Science-hating Miranda Devine reviews An Inconvenient Truth. Not surprisingly, she hated it. Apparently it is stodgy and full of hyperbole. Despite the fact that climate researchers say that Gore got the science right, Devine trots out geologist Bob Carter to say "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic." Carter provided no evidence to support his claim, but this didn't bother Devine. People who say stuff that she wants to believe don't need evidence.
There's more, including an appearance of the mythical DDT ban, but I've outsourced the heavy lifting to Stephen Gloor.
More like this
Matt Drudge recently linked to a web site claiming that climate experts disagreed with Al Gore about global warming. Hundreds of blogs uncritically swallowed the claim.
One of the few skeptics was Bruce Perens who wrote
We ran a pointer to a global-warming-doubter story this morning. Here's the…
Four of the six government members on a committee examining geosequestration put out a dissent denying the existence of anthropogenic global warming. I was going to write a post on what they got wrong, but I realised that since they rely on Bob Carter so much, I'd already done it. John Quiggin…
Senator Inhofe (R, Exxon) has responded to the AP story on how top climate researchers say Gore got it right. Drudge pimped the response, so it's all over the place now.
Inhofe's press release starts with a straight lie:
AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE'S MOVIE
Top climate researchers…
This morning, a plethora of Sizzle reviews will saturate Scienceblogs. I've no doubt that the film's science will be thoroughly dissected by more informed reviewers than I. So I'm going to steer clear of temperature trends and timetables, and instead consider how the film pitches its message.…
If Inconvenient Truth is "Climate Porn", presumably that makes Al Gore a "climate porn" star, right?
Makes perefect sense to me. I'm quite sure that most people would prefer seeing Big Al boring ice in Antarctica to watching Deep Throat any day of the week. I know I would.
Peak oil and Global warming collides. How will that define the 21st century ?
Peak oil, here is the best argument I have seen
http://www.theviewfromthepeak.com
I think anti-global warming crowd is plain silly. There may be a few pieces of evidence that don't support the hypothesis that the earth is warming, but the vast bulk research indicates otherwise. With anything as inherently chaotic as the weather, you have to compare the weight of all research to find the truth.
Still, I can't help but find Gore obnoxious. Like so many liberals, it is "do as I say, not as I do."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060810/cm_usatoday/goreisntquiteasgr…
Like so many liberals, it is "do as I say, not as I do.
Speaking of standard boilerplate demonization tactics, I wonder what, say, the conservative divorce/adultery rate is...I wonder...I wonnnnnnder...
Best,
D
Speaking of standard boilerplate demonization tactics, I wonder what, say, the conservative divorce/adultery rate is...I wonder...I wonnnnnnder...
I'm not a Christian, but yes indeed, many Christian fundamentalists are hypocrites in much the same way as leftists are.
But then, I suppose you'll object to my "boilerplate demonization" of Christian conservatives, won't you?
Didn't think so.
No Mike, I would object. However, I also object to folk who claim that all virtue resides with them, especially those who demand that others be perfect before they will bestir themselves to be ok.
PS. Gore does make a considerable effort to be "carbon neutral". It was discussed in this blog not so long ago.
Eli,
Gore being carbon neutral would achieve that by not breathing.
Excellent analysis.
Ah yes, Andrew Dessler had an interesting insight on Louis types, and so did I.
But before we get to that we should discuss in detail the passive agressive nature of Louis and his cohort who have besmirched the blogging community with their evil.
passive-aggressive nature - hmmmm - that would almost rank as a "Quigginism".
"With anything as inherently chaotic as the weather, you have to compare the weight of all research to find the truth."
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought the scientists (and Gore in his movie) were talking about the climate, not the weather.
As far as whether (or is it climate?) Gore is a hypocrite or not, it has no bearing on climate (whether?) he is right about any of the stuff in his movie.
Judging from the kind of silly critiques (eg, Gore's movie is "climate porn"), I suspect that an intense dislike for Gore is at the heart of many of the attacks on Inconvenient Truth.
Ya think?
A Quiggenry would be messy-obsessive.
Foolish is someone who tries to top a pooka. Don't be foolish Louis, OTOH.....
Ah Louis, still wasting our time.
BTW, how's the winter going in Perth? Lawn still brown? Still don't believe in that AGW nonesense?
Re: "Gore being carbon neutral would achieve that by not breathing."
Wrong. If contrarians had any desire to be carbon neutral, they would not speak, since what they say is just hot air coming out of their mouths.
An excellent expose of the Canadian "denialist" industry which was published in the Globe & Mail today (Aug 12):
http://www.charlesmontgomery.ca/mrcool.html
"I suspect that an intense dislike for Gore is at the heart of many of the attacks on Inconvenient Truth."
And of course, vehement bias against any kind of government regulation is at the heart of much of the intense dislike of Gore.
"The Circle of Life......"
I feel I'm doing my part. After all, I'm certain I am less harmful to the environment (both the natural and the political) than Al Gore. Among other things, I drive a small car with excellent gas mileage, I walk to most locations that are only a mile or two from my house whenever I have the opportunity (which is frequently), and I rarely fly (and never on a private jet), and I don't even operate a zinc mine on my property or contaminate the local river.
Small steps to a much cleaner world.
Lol.
Using a private jet is not a good example to set but I fail to see how owning a mine without consuming the products of that mine anymore than anyone else makes you a CO2 pariah. The issue is consumption, not ownership.
Rhetoric overlooks still that the initiator of any measure of increase in 'median temperature' is the Land Surface, and this is still seen in plots of Surface Temperature. There is no lead of the Ocean surface as it is NOT being warmed by a 'greenhouse effect' as such is NOT evident. There is not even evident any sufficient alteration in 'greenhouse radiation' to power a supposed 'greenhouse effect'.
The energy inputted to Kinetic Induction is also powering Turbulence, such energy NOT being measurable as 'temperature' which infact measures the residual Kinetic Energy within the materials of the 'system'. The lead of an observed 'temperature' trend into the Ocean is around 15 years, and the muting of that trend is due to the effect of production of Turbulence in interaction to those Kinetic Inputs.
As for the Gore 'science-fiction movie', there is still not shown existent directly the energy in the 'Infrared Region' capable of production, with notice to the materials there in present on the surface and within the atmosphere, the warming OPINIONED due to a supposed 'greenhouse effect'. The observations seen and being claimed as due supposedly to a 'greenhouse warming' effect would require more energy than is evident with the materials known and present, and with the also known properties of these materials. The LONG TERM consistency in this 'energy' is INFACT observed within the reactions of evolutionary adaptation of species, including Humanity. Saline Water-based bio-forms would NOT evolve as they have in an environment in which thee was HIGH variation in Incident Radiation able to strongly HEAT WATER. An ancient 'tree' species 'rediscovered in a remote Australian valley' does as well NOW as it must have done millions of years previously, noticed from the number of seedlings being now produced. Again, it is the surface materials that are being altered, NOT the overall 'energy' as if there WAS enough 'greenhouse energy' to produce the 'greenhouse warming' then the Human bio-form would not be able to persist, which it has now for near 7 Million Years it seems.
The Human produced rematerialing is altering the amount of kinetic induction made from the available energy by providing different (more capable) materialing coverage. The alterations then made to and within the kinetic processes of Turbulence will also then produce variation in measured 'temperature' independent to overall kinetic induction trends. Alterations to Turbulence will produce variation in residual kinetic energy, which is measured as a 'temperature', of the materials involved within 'the system'. Variation in precipitation in both volume and location can result in Glacial expansion. Sufficient glacial expansion will reduce lower atmospheric humidity, reduce kinetic induction within the lower atmosphere and hence increase the 'thermal gap' tween lower atmosphere and Surface. Conduction to 'bridge' that 'gap' followed by convection within the Atmosphere as reaction to those kinetic inputs will mean that the surface will become cooler whilst the Atmosphere need NOT display any increase in measured 'temperature'.
So 'Turbulence Cooling' can display in a Humanistic time frame (several decades perhaps running possibly into a 'few' Centuries) cooling as is mentioned as well as, in reversion, a 'warming period'. This 'oscillation' is irregularly produced as the 'initiators' of any 'significant' variation are NOT 'Energy related' directly (persistent snow fall alterations at a Glacial Head as one example). One problem for the 'production' of so much of 'climate science' is in the attempt to make such 'variations' as being 'climate change', and it is NOT at all such.
The 'unnatural' warming so far seen is however trended strongly to the alterations to the planetary surface by Humanity over the past 400 years and the rebalance towards greater kinetic induction (in its cumulative effect) is now producing observable alterations not only to the Land Surface median Temperature, but to the Ocean (vie conduction/convection) and a still unconfirmed claim of a small overall rise in Median Atmospheric Temperature, which if 'true' would place the Planetary Biosphere on the "Human Population Plot" with regard to 'warming'.
It is the 'Median Material Covering' of the Land Surface that is altering and that is producing alteration to Kinetic Energy Induction, and altering Weather Patterning within alterations to overall Turbulence, NOT changes in 'incident energy', especially NOT alteration to 'incident greenhouse energy', and none of this could be validly qualified as 'Human induced climate change' even. All Humanity is doing is altering WHERE precipitation occurs and other patterning within Turbulent processes. This is as Humanity is replacing the cooler Photosynthetic (energy trapping) Surface with Asphalt and Concrete. There is very little SCIENCE behind the 'Gore' movie, THAT is the 'inconvenient truth'...
Your's,
Peter K. Anderson a.k.a. Hartlod(tm)
- From the PC of Peter K Anderson
- E-Mail: Hartlod@bigpond.com
- http://hartlod.blogspot.com/
"Saline Water-based bio-forms would NOT evolve as they have in an environment in which thee was HIGH variation in Incident Radiation able to strongly HEAT WATER."
...come again?
It's like Francis E. Dec became a global warming skeptic ("DEADLY CIA UNDERLING TOP-SECRET DEADLY POISON NERVE GAS SMOKE SPAYED AT ME FROM WIG OF SENATOR'S WIFE DEADLY FRANKENSTEIN BRAIN BROADCAST RADIO COMMUNIST GANSTER PLAYBOY SCUM ROBOT UNDETECTABLE EYESIGHT TELEVISION PLAYBACK DEADLY ASASSIN EXTERMINATION!!")
Francis E. Dec or Jaclk D. Ripper "The Saline Water-based bio-forms were not evolved in an environment of human-produced rematerialing and therefore our kidneys can not cope with the effects of partterning within turbulent processes on our precious bodily fluids."
Still he makes as good a case as Ken Ring or Louis Hissink.