Or call it man-caused climate change, or anthropogenic global warming, whatever you prefer. It is all a hoax, a big lie, and a scam. Now the Obama Administration, using the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) as a tool, is trying to ram it down our throats. We will pay dearly if his proposed legislation succeeds. This will be done without open debate, without a vote, in fact it represents a tremendous amount of taxation without representation. Weren't there wars fought over the violation of that right, the right to have a say in how one is taxed? Read on.
Peter
Thomas: Is it consensus or really censorship?
Cal Thomas Tribune Media Services (source)
The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted a "finding" to the White House Office of Management and Budget that will force the Obama administration to decide whether to limit greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. If adopted, new laws and regulations will likely follow that have the potential to change our lifestyles and limit our freedoms. None of these will be preceded by debate, they will be imposed on us by fundamentalist politicians and scientists who have declared global warming as fact; end of discussion.
On the Discovery Channel last week, Tom Brokaw hosted a special called "Global Warming: The New Challenge." While promoting the piece, Brokaw declared, "there is a growing consensus that global warming is real and getting worse." Actually, there is a growing body of opinion that global warming is a fraud perpetrated by liberal politicians and their scientific acolytes who want more control over our lives.
Whenever politicians declare a crisis, or an emergency, watch out. Chances are this means they want to impose something before the public discovers the truth. One of the definitions of consensus is "general agreement or concord; harmony." Any honest assessment of scientific opinion leads to the conclusion that there is significant disagreement on global warming within the scientific community among those with expertise in climatology and related fields.
Yet many politicians want us to believe all of science is on board with manmade global warming and that we must act now to save the planet and ourselves from catastrophe (catastrophe is another word politicians like to use when imposing their agendas).You know something is up when prominent apostles of global warming, especially former vice president Al Gore, refuse to discuss the issue with any scientist who takes a contrary view.
For information that debunks the "science" of global warming visit www.globalwarminghoax.com.
For global warming fundamentalists, no amount of contradictory information will dilute their faith. Science makes mistakes, as did NASA when it published data on global warming trends in an effort to gauge the warmest years in U.S. history. Their temperature statistics were flawed. The year 1998 was not the hottest year on record, as NASA originally stated, it was 1934 -- the year Wiley Post discovered the jet stream.
In New York earlier this month, more than 600 scientists, economists, legislators and journalists from many nations met for the second International Conference on Climate Change. Numerous presentations debunked with documentation what they called the pseudoscience and dictatorial intentions promoted by the UN, the European Union and the Obama administration. If there was media coveraget, I missed it.
The keynote speaker at the gathering was Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic and the European Union. Klaus described environmentalism as a new collectivist religion that doesn't just want to change the climate, but us as well. Klaus rejected the executive summary published by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as all politics and environmental activism, "not science."
Truth is sometimes inconvenient, as Al Gore likes to say. But that cuts both ways. Truth can also be inconvenient when it shines light on propaganda. Not to allow for a full-fledged debate on global warming is censorship, a popular practice in totalitarian societies and many fundamentalist religions and cults.
Showing posts with label An Inconvenient Truth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label An Inconvenient Truth. Show all posts
Friday, April 3, 2009
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Oh I love Nevada.....and Lake Lahontan, and the Truth
This is what Nevada looked like just a few thousand years ago.......before "global warming".....not computer modeling, not IPCC......just factual observation and measurements. Where did all that water, and all those lakes go?The following article is entertaining.....with an under-current of truth.....Imagine a lake this size and more, dried up and gone since the last Ice Age.....not computer modeling, fact, not myth.....Enjoy.
Peter
source:
Peter
source:
The following comes from Nevada.........
Our global warming 'Animal Farm'
January 9, 2008, 12:05 AM
By Ed Iverson
In one of his incomparable essays, C. S. Lewis criticized man's often insolent determination to control the forces of nature. He remarked that man's control of nature was frequently nothing more than man's control over other men - with nature as the instrument.
Nothing explains the mad obsession with global warming quite so pointedly. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the global warming panic has little to do with temperature change and everything to do with man's control of other men with climate as the instrument.
The global warming hoax is a dream come true for the global bullies intent on imposing their repressive regulatory regime upon a willing world of useful idiots. With an ozone hole here and a stranded polar bear there, here an oink there an oink, everywhere an oink, oink, Old Napoleon Gore had a farm; and pretty soon all the animals were explaining to themselves why the rules were constantly changing to advance the agenda of the swine who had assumed control in the house. The "chosen" go to Bali. The rest of us schmucks go meekly to our secure stalls in the barn. As the self-appointed dungeon masters softly close the iron gates, the plastic faces in Hollywood form a cheering chorus line. As we labor under increasingly onerous regulations, faint-hearted academics fearful of losing their grants gravely announce the absolute necessity of the new rules.
There are signs, however, that the tide is running out for popular support of Napoleon Gore's contrived crisis. The myth of scientific consensus is evaporating like the hazy aura of Clintonian inevitability. Even the New York Times is starting to dither and dissemble about the grimness of the emergency. A recent editorial openly questioned the data supporting the exaggerated claims of Napoleon Gore and the biased reporting of the "Squealer" media. According to an article recently run by Newsmax.com, New York Times columnist John Tierney "took a close look at the global warming debate and found that the climate change scenario being peddled by Mr. Gore and his legion of followers is anything but the settled scientific fact they claim."
In his column, Tierney noted that last January, weather experts in England confidently predicted that the buildup of greenhouse gases would make 2007 the "hottest year on record." Tierney then illustrated the fanatical commitment to global warming that we of the great unwashed see all the time. He wrote "even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record (it was actually lower than any year since 2001) the BBC confidently proclaimed, '2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.'"
Global warming is not a scientific fact. Shoot, global warming does not even rise to the level of scientific theory. In order to qualify as a scientific, a theory must in principle be falsifiable. There must be some conceivable means of disproving it. By rendering global warming bulletproof, devotees have transferred global warming to the unassailable regions of faith.
Examples of this sort of thing are everywhere. According to satellite imaging, ice in the Arctic has thinned. Good old Squealer (the sycophant media) trumpeted this as an indication that the entire planet was warming. However, when the same technology revealed that ice in the Antarctic increased to the highest level ever recorded, Squealer totally ignored the data.
Remember the hand wringing and chest beating indulged in by Napoleon after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita? A sure sign of the terrible hurricanes our overheated planet would generate in the coming years, he bellowed. He never mentioned the last two quiet seasons while accepting the Nobel Prize.
In a recent report to the a senate subcommittee, more than 400 climatologists cast doubt upon the "scientific consensus" that man-made global warming is a threat to the planet. Many of the scientists were members of the IGPCC.
If it was about science, real scientists would welcome the minority report. Instead, dissenting scientists are ostracized and accused of industrial collusion. Now, here is the truth: Global warming has nothing to do with a verifiable warming of our planet. It has everything to do with man's control over other men with "science" as the tool.
Ed Iverson is a former Fallon (Nevada)resident.
Our global warming 'Animal Farm'
January 9, 2008, 12:05 AM
By Ed Iverson
In one of his incomparable essays, C. S. Lewis criticized man's often insolent determination to control the forces of nature. He remarked that man's control of nature was frequently nothing more than man's control over other men - with nature as the instrument.
Nothing explains the mad obsession with global warming quite so pointedly. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the global warming panic has little to do with temperature change and everything to do with man's control of other men with climate as the instrument.
The global warming hoax is a dream come true for the global bullies intent on imposing their repressive regulatory regime upon a willing world of useful idiots. With an ozone hole here and a stranded polar bear there, here an oink there an oink, everywhere an oink, oink, Old Napoleon Gore had a farm; and pretty soon all the animals were explaining to themselves why the rules were constantly changing to advance the agenda of the swine who had assumed control in the house. The "chosen" go to Bali. The rest of us schmucks go meekly to our secure stalls in the barn. As the self-appointed dungeon masters softly close the iron gates, the plastic faces in Hollywood form a cheering chorus line. As we labor under increasingly onerous regulations, faint-hearted academics fearful of losing their grants gravely announce the absolute necessity of the new rules.
There are signs, however, that the tide is running out for popular support of Napoleon Gore's contrived crisis. The myth of scientific consensus is evaporating like the hazy aura of Clintonian inevitability. Even the New York Times is starting to dither and dissemble about the grimness of the emergency. A recent editorial openly questioned the data supporting the exaggerated claims of Napoleon Gore and the biased reporting of the "Squealer" media. According to an article recently run by Newsmax.com, New York Times columnist John Tierney "took a close look at the global warming debate and found that the climate change scenario being peddled by Mr. Gore and his legion of followers is anything but the settled scientific fact they claim."
