Al Gore is a disgrace–now a very rich disgrace–but a disgrace, nonetheless. If global warming is the crisis he claims, he should be debating all comers. He should face hostile questions and rebut them with facts. But he won’t. Perhaps that’s because he is too imperious to handle the give and take of debate and has no clue about facts. In any event, unable to discuss the truth, as usual, he lies, this time about Climategate. From the story:
Al Gore has studied the Climategate emails with his typically rigorous eye and dismissed them as mere piffle:
Q: How damaging to your argument was the disclosure of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University?
A: To paraphrase Shakespeare, it’s sound and fury signifying nothing. I haven’t read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old. These private exchanges between these scientists do not in any way cause any question about the scientific consensus…I think it’s been taken wildly out of context. The discussion you’re referring to was about two papers that two of these scientists felt shouldn’t be accepted as part of the IPCC report. Both of them, in fact, were included, referenced, and discussed. So an e-mail exchange more than 10 years ago including somebody’s opinion that a particular study isn’t any good is one thing, but the fact that the study ended up being included and discussed anyway is a more powerful comment on what the result of the scientific process really is.
Ah, no, that would not be right:
In fact, as Watts Up With That shows, one Climategate email was from just two months ago. The most recent was sent on November 12 – just a month ago. The emails which have Tom Wigley seeming (to me) to choke on the deceit are all from this year. Phil Jones’ infamous email urging other Climategate scientists to delete emails is from last year.
Would an in-the-tank interviewer of Gore just once challenge him on his lies? Naw, that would require journalists to actually practice their profession. In any event, here’s just another in a long series of examples illustrating: Al Gore, thy name is mendacity.
December 9th, 2009 | 1:03 pm
Yes,
It is a real shame when people won’t show up to defend their positions when it really counts.
Kind of like how the Discovery Institute didn’t show up at Kitzmiller v. Dover.
There is a difference between Al Gore and the Discovery Institute, however. Al Gore can turn to experimental evidence in peer-review, published, premiere science journals to back up his claims.
It’s not his job to run around and displace the willful ignorance of those too inept to pick up and study a peer-reviewed science journal.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
December 9th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
What a crock. The DI was opposed to what the Dover School Board did. But why allow facts to get in your way. Just like Gore. But if you want to yell about ID, take it up with those who are into that field. I am not.
December 9th, 2009 | 1:37 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, J. Robert Howell. J. Robert Howell said: Climategate: That Mendacious Al Gore Lies Again http://is.gd/5h4Kg a disgrace–now a very rich disgrace–but a disgrace, nonetheless [...]
December 9th, 2009 | 1:58 pm
Note to David: I deleted your last comment. I am not going to allow this thread to be diverted into a discussion of Dover or ID. Partially my fault for responding to that part of your comment at all.
If you want to discuss global warming/Gore, etc., relevant to this post, feel free.
Thanks.
December 9th, 2009 | 3:23 pm
Let’s not be too hard on poor Al (OK, actually he’s obscenely rich). He may not be a liar. He may be just too stupid to know what he’s talking about. I’d wager on the latter, based on his history. If “stupid” is too mean, let’s go with “uninformed” although he is so uninformed about so much that it has to be quite deliberate, if the problem is not in fact a lack of cognitive ability.
For example, the cover of his latest book, the one that includes a hurricane spinning the wrong way? I really doubt that he or anyone working for him has the first clue which way hurricanes spin. He probably doesn’t even know that they always spin the same direction.
December 9th, 2009 | 6:16 pm
David, who “peer-reviews” the “peer-reviewers”?
December 10th, 2009 | 12:18 am
In contemplating Gore, we’re stuck with the old “villain or a fool” conundrum. That’s not new. The truly lamentable problem is the ignorance of the press. Consider: one of the most important facets of modern life is science. Journalists, with commendable but rare exceptions, become journalists without the least benefit of science education in journalism school. Rigorous scientific study should be as much a part of the training of journalists as it is of the undergraduate training of physicians.
December 11th, 2009 | 1:32 pm
Further to David: What “experimental evidence”? It’s all statistical analysis that can be skewed any of an uncountably large number of way to arrive at a desired “consensus”. Consensus never was an adequate approximation of proof.
January 1st, 2010 | 4:00 pm
He doesn’t even understand the meaning of ‘paraphrase,’ as the Shakespeare line is a direct quote. Old Will was right about one thing at least: this is a tale told by an idiot.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact