«
»

Official British Court Finds 11 Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Labels It As Political Propaganda

By Scott Thong

UPDATE: Just 9 errors.

InconvenientPrize9

Bwah ha ha ha ha ha! Take that in your face, Gorezilla!

If this keeps up, Al Gore and his hypocrite cronies could be conclusively debunked as utterly wrong and disowned as dishonest swindlers within my lifetime!

Before allowing it to be shown in schools Britain-wide, the British government has officially tried AL Gore’s global warming propa-scam-da film, An Inconvenient Truth, in court… And have reached the following conclusions (bolding is mine):

——————————

…the Court found that the film was misleading in 11 respects and that the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisors served only to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

The inaccuracies are:

  • The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
  • The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

[See Climate Skeptic where you can find this outright lie to school children to spread global warming propaganda graph:

CO2andTemperatureLIE

And the actual facts graph:

CO2andTemperatureTRUTH

Teaching blatant, 180-degrees turned around untruths to kids... Can global warming fearmongers get any more intentionally, ethicslessly dishonest? Unfortunately, being comprised mostly of LIE-berals, I'm sure they can.]

  • The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
  • The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
  • The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
  • The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
  • The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
  • The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
  • The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

[See Irrefutable, It-Is-A-Fact Global Warming Causes ‘All-Time’ High Antarctic Ice.]

  • The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
  • The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

Learnt about at The Jawa Report, Climate Skeptic and Newsbusters which source from the original here.

ThatsNotSureAtAll

GoreInventedNobelPeacePrize

9MarkedPeacePrize

InconvenientClassroomShowing

More related cartoons can be found at Al Gore 2007 Nobel Peace Prize Editorial Cartoons and Global Warming Editorial Cartoons.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on October 10, 07 at 3:39 pm and is filed under Editorial Cartoons, Global Warming Fears. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “Official British Court Finds 11 Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Labels It As Political Propaganda”

  1. Infidel Says:
    October 12, 07 at 3:34 am

    You failed to mention that the judge quite clearly expressed that the movie won’t be banned from schools, as Dimmock demanded, because the detected errors were minor in nature and that the movie contains four main messages that are very well and truthfully documented: That climate change is made by man, that temperatures will rise further, that the climate change will have bad consequences and that it is possible for governments and individuals to do something about it.

  2. Scott Thong Says:
    October 12, 07 at 8:29 am

    True, it’s not been BANNED per se.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=485336&in_page_id=1811

    I agree with last three points, and less so with the first point. It is quite clear that localised climate can be affected by human activities, and that on a global scale this may very well be true.

    But the statement ‘climate change is caused by man’ is somewhat superlative… It implies that ALL climate change is caused by man, whereas I feel the evidence is highly deficient in that respect… The evidence rather points to climate change being driven by non-human factors, as it has been for eons.

    I also disagree greatly with Mr. Gore on HOW governments and individuals should mitigate/adapt to climate change. I feel that the WORSE method available is carbon caps and trading, which impacts the economy badly and does not reduce overall CO2 levels at all.

    Basically, I think all it does is make Al Gore even richer from his carbon trading company. Especially poignant since Gore himself refuses to cut his own CO2 levels, preferring instead to offset them with carbon credits… Purchased with his money… Which he earns from carbon credits. The evil genius of it all!

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/follow-the-clues-is-al-gores-promotion-of-global-warming-hysteria-merely-a-scam-to-make-him-money/

    I’m in favour of the Bussard Clean Fusion Reactor to replace oil and coal:
    http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2007/03/mr-fusion.html

    And as for the ‘truthfully documented’ bit… I’m sad to mention the following:

    —–

    Mann’s Hockey Stick hoax:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy

    http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/070313goodprint.html

    http://www.climate2003.com/pdfs/2004GL012750.pdf

    —–

    NASA’s flawed climate data:

    http://michellemalkin.com/2007/08/09/hot-news-nasa-fixes-flawed-temperature-data-1998-was-not-the-warmest-year-in-the-millenium/

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/08/10/un-s-ipcc-accused-possible-research-fraud

    —–

    Idiotically placed temperature sensors, yet problem is not fixed and the temperature data is intentionally skewed even higher:

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/ground-based-temperature-recording-stations-stupid-locations-for-measuring-global-warming/

    http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2007/07/an-interesting-.html

    —–

    My question to you, Infidel, is this: Are you really convinced that the world is going to be seriously and badly affected by climate change, especially when nobody – LEAST OF ALL Al Gore and other big-name global warming proponents – wants to do anything meaningful to mitigate it if means their own comfort and profits will be affected?

    “I’ll believe there’s a crisis when the people who keep saying there’s a crisis act like there’s a crisis.” – Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit

  3. jaska Says:
    October 23, 07 at 2:10 am

    “True, it’s not been BANNED per se.”

    True, it is being send to every british state secondary school by the government. The judge mainly asked teachers to note how Gore differences from IPCC consensus. He took rather interesting and wide definition of ‘partisan politics’. Guess would your view be permitted in British schools.

    Check the original, not misleading and biased news about it:
    “I have no doubt that Dr Stott, the Defendant’s expert, is right when he says that: “Al Gore’s presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change in the film was broadly accurate.”"

    “There is no call for the Defendant to support the more extreme views of Mr Gore – indeed the Government’s adherence is to the IPCC views – but the present package in my judgment does enough to make it clear both what the mainstream view is, insofar as Mr Gore departs from it, and that there are views of “sceptics” who do not accept even the consensus views of the IPCC.”

    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/2288.html

  4. Scott Thong Says:
    October 23, 07 at 8:29 am

    So Gore is too extreme even for the IPCC?

  5. LIE-beral Says:
    May 1, 09 at 10:10 pm

    si

  6. LIE-beral Says:
    May 1, 09 at 10:13 pm

    seńor

Leave a Reply