views," and that the film could only be shown if guidance notes were included to balance the movie's biased views.[11]

In July 2009, Gore dodged a question about the errors found in the court ruling and blatantly lied about the ruling favoring him:[12]

HEATHER EWART: There was also, though, a British judge who ruled that there were in fact, I think, nine errors when it was challenged in court?

AL GORE: Well, the ruling was in my favour.

However, after the ruling, Mr. Justice Burton had stated, "I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act."[13]

Gore's contributions to global warming

"There are many who still do not believe that global warming is a problem at all. And it's no wonder: because they are the targets of a massive and well-organized campaign of disinformation lavishly funded by polluters who are determined to prevent any action to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming out of a fear that their profits might be affected if they had to stop dumping so much pollution into the atmosphere."

Sean Hannity reported on Fox News Channel's Hannity & Colmes, February 18, 2007, that when Al Gore was running his campaign: "On January 27th, 2000, Gore campaigned in Concord and Manchester, New Hampshire, and on that very same day reimbursed the Thomas Lee Company $1,400 for the use of their corporate jet. That evening he left New Hampshire and flew back to Washington aboard Air Force Two, the vice president's official plane is a 757, which means that the flight from New Hampshire to Washington, well, the vice president emitted more than 22,000 pounds of CO2." [14]


Despite its many scientific inaccuracies, the film has received several awards:

  • Academy Awards (The Oscars) 2007
  • Chicago Film Critics Association
  • Dallas-Fort Worth Film Critics Association
  • Florida Film Critics 2006
  • Kansas City Film Critics Awards 2006
  • Las Vegas Film Critics Circle 2006
  • National Board of Review
  • New York Film Critics Online
  • New York Film Critics Society
  • Ohio Film Critics Awards 2006
  • Oklahoma Film Critics Circle Awards 2006
  • Online Film Critics 2006
  • Phoenix Film Critics Circle 2006
  • Satellite Awards (Nominated) 2006
  • St. Louis Film Critics Awards 2006
  • Toronto Film Critics Circle (Nominated) 2006
  • Utah Film Critics Awards 2006
  • Washington D.C. Film Critics Association 2006


External links

See also