But no one ever accused the left of being.......right ;^)
FGS
Posted on 06/27/2006 6:15:23 PM PDT by highlander_UW
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The nation's top climate scientists are giving "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore's documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy.
The former vice president's movie -- replete with the prospect of a flooded New York City, an inundated Florida, more and nastier hurricanes, worsening droughts, retreating glaciers and disappearing ice sheets -- mostly got the science right, said all 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or read the book and answered questions from The Associated Press.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
This is a lie.
Over 17,000 scientists have signed a petition disputing Gore's theories.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1654996/posts
How much has that movie made so far? Has it cracked $10 million yet?
So we're weighing 19 climatologists who self selected to support the movie by paying to see it in the first place vs 17,000 who say it's bunk. Well, of course the AP/CNN would conclude the 19 that support their view are correct. /disgust
Al Gore is the second coming of L. Ron Hubbard.
Without the wit.
Gorebot has created more global warming by all his hot air over "global warming" then my SUV!
It's hard to pack more lies into one statement.
Gore is a democrat politician...he's highly skilled at lying.
'As far as the movie's entertainment value, Scripps Institution geosciences professor Jeff Severinghaus summed it up: "My wife fell asleep. Of course, I was on the edge of my chair."'
Wisconsin should be covered with ice, not with dairy cows, nice folks, and happy vacationers.
Basically the few weegies who care will get all excited, some might even go out and buy Priuses. The rest of red state America will realize that either (a) Gore is lying or (b) Gore isn't lying but we're f*d no matter what we do. Gore's "solution" for the alleged problem is to send a bunch of money to China and India. Well, gee, says Average Joe, we already sent my job there, what a great idea!
What a BS "reporting" job. Exactly who elected these people as "leading" scientists?
You're kidding, right?
Obviously it was George Bush.
But no one ever accused the left of being.......right ;^)
FGS
Harris also refers to a petition signed by 17,000 scientists. It sounds impressive. But it is a crock and has been effectively dismissed. To qualify as scientist all that was required was a B.Sc. degree. How did it come about?
In the spring of 1998, mailboxes of U.S. university graduates were flooded with packets from the “Global Warming Petition Project.” The packets included a reprint of a Wall Street Journal op-ed with the headline “Science has spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth,” a copy of a faux scientific article claiming that “increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have no deleterious effects upon global climate,” a short letter signed by U.S. National Academy of Sciences, past-president Frederick Seitz, and a short petition calling for the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol on the grounds that a reduction in carbon dioxide “would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.”
The sponsor, the little-known Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, tried to beguile unsuspecting scientists into believing that this packet had originated from the National Academy of the Sciences (NAS), both by referencing Seitz’s past involvement with the NAS and with an article formatted to look as if it was a published article in the Academy’s Proceedings, which it was not. The NAS quickly distanced itself from the petition project, issuing a statement saying, “the petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of the academy.”
http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/postings/climate-skeptic-response.html
The AP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.