Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe

Canada Free Press ^ | onday, June 12, 2006 | Tom Harris

[E. Pluribus Unum]

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Look at that guy's teeth. Sheesh, wasn't his father a millionaire senator? He didn't have enough $$ for braces?

[PubliusToo]

Is your point that man-made global warming is a fraud or that Al Gore overstates the case because he does not report all aspects of the story, including the views of scientists disagreeing with him? In either case, the article you linked to also overstates the case against man-made global warming. In fact, at least some highly qualified scientists think man-made global warming is a serious problem.

Ohio State University Professor of Geological Sciences, Lonnie Thompson, recognized as a leader in his field, predicts the loss of glaciers and ice caps in Africa and Peru within the next 15 years due to global warming.

Sir Nicholas Shackleton, a geologist who has made fundamental contributions to Quaternary paleoclimatology and palaeoceanography, also warns against climate change (i.e., global warming) caused by carbon emissions; if you want to know what "Quaternary " means, you have to follow the link and read the article.

Lamont-Doherty (Columbia University) paleoclimatologist, George Kukla, maintains that the Earth's orbit around the Sun is the primary force behind ice age glaciation; in fact, it is possible that human induced global warming could hasten another ice age by exacerbating the temperature difference between the temperate regions and the polar regions and increasing the rate of water transport poleward.

Lamont-Doherty (Columbia University), PETER B. DEMENOCAL, an associate professor of earth and environmental sciences, who serves on the steering committees for the National Science Foundation, American Geophysical Union, and the National Academy of Sciences, discusses his view on the effects of global warming.

One thing seems certain to me, willful ignorance does not make for good public policy.

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

There's a snake expert at UT Austin (I think) who wants only a million people or so on earth (of course he's one of them). Enviro-whackos are a scary lot!

[skeptoid]

How very ironic you should post this.
ALGORE once translated E. Pluribus Unum" to mean "from one, many".

[Patriot Son]

Yes, Kemo Sabe, take a good look at Al's tongue in the picture. Him speak with "forked tongue". Him also speak "lickety split".
Remember that famous televised kiss on the Presidential Debates? No wonder his wife hung in there for the duration... The effect must be special.
Well, she did a good job that night, Al -- hope you remembered to "Tip her"?

[SunkenCiv]

"Well, number one, we noticed there wasn't any science behind it." -- spokesperson, Really Unconcerned Scientists of America

[boop]

Nope. None of these "eminent" scientists can answer even the most basic of questions.
1) If huge glaciers covered the US During the Ice Age creating the Great Plains with their pressure, how come then, did dry land appear when the earth warmed? Shouldn't the earth have been covered deeper in water per GW alarmists? If water takes up more space when it is in the frozen state, doesn't it make sense that it would make MORE land appear when it melts?
2) How can we possibly even use data taken from 100 years ago and compare it to ANY measurement today? Just how many satellite photos, oceanic weather balloons, and digital thermometers accurate to 1/100 of a degree were they using in 1880?
3) In the 70's we were taught in school about the new Ice Age we were entering. Evidence? The Blizzards of '77 and '78 especially. The scientists then were analyzing the data THEY had of past temperatures and came to this conclusion. Now supposedly the earth is warming. This means that there logically was a time when the earth was "just right" between 1975 and about 1990. Also to prove warming today, all of the "cooling" data must have been couteracted by warming data, and it had to have been since the mid 1970's. So, I forgot, was it the summer of 1985 or 1986 that we were having those 300 degree highs? Were the 1970's scientists liars?
4)Since anyone who dares question GW is obviously an oil industry shill, hwhy is it that the proponents of a "solution" for GW are 99% anti-industry, anti-progress, anti-American, anti-capitalist? Is this just a coincidence?

[StAnDeliver]

"One thing seems certain to me, willful ignorance does not make for good public policy."

Tell us all about it, Signed Up Yesterday. Tell us your favorite part of the movie -- perhaps the palpably laughable schadenfreude moment where Gore demonstrates how GW accelerated rapidly under him and Clinton.

[Reily]

and neither graduate programs had anything to do with science !

[Tiberius109]

First they scare you , them they offer you a solution . Vote for them and you'll be saved..Simple set up and a political trick as old as the hills. Gore is a roysl jerkoff and not very intelligent on top of it .

[jwalsh07]

Here's a prediction. It will have to be archived though because it will take a while to test it.

The Earth will cool....

And then it will warm again.

I know I'm going out on a limb here but what the heck, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

[Tiberius109]

I've printed it and will post it in work where otherwise smart people swallow Gore's juck science whole. I can't believe the people who actually believe this crap and take it for face value..Is the world that insane now ?

[Reily]

Do a Google search on Chaos Theory & Edward Lorentz.
You will get information on something called the "Lorentz Attractor'. Read it I won't prejudice you by making any comments.
However what phenomenon was the good Dr. Lorentz trying to model ?

[Roberts]

bump

[chuckles]

I'm not sure what you are trying to get across. I know he was modeling the weather and found that a slight change made a big difference. The fractal looks like a butterfly, so they called it the butterfly effect. It was said a butterfly flapping its wings in Tokyo would cause a tornado on the other side of the world.

An enviro wacko would tell you that driving your SUV will destroy the planet because you are affecting change everywhere. I understand that a small inaccuracy in the data fed to the weather computer will change the outcome of the prediction greatly, but the waco's will still insist we are all going to die. I tell them they are right, we are all going to die........someday. I just want to own an SUV while I'm waiting.

[Screamname]

The face of pure unadulterated grade A insanity.....

[gondramB]

Those nerd friends of mine with whom I have frequent debates about whether human causality of the current global warming problem has been proved have been urging me to see this film saying it will convince me. My initial thought was you guys from Cal Tech and M.I.T. have only show that there is a strong, lagging correlation between CO2 levels and temperature - what's Al gonna say that I don't hear every week from you guys.


Right now we are debating CO2 sampling in Antarctic ice core samples and whether the precession of the earth effected the findings.

BTW, here's the link to the preview - it mainly pissed me off but I do admit it is very well produced.

[Kozak]

****"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," ****

Gore himself feels no such obligation...

Wednesday's Washington Times ran a column on global warming by Cato's Patrick Michaels in which he quoted Al Gore as saying, "I believe it is appropriate to have an overrepresentation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."

As a public service I will now translate this politically obtuse statement into English; It is alright to lie to people in order to scare them into doing something that is against their own interest.

[sgtbono2002]

Al Gore , Struggling to make himself relevent.

Its a rough road and he is failing.