Who debunked Al Gore? Was it a legitimate source/individual or a raving loon?

Favorite Answer

It was a court in England.

Al Gore’s movie "An Inconvenient Truth" was full of bald faced lies. Like the Polar Bears were drowning, or the Ice Caps were melting, or the oceans were rising --- all lies. In fact a court of England ruled the movie was so flawed that it could not be shown to school children without a disclaimer.

35 major errors in Al Gore’s movie
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

Court rules Al Gore’s movie unfit without disclaimer (11 major errors reviewed)
http://creation.com/al-gores-inconvenient-errors

-----------------------...Show more

Inconvenient Truth Debunked...Show more

The debunking of Al Gore's movies has a few sources.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html
Note that Monckton has some facts that do debunk what Gore said, and some that are not a scientifically rigorous.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3310137/Al-Gores-nine-Inconvenient-Untruths.html

Note that these are high court rulling, but only address 9 problems and certainly could not be considered a firm debunking of the whole film


Al Gore represents something though. He represents the difference betweenthe global warming proponents and the scientists. He makes far greater claims of certainty than any scientists would normally make. He also uses the worst-case scenario models as if they are the likely models. Further, due mostly to ignorance, he makes some silly mistakes that most scientists would not have made.

BUT, Al Gore also represents the government officials. He claims to fear global warming as he hops in his personal jet to talk about it. He fear the rise of the seas as he buys sea front property. He represents everything the warmers should despise. Hypocrites getting rich off of global warming while living large and asking the common man to go without.

Therein lies the real problem. Now Al Gore is not the devil. What he is, is a rich politician getting even richer off of global warming. He is a very visible pretender.

If I were a warmer, I would derail the man as someone who talks the talk, but does not walk the walk. Unfortunately for the warmers, they actually defend Al Gore to their own detriment.

Fact is that while the warmers call me a "denier" and dump insults upon me, my "carbon footprint" is rather small as I actually take measures like recycle, reducing what I use, using fuel efficient vehicles, etc. Why? Because I do agree with helping out the environment even if I am not sold on "climate change" having a huge negative affect.

So how silly do they look defending what amounts to a charlatan, while attacking someone like myself?

Pegminer,
I don't expect honesty from you either. Look at yourself. Are you really not even going to acknowledge how Gore seems to be the type that talks the talk and does nto walk the walk???

You talk about honesty??? Try some on for size. Having a hypocrit on the warmer's side does not make your side wrong. DEFENDING HIM, however, doesn't look good. Defending him, while calling people liars, makes you look bad. Defending him, calling others people liars AND attacking people who have a less negative impact on the environment, makes you look horrible....Show more

The question is somewhat confusing. Has Al Gore been debunked? I know people have had things to say about his film "An Inconvenient Truth" so I will concentrate on that.

Also, what is an "Anti-Climate Changer"? As far as I know, both the major sides in this debate agree that the climate changes. One side thinks it has always changed and the other thinks it only started changing after the, man-made, Industrial Revolution started.

An official questioning of the film took place in a UK court. This was not so much to question its scientific accuracy but to see whether it was politicaly acceptable. The UK has rules about the state politicising children. The judge ruled that the film was partisan but that was insufficient justfication to ban it. The onus was placed upon the teachers to give the balancing view.

To that end the guidelines for the film were re-written and issued along with the film. References about pressuring your MPs, for instance, were removed and the list or organisations for further information was changed from a rather politically biased set.

The judge, Mr Justice Burton, also ruled that the "Go to" place for climate information should be the IPCC Assessment Report and not the film An Inconvenient Truth. He compared the film to AR4 and that is how he identified the nine points of difference which he called "errors" (usually with quotes but sometimes without).

I think the main problem anyone would have with Al Gore is the hypocrisy involved. His family did well out of tobacco and Big (Standard) Oil and his father was linked to communist spies. Gore Jr had a tin mine on one of his properties that made him the largest private polluter in Tennessee. He flies his private jet round the world telling everyone else that they should cut back their carbon footprint while choosing which of his many large houses he will live in that day. He even insists that his motorcade should keep its engines running while he gives one of his dollar six figure lectures - even when it is actually illegal as in Sweden.

Then there are the business interests that stand to make a profit out of environmental issues (e.g. Generation Investment Management) and the various well-paid jobs in non-profit organisations and acting as a government advisor (e.g. to the UK) not to mention the Chicago Climate Exchange which he pioneered in collusion with some Goldman Sachs cronies....Show more

A mountain of evidence of data fabrication and distortion along with long term temperature charts show Al to be as bogus as a 6 dollar bill. East Anglia college emails, NASA October temps used as November temps, the reduced number of reporting stations thus skewing temps up since it has been rural stations closed, etc. The bizarre notion of scientific consensus. What the heck is that? We would still believe the earth by that folly.

Then he has three 30" monitors for his home computer. The house is way bigger than any neighbors. He flies all over in his private jet. And he sells his Current cable network to Al Jazeera which is funded by Abu Dubai which is oil money. All hypocrisy.

Why would anyone still have any respect for Al? Oh yeah - did you hear him say the earth is a "couple million degrees" just a mile under your feet? So who is the raving loon?...Show more