In his column, Tierney noted that last January, weather experts in England confidently predicted that the buildup of greenhouse gases would make 2007 the "hottest year on record." Tierney then illustrated the fanatical commitment to global warming that we of the great unwashed see all the time. He wrote "even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record (it was actually lower than any year since 2001) the BBC confidently proclaimed, '2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.'"
Global warming is not a scientific fact. Shoot, global warming does not even rise to the level of scientific theory. In order to qualify as a scientific, a theory must in principle be falsifiable. There must be some conceivable means of disproving it. By rendering global warming bulletproof, devotees have transferred global warming to the unassailable regions of faith.
Examples of this sort of thing are everywhere. According to satellite imaging, ice in the Arctic has thinned. Good old Squealer (the sycophant media) trumpeted this as an indication that the entire planet was warming. However, when the same technology revealed that ice in the Antarctic increased to the highest level ever recorded, Squealer totally ignored the data.
Remember the hand wringing and chest beating indulged in by Napoleon after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita? A sure sign of the terrible hurricanes our overheated planet would generate in the coming years, he bellowed. He never mentioned the last two quiet seasons while accepting the Nobel Prize.
In a recent report to the a senate subcommittee, more than 400 climatologists cast doubt upon the "scientific consensus" that man-made global warming is a threat to the planet. Many of the scientists were members of the IGPCC.
If it was about science, real scientists would welcome the minority report. Instead, dissenting scientists are ostracized and accused of industrial collusion. Now, here is the truth: Global warming has nothing to do with a verifiable warming of our planet. It has everything to do with man's control over other men with "science" as the tool.
Ed Iverson is a former Fallon (Nevada)resident.
Friday, October 26, 2007
35 Mistakes, continued to conclusion
ERROR 27
Mosquitoes "climbing to higher altitudes"
Gore says that, because of “global warming”, mosquitoes are climbing to higher altitudes. They are not. Most recent outbreaks have been at lower levels than those of a century and more ago. He says that Nairobi was founded 1000 m above sea level so as to be above the mosquito line. It was not. In the period before anthropogenic warming could have had any significant effect, there were ten malaria outbreaks in Nairobi, one of which reached as far up as Eldoret, almost 3000 m above sea level. Malaria is not a tropical disease. Mosquitoes do not need tropical temperatures: they need no more than 15 degrees Celsius to breed. The largest malaria outbreak of modern times was in Siberia in the 1920s and 1930s, when 13 million were infected, 600,000 died and 30,000 died as far north as Arkhangelsk, on the Arctic Circle. There is no reason to suppose that malaria will spread even if the climate continues to become warmer.
ERROR 28
Many tropical diseases "spread through
'global warming'"
Gore says that, as well as malaria, “global warming” is spreading dengue fever, Lyme disease, West Nile virus, arena virus, avian flu, Ebola virus, E. Coli 0157:H7, Hanta virus, legionella, leptospirosis, multi-drug-resistant TB, Nipah virus, SARS and Vibrio Cholerae 0139. It is doing no such thing. Only the first four diseases are insect-borne, but none is tropical. Of the other diseases named by Gore either in his film or in the accompanying book, not one is sensitive to increasing temperature. They are spread not by warmer weather but by rats, chickens, primates, pigs, poor hygiene, ill-maintained air conditioning, or cold weather.
ERROR 29
West Nile virus in the US "spread through
'global warming'"
Gore says that West Nile virus spread throughout the US in just two years, implicitly because of “global warming.” It did not. The climate in the US ranges from some of the world’s hottest deserts to some of its iciest tundra. West Nile virus flourishes in any climate. Warming of the climate, however caused, does not affect its incidence or prevalence.
ERROR 30
Carbon dioxide is "pollution"
Gore describes carbon dioxide as “global warming pollution.” It is not. It is food for plants and trees. Tests have shown that even at concentrations 30 times those of the present day even the most delicate plants flourish. Well-managed forests, such as those of the United States, are growing at record rates because the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is feeding the trees. Carbon dioxide, in geological timescale, is at a very low concentration at present. Half a billion years ago it was at 7000 parts per million by volume, about 18 times today’s concentration.
ERROR 31
The European heat wave of 2003 "killed 35,000"
Gore says, “A couple of years ago in Europe they had that heat wave that killed 35,000.” Though some scientists agree with Gore, the scientific consensus is that extreme warm anomalies more unusual than the 2003 heat wave occur regularly; extreme cold anomalies also occur regularly; El Niño and volcanism appear to be of much greater importance than any general warming trend; and there is little evidence that regional heat or cold waves are significantly increasing or decreasing with time. In general, warm is better than cold, which is why the largest number of life-forms are in the tropics and the least number are at the poles. A cold snap in the winter following the European heat wave killed 20,000 in the UK alone. Though the IPCC says 150,000 people a year are being killed worldwide by “global warming,” it reaches this figure only by deliberately excluding the number of people who are not being killed because there is less cold weather. In the US alone, it has been estimated that 174,000 fewer people are being killed each year because there are fewer episodes of extreme cold.
ERROR 32
Pied flycatchers "cannot feed their young"
Gore says “The peak arrival date for migratory birds 25 years ago was April 25. Their chicks hatched on June 3, just at the time when the caterpillars were coming out: Nature’s plan. But 20 years of warming later the caterpillars peaked two weeks earlier. The chicks tried to catch up with it, but they couldn’t. So they are in trouble.” Yet adaptation is easy for the flycatchers: they merely fly a few tens of kilometers further north and they will find caterpillars hatching at the appropriate time. Besides, though Gore does not say so, what is bad news for the pied flycatchers is good news for the caterpillars, and for the butterflies they will become.
ERROR 33
Gore's bogus pictures and film footage
In the book accompanying Gore’s film, the story of the pied flycatchers and the caterpillars is accompanied by a picture of a bird feeding her hungry chicks. However, closer inspection shows that the bird is not a pied flycatcher but a black tern; and that she is not carrying a caterpillar in her beak, but a small fish. Gore similarly misuses spectacular footage of a glacier apparently calving off enormous slabs of ice into the sea – footage that is often shown on television to accompany stories about “global warming.” However, the glacier in question is one that is known to be advancing – and to be doing so more rapidly and more often than previously. It is in southern Argentina, where its snout crosses – and eventually dams, Lake Argentino. Water builds up behind the ice dam and eventually bursts it, causing the spectacular collapse of ice into the lake that is so misleadingly used as the iconic image of the effect of “global warming” on glaciers. The breaking of the ice dam used to occur every eight years or so: now, however, it occurs every five years, not because of “global warming” because of the regional cooling of the southern Atlantic.
ERROR 34
The Thames Barrier "closing more frequently"
Gore says that rising sea levels are compelling the operators of the Thames Barrier to close it more frequently than when it was first built. They are not. The barrier is indeed closed more frequently than when it was built, but the reason has nothing to do with “global warming” or rising sea levels. The reason is a change of policy by which the barrier is closed during exceptionally low tides, so as to retain water in the tidal Thames rather than keeping it out. Yet even the present leader of the official Opposition in the UK Parliament recently used a major speech as the opportunity to mention today’s more frequent closing of the Thames Barrier as though it were a matter of grave concern.
ERROR 35
"No fact...in dispute by anybody."
Gore says that his prediction that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide will rise to more than 600 parts per million by volume as soon as 2050 is “not controversial in any way or in dispute by anybody.” However, not one of the half-dozen official projections of growth in CO2 concentration made by the IPCC shows as much as 600 parts per million by 2050.
Conclusion
35 serious scientific errors
As many as 35 serious scientific errors or exaggerations, all pointing towards invention of a threat that does not exist at all, or exaggerations of phenomena that do exist, do not reflect credit on the presenter of the movie or on those who advised him. The movie is unsuitable for showing to children, and provides no basis for taking policy decisions. Schools that have shown the movie to children are urged to ensure that the errors listed in this memorandum are drawn to the children’s attention.
