October 13, 2007

Celebrating the Goracle

The announcement of Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize is as good an excuse as any to post some Gore stuff I have been accumulating for a couple of days. But first, reaction to today's news:

Power Line supplies some context for the announcement by listing a few of the liars, poseurs and frauds among recent Nobel Peace Prize recipients, and Jesse Walker advises on how you too can win a Nobel Peace Prize. (Ex. "#3 - Kill a lot of people, then stop") Or, as in the case of Yasser Arafat...don't stop.

Gore could probably use the prize as a springboard to run for President in 2008, and he probably would if he didn't think Hillary is unstoppable. Yet Allahpundit's glass is half full:

Look on the bright side: after Arafat, Carter, and Iranian marionette Mohammed ElBaradei, the award couldn’t possibly be more degraded.

And James Taranto believes a Gore run for in 2008 is unlikely:

If Gore really believes in global warmism, he couldn't possibly want to be president, a job that would require him to spend most of his time dealing with more important matters.

Steven Hayward says this announcement "will probably turn out to be the high water mark for climate change hysteria".

That assessment might be informed by some news from earlier this week, when a court ruled that it will permit Gore's film to be distributed to all schools in the UK. Sounds like a big win for the Goremeister, until you get to the asterisk. The court requires that before showing the film, English schools must alert students to numerous significant inaccuracies and misstatements in it. From Iain Murray:

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.

The inaccuracies are:

* 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.

* 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.

* 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 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.

* 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.

* 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.

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

* 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.

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

* 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.

* 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.

(bold in original)

Who knows whether or not British schoolchildren will actually get any of this required balancing of the Gore distortions, but at least the notoriety the decision gets should raise consciousness a bit.

And since Mr. Gore has refused to debate his global warming positions with scientists citing studies with differing conclusions, (the debate being "over" and all) here's a video that juxtaposes his claims with those of a number of professional climatologists:

UPDATE 10/14: Another climate scientist who hadn't heard that the debate was over...

ONE of the world's foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works".

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.

His comments came on the same day that the Nobel committee honoured Mr Gore for his work in support of the link between humans and global warming.

"We're brainwashing our children," said Dr Gray, 78, a long-time professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie [An Inconvenient Truth] and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."

UPDATE 10/15: From the Hewitt archives, a summation (through 2000 or so) of Gore playing loose with the truth.

Posted by dan at October 13, 2007 12:14 AM