Here's my take: When a biased, wealthy, publicitiy-seeking author/activist can successfully call into question the opinions of "climate experts", then said "scientific opinions" have serious shortcomings.
Besides, could we not also say:
"Al Gore: climate expert or biased, very wealthy, publicity-seeking, book-selling activist? You make the call."
He wasn't successful, because he was inaccurate and misleading. He got publicity, that's all (mainly from climate change skeptics). Maybe he wants publicity for being wrong (and to sell books about his fiction where he demonstrates that he's wrong) -- that's his prerogative.
Most confusing statement of the entire thread,
Unless of course, you are attempting to agree with both sides of the issue.