[1] For a detailed discussion, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html) and also (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_reprint_series/the_role_of_greenland_in_sea_level_rise_a_summary_of_the_current_literature.html)
[1] See (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20060331_issues.pdf)
[1] See: (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=336&Itemid=77)
[1] See discussion at: (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/Kiliman-MAC-4-8-04.pdf)
[1] For a serioius examination of this issue, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_reprint_series/polar_bears_of_western_hudson_bay_and_climate_change.html)
[1] Are Coral Reefs Endangered by Global Warming? (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=382&Itemid=77)
[1] For a discussion of future hurricane trends for Florida, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] For an in depth look at these issues, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/originals/hurricanethreat.html)
[1] For a discussion of the sun’s role in climate, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/the_unruly_sunne_cannot_be_ruled_out_as_a_cause_of_recent_climate_variation.html)
[1] See: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] For fuller discussion of Polar regions and Greenland, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] Discussion by world-class expert and IPCC reviewer: (http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/reiter-climate-change-mbd.pdf)
Mosquitoes "climbing to higher altitudes"
Gore says that, because of “global warming”, mosquitoes are climbing to higher altitudes. They are not. Most recent outbreaks have been at lower levels than those of a century and more ago. He says that Nairobi was founded 1000 m above sea level so as to be above the mosquito line. It was not. In the period before anthropogenic warming could have had any significant effect, there were ten malaria outbreaks in Nairobi, one of which reached as far up as Eldoret, almost 3000 m above sea level. Malaria is not a tropical disease. Mosquitoes do not need tropical temperatures: they need no more than 15 degrees Celsius to breed. The largest malaria outbreak of modern times was in Siberia in the 1920s and 1930s, when 13 million were infected, 600,000 died and 30,000 died as far north as Arkhangelsk, on the Arctic Circle. There is no reason to suppose that malaria will spread even if the climate continues to become warmer.
ERROR 28
Many tropical diseases "spread through
'global warming'"
Gore says that, as well as malaria, “global warming” is spreading dengue fever, Lyme disease, West Nile virus, arena virus, avian flu, Ebola virus, E. Coli 0157:H7, Hanta virus, legionella, leptospirosis, multi-drug-resistant TB, Nipah virus, SARS and Vibrio Cholerae 0139. It is doing no such thing. Only the first four diseases are insect-borne, but none is tropical. Of the other diseases named by Gore either in his film or in the accompanying book, not one is sensitive to increasing temperature. They are spread not by warmer weather but by rats, chickens, primates, pigs, poor hygiene, ill-maintained air conditioning, or cold weather.
ERROR 29
West Nile virus in the US "spread through
'global warming'"
Gore says that West Nile virus spread throughout the US in just two years, implicitly because of “global warming.” It did not. The climate in the US ranges from some of the world’s hottest deserts to some of its iciest tundra. West Nile virus flourishes in any climate. Warming of the climate, however caused, does not affect its incidence or prevalence.
ERROR 30
Carbon dioxide is "pollution"
Gore describes carbon dioxide as “global warming pollution.” It is not. It is food for plants and trees. Tests have shown that even at concentrations 30 times those of the present day even the most delicate plants flourish. Well-managed forests, such as those of the United States, are growing at record rates because the extra carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is feeding the trees. Carbon dioxide, in geological timescale, is at a very low concentration at present. Half a billion years ago it was at 7000 parts per million by volume, about 18 times today’s concentration.
ERROR 31
The European heat wave of 2003 "killed 35,000"
Gore says, “A couple of years ago in Europe they had that heat wave that killed 35,000.” Though some scientists agree with Gore, the scientific consensus is that extreme warm anomalies more unusual than the 2003 heat wave occur regularly; extreme cold anomalies also occur regularly; El Niño and volcanism appear to be of much greater importance than any general warming trend; and there is little evidence that regional heat or cold waves are significantly increasing or decreasing with time. In general, warm is better than cold, which is why the largest number of life-forms are in the tropics and the least number are at the poles. A cold snap in the winter following the European heat wave killed 20,000 in the UK alone. Though the IPCC says 150,000 people a year are being killed worldwide by “global warming,” it reaches this figure only by deliberately excluding the number of people who are not being killed because there is less cold weather. In the US alone, it has been estimated that 174,000 fewer people are being killed each year because there are fewer episodes of extreme cold.
ERROR 32
Pied flycatchers "cannot feed their young"
Gore says “The peak arrival date for migratory birds 25 years ago was April 25. Their chicks hatched on June 3, just at the time when the caterpillars were coming out: Nature’s plan. But 20 years of warming later the caterpillars peaked two weeks earlier. The chicks tried to catch up with it, but they couldn’t. So they are in trouble.” Yet adaptation is easy for the flycatchers: they merely fly a few tens of kilometers further north and they will find caterpillars hatching at the appropriate time. Besides, though Gore does not say so, what is bad news for the pied flycatchers is good news for the caterpillars, and for the butterflies they will become.
ERROR 33
Gore's bogus pictures and film footage
In the book accompanying Gore’s film, the story of the pied flycatchers and the caterpillars is accompanied by a picture of a bird feeding her hungry chicks. However, closer inspection shows that the bird is not a pied flycatcher but a black tern; and that she is not carrying a caterpillar in her beak, but a small fish. Gore similarly misuses spectacular footage of a glacier apparently calving off enormous slabs of ice into the sea – footage that is often shown on television to accompany stories about “global warming.” However, the glacier in question is one that is known to be advancing – and to be doing so more rapidly and more often than previously. It is in southern Argentina, where its snout crosses – and eventually dams, Lake Argentino. Water builds up behind the ice dam and eventually bursts it, causing the spectacular collapse of ice into the lake that is so misleadingly used as the iconic image of the effect of “global warming” on glaciers. The breaking of the ice dam used to occur every eight years or so: now, however, it occurs every five years, not because of “global warming” because of the regional cooling of the southern Atlantic.
ERROR 34
The Thames Barrier "closing more frequently"
Gore says that rising sea levels are compelling the operators of the Thames Barrier to close it more frequently than when it was first built. They are not. The barrier is indeed closed more frequently than when it was built, but the reason has nothing to do with “global warming” or rising sea levels. The reason is a change of policy by which the barrier is closed during exceptionally low tides, so as to retain water in the tidal Thames rather than keeping it out. Yet even the present leader of the official Opposition in the UK Parliament recently used a major speech as the opportunity to mention today’s more frequent closing of the Thames Barrier as though it were a matter of grave concern.
ERROR 35
"No fact...in dispute by anybody."
Gore says that his prediction that the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide will rise to more than 600 parts per million by volume as soon as 2050 is “not controversial in any way or in dispute by anybody.” However, not one of the half-dozen official projections of growth in CO2 concentration made by the IPCC shows as much as 600 parts per million by 2050.
Conclusion
35 serious scientific errors
As many as 35 serious scientific errors or exaggerations, all pointing towards invention of a threat that does not exist at all, or exaggerations of phenomena that do exist, do not reflect credit on the presenter of the movie or on those who advised him. The movie is unsuitable for showing to children, and provides no basis for taking policy decisions. Schools that have shown the movie to children are urged to ensure that the errors listed in this memorandum are drawn to the children’s attention.
[1] For a detailed discussion, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html) and also (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_reprint_series/the_role_of_greenland_in_sea_level_rise_a_summary_of_the_current_literature.html)
[1] See (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20060331_issues.pdf)
[1] See: (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=336&Itemid=77)
[1] See discussion at: (http://www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/Kiliman-MAC-4-8-04.pdf)
[1] For a serioius examination of this issue, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_reprint_series/polar_bears_of_western_hudson_bay_and_climate_change.html)
[1] Are Coral Reefs Endangered by Global Warming? (http://ff.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=382&Itemid=77)
[1] For a discussion of future hurricane trends for Florida, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] For an in depth look at these issues, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/originals/hurricanethreat.html)
[1] For a discussion of the sun’s role in climate, see (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/the_unruly_sunne_cannot_be_ruled_out_as_a_cause_of_recent_climate_variation.html)
[1] See: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] For fuller discussion of Polar regions and Greenland, see: (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/sppi_originals/current_issues_in_climate_science_focus_on_the_poles.html)
[1] Discussion by world-class expert and IPCC reviewer: (http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/reiter-climate-change-mbd.pdf)
35 mistakes, continued........
ERROR 22
Mountain glaciers worldwide "disappearing"
Gore says that “the ice has a story to tell, and it is worldwide.” He shows several before-and-after pictures of glaciers disappearing. However, the glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and “global warming” had nothing to do with that.
