Thursday, June 15, 2006

Gored
Some inconvenient scientists have found Algore's new flick to be patently untrue.
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."

But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?

No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Ohhhhh, I see! So to do a study on humans effecting climate change, you should get scientists that actually specialize in that field!
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."
Eh? So what you're telling us is... icebergs are naturally forming glacier bits. How could this be? Just because this was common knowledge before Algore blazed onto the scene doesn't mean we have to believe it, right? I mean, it's much more fun to yell FIRE in a theater!
Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."
But... how... what is this "low pressure system" voodoo of which you speak? It must be HUMANS! Didn't you see the film? HUMANS are causing the "warming" of the Earth... not naturally occurring phenomena over millions of years. Let me spell it out for you: H. U. M. A. N. S. You know, the same HUMANS that Algore valued at less than 3 trees?
But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.
More snow? The ice dome is growing? Simply impossible. There's no way Algore would lie to us in order to gain more political power for himself and his party. That would be unscrupulous, akin to losing an election and nearly destroying the Union by dragging it through an unecessary court battle and near constitional crisis in a desperate attempt to litigate victory. Nope, not even Richard Nixon would do that!
Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."
What, selectively picking narrowly focused facts, likely inconsistent with the argument as a whole to win supporters? It's almost the same as hand-picking ballots that might almost possibly maybe are a vote for you because there's a slight bulge where someone may have pressed before fully punching out the section for the other guy. Maybe. But we've been down this road.

Anyway, as much fun as I'm having mocking Algore, I'll leave you with the money quote:
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."

Comments on "Gored"

 

Anonymous Theo said ... (9:39 AM) : 

Congrats, you found ONE scientist who got a write-up by a guest column in the CANADA FREE PRESS!

Way to go, Chuckie - you've broken this story WIDE OPEN.

I actually saw the movie last night - have you? Can you save your critiques until you see it?

I am consistently amazed the frequency with which conservatives allow themselves to be duped. But hey, keep voting against your own economic self-interest, your health, your environment, and those of your children.

Whatever brings on the Book of Revelations faster, eh?

 

Blogger Chucko said ... (10:27 AM) : 

Starting early today, eh? Read the article Theo. Do eeeeet.
Thanks for the props though! Hopefully the media will descend upon Chuckoblog and lift it to the highest heights it has seen!

I will see the film, as soon as I do not have to pay for it. I did pay $5 for Fahrenheit 9/11 used, but at least that movie was funny!

You seem to have it in your head that I am a fundamentalist, end is nigh Christian. I am not, so if you could find it within yourself to not group every single person who is conservative into a very small niche, it would be much appreciated. If you want to continue to do so, however, feel free. Only helps "us" out.

 

Blogger Chucko said ... (10:27 AM) : 

BTW, like the new format of THEOcracy. Haven't found anything to post on yet, however.

 

Anonymous Theo said ... (12:27 PM) : 

I did read the article.
The movie's a hell of a lot more convincing.

Has this guy's claims been peer-reviewed? No.
There is not ONE peer-reviewed study on global warming that disproves it.

The Bush administration even admits the science now. Are the rest of conservatives so afraid of being proven wrong they'll stick to anything? You guys couldn't have been more wrong on Iraq...

 

Blogger Dave T. said ... (4:42 PM) : 

The scientists quoted in that article -- an article published by web site that is not a credible news source -- have no credibility.

 

Blogger Chucko said ... (7:00 PM) : 

And so the liberal attacks on critics of global warming theory commence, as they have in the past. Ah well. If you are going to complain about biased articles and PR firms, at least have the self respect to link to a nonbiased source yourself. I don't claim to be unbiased.

 

Blogger Chucko said ... (7:25 PM) : 

Here's another link. Don't worry, I'm securely confident you'll find one on your side that debunks everything they have to say, or discredits them personally while tap dancing on the hood of their car.

 

Anonymous Theo said ... (12:37 AM) : 

Oh, Chuckie...did you read Deltoid, or did you just screw up the link?
Look at it again - they back pretty much everything Gore has to say.
And as far as the "Free Enterprise Education Institute" is concerned (they run "junkscience.com"), they received at least $80,000 from Exxon over the last two years.

Stupid facts.

 

Blogger Chucko said ... (8:20 AM) : 

Hey Theo, Deltoid is the link dave t provided while attempting to discredit my sources, so I linked to his specific posts on that site which all back Gore (among other lefty causes) while linking to such unbised sources as Salon.com themselves.

 

post a comment

Go to the source!