Should Al Gore be charged with fraud?

Question

The founder of The Weather Channel says Al Gore should be sued for fraud. A group of scientists convened in New York and roasted Gore and his "An Inconvenient Truth" film.

The entire concept of "global warming" is being increasingly scrutinized and questioned, and the effects of reducing greenhouse gases seems to be questionable as well.

Is this just alarmism? Is it just media sensationalism over a pet cause?

If global warming is real, then why are scientists reporting reduced core temperatures around the globe?

Answer 1

And then maybe we could sue Bush over his "Clear Skies Initiative" or his "Healthy Forest Initiative" or his "No Child Left Behind" swindle.

Answer 2

Al Gore should not be charged with fraud. Global warming is proven scientifically. Global Warming is happening today. the earth might be getting warmer on it's own but WE are not helping.

IT IS NOT ALARMISIM.

SCIENTISTS ARE NOT REPORTING REDUCED CORE TEMPERATURES.

Answer 3

What do you mean by "global warming is being increasingly scrutinized and questioned"?  Where did you lift that trash?  Disclose the source please, and we can trace its funding to ExxonMobil.  

No, Al Gore should not be charged with fraud.  He won the Nobel Prize because he is doing humanity a great service.  On the other end of the spectrum, hopefully ExxonMobil executives will be held accountable under U.S. tort laws for the damage and deaths they are contributing to by delaying response to a serious global threat.

The science behind global warming theory is constantly being developed, but it is sound and virtually undisputed.  That's why nearly all of the anti-global warming responses here contain no links related to peer-reviewed science.  What leads you to believe that contrary evidence exists?  Why can no one show it?

Answer 4

I am sure that the right group of people convinced Al Gore that global warming being caused by humans was true.  Gore never impressed me as being an intelligent man and he did not do his homework before latching onto this "cause".  Now he is starting to look like the boob everyone thinks he is.  

The earth may be warming....or it just may be going through a natural cycle.  The earth is about 5 billion years old.  Humans have only inhabited the earth about 200,000 years.  Recorded history has only been around for about 5000 to 6000 years.  We don't really know what has happened the other 4.8 billion years.  Geologists can look at the earths layers and make educated guesses, but can't say for sure.  All that being said, global warming was something eluded to many years ago (the supposed hole in the ozone layer) and the media has latched onto it and ran with it....like they do everything else.  I feel so called global warming is a figment of the imagination of the media.

Answer 5

I don't pretend to understand all of the science involved in determining whether people are causing global warming, but I don't see how trying to convince people to pollute less on their own could cause any kind of problems. So I don't see why anyone would bother to charge Gore with fraud. He believes what he is saying.

Answer 6

I personally think that you cannot argue with the cold hard fact that the earth's temperatures have been rising, but I also do not believe that humans are all of the cause and am not an alarmist.

I do not think that Al Gore should be sued, though I have to admit it would give me great pleasure. He is a major poser in the ecological sense. His house uses about 10 times more energy than the average American's family uses.

Answer 7

"Should Al Gore be charged with fraud?"

No, that's stupid.  You have to commit fraud to be convicted of fraud, so why sue somebody for a crime he didn't commit?  That's an abuse of the judicial system.  The case would be thrown out in two seconds.  That's why Coleman said “If the lawyers will take the case - sue".  No lawyer in his right mind would take that loser of a case.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles...

"The entire concept of "global warming" is being increasingly scrutinized and questioned, and the effects of reducing greenhouse gases seems to be questionable as well."

Care to provide some evidence to support these claims?  I strongly disagree.

"Is this just alarmism? Is it just media sensationalism over a pet cause?"

No, it's science.

"If global warming is real, then why are scientists reporting reduced core temperatures around the globe?"

Because we reached the peak of a strong La Nina cycle, as explained here by James Hansen, head of NASA GISS (one of the groups which reported the cool single month of January 2008):

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2...

Answer 8

yes

Answer 9

Al Gore isn't making any money off global warming, so there's no fraud on his part.

The problem is that global warming has changed from a scientific debate into a political one.  And that changes the rules for questions.

In a scientific debate, the person asking the questions is supposed to keep an open mind, and let the facts lead him to the truth.  When a scientist finds a fact that is incompatible with his conclusion, he needs to change his conclusion.

In a political (or legal) debate, the person asking the questions already knows the answers, and is trying to lead the facts to his pre-determined position on the issues.  When a lawyer finds a fact that is incompatible with his conclusion, he buries the fact and hopes his opponent doesn't discover it.

The other problem is that the experts in the field aren't the ones making the decisions.  You may have all the proof in the world that humans are not causing global warming, but if you can't win a 15 second soundbite debate against Al Gore, then knowing the facts won't do you any good.

When scientists start acting like lawyers, the search for truth is abandoned.

Answer 10

I think John Coleman (the founder of the weather channel) made a very good point.  It is almost getting to the point that if you don't believe in Global Warming you are retarded.  In all reality its a simple theory and when people started treating it like fact is when everything went wrong.  In all reality I don't think he should think about suing him, he should do it..... :)

And why is it every time somebody says that Global Warming is a fraud that they immediately accuse Exxon, you guys are pathetic...................

Answer 11

I just saw the film on DVD last night. Wether if it's fraud or not,it did help make some good points i have to admit.

Answer 12

No.  I think he should be given the Nobel Prize.  Wait - they already did that.

Weather factors can overcome global warming for a short time.  It happened in 1982, 1991-1992, 1999-2000.  EVERY TIME global warming came back stronger than ever.  Proof.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/

discussed in detail, with confirmation, at:

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/g...

As long as we keep making greenhouse gases in enormous amounts, global warming will dominate in the long run.  It's simple physics.

http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/earthguide/di...