ERROR 23
Sahara desert "drying"
Gore says terrible tragedies are occurring in the southern Sahara because of drought which he blames on “global warming.” There is no drought caused by “global warming.” In 2007 there were record rains across the whole of the southern Sahara. In the past 25 years the Sahara has shrunk by some 300,000 square kilometers because of additional rainfall. Some scientists think “global warming” may actually mitigate pre-existing droughts because there will be more water vapor in the atmosphere. Before 1200 AD there were frequent, prolonged and severe droughts in the Great Plains. Since 1200 AD, there has been more rainfall. Likewise, the US has had more rainfall since the 1950s than it had in the earlier part of the 20th Century, when the great droughts which were then common were described by John Steinbeck in The Grapes of Wrath. South African rainfall was also more stable in the second half of the 20th Century, when human effect on climate is said to have become significant, than in the first half.
ERROR 24
West Antarctic ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says disturbing changes have been measured under the West Antarctic ice sheet, implicitly because of “global warming.” Yet most of the recession in this ice sheet over the past 10,000 years has occurred in the absence of any sea-level or temperature forcing. In most of Antarctica, the ice is in fact growing thicker. Mean Antarctic temperature has actually fallen throughout the past half-century. In some Antarctic glens, environmental damage has been caused by temperature decreases of up to 2 degrees Celsius. Antarctic sea-ice spread to a 30-year record extent in late 2007.
ERROR 25
Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves "breaking up"
Gore says half a dozen ice shelves each “larger than Rhode Island” have broken up and vanished from the Antarctic Peninsula recently, implicitly because of “global warming.” Global warming is unlikely to have been the cause. Gore does not explain that the ice shelves have melted before, as studies of seabed sediments have shown. The Antarctic Peninsula accounts for about 2% of the continent, in most of which the ice is growing thicker. All the recently-melted shelves, added together, amount to an area less than one-fifty-fifth the size of Texas.
ERROR 26
Larsen B Ice Shelf "broke up because of
'global warming'"
Gore focuses on the Larsen B ice shelf, saying that it completely disappeared in 35 days. Yet there has been extensive ice-shelf break-up throughout the past 10,000 years, and the maximum ice-shelf extent may have been in the Little Ice Age in the late 15th century.
Mountain glaciers worldwide "disappearing"
Gore says that “the ice has a story to tell, and it is worldwide.” He shows several before-and-after pictures of glaciers disappearing. However, the glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and “global warming” had nothing to do with that.
ERROR 23
Sahara desert "drying"
Gore says terrible tragedies are occurring in the southern Sahara because of drought which he blames on “global warming.” There is no drought caused by “global warming.” In 2007 there were record rains across the whole of the southern Sahara. In the past 25 years the Sahara has shrunk by some 300,000 square kilometers because of additional rainfall. Some scientists think “global warming” may actually mitigate pre-existing droughts because there will be more water vapor in the atmosphere. Before 1200 AD there were frequent, prolonged and severe droughts in the Great Plains. Since 1200 AD, there has been more rainfall. Likewise, the US has had more rainfall since the 1950s than it had in the earlier part of the 20th Century, when the great droughts which were then common were described by John Steinbeck in The Grapes of Wrath. South African rainfall was also more stable in the second half of the 20th Century, when human effect on climate is said to have become significant, than in the first half.
ERROR 24West Antarctic ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says disturbing changes have been measured under the West Antarctic ice sheet, implicitly because of “global warming.” Yet most of the recession in this ice sheet over the past 10,000 years has occurred in the absence of any sea-level or temperature forcing. In most of Antarctica, the ice is in fact growing thicker. Mean Antarctic temperature has actually fallen throughout the past half-century. In some Antarctic glens, environmental damage has been caused by temperature decreases of up to 2 degrees Celsius. Antarctic sea-ice spread to a 30-year record extent in late 2007.
ERROR 25Antarctic Peninsula ice shelves "breaking up"
Gore says half a dozen ice shelves each “larger than Rhode Island” have broken up and vanished from the Antarctic Peninsula recently, implicitly because of “global warming.” Global warming is unlikely to have been the cause. Gore does not explain that the ice shelves have melted before, as studies of seabed sediments have shown. The Antarctic Peninsula accounts for about 2% of the continent, in most of which the ice is growing thicker. All the recently-melted shelves, added together, amount to an area less than one-fifty-fifth the size of Texas.
ERROR 26
Larsen B Ice Shelf "broke up because of
'global warming'"
Gore focuses on the Larsen B ice shelf, saying that it completely disappeared in 35 days. Yet there has been extensive ice-shelf break-up throughout the past 10,000 years, and the maximum ice-shelf extent may have been in the Little Ice Age in the late 15th century.
35 Mistakes, continued
ERROR 15
Mumbai "flooding"
Gore says flooding in Mumbai is increasing, by implication because of “global warming.” It is not. Rainfall trends at the two major weather stations in Mumbai show no increase in heavy rainfall over the past 48 years.
ERROR 16
Severe tornadoes "more frequent"
Gore says that 2004 set an all-time record for tornadoes in the US. More tornadoes are being reported because detection systems are better than they were. But the number of severe tornadoes has been falling for more than 50 years.
ERROR 17
The sun "heats the Arctic ocean"
Gore says that ice-melt allows the Sun to heat the Arctic Ocean, and a diagram shows the Sun’s rays heating it directly. It does not. The ocean emits radiant energy at the moment of absorption, and would freeze if there were no atmosphere. It is the atmosphere, not the Sun that warms the ocean. Also, Gore’s diagram confuses the tropopause with the ionosphere, and he makes a number of other errors indicating that he does not understand the elementary physics of radiative transfer.
ERROR 18
Arctic "warming fastest"
Gore says the Arctic has been warming faster than the rest of the planet. It is not. While it is in general true that during periods of warming (whether natural or anthropogenic) the Arctic will warm faster than other regions, Gore does not mention that the Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the spring of 2007, but few newspapers reported this. The newspapers reported that the North-West Passage was free of ice in 2007, and said that this was for the first time since records began: but the records, taken by satellites, had only begun 29 years previously. The North-West Passage had also been open for shipping in 1945, and, in 1903, the great Norwegian explorer Amundsen had passed through it in a sailing ship.
ERROR 19
Greenland ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says “global warming” is making the Greenland ice sheet unstable. It is not. Greenland ice grows 2in a year. The Greenland ice sheet survived each of the previous three interglacial periods, each of which was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present. It survived atmospheric CO2 concentrations of up to 1000 ppmv (compared with today’s 400 ppmv). It last melted 850,000 years ago, when humankind did not exist and could not have caused the melting. There is a close correlation between variations in Solar activity and temperature anomalies in Greenland, but there is no correlation between variations in CO2 concentration and temperature changes in Greenland. The IPCC (2001) says that to melt even half the Greenland ice sheet would require temperature to rise by 5.5 degrees C and remain that high for several thousand years.
ERROR 20
Himalayan glacial melt waters "failing"
Gore says 40% of the world’s population get their water supply from Himalayan glacial melt waters that are failing because of “global warming.” They don’t and they are not. The water comes almost entirely from snow-melt, not from ice-melt. Over the past 40 years there has been no decline in the amount of snow-melt in Eurasia.
ERROR 21
Peruvian glaciers "disappearing"
Gore says that a Peruvian glacier is less extensive now than it was in the 1940s, implying that “global warming” is the cause. It is not. Except for the very highest peaks, the normal state of the Peruvian cordilleras has been ice-free throughout most of the past 10,000 years.
Mumbai "flooding"
Gore says flooding in Mumbai is increasing, by implication because of “global warming.” It is not. Rainfall trends at the two major weather stations in Mumbai show no increase in heavy rainfall over the past 48 years.
ERROR 16
Severe tornadoes "more frequent"
Gore says that 2004 set an all-time record for tornadoes in the US. More tornadoes are being reported because detection systems are better than they were. But the number of severe tornadoes has been falling for more than 50 years.
ERROR 17
The sun "heats the Arctic ocean"
Gore says that ice-melt allows the Sun to heat the Arctic Ocean, and a diagram shows the Sun’s rays heating it directly. It does not. The ocean emits radiant energy at the moment of absorption, and would freeze if there were no atmosphere. It is the atmosphere, not the Sun that warms the ocean. Also, Gore’s diagram confuses the tropopause with the ionosphere, and he makes a number of other errors indicating that he does not understand the elementary physics of radiative transfer.
