RSS Feed
Loading ...
‘Inconvenient Truth Lie’ wins Academy Award
Climatologist calls Gore’s film ‘Science Fiction’…
The main point of the movie is that, unless we do something very serious, very soon about carbon dioxide emissions, much of Greenland’s 630,000 cubic miles of ice is going to fall into the ocean, raising sea levels over twenty feet by the year 2100.
Where’s the scientific support for this claim? Certainly not in the recent Policymaker’s Summary from the United Nations’ much anticipated compendium on climate change. Under the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s medium-range emission scenario for greenhouse gases, a rise in sea level of between 8 and 17 inches is predicted by 2100. Gore’s film exaggerates the rise by about 2,000 percent.
Even 17 inches is likely to be high, because it assumes that the concentration of methane, an important greenhouse gas, is growing rapidly. Atmospheric methane concentration hasn’t changed appreciably for seven years, and Nobel Laureate Sherwood Rowland recently pronounced the IPCC’s methane emissions scenarios as “quite unlikely.”
Nonetheless, the top end of the U.N.’s new projection is about 30-percent lower than it was in its last report in 2001. “The projections include a contribution due to increased ice flow from Greenland and Antarctica for the rates observed since 1993,” according to the IPCC, “but these flow rates could increase or decrease in the future.”
According to satellite data published in Science in November 2005, Greenland was losing about 25 cubic miles of ice per year. Dividing that by 630,000 yields the annual percentage of ice loss, which, when multiplied by 100, shows that Greenland was shedding ice at 0.4 percent per century.
“Was” is the operative word. In early February, Science published another paper showing that the recent acceleration of Greenland’s ice loss from its huge glaciers has suddenly reversed.
Nowhere in the traditionally refereed scientific literature do we find any support for Gore’s hypothesis. Instead, there’s an unrefereed editorial by NASA climate firebrand James E. Hansen, in the journal Climate Change — edited by Steven Schneider, of Stanford University, who said in 1989 that scientists had to choose “the right balance between being effective and honest” about global warming — and a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was only reviewed by one person, chosen by the author, again Dr. Hansen.
These are the sources for the notion that we have only ten years to “do” something immediately to prevent an institutionalized tsunami. And given that Gore only conceived of his movie about two years ago, the real clock must be down to eight years!
It would be nice if my colleagues would actually level with politicians about various “solutions” for climate change. The Kyoto Protocol, if fulfilled by every signatory, would reduce global warming by 0.07 degrees Celsius per half-century. That’s too small to measure, because the earth’s temperature varies by more than that from year to year.
The Bingaman-Domenici bill in the Senate does less than Kyoto — i.e., less than nothing — for decades, before mandating larger cuts, which themselves will have only a minor effect out past somewhere around 2075. (Imagine, as a thought experiment, if the Senate of 1925 were to dictate our energy policy for today).
Mendacity on global warming is bipartisan. President Bush proposes that we replace 20 percent of our current gasoline consumption with ethanol over the next decade. But it’s well-known that even if we turned every kernel of American corn into ethanol, it would displace only 12 percent of our annual gasoline consumption. The effect on global warming, like Kyoto, would be too small to measure, though the U.S. would become the first nation in history to burn up its food supply to please a political mob.
Others blogging:
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Virtuous Republic, Right on the Right, Big Dog’s Weblog, Shadowscope, DragonLady’s World, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Pursuing Holiness, Sujet- Celebrities, Pet’s Garden Blog, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein… has no mercy, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, Pirate’s Cove, The Right Nation, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, The Random Yak, A Blog For All, 123beta, Maggie’s Notebook, Adam’s Blog, basil’s blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, Phastidio.net, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Allie Is Wired, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
February 25, 2007 - 11:34 PM on February 25th, 2007
I love that photo of Gore!!!
February 25, 2007 - 11:49 PM on February 25th, 2007
Hollywood has adopted a new leftist definition of “documentary” which omits facts, logic and truth. This was done in order to justify giving Michael Moore an Oscar for his “documentary.” Hollywood’s definition of documentary is inconsistent with legitimate definitions of documentary. But that has never stopped the liberals in Hollywood.
February 25, 2007 - 11:52 PM on February 25th, 2007
How do you think Al Gore went to the Oscars? Did he have the Prius that all liberals seem to worship or did he take the private jet and limo like many “environmentalists” do?
February 26, 2007 - 04:43 AM on February 26th, 2007
So here is a classic example of what I posted in another thread about the academy awards being concerned with political correctness as much as skill and art. Care to acknowledge it, SFL?
They are calling the film a documentary. What a laugh, what a joke! It is no more a documentary than Farenhype 9/11. They are crockumentaries, or propamentaries.
