Oh, get off of it. He has alerted the people of the world to a very serious situation, and is to be commended for it. The fact that you use this kind of attack, rather than addressing the scientific basis of anthropogenic warming demonstrates that you concede the arguement.
Do as I say, not as I do, huh? Sorry, it's difficult for me to listen to my doctor telling me to lose weight, when he's over 600 lbs and downing his second pie of pizza in the past 10 minutes.
Richard S. Lindzen wrote in a June 26, 2006 op-ed in the
Wall Street Journal that Gore was using a biased presentation to exploit the fears of the public for his own political gain.
[95] Roy Spencer wrote an open letter to Gore criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film, asserting that the Arctic had a similar temperature in the 1930s before the mass emissions of carbon dioxide began.
[96] Timothy F. Ball rejected GoreÂ’s claim that there has been a sharp drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970, stating that the data was taken only from an isolated area of the Arctic and during a specific cooling period.
[97]
William Gray said of the movie: "We're brainwashing our children. They're going to the Gore movie
An Inconvenient Truth and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."
[98] While discussing the companion book to the movie Gray said, "This is a slick propaganda book. The pictures are very good. But there are factual errors."
[99]
A March 13, 2007 article in
The New York Times reported on concerns among some scientists about the tone and the accuracy of the film, noting that they "argue that some of Mr. GoreÂ’s central points are exaggerated and erroneous." Gore's discussion of a rise in sea level of up to 20 feet, while not stating a timeframe, appears in contrast with a report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which predicts a maximum rise of 23 inches this century, excluding non-linear effects on ice sheets; although that too discusses the possibilities of higher rises if the ice sheets melt. The article also states that "a report last June by the National Academies seemed to contradict Mr. GoreÂ’s portrayal of recent temperatures as the highest in the past millennium."
[100][101] The article quotes both defenders and critics of the film; Gore responds that scientists may disagree with him on some details, "but we do agree on the fundamentals."
[100]
The
documentary film The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on
Channel 4 in the UK in 2007, brought together skeptical scientists and others who disagree with the
IPCC position regarding human-caused global warming. The film claims that Gore misrepresented the data in
An Inconvenient Truth, and contends that the actual
relationship between carbon dioxide and the temperature is the other way round (that is, rise in temperature preceded an increase in carbon dioxide in the
ice core samples and therefore does so today). The claim that CO2 increases lag temperature increases in the historical ice core record is not disputed, but the inference that the same relationship holds today, and several other of
The Great Global Warming Swindle's claims, have been disputed by scientists and scientific bodies such as
John T. Houghton,
[102] the
British Antarctic Survey,
[103] Eigil Friis-Christensen,
[104] and the
Royal Society.
[105] The UK media regulator
OfCom has since upheld some complaints against the programme (while rejecting others and declining to investigate the majority).
[106]
