Goracle's Eleven

The Goracle's mockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" may have won an Oscar, but a court in Great Britain is finding it should have been in the "Best Dramatic Motion Picture" category. In case you haven't heard, (And why should you have? No one in the MSM is carrying this story) a British truck driver has filed a lawsuit to prevent the airing of "An Inconvenient Truth" in British public schools. Now, the court hearing the case has identified eleven (only eleven?) material falsehoods in the movie that prompted the court to require that, prior to the film being shown in schools, the teachers must make clear that the movie is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument and point out the eleven inaccuracies. If not, the teacher may be found guilty of section 406 of the Education Act of 1996 regarding political indoctrination.

What are Gore's eleven lies?

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.

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.

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.

What are the chances a suit like that would succeed in the U.S.?

Al Gore: Ball of Fire

I've been tuning in to Rush while out and about on the job, and he has had this tune in the rotation on his show quite a bit as of late. I decided to try tracking it down on youtube and sure enough, there it was. Enjoy!

Al Gore Dummies Up

After scolding the media for failing to adequately convey his message of environmental alarmism, Al Gore fled the stage without answering questions.

I'm sure the rest of you are as shocked as I am to learn that the media has not toed his line obediently enough, but he does.

"I believe that is one of the principal reasons why political leaders around the world have not yet taken action," Gore said. "There are many reasons, but one of the principal reasons in my view is more than half of the mainstream media have rejected the scientific consensus implicitly — and I say 'rejected,' perhaps it's the wrong word. They have failed to report that it is the consensus and instead have chosen … balance as bias.

"I don't think that any of the editors or reporters responsible for one of these stories saying, 'It may be real, it may not be real,' is unethical. But I think they made the wrong choice, and I think the consequences are severe.

"I think if it is important to look at the pressures that made it more likely than not that mainstream journalists in the United States would convey a wholly inaccurate conclusion about the most important moral, ethical, spiritual and political issue humankind has ever faced."

Gore would not answer any questions from the media after the event.

I wonder why?

More on "Carbon Offsets"

If you're filthy rich, like Al Gore or his Hollywood limousine liberal buddies, where to you buy carbon offsets that allow you to live a lifestyle that consumes spews 20 times as much carbon as the average family? Well, in the case of Algore, he buys them from himself.

Bill Hobbs has the rest of the story.

So far, so good. So, where does Gore buy his ‘carbon offsets’? According to The Tennessean newspaper’s report, Gore buys his carbon offsets through Generation Investment Management. a company he co-founded and serves as chairman:
Gore helped found Generation Investment Management, through which he and others pay for offsets. The firm invests the money in solar, wind and other projects that reduce energy consumption around the globe…
As co-founder and chairman of the firm Gore presumably draws an income or will make money as its investments prosper. In other words, he “buys” his “carbon offsets” from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself. To be blunt, Gore doesn’t buy “carbon offsets” through Generation Investment Management - he buys stocks.

Will someone tell my how this story is different from a televangelist getting caught in a motel room with a whore?