Just shows that the Church of Global Warming has been thoroughly embraced by the Hollywood Idiots.
What a bunch of complete asinine idiots…
February 26, 2007 - 05:21 AM on February 26th, 2007
It’s not really a surprise that those who are kiddin about global warming are not concerned about a rising sea level… if I was >1000 miles away from any coast, I wouldn’t be afraid either…
February 26, 2007 - 07:24 AM on February 26th, 2007
Rocky, It’s okay if he does that stuff..haven’t you been following? Carbon offsets!
February 26, 2007 - 07:31 AM on February 26th, 2007
Carl- here is info to back up what you said:
NPR: From blockbusters like Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 and Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth to smaller films like Deliver Us From Evil, documentaries are drawing large audiences and enjoying something of a renaissance.
But filmmakers fear a slowdown in the growth of interest. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has proposed some rules changes for Oscar qualification for documentaries that many feel will make it hard for small films to survive.
Gore Likely to Win Oscar Sunday Despite Violating Academy’s Rules :
As reported by CNSNews Thursday:
But there’s more:
There are indeed precedents for “documentaries” which falsify or recreate events being either disqualified after the fact, or not considered for Oscars at all:
The article gave other examples as to why Gore’s film should never have been nominated based upon the Academy’s own rules. Unfortunately, it appears irrelevant when politics are involved as stated early in the piece: “Documentaries that distort reality and shade the truth are insulated from criticism so long as they advance left-wing causes.”
I guess this gives conservatives one more reason to do something else on Sunday.
February 26, 2007 - 07:34 AM on February 26th, 2007
Mattias, believe the lies and all you can tell is lies. In the prediction AlBore made, he licd by 2000%! At the High End of predictions is 17 INCHES, you FOOL!!!! Oh, I forgot, you can’t swim and you float face down.
February 26, 2007 - 08:46 AM on February 26th, 2007
Link to Al Gore’s lies
I knew AKD and shitto would be wondering.
February 26, 2007 - 09:00 AM on February 26th, 2007
These awards are no longer awarded for artistic values but the leftists propeganda they show and AL GORE is nothing but a egotistical big mouth and with a little image of a naked bald man you will hear no end to AL GORE and his idiotic banter GET SET FOR MORE HOT AIR FROM THAT JERK:roll:
February 26, 2007 - 09:34 AM on February 26th, 2007
8 - I didn’t want to respond to your repeated unsubstantial bashing, but this temptation is just too strong:
Why do you all of a sudden believe in IPCC predictions? ..don’t they also belong to this leftist commie Church of global warming?…
February 26, 2007 - 09:46 AM on February 26th, 2007
11, Well, Mr. “I channel Legendary liars and propagandists”, I don’t believe in the hysteria promoted by our insane ex-Vice President. The IPCC summary you tout as a report is more substantial than Mr. AlBore will ever be. In the end, fools like you who worship at the altar of anti-americanism will be embarrassed by how slaviahly you repeated baseless non-sense as scientific fact.
February 26, 2007 - 10:07 AM on February 26th, 2007
12- Maybe we (the leftist global warming world conspiracy board) instructed/created Al Gore to act as the extremist voice of our philosophy in order to make it easier for you to swallow to moderate version of our idea…
If we get Hillary or Obama to speak extremely on weird PETA theories we may have a chance to convert all you cons into pet lovers! Or even philanthropists…
February 26, 2007 - 10:14 AM on February 26th, 2007
13, Mattias, you are a fool, pure and simple. You didn’t create AlBore, his dad did in a similar and less successful fashion than Joe Kennedy, Sr. did with his kids. Ted, being the lying drunkard of the bunch is just lucky no one thinks he’s worth a bullet or a bomb.
Now, are you going to tell us all the world’s problems are the fault of the “jooooss”?
February 26, 2007 - 12:57 PM on February 26th, 2007
I may not like Gore, but I lothe your statistic on Greenland - thanks for taking the scientific data and throwing out the window. Your little diatribe suggests that the rate of ice loss will be constant for 100 years, which isn’t just bad reporting - it’s stupid. Like many other glacier melts, more water means *more* melting. Do your research for once.
February 26, 2007 - 01:05 PM on February 26th, 2007
Bob, Thaw out. Do your research. There are Cycles in nature. Some years you melt more, some years you grow more icepack. Sheesh.
February 26, 2007 - 01:13 PM on February 26th, 2007
PCD, Maybe my tone was a bit harsh, but show me one study which says Greenland “grew” more ice than it lost. I can’t find one.
