Well, it's common to attack the messenger, in fact many of us are accused of exactly that when we challenge the Gore's conclusions.
The clear difference here is that the "Australians, not a definitive science source" are simply reporting the data findings of the new NASA Aqua Satellite; Al gore simply spouts opinions about facts he's incapable of understanding, unless he's acquired a climatologist or physics degree while we weren't looking.
Do you have any constructive comments about the new data?
No?
Thought so.
>>The clear difference here is that the “Australians, not a definitive science source” are simply reporting the data findings of the new NASA Aqua Satellite; Al gore simply spouts opinions about facts he’s incapable of understanding, unless he’s acquired a climatologist or physics degree while we weren’t looking.
Do you have any constructive comments about the new data?
No?
Thought so.<<
No, they are reaching an unsubstantiated conclusion about the data and thus attacking the messenger is appropriate.