ERROR 18
Arctic "warming fastest"
Gore says the Arctic has been warming faster than the rest of the planet. It is not. While it is in general true that during periods of warming (whether natural or anthropogenic) the Arctic will warm faster than other regions, Gore does not mention that the Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the spring of 2007, but few newspapers reported this. The newspapers reported that the North-West Passage was free of ice in 2007, and said that this was for the first time since records began: but the records, taken by satellites, had only begun 29 years previously. The North-West Passage had also been open for shipping in 1945, and, in 1903, the great Norwegian explorer Amundsen had passed through it in a sailing ship.
ERROR 19
Greenland ice sheet "unstable"
Gore says “global warming” is making the Greenland ice sheet unstable. It is not. Greenland ice grows 2in a year. The Greenland ice sheet survived each of the previous three interglacial periods, each of which was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present. It survived atmospheric CO2 concentrations of up to 1000 ppmv (compared with today’s 400 ppmv). It last melted 850,000 years ago, when humankind did not exist and could not have caused the melting. There is a close correlation between variations in Solar activity and temperature anomalies in Greenland, but there is no correlation between variations in CO2 concentration and temperature changes in Greenland. The IPCC (2001) says that to melt even half the Greenland ice sheet would require temperature to rise by 5.5 degrees C and remain that high for several thousand years.
ERROR 20
Himalayan glacial melt waters "failing"
Gore says 40% of the world’s population get their water supply from Himalayan glacial melt waters that are failing because of “global warming.” They don’t and they are not. The water comes almost entirely from snow-melt, not from ice-melt. Over the past 40 years there has been no decline in the amount of snow-melt in Eurasia.
ERROR 21
Peruvian glaciers "disappearing"
Gore says that a Peruvian glacier is less extensive now than it was in the 1940s, implying that “global warming” is the cause. It is not. Except for the very highest peaks, the normal state of the Peruvian cordilleras has been ice-free throughout most of the past 10,000 years.
35 Mistakes, continued
ERROR 8
Polar bear "dying"
Gore says a scientific study shows that polar bears are being killed swimming long distances to find ice that has melted away because of “global warming.” They are not. The study, by Monnett & Gleason (2005), mentioned just four dead bears. They had died in an exceptional storm, with high winds and waves in the Beaufort Sea. The amount of sea ice in the Beaufort Sea has grown over the past 30 years. A report for the World Wide Fund for Nature shows that polar bears, which are warm-blooded, have grown in numbers where temperature has increased, and have become fewer where temperature has fallen. Polar bears evolved from brown bears 200,000 years ago, and survived the last interglacial period, when global temperature was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present and there was probably no Arctic ice-cap at all. The real threat to polar bears is not “global warming” but hunting. In 1940, there were just 5,000 polar bears worldwide. Now that hunting is controlled, there are 25,000. Ms. Kreider says sea-ice “was the lowest ever measured for minimum extent in 2007.” She does not say that the measurements, which are done by satellite, go back only 29 years. She does not say that the North-West Passage, a good proxy for Arctic sea-ice extent, was open to shipping in 1945, or that Amundsen passed through in a sailing vessel in 1903.
ERROR 9
Coral reefs "bleaching"
Gore says coral reefs are “bleaching” because of “global warming.” They are not. There was some bleaching in 1998, but this was caused by the exceptional El Nino Southern Oscillation that year. Two similarly severe El Ninos over the past 250 years also caused extensive bleaching. “Global warming” was nothing to do with it.Ms. Kreider says, “The IPCC and other scientific bodies have long identified increases in ocean temperatures with the bleaching of coral reefs.” So they have: but the bleaching in 1998 occurred as a result not of “global warming” but of a rare, though not unique, severe El Nino Southern Oscillation.
ERROR 10
100 ppmv of CO2 "melting mile-thick ice"
Gore implies that the difference of just 100 parts per million by volume in CO2 concentration between an interglacial temperature maximum and an ice-age temperature minimum causes “the difference between a nice day and having a mile of ice above your head.” It does not. Gore’s implication has the effect of overstating the mainstream consensus estimate of the effect of CO2 on temperature at least tenfold. Temperature changes by up to 12 degrees C between glacial minima and interglacial maxima, but CO2 concentration changes by no more than 100 ppmv. Gore is accordingly implying that 100 ppmv can cause a temperature increase of up to 12 degrees C. However, the consensus as expressed by the IPCC is that 100 ppmv of increased CO2 concentration, from 180 to 280 ppmv, would increase radiant energy flux in the atmosphere by 2.33 watts per square meter, or less than 1.2 degrees Celsius including the effect of temperature feedbacks.
ERROR 11
Hurricane Caterina "manmade"
Gore says that Hurricane Caterina, the only hurricane ever to strike the coast of Brazil, was caused by “global warming.” It was not. In 2004, Brazil’s summer sea surface temperatures were cooler than normal, not warmer. But air temperatures were the coldest in 25 years. The air was so much colder than the water that it caused a heat flux from the water to the air similar to that which fuels hurricanes in warm seas.
ERROR 12
Japanese typhoons "a new record"
Gore says that 2004 set a new record for the number of typhoons striking Japan. It did not. The trend in the number of typhoons, and of tropical cyclones, has fallen throughout the past 50 years. The trend in rainfall from cyclones has also fallen, and there has been no trend in monsoon rainfall.
ERROR 13
Hurricanes "getting stronger"
Gore says scientists had been giving warnings that hurricanes will get stronger because of “global warming.” They will not. Over the past 60 years there has been no change in the strength of hurricanes, even though hydrocarbon use went up six-fold in the same period. Research by Dr. Kerry Emanuel, cited by Ms. Kreider, has been discredited by more recent findings that wind-shear effects tend to nullify the amplification of hurricane strength which he had suggested, and, of course, by the observed failure of hurricanes to gain strength during the past 60 years of “global warming.”
ERROR 14
Big storm insurances losses "increasing"
Gore says insurance losses arising from large storms and other extreme-weather events are increasing, by implication because of “global warming.” They are not. Insured losses, as a percentage of the population of coastal areas in the path of hurricanes, were lower even in 2005 than they had been in 1925. In 2006, a very quiet hurricane season, Lloyds of London posted their biggest-ever profit: £3.6 billion.
Polar bear "dying"
Gore says a scientific study shows that polar bears are being killed swimming long distances to find ice that has melted away because of “global warming.” They are not. The study, by Monnett & Gleason (2005), mentioned just four dead bears. They had died in an exceptional storm, with high winds and waves in the Beaufort Sea. The amount of sea ice in the Beaufort Sea has grown over the past 30 years. A report for the World Wide Fund for Nature shows that polar bears, which are warm-blooded, have grown in numbers where temperature has increased, and have become fewer where temperature has fallen. Polar bears evolved from brown bears 200,000 years ago, and survived the last interglacial period, when global temperature was 5 degrees Celsius warmer than the present and there was probably no Arctic ice-cap at all. The real threat to polar bears is not “global warming” but hunting. In 1940, there were just 5,000 polar bears worldwide. Now that hunting is controlled, there are 25,000. Ms. Kreider says sea-ice “was the lowest ever measured for minimum extent in 2007.” She does not say that the measurements, which are done by satellite, go back only 29 years. She does not say that the North-West Passage, a good proxy for Arctic sea-ice extent, was open to shipping in 1945, or that Amundsen passed through in a sailing vessel in 1903.
ERROR 9
Coral reefs "bleaching"
Gore says coral reefs are “bleaching” because of “global warming.” They are not. There was some bleaching in 1998, but this was caused by the exceptional El Nino Southern Oscillation that year. Two similarly severe El Ninos over the past 250 years also caused extensive bleaching. “Global warming” was nothing to do with it.Ms. Kreider says, “The IPCC and other scientific bodies have long identified increases in ocean temperatures with the bleaching of coral reefs.” So they have: but the bleaching in 1998 occurred as a result not of “global warming” but of a rare, though not unique, severe El Nino Southern Oscillation.
ERROR 10
100 ppmv of CO2 "melting mile-thick ice"
Gore implies that the difference of just 100 parts per million by volume in CO2 concentration between an interglacial temperature maximum and an ice-age temperature minimum causes “the difference between a nice day and having a mile of ice above your head.” It does not. Gore’s implication has the effect of overstating the mainstream consensus estimate of the effect of CO2 on temperature at least tenfold. Temperature changes by up to 12 degrees C between glacial minima and interglacial maxima, but CO2 concentration changes by no more than 100 ppmv. Gore is accordingly implying that 100 ppmv can cause a temperature increase of up to 12 degrees C. However, the consensus as expressed by the IPCC is that 100 ppmv of increased CO2 concentration, from 180 to 280 ppmv, would increase radiant energy flux in the atmosphere by 2.33 watts per square meter, or less than 1.2 degrees Celsius including the effect of temperature feedbacks.
