Gorey Truths
25 inconvenient truths for Al
Gore.
By Iain Murray
With An Inconvenient Truth, the
companion book to former Vice President Al Gore’s global-warming movie,
currently number nine in Amazon sales rank, this is a good time to point out
that the book, which is a largely pictorial representation of the movie’s
graphical presentation, exaggerates the evidence surrounding global warming.
Ironically, the former Vice President leaves out many truths that are
inconvenient for his argument. Here are just 25 of them.
1. Carbon Dioxide’s Effect on Temperature. The
relationship between global temperature and carbon dioxide (CO2), on which the
entire scare is founded, is not linear. Every molecule of CO2 added to the
atmosphere contributes less to warming than the previous one. The book’s graph
on p. 66-67 is seriously misleading. Moreover, even the historical levels of CO2
shown on the graph are disputed. Evidence from plant fossil-remains suggest that
there was as much CO2 in the atmosphere about 11,000 years ago as there is
today.
2. Kilimanjaro. The snows of Kilimanjaro are
melting not because of global warming but because of a local climate shift that
began 100 years ago. The authors of a report in the International Journal of
Climatology “develop a new concept for investigating the retreat of
Kilimanjaro’s glaciers, based on the physical understanding of glacier–climate
interactions.” They note that, “The concept considers the peculiarities of the
mountain and implies that climatological processes other than air temperature
control the ice recession in a direct manner. A drastic drop in atmospheric
moisture at the end of the 19th century and the ensuing drier climatic
conditions are likely forcing glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro.”
3. Glaciers. Glaciers around the world have been
receding at around the same pace for over 100 years. Research published by the
National Academy of Sciences last week indicates that the Peruvian glacier on p.
53-53 probably disappeared a few thousand years ago.
4. The Medieval Warm Period. Al Gore says that
the “hockey stick” graph that shows temperatures remarkably steady for the last
1,000 years has been validated, and ridicules the concept of a “medieval warm
period.” That’s not the case. Last year, a team of leading paleoclimatologists
said, “When matching existing temperature reconstructions…
the timeseries display a reasonably coherent picture of
major climatic episodes:
‘Medieval Warm Period,’ ‘Little Ice Age’ and
‘Recent Warming.’” They go on to conclude, “So what would it mean, if the
reconstructions indicate a larger…
or smaller…temperature amplitude? We suggest that the
former situation, i.e. enhanced variability during pre-industrial times, would
result in a redistribution of weight towards the role of natural factors in
forcing temperature changes, thereby relatively devaluing the impact of
anthropogenic emissions and affecting future temperature predictions.”
5. The Hottest Year. Satellite temperature
measurements say that 2005 wasn't the hottest year on record — 1998 was — and
that temperatures have been stable since 2001 (p.73). Here’s the satellite
graph:
6. Heat Waves. The summer heat wave that struck Europe
in 2003 was caused by an atmospheric pressure anomaly; it had nothing to do with
global warming. As the United Nations Environment Program reported in September
2003, “This extreme wheather [sic] was caused by an anti-cyclone firmly anchored
over the western European land mass holding back the rain-bearing depressions
that usually enter the continent from the Atlantic ocean. This situation was
exceptional in the extended length of time (over 20 days) during which it
conveyed very hot dry air up from south of the Mediterranean.”
CLICK FOR FULL REPORT:>>=============================================
The Global Warming Hoax
Even Roger Revelle, one of the fathers of Global
Warming
theory and the man much touted by Al Gore in his
mockumentary,
came to, well, not disavow his ...
MORE:>>
Al Gore - FOR a One World Church and UN
Dictatorship
MORE:>>Gore, in
Palo Alto, spreads thanks for Nobel Peace Prize win
Nuevo Mundo, CA - 3 hours
ago
By Mary Anne Ostrom and Mark Gomez
Former US Vice-president
Al Gore, center addresses to media during a press
conference
on Friday morning in Palo Alto ...
MORE:>>
Al Gore Interview With Dianne
Sawyer
10 min - May 22, 2007 - (100 ratings)
Iraq, and how the media frames these debates and the
problems
with our democracy and the news media today....Al Gore
Diane
Sawyer Good Morning America
Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of
climate catastrophe "The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom Harris Monday, June 12, 2006 ... more
Scientists respond to Gore's
warnings of climate catastrophe "The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient
to alarmists
By Tom
Harris
Monday, June 12, 2006
"Scientists have an independent
obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly
asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in
Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts
actually think about the science of his movie?
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine
Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for
many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are
so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film,
are commanding public attention."
See also:
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard
Facts?
US being hoodwinked into draconian
climate policies
The Gods must be laughing
A sample of experts' comments about the
science of "An Inconvenient Truth":
But surely Carter is merely part of
what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who
disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly
qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who
contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing
significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here.
Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only
a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate
field.
Even among that fraction, many focus their
studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study
everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly
skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the
causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg
climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the
effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their
studies."
This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't
make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact
experts.
So we have a smaller
fraction.
But it becomes smaller still. Among
experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many
concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of
hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their
scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not
"predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting
policy-makers and the public think they are actually making
forecasts."
We should listen most to scientists who use real
data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes
and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there
is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would
suggest.
Here is a small sample of the side of the debate
we almost never hear:
Appearing before the Commons Committee on
Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University
paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful
correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time
frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now,
about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute
coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee,
"On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent
relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past
century's modest warming?"
Check
out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos.