June 28, 2006

"A Convenient Untruth" About "An Inconvenient Truth"

When I read the Associated Press article titled "Scientists OK Gore's Movie for Accuracy," I went to see the substance of that claim and realized that it was more leftist fluff than fact. Well, someone else has done a little more research and spilled the inconvenient beans on the crusade with "AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE’S MOVIE", which adds additional information, like: "The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President." Maybe he got free popcorn along with some grants, too.

I've noticed how in every interview that I've seen of Al Gore lately that, when questioned about scientists who have doubts about human induced global warming, Al Gore quickly shuts the questioner down with the same phrase, "The debate is over." That's it. Period. It reminds me of a congregational saying: "The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it." Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I am not aware of anyone who died and made Al Gore God. So, excuse me if I still express doubts on his claims and respect debate on the issue.

Fire Breathing Preacher Adds Hot Air to Global Warming

Just the other day, I was reading "Discover" magazine (which I'm not renewing) and came across an article by one of Al Gore's disciples, who had this praise of Al Gore in a feature titled "FILM: Idlers on climate change, watch out! Al Gore is on the warpath." (bottom of page.) In that article, the writer said this (emphasis mine), "While much of this movie may be old hat to savvy Discover readers, it is most definitely worth watching by skeptics...."

Okay, if I accept Al Gore and global warming hysteria without further debate, then I'm savvy; but, if I'm a skeptic then I'm not savvy. Maybe the truth is that a "savvy person" keeps an open mind, listens to all points of view, and comes to logical, rather than emotional and false, conclusions.

Count me as a savvy skeptic.

Posted by Woody M. at June 28, 2006 09:30 AM | TrackBack

I'd have possibly watched this movie if it was not in any way attached to Gore. That it is tells me all I need to know.

Posted by Jenn at June 28, 2006 01:09 PM

Here's a question that I'd like answered: What are you going to do if it turns out that Gore is right?

Posted by e. nonee moose at June 28, 2006 02:28 PM

Take off one layer of clothes... And what will you do if (as is likely) Gore is wrong?

Posted by GM at June 28, 2006 06:12 PM

Whoa, GM, I cancelled my subscription to Discover more than ten years ago - maybe fifteen.

Pupular Mechanics used to be the home of ham-radio operators and guys who liked diagrams of jet engines, but in the last 5-10 years it has become one of the best pure science magazines around. I also like Technology Review.

Or you could just go over to tech central station on the web!

Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at June 28, 2006 07:46 PM

AVI... LOL, Woody is the one with the subscription... not me... I cancelled mine about the same time you did... probably for many of the same reasons...

Posted by GM at June 28, 2006 08:14 PM

I've been tired of the liberal rants and liberal bias of "Discover" for years. It's just that my wife keeps automatically renewing it for me as a gift. I'd just as soon burn the money, even if it does contribute to global warming. "Discover" got rid of their science writers and now concentrate on using political writers.

Hey, I just checked out Tech Central Station. I had never seen it before. Anyway, here's a pertinent link for which liberals will say is all wrong. http://www.tcsdaily.com/sections/science_roundtable.aspx

Posted by Woody at June 28, 2006 09:08 PM

Moose, I have no expectation at all that Gore is correct, and I believe that it would take over 1,000 years to prove him correct. I need more proof before committing trillions of dollars on a problem still debated and for which cost-benefit analyses seem to indicate a very poor return in relation to other needs. I would invest in education before this project. With smarter students, we may eliminate global warming beliefs altogether.

You're not stupid. Have you given this much personal thought beyond accepting liberal claims? I just wonder how deeply people analyze global warming before accepting it.

Posted by Woody at June 28, 2006 09:39 PM

S. Fred Singer, Professor emeritus of environmental sciences, at the University of Virginia (and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service), does a good fisking of Algores' mockumentary at-

He includes weekly evidence, debunking the 'man-made' GW theory, in which Algore adds prophesies of doom.

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at June 29, 2006 03:30 AM

Thanks, Ben. I've never seen that site. I don't know why, but I had trouble with the link, so I'll try one myself which covers his archives.


If the whole world is so big on global warming and if it is so important, then they should get started without us. They don't hold up a baseball game until everyone has bought a ticket.

P.S. I just realized that I needed to add the http preface to the link, so I added that to your comment.

Posted by Woody at June 29, 2006 06:15 AM

Thanks Woody. How could I forget the http?

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at June 29, 2006 07:25 AM

Thanks Woody. How can I forget the http?

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at June 29, 2006 07:50 AM

When Omni magazine went belly up and they replaced the remainder of my subscription with Discover I just let it run out and didn't renew. Week after week they sent me offers to renew until it was nearly free. Each offer went straight into the 86 file.

TCS Daily is a great site.

Posted by Oyster at June 29, 2006 08:52 AM

Take off one layer of clothes...

How very droll. You'll be doing a lot more than that and you know it.

And what will you do if (as is likely) Gore is wrong?

Much of what needs to be done to prevent global warming would make America less dependent on foreign oil and improve air quality in major U.S. cities as well. So if Gore is wrong I'd be quite happy that we did the right thing anyway and reaped some benefits regardless.

Posted by e. nonee moose at June 29, 2006 03:02 PM

Droll is my middle name... just like yours is Nonee. :-)

Actually, what you declare "...of what needs to be done..." assumes that the added effects of CO2 are anthropogenic in the first place and that is the science that is debated over and over again. Too, there is considerable evidence (provided by Woody's links) that argue that the entire "Hockey Stick" information on which the GW controversy is founded, is inaccurate. There seems to be some, well, shall we say, reluctance for Mann et al to release their lines of codes for checking... not exactly what one does when one is sure of their data.

Prove the science, and I'll capitulate, castigate myself etc., and provide a suitable retraction in big print

Posted by GM at June 29, 2006 04:44 PM

Moose, would you marry a girl who thinks that she's pregnant and thinks that you're the cause? I'd want to see that blue strip and a DNA test before I spent a lot of money on that venture, even if it would have some positive results.

Surely, you have some requirements for proof beyond anecdotal claims.

Posted by Woody at June 29, 2006 04:51 PM

The underlying purpose of the AGW true believers is to replace capitalism with socialism (some would have us live like the Indians used to).
They would also impose the greenie lifestyle. All animals and plants are more important than humans.
It's a non-democratic power grab, and the ones who would be in power would be the UN, Algore, and the greenie leaders.
Isn't it ironic that European countries can't meet their Kyoto obligations?

Posted by Ben USN (Ret) at June 30, 2006 05:45 AM

The only reason we have the current GW hysteria is because our public school system doesn't teach people how to think, nor give them the tools to be able to figure it out on their own anymore. Politicians such as Algore know this all too well, and use it in their own self-interest. If we had an educated citizenry, no one would even know Algore's name. So sad, but then the liberals like it that way for all the obvious reasons.

Posted by Vulgorilla at June 30, 2006 09:18 AM

Air quality in major cities? That's odd, because I've read quite a bit about how air quality has improved in many major cities without Kyoto compliance for over two decades.

For only one instance:

And I really get peeved at those who attempt to appeal to my sense of right and wrong by using the "foreign" oil argument. Actually, if one is against fossil fuels, why do they so often use the term "foreign" fossil fuels? Because if we wanted to get off "foreign" oil, we could simply drill here. So see, that's not the point at all. It's merely a tactic used for argument's sake.

My point is not that we can't be more responsible, or even to deny changes in our atmosphere, but that global warming enthusiasts, bullies and extremists are exploiting people using emotion and employing fear tactics more than actual science. If one cherrypicks from articles to rebut them, it's largely because the science itself has been cherrypicked.

In the meantime, I will simply continue to be as environmentally friendly as I can as an individual.

Most of us do not deny that global temperatures have changed. I've said this a million times if I've said it once. Global climate has changed in the past and it will continue to do so until a comet takes us all out. It's the manner in which these people instill stark fear in the public and then come up with totally unrealistic proposals through computer models and far-fetched extrapolations which oddly benefits only their special interest groups (something they continually accuse others of) and will produce little or nothing in the way of results. There are no promises that the Kyoto Treaty, for one thing, will produce any results at all - ever.

Raise awareness through education? I'm all for it. But the bigotry, hypocrisy and shrill rhetoric many use that dominates the discussion has to go.

If you're a scientist that advocates the prevalent Global Warming theory, you're a "respected member of the scientific community". If you question it, you're a "crackpot on someone's payroll".


Posted by Oyster at July 1, 2006 11:54 AM

The underlying purpose of the AGW true believers is to replace capitalism with socialism (some would have us live like the Indians used to).
They would also impose the greenie lifestyle. All animals and plants are more important than humans.
It's a non-democratic power grab, and the ones who would be in power would be the UN, Algore, and the greenie leaders.

Dude... you're not supposed to drink the bong water... okay?

Posted by E. Nonee Moose at July 2, 2006 04:50 PM

Oppose Harry Reid

Christians Against Leftist Heresy


I Stand With Piglet, How About You?

Reject The UN
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


101st Fighting Keyboardists

Prev | List | Random | Next
Powered by RingSurf!

Naked Bloggers

Improper Blogs

Milblogs I Read

The Texas Connection
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

American Conservative

The Wide Awakes


< TR>
AgainstTerrorism 1.jpg
[ Prev || Next || Prev 5 || Next 5]
[Rand || List || Stats || Join]

Open Tracback Providers

No PC Blogroll

Blogs For Bush

My Technorati Profile
Major Media Links

Grab A Button
If you would like to link to GM's Corner, feel free to grab one of the following buttons. (Remember to save the image to your own website).

Whimsical Creations by GM Roper
My Store

Technorati search

Fight Spam! Click Here!
YCOP Blogs

The Alliance
"GM's Corner is a Blogger's
Blog, and then some!"
-----Glenn Reynolds

Coalition Against Illegal Immigration

Southern Blog Federation

Kim Komando, America's Digital Goddess
Powered by:
Movable Type 2.64

Template by:

Design by:

Hosted by: