Gore Now in Company with Arafat, Annan, and Carter
- 14 October 2007 by Author 0 Comments
Gore Now in Company with Arafat, Annan, and Carter
By Richard Larsen
Published – Idaho State Journal, 10/14/07
The Nobel Foundation has proven yet again how disengaged from reality it is when it comes to bestowing the Nobel Peace Prize by granting it to Al Gore this week. While the award has often been granted to clearly deserving recipients like Mother Theresa, Norman Borlaug, Albert Schweitzer and Andrei Sakharov, they have of late stumbled badly, tripping over the political axes they feel compelled to grind. Al Gore thus joins the likes of the terrorist Yasser Arafat, former leader of the PLO, the now disgraced Kofi Annan whose rein at the UN was characterized by numerous scandals and ineptness at handling crises, and Mikhail Gorbachev (instead of Ronald Reagan who famously told him, “Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”) This is to say nothing of failed president turned political gadfly Jimmy Carter, whose spinelessness led to the creation of the Islamic Republic of Iran and much of today’s terrorist threats.
Granted, the Nobel organization can award the prizes to whomever they choose, and for whatever purpose. But it’s difficult to see how production of a propagandistic movie filled with errors and proposing that Western Africa should be denied access to the energy that can lift them out of poverty can be even remotely viewed as advancing the international cause of peace.
Just last week the High Court of the United Kingdom declared that if teachers are going to show Al Gore’s movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” that it must be done with the disclosure that it is propagandistic and factually inaccurate. The ruling highlighted 11 factual errors in the movie that when extricated from the movie, make it an empty, inconclusive and unpersuasive polemic. The truth seems to be inconvenient to Al Gore, for his movie contains little of it, while it’s replete with propaganda and hyperbole.
According to the UK Guardian, the following factual errors were cited in the film. The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years.
The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming.
The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream, throwing Europe into an ice age. The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching.
The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7 meters causing the displacement of millions of people. The film claims that rising sea levels have caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. And finally, the film suggests that the Antarctic ice shelf is melting.
In each of these instances, factual evidence was provided to the court proving these claims as scientifically untruthful. Judge Michael Burton said in his ruling, “It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film, but that it is a political film.”
Timothy Ball, a climatologist who leads the National Resources Stewardship Project, says he agrees that “An Inconvenient Truth” is a “wonderful piece of propaganda, but that’s all it is.” Calling the film’s scientific errors “huge,” Ball said that the movie “would fail as a grade 10 science project,” because it depends on “visual imagery and gimmickry” to make its point and not scientific fact.
Ball also said it’s a “travesty” that Gore would be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize since “you can spin the lies but you can’t spin the truth. I hope that one day soon, we’ll be able to have a calm and rational debate about climate change.”
Patrick Michaels, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute is also bothered by the fact that the former vice president has refused to debate skeptics of manmade global warming. “If your science is solid, there should be no reluctance to debate with those of opposing views,” he said.
“Deniers” of natural global warming would undoubtedly assert that in spite of the factual errors in the film, that Gore still deserves the accolades because he’s bringing to light a grave concern for the future of mankind, hence, the ends justify the means. I find that a very unsettling and untenable proposition, for if the “evidence” upon which the premise of manmade global warming is based is false, all subsequent conclusions drawn from those claims are likewise going to be fallacious.
When I was growing up on a potato farm west of Blackfoot, my father used to always tell me that the quality of our decisions is directly connected with the quality of the facts upon which the decisions are based. He’d be sorely disappointed in the gullibility of the masses in light of the dearth of factual evidence supporting the claims of manmade global warming proponents.
As I mentioned here a few weeks ago, the global warming alarmists lost two of their strongest arguments for their cause. NASA has correctly revised their global temperature data which erroneously showed the last 9 years as among the hottest on record. And the now infamous “hockey-stick” chart, and the program that generated it, by paleoclimatologist Michael Mann from the University of Massachusetts has been proven fraudulent by statisticians Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. Couple those scientific failures with the intellectual prostitution of NASA’s James Hansen, one of the most ardent proponents of manmade global warming, with his “grant” from George Soros, an anti-capitalist anti-American billionaire, and you have the proposition of man “causing” this natural climatic cycle crumbling like a deck of cards.
We are stewards of the environment, and as such, should make wise decisions to not pollute, intentionally damage our environment, and manage and utilize our resources prudently. If we are wrong on manmade global warming, it will be proven with science, not by the alarmist hysteria and illogic of the politically and pecuniary driven proselytizers like Al Gore and his fallacious movie, neither of which are deserving of a Nobel Prize, unless they awarded one for acting and works of fiction. Well, at least for works of fiction.
Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board. He can be reached at email@example.com.