ERROR 11
Hurricane Caterina "manmade"
Gore says that Hurricane Caterina, the only hurricane ever to strike the coast of Brazil, was caused by “global warming.” It was not. In 2004, Brazil’s summer sea surface temperatures were cooler than normal, not warmer. But air temperatures were the coldest in 25 years. The air was so much colder than the water that it caused a heat flux from the water to the air similar to that which fuels hurricanes in warm seas.
ERROR 12
Japanese typhoons "a new record"
Gore says that 2004 set a new record for the number of typhoons striking Japan. It did not. The trend in the number of typhoons, and of tropical cyclones, has fallen throughout the past 50 years. The trend in rainfall from cyclones has also fallen, and there has been no trend in monsoon rainfall.
ERROR 13
Hurricanes "getting stronger"
Gore says scientists had been giving warnings that hurricanes will get stronger because of “global warming.” They will not. Over the past 60 years there has been no change in the strength of hurricanes, even though hydrocarbon use went up six-fold in the same period. Research by Dr. Kerry Emanuel, cited by Ms. Kreider, has been discredited by more recent findings that wind-shear effects tend to nullify the amplification of hurricane strength which he had suggested, and, of course, by the observed failure of hurricanes to gain strength during the past 60 years of “global warming.”
ERROR 14
Big storm insurances losses "increasing"
Gore says insurance losses arising from large storms and other extreme-weather events are increasing, by implication because of “global warming.” They are not. Insured losses, as a percentage of the population of coastal areas in the path of hurricanes, were lower even in 2005 than they had been in 1925. In 2006, a very quiet hurricane season, Lloyds of London posted their biggest-ever profit: £3.6 billion.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Judge Rules Against Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"
And Al Gore is being considered for a Nobel Prize and people want him to run for President again? The global warming nonsense just keeps getting more, and more ridiculous. Maybe this is what it will take to reveal the hoax of global warming........legal action......
Peter
Judge Rules Against Al Gore's Global Warming
by Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media
A High Court judge just ruled that former US vice president Al Gore's moving, 'An Inconvenient Truth', promoting what many scientists call "science fiction", has now been court ordered to provide a listed document explaining nine scientific errors in Al Gore's film when distributing this "politically biased" film to schools. The Government had pledged to send thousands of copies of the film to schools across the country, but a Kent father challenged that policy saying it would "brainwash" children.
A judge was asked to adjudicate between Stewart Dimmock and the Department of Children, Schools and Families. Mr Justice Burton ruled that the film could be sent to schools, but only if it was accompanied by new guidelines to balance the former US vice-president's "one-sided" views. The judge said some of the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration" in order to support Mr Gore's thesis on global warming.
He said that while the film was dramatic and highly professional, it formed part the ex-politician's global crusade on climate change and not all the claims were supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus. He went on to list those errors:-
Error one Al Gore: A sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future".The judge's finding: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore's "wake-up call". It was common ground that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia."-
Error two Gore: Low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls are already "being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming."Judge: There was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.-
Error three Gore: The documentary described global warming potentially "shutting down the Ocean Conveyor" - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe.Judge: According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it was "very unlikely" it would be shut down, though it might slow down.-
Error four Gore: He asserted - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit".Judge: Although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts".-
Error five Gore: The disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to global warming.Judge: This "specifically impressed" David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, but the scientific consensus was that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.-
Error six Gore: The drying up of Lake Chad was used in the film as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming, said the judge.Judge: "It is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability."-
Error seven Gore: Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans to global warming.Judge: There is "insufficient evidence to show that".-
- Error eight Gore: Referred to a new scientific study showing that, for the first time, polar bears were being found that had actually drowned "swimming long distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice". Judge: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm." That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued - "but it plainly does not support Mr Gore's description".-
Error nine Gore: Coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors.Judge: The IPCC had reported that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality, unless the coral could adapt. But separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult.
Peter
Judge Rules Against Al Gore's Global Warming
by Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media
A High Court judge just ruled that former US vice president Al Gore's moving, 'An Inconvenient Truth', promoting what many scientists call "science fiction", has now been court ordered to provide a listed document explaining nine scientific errors in Al Gore's film when distributing this "politically biased" film to schools. The Government had pledged to send thousands of copies of the film to schools across the country, but a Kent father challenged that policy saying it would "brainwash" children.
A judge was asked to adjudicate between Stewart Dimmock and the Department of Children, Schools and Families. Mr Justice Burton ruled that the film could be sent to schools, but only if it was accompanied by new guidelines to balance the former US vice-president's "one-sided" views. The judge said some of the errors were made in "the context of alarmism and exaggeration" in order to support Mr Gore's thesis on global warming.
He said that while the film was dramatic and highly professional, it formed part the ex-politician's global crusade on climate change and not all the claims were supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus. He went on to list those errors:-
Error one Al Gore: A sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future".The judge's finding: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore's "wake-up call". It was common ground that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia."-
Error two Gore: Low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls are already "being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming."Judge: There was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.-
Error three Gore: The documentary described global warming potentially "shutting down the Ocean Conveyor" - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over the North Atlantic to western Europe.Judge: According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it was "very unlikely" it would be shut down, though it might slow down.-
Error four Gore: He asserted - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit".Judge: Although there was general scientific agreement that there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts".-
Error five Gore: The disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to global warming.Judge: This "specifically impressed" David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, but the scientific consensus was that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.-
Error six Gore: The drying up of Lake Chad was used in the film as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming, said the judge.Judge: "It is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability."-
Error seven Gore: Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans to global warming.Judge: There is "insufficient evidence to show that".-
- Error eight Gore: Referred to a new scientific study showing that, for the first time, polar bears were being found that had actually drowned "swimming long distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice". Judge: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm." That was not to say there might not in future be drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice continued - "but it plainly does not support Mr Gore's description".-
Error nine Gore: Coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors.Judge: The IPCC had reported that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality, unless the coral could adapt. But separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was difficult.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Schools Must Warn Of Gore Climate Film Bias
It looks like our British friends are finally beginning to catch on to the hoax that Al Gore is perpetuating about the myth of man-caused global warming. Hopefully this represents the "tipping point" and this nonsense and fear-mongering about global warming will fade away like Al Gore.
Peter
Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias
Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" has been called unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'.Schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore's controversial film about global warming, a judge indicated yesterday.
The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of 'brainwashing' children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'.
He wants the video banned after it was distributed with four other short films to 3,500 schools in February.
Mr Justice Burton is due to deliver a ruling on the case next week, but yesterday he said he would be saying that Gore's Oscar-winning film does promote 'partisan political views'.
This means that teachers will have to warn pupils that there are other opinions on global warming and they should not necessarily accept the views of the film.
He said: 'The result is I will be declaring that, with the guidance as now amended, it will not be unlawful for the film to be shown.'
Al Gore talks about Hurricane Katrina in a scene from the controversial movie
The outcome marks a partial victory for Mr Dimmock, who had accused the 'New Labour Thought Police' of indoctrinating youngsters by handing out thousands of Climate Change Packs to schools.
Mr Dimmock, a lorry driver from Dover with children aged 11 and 14, said at the outset of the hearing: 'I wish my children to have the best education possible, free from bias and political spin, and Mr Gore's film falls far short of the standard required.'
His solicitor John Day, said yesterday that the Government had been forced to make 'a U-turn', but said it did not go far enough.
He said 'no amount of turgid guidance' could change the fact that the film is unfit for consumption in the classroom.
The case arises from a decision in February by the then Education Secretary Alan Johnson that DVDs of the film would be sent to all secondary schools in England, along with a multimedia CD produced by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs containing two short films about climate change and an animation about the carbon cycle.
David Miliband, who was Environment-Secretary when the school packs were announced, said at the time: 'The debate over the science of climate change is well and truly over.'
But during the three-day hearing, the court heard that the critically-acclaimed film contains a number of inaccuracies, exaggerations and statements about global warming for which there is currently insufficient scientific evidence.
The Climate Change Resource Pack has now been sent to more than 3,500 schools and is aimed at key stage 3 pupils - those aged 11 to
Children's Minister Kevin Brennan said last night: 'The judge's decision is clear that schools can continue to use An Inconvenient Truth as part of their teaching on climate change in accordance with the amended guidance, which will be available online today.
'We have updated the accompanying guidance, as requested by the judge to make it clearer for teachers as to the stated Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change position on a number of scientific points raised in the film.'
Friday, June 15, 2007
"An Inconvenient Truth": Climate Change Is Indeed A Moral Issue
Here is a statement from the "discredited" Prof. Robert M. Carter. Read what he has to say and make up your own mind about whether he makes sense, or not.
Peter
From: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4938
'An Inconvenient Truth': climate change is indeed a moral issue
By Bob Carter - posted Wednesday, 20 September 2006
Al Gore’s movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, has surely been the subject of more reviews and media comment than any other film in recent history. Not least because of the unflagging razzmatazz with which Mr Gore has undertaken a world “author’s tour” to invoke publicity.
The Australian media - with Four Corners, the Andrew Denton Show and Phillip Adams in the vanguard - have fallen compliantly into Mr Gore’s sticky fly-trap, producing breathless hagiographies of a man and film whose message is rooted in junk science.
Film reviews typically contain four types of information. What a film is about: in this case, human-caused global warming. How well a film is made: this one being a beautifully crafted, photographed and edited production. How well the actors play their roles: the only actor here, Al Gore, scrubs up moderately well, exhibiting no obvious hanging chads though delivering an over-rehearsed, and somewhat self-indulgent, performance. And finally, whether a film is fact or fiction: in this case … well hang on a moment.
Those raw scientific facts that Mr Gore chooses for use in An Inconvenient Truth are mostly correct. Indeed, much of the material could have been drawn from elementary university courses in meteorology, geography or geology, though one would hope that university treatments would be presented in a more balanced and critical way.
Overall, the film is a compelling account of various natural earth phenomena that have the potential to impact humanity disastrously, and therefore a graphic illustration of the fact that we live on a dynamic planet. Were the film to be stripped of its sententious script, we might be watching an episode in David Attenborough’s recent TV series, Planet Earth.
Hence, presumably, the appeal to audiences: who often break into spontaneous applause at the end of a showing, and thereby reveal both their gullibility to emotional messages and their lack of scientific understanding.
For the problem with An Inconvenient Truth is that it is well-made propaganda for the global warming cause rather than well-made climate science. Nowhere does Mr Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet. Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change. This is not surprising, for no such evidence yet exists.
During his movie, Mr Gore asserts that climate change is now a moral rather than a scientific issue. He is right, though not in quite the way that he might have imagined.
The moral issue concerns the way in which much of today's environmental “science” - including that regarding climate change, as typified by this film - is presented to governments and the public. Mr Gore clearly believes that his presumed morally superior ends justify any means, including distortion of evidence, and in consequence he nails his colours firmly to the climate alarmist mast.
In an interview with Grist Magazine, when asked about his film: do you scare people or give them hope?
Mr Gore replied:
I think the answer to that depends on where your audience’s head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual solutions on how dangerous it (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.
Indeed. And the intellectual dishonesty involved in this is not restricted to Mr Gore’s film, but has become all pervasive.
For example, professional sociologists at the London-based Institute for Policy Research urge that “the task of climate change agencies is not to persuade by rational argument. ... Instead, we need to work in a more shrewd and contemporary way, using subtle techniques of engagement. ... The ‘facts’ need to be treated as being so taken-for-granted that they need not be spoken”.
And the same authors then calmly advise: “Ultimately, positive climate behaviours need to be approached in the same way as marketeers approach acts of buying and consuming. ... It amounts to treating climate-friendly activity as a brand that can be sold. This is, we believe, the route to mass behaviour change”.
Add to these astonishing, Orwellesque statements the fact that Gore and his Australian acolyte Phillip Adams urge that the public should take global warming seriously because “more and more corporations see a quid in the climate” and the crack in moral integrity becomes a yawning chasm.
The moral issue with An Inconvenient Truth is that of a person of talent, born into a privileged family, and given opportunities to rise to the position of vice-president of the United States, who then uses his privileged position to lead a campaign of misinformation. Conviction politics is doubtless needed to rise to the top of the political ladder in any country; conviction science, in contrast, is a contradiction in terms that should be anathema to any democratic society.
Professor Hubert Lamb, doyen of 20th century climatologists, remarked in his classic book, Climate History and the Modern World that: “The possibility of global warming, even drastic warming with dislocation of other elements of the climate pattern as a consequence, has to be balanced against the possibility of cooling, even drastic cooling, as the natural climate develops over the same period. Neither side of the balance is yet adequately known and understood.”
Precisely. Professor Lamb’s wise words were accurate in 1982 and they remain accurate today. The task of climate policy, therefore, is to ensure society’s capability to react appropriately to the full range of modern natural weather events, and to prepare adaptive plans equally for both future climatic warmings and the much more dangerous coolings.
Would that Mr Gore’s army of supporters were able to comprehend this simple advice. With respect to which, it is noteworthy that global temperature has not risen since 1998, and that scientists at the Russian Academy of Sciences have recently issued a warning that the next 20 years are likely to see the development of a Little Ice Age, similar to the one documented from Europe during the Middle Ages.
And what about the final piece of advice that is found in most reviews - should you go to see this film, or not? Well, yes, if you like majestic photography of dynamic earth phenomena and understand that the changes depicted will always be with us. And no, if you dislike sanctimonious propaganda.
A detailed analysis of the inadequacy of the science behind Mr Gore's film can be found here.
Peter
From: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4938
'An Inconvenient Truth': climate change is indeed a moral issue
By Bob Carter - posted Wednesday, 20 September 2006
Al Gore’s movie on global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, has surely been the subject of more reviews and media comment than any other film in recent history. Not least because of the unflagging razzmatazz with which Mr Gore has undertaken a world “author’s tour” to invoke publicity.
The Australian media - with Four Corners, the Andrew Denton Show and Phillip Adams in the vanguard - have fallen compliantly into Mr Gore’s sticky fly-trap, producing breathless hagiographies of a man and film whose message is rooted in junk science.
Film reviews typically contain four types of information. What a film is about: in this case, human-caused global warming. How well a film is made: this one being a beautifully crafted, photographed and edited production. How well the actors play their roles: the only actor here, Al Gore, scrubs up moderately well, exhibiting no obvious hanging chads though delivering an over-rehearsed, and somewhat self-indulgent, performance. And finally, whether a film is fact or fiction: in this case … well hang on a moment.
Those raw scientific facts that Mr Gore chooses for use in An Inconvenient Truth are mostly correct. Indeed, much of the material could have been drawn from elementary university courses in meteorology, geography or geology, though one would hope that university treatments would be presented in a more balanced and critical way.
Overall, the film is a compelling account of various natural earth phenomena that have the potential to impact humanity disastrously, and therefore a graphic illustration of the fact that we live on a dynamic planet. Were the film to be stripped of its sententious script, we might be watching an episode in David Attenborough’s recent TV series, Planet Earth.
Hence, presumably, the appeal to audiences: who often break into spontaneous applause at the end of a showing, and thereby reveal both their gullibility to emotional messages and their lack of scientific understanding.
For the problem with An Inconvenient Truth is that it is well-made propaganda for the global warming cause rather than well-made climate science. Nowhere does Mr Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet. Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change. This is not surprising, for no such evidence yet exists.
During his movie, Mr Gore asserts that climate change is now a moral rather than a scientific issue. He is right, though not in quite the way that he might have imagined.
The moral issue concerns the way in which much of today's environmental “science” - including that regarding climate change, as typified by this film - is presented to governments and the public. Mr Gore clearly believes that his presumed morally superior ends justify any means, including distortion of evidence, and in consequence he nails his colours firmly to the climate alarmist mast.
In an interview with Grist Magazine, when asked about his film: do you scare people or give them hope?
Mr Gore replied:
I think the answer to that depends on where your audience’s head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual solutions on how dangerous it (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.
Indeed. And the intellectual dishonesty involved in this is not restricted to Mr Gore’s film, but has become all pervasive.
For example, professional sociologists at the London-based Institute for Policy Research urge that “the task of climate change agencies is not to persuade by rational argument. ... Instead, we need to work in a more shrewd and contemporary way, using subtle techniques of engagement. ... The ‘facts’ need to be treated as being so taken-for-granted that they need not be spoken”.
And the same authors then calmly advise: “Ultimately, positive climate behaviours need to be approached in the same way as marketeers approach acts of buying and consuming. ... It amounts to treating climate-friendly activity as a brand that can be sold. This is, we believe, the route to mass behaviour change”.
Add to these astonishing, Orwellesque statements the fact that Gore and his Australian acolyte Phillip Adams urge that the public should take global warming seriously because “more and more corporations see a quid in the climate” and the crack in moral integrity becomes a yawning chasm.
The moral issue with An Inconvenient Truth is that of a person of talent, born into a privileged family, and given opportunities to rise to the position of vice-president of the United States, who then uses his privileged position to lead a campaign of misinformation. Conviction politics is doubtless needed to rise to the top of the political ladder in any country; conviction science, in contrast, is a contradiction in terms that should be anathema to any democratic society.
Professor Hubert Lamb, doyen of 20th century climatologists, remarked in his classic book, Climate History and the Modern World that: “The possibility of global warming, even drastic warming with dislocation of other elements of the climate pattern as a consequence, has to be balanced against the possibility of cooling, even drastic cooling, as the natural climate develops over the same period. Neither side of the balance is yet adequately known and understood.”
Precisely. Professor Lamb’s wise words were accurate in 1982 and they remain accurate today. The task of climate policy, therefore, is to ensure society’s capability to react appropriately to the full range of modern natural weather events, and to prepare adaptive plans equally for both future climatic warmings and the much more dangerous coolings.
Would that Mr Gore’s army of supporters were able to comprehend this simple advice. With respect to which, it is noteworthy that global temperature has not risen since 1998, and that scientists at the Russian Academy of Sciences have recently issued a warning that the next 20 years are likely to see the development of a Little Ice Age, similar to the one documented from Europe during the Middle Ages.
And what about the final piece of advice that is found in most reviews - should you go to see this film, or not? Well, yes, if you like majestic photography of dynamic earth phenomena and understand that the changes depicted will always be with us. And no, if you dislike sanctimonious propaganda.
A detailed analysis of the inadequacy of the science behind Mr Gore's film can be found here.
Godwin's Law, "An Inconvenient Truth" and "Triumph of the Will"....An Appropriate Comparison.
Some people took offense at my comparing Al Gore's "documentary" "An Inconvenient Truth" to Hitler's film "The Triumph of the Will", made in 1934. I didn't say Al Gore was like Hitler, I said the films used similar techniques, namely the are both prime examples of propaganda.
Amazingly, there are unofficial "rule" of etiquette in online, or Internet debates. One of them is called Godwin's Law, and it relates to the use to the words Hitler and Nazi. Apparently this is considered "poor form". However note that there is an exception, and that is when the comparison is valid. See what wikipedia says on the subject.
Peter
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies[1]) is an adage that Mike Godwin formulated in 1990. The law states:[2]
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Godwin's Law does not question whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,[3] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.
Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[4] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.
Godwin has stated that he introduced Godwin's Law as an experiment in memetics.[2]
[There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's Law.
It is considered poor form to raise arbitrarily such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's Law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as "Quirk's Exception").[5]
Godwin's Law does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime. Instead, it applies to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis. However, Godwin's Law can itself also be abused, as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.
Amazingly, there are unofficial "rule" of etiquette in online, or Internet debates. One of them is called Godwin's Law, and it relates to the use to the words Hitler and Nazi. Apparently this is considered "poor form". However note that there is an exception, and that is when the comparison is valid. See what wikipedia says on the subject.
Peter
Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies[1]) is an adage that Mike Godwin formulated in 1990. The law states:[2]
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.
Godwin's Law does not question whether any particular reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that one arising is increasingly probable. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,[3] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.
Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[4] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.
Godwin has stated that he introduced Godwin's Law as an experiment in memetics.[2]
[There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's Law.
It is considered poor form to raise arbitrarily such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's Law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as "Quirk's Exception").[5]
Godwin's Law does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime. Instead, it applies to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis. However, Godwin's Law can itself also be abused, as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Stopping Global Warming a Matter of Will, Call It "Triumph of the Will"....Sound Familiar?
Just some thoughts while reading this article from: http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11658
First, an excerpt of the article at the bottom of this post. The author is explaining how controlling carbon dioxide emissions and thus global warming is a political issue. Now read his last sentence, "and in politics, most things can be done if there is the will."
Now read this about an infamous movie titled "Triumph of the Will", and see if it doesn't remind you a lot of a movie titled "An Inconvenient Truth". The similarities are chilling, globally chilling.
Peter
Triumph of the Will
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Directed by
Leni Riefenstahl
Produced by
Leni RiefenstahlAdolf Hitler
Written by
Leni RiefenstahlWalter Ruttmann
Starring
Adolf HitlerHermann GöringOther Nazi Leaders
Music by
Herbert WindtRichard Wagner
Distributed by
Reichsparteitagsfilm
Release date(s)
28 March 1935 (Berlin)
German
Budget
Unlimited
Triumph of the Will (German: Triumph des Willens) is a propaganda film by the German filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. It chronicles the 1934 Nazi Party Congress in Nuremberg. The film contains excerpts from speeches given by various Nazi leaders at the Congress, including portions of speeches by Adolf Hitler, interspersed with footage of massed party members. Hitler commissioned the film and served as an unofficial executive producer; his name appears in the opening credits. The overriding theme of the film is the return of Germany as a great power, with Hitler as the True German Leader who will bring glory to the nation.
Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the better-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl's techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest propaganda films in history. Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[1] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day, even as it raises the question over the dividing line between art and morality.[2]
(Global Warming) A Political issue
To repeat, this is not primarily a technological or even an economic problem, as huge as these challenges are. It is a political problem. And in politics, most things can be done if there is the will."
First, an excerpt of the article at the bottom of this post. The author is explaining how controlling carbon dioxide emissions and thus global warming is a political issue. Now read his last sentence, "and in politics, most things can be done if there is the will."
Now read this about an infamous movie titled "Triumph of the Will", and see if it doesn't remind you a lot of a movie titled "An Inconvenient Truth". The similarities are chilling, globally chilling.
Peter
Triumph of the Will
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Directed by
Leni Riefenstahl
Produced by
Leni RiefenstahlAdolf Hitler
Written by
Leni RiefenstahlWalter Ruttmann
Starring
Adolf HitlerHermann GöringOther Nazi Leaders
Music by
Herbert WindtRichard Wagner
Distributed by
Reichsparteitagsfilm
Release date(s)
28 March 1935 (Berlin)
German
Budget
Unlimited
Triumph of the Will (German: Triumph des Willens) is a propaganda film by the German filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. It chronicles the 1934 Nazi Party Congress in Nuremberg. The film contains excerpts from speeches given by various Nazi leaders at the Congress, including portions of speeches by Adolf Hitler, interspersed with footage of massed party members. Hitler commissioned the film and served as an unofficial executive producer; his name appears in the opening credits. The overriding theme of the film is the return of Germany as a great power, with Hitler as the True German Leader who will bring glory to the nation.
Triumph of the Will was released in 1935 and rapidly became one of the better-known examples of propaganda in film history. Riefenstahl's techniques, such as moving cameras, the use of telephoto lenses to create a distorted perspective, aerial photography, and revolutionary approach to the use of music and cinematography, have earned Triumph recognition as one of the greatest propaganda films in history. Riefenstahl won several awards, not only in Germany but also in the United States, France, Sweden, and other countries. The film was popular in the Third Reich[1] and elsewhere, and has continued to influence movies, documentaries, and commercials to this day, even as it raises the question over the dividing line between art and morality.[2]
(Global Warming) A Political issue
............"But this is primarily a political issue. The industrialised nations have already emitted enough carbon dioxide to trigger significant warming. Humanity cannot afford for the developing world to take the same path. So a deal has to be done to prevent that. But today the technology to develop on a low-carbon path is much further advanced. And costs are coming down fast.
A new deal to save the world from climate change will probably involve large flows of technology and cash to the developing world. There are precedents for this. Developing countries are already being paid in cash and technology for not using ozone-destroying chemicals in refrigerators and air-conditioning systems. The same must be done on a bigger scale to halt climate change.
A new deal to save the world from climate change will probably involve large flows of technology and cash to the developing world. There are precedents for this. Developing countries are already being paid in cash and technology for not using ozone-destroying chemicals in refrigerators and air-conditioning systems. The same must be done on a bigger scale to halt climate change.
To repeat, this is not primarily a technological or even an economic problem, as huge as these challenges are. It is a political problem. And in politics, most things can be done if there is the will."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)