February 26, 2007 - 01:22 PM on February 26th, 2007
Bob, I know what the NRO piece said. I know that the ozone hole opens and closes much to the chagrin of the “watermelons”. Are you going to say that ever inch of the Earth is studied and measured? If you try, I’ll say you are full of crap. Studies only come out about areas the left can use to counter industrialization. Hell, if it furthered their cause, they’d say that Santa Clause at the North Pole causes some ice pack to melt.
February 26, 2007 - 01:40 PM on February 26th, 2007
PCD, nice try. Stop obfusticating the issue. No one’s mentioned the Ozone holes. No one ever said anything about studying every inch of the earth. We’re talking about Greenland. As far as global warming studies are concerned, its studied intensely. Would you like a list of Groups working on that area of the world? Now put up, or shut up.
February 26, 2007 - 02:17 PM on February 26th, 2007
Bob, I’m not interested in your watermelon groups that need to feed at the government trough. Go be a wacko elsewhere.
February 26, 2007 - 04:02 PM on February 26th, 2007
Ah, yes! Remember the ozone hole hysteria? That was another Al Gore boondoggle. Yes, we were all going to burn up from UV exposure, all die, and the planet destroyed.
So we banned Freon 12 and replaced it with R-134. Not as good, but we needed to save the planet! Billions of dollars were spent converting and replacing to use R134.
Then later it turned out the whole thing was bullshit; ozone hole variation is a naturally-occurring phenomenon. Now you never hear it mentioned (except for an occasional idiot who is still reading from his Sierra Klub propaganda pamphlet from the 1970s and isn’t aware the ozone hole is no longer on the top 10 list of ways we are destroying th planet :lol
.
The public has also forgotten this; that they were bamboozled by the same fraud artists back then who are now pushing this vastly larger, incredibly more far-reaching fraud.
The promoters, hucksters, snake oil salesman and eco-commies have NO credibility. Any rational, thinking, non-brainwashed person can see this plain as day.
February 26, 2007 - 06:54 PM on February 26th, 2007
Link to a copy of Al Gore’s real Oscar acceptance speech:
Hre’s the frist few paragraphs:
Ladies and Gentlemen! Comrades!
Climate change is a modern-day equivalent of class struggle. Global Warming is an easily understood, historically inevitable concept in Marxist Science designed to help the Party to crush capitalism and fulfill mankind’s utmost desire to redistribute wealth and establish a centralized global government with an army of enlightened bureaucrats running a planned global economy based on world-wide quotas and five-year plans.
In the absence of classical Marxist preconditions for the Revolution - global crisis of capitalism combined with massive poverty and despair - Global Warming stands out as the most convenient, non-denominational replacement thereof. It provides both the means to manipulate the masses - and a moral justification for doing so. As such it replaces the previously promising but failed agitprop tools as “Overpopulation,” “Ozone Holes,” “Global Famine,” and “Ice Age 2.” Until the time when it gets replaced by another convenient agitprop tool, Global Warming must remain an unquestionable dogma in all political discussions (you shall be notified of changes, if any, by the NPR, the New York Times, and other progressive media organs.)
The importance of Global Warming for the Revolution is too great to leave it in the hands of scientists. The masses must believe that it is beneficial to have faith in Global Warming whether it can be proven or not. If Global Warming didn’t exist it would be necessary to invent it.
February 26, 2007 - 08:13 PM on February 26th, 2007
Bob- Actually, you should be the one putting up..you haven’t disputed what the author is saying.
February 26, 2007 - 09:36 PM on February 26th, 2007
As I said before, global warming is a fact. Humans causing it is at best conjecture. The earth had a mini ICE AGE that ran from approximately 1550 to 1850 AD and we are still recovering from it. There have been at least two PROVEN eras wherein the earth was substantially warmer than it is now and BOTH were before the industrial age. One, the LITLLE CLIMATIC OPTIMUM, was such that it was warm enough to grow crops in the Scotttish highlands and grapes in England as well as the part of North America visited by the Vikings which they subsequently named “Vinland”. Seeing as the only known settlement of Vikings in North America is located at L’anse eax Meadows (sp?) in Nova Scotia, for grapes to have been growing in the area, the temperatures would’ve had to have been substantially higher than the current level.
The earth goes through episodic periods of heating and cooling based on solar cycles. The same scientists (?) who are currently making unsubstantiated predictions of disastrously high temperatures were making nearly identical claims about an impending Ice Age less than 30 years ago. All in all, I think the whole damn thing is just another damn excuse to bilk the US taxpayer for millions/billions for to fund another pointless study.
February 27, 2007 - 09:20 AM on February 27th, 2007
Dont forget MICHEAL MOORE was given a oscar for his fruadelent documentry BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE these stupid award shows are a waste and sre just plain rediculous:mad: