What's wrong with "The Inconvienient Truth"?

Question

I just watched it and I thought it made a pretty good point... so could someone tell me the rebuttle? Is there anything untrue, it all seems like a good argument to me but, please due tell me the other side... if there really is one. (With some evidence please)

Answer 1

The evidence is from Gore's own scientists...   If you look at the information referred to by the IPCC, they told Gore that the most the oceans could rise by the 21st Century is 23 inches, yet between him and his PR people, that changed to over 20 feet.

That polar bear picture...  You should hear the interview on You Tube where the Australian Biologist that took the photo said, "There was no danger to the polar bears, they weren't that far from land and they can swim.  I just thought it was an impactful photograph."

Then the other sad and limping polar bear that looked like he was about to die...  Yea, that polar bear had just tangled with a gang of walruses.  Ask NGEO (The National Geographic Channel) who provided the footage, of course with the walrus part left out.

Then you have that huge hockey stick graph that seems to have disappeared.  If you look very carefully at the lines, you will notice that CO2 is a result of heat and not the cause.  Yes, in Gore's own confusing graph, CO2 lags heat by about 800 years.  So, if anything CO2 increases cause global cooling.

Then you have scientific research documents that contradict themselves.  Here is one of those so-called papers that relies heavily and almost exclusively on 'computer models.'  

http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/...

Also most of the scientists against global warming are ex IPCC scientists and an example of others against Gore are the founder of Greenpeace and the founder of the Weather Channel.

Answer 2

I am the Great OZ!  You are all going to die!

Get the picture?  Follow the money.

Answer 3

Global warming is not a myth everyone knows that the weather is changing, its only the reason why its changing thats under dispute.

Answer 4

There is very little wrong with that movie, the only thing it did wrong was call it global warming instead of global climate change. Other than that, the facts are the same as the scientific community claims. Anyone who says its not true will just say they don't like Gore, to me that's not a very good reason not to believe.

Answer 5

Check out the Global Warming Swindle documentary.

Answer 6

This is probably the most convincing material I've seen lately. Hope it answers some questions for you. There's lots more out there. The media is just now starting to open up some time to the other side of this issue. Enjoy.

http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-w...

On Dec. 13, 2007, 100 scientists jointly signed an Open Letter to Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, requesting they cease the man-made global warming hysteria and settle down to helping mankind better prepare for natural disasters.  The final signature was from the President of the World Federation of Scientists.

Answer 7

Global warming is REAL,

evidence is not needed.

we all definitely can FEEL,

the threat it brings to us.

Answer 8

Gores attempt to make money with "carbon credits", bunch of BS!

Answer 9

Hi,

This should keep you busy and answer your question…

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...

If you’d like more about how much Al Gore distorted the truth, you could also read this…

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...

And he’s not getting any better. The following is only a week old…

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...

How does he get away with it? I suspect it’s because people are just *so* gullible.

As ever with global warming: don’t believe the hype.

Answer 10

Don't listen to these denialists who get their information from right-wing think tanks like the Heartland Institute.

Gore's film was good because it got its information directly from climate scientists.  There were some minor errors (mainly just exaggerations) in the film, but for the most part it did a very good job getting the basic science right.

"The nation's top climate scientists are giving An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore's documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy."

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/200...

British judge's conclusion is that An Inconvenient Truth is "substantially founded upon scientific research and fact"

http://mediamatters.org/items/2007101700...

Answer 11

Everything.

Answer 12

everything is untrue, global warming  is a myth.

Answer 13

Here's something new.......

Only those scientists who stand to make a buck and want to keep their jobs and their research grants........believe in "man-did-it' global warming.

For information on the fictional nature of the movie for which Gore is the pitch-man, use your favorite search engine and search using the words 'inconvenient truth hoax'

Answer 14

Try these sites:

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?art...

Article written by the co-winner of the Nobel Prize that reveals the deceit and changes, twists and exaggerations that were done by Gore and the IPCC after the scientists who actually did the "research" submitted their report.

Next, try:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c...

In addition to disproving man made global warming, it also has "Claude Allegre, a leading French scientist, who was among the first scientists to try to warn people of the dangers of global warming 20 years ago, now believes that “increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena”".

and, "the President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus said,  IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.”

And, Timothy Ball, one of the first Canadian doctors in climatology... “Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science”.

This site, a scientific "Peer Reviewed" research paper that is supported by over 19000 scientists proving man made g/w is a myth:http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

And, http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorou...

A site that shows how Gore "conveniently" set up an "investment" company that will make billions, run by some "questionable" people, to deal with g/w BEFORE he went on his little "save the world campaign".  Interesting on how he had the "cure" before the "disease" was made public.

Lastly, don't forget that "Al Gore is not a climatologist, meteorologist, astronomer, or scientist of any kind; he is a politician. And as we all know, politicians always tell the truth."

Answer 15

Why do you insist on evidence to disprove the global warming effect, yet, do not require evidence to prove it exists? The world is very old and has gone through several phases that scientists can document, why does it happen to be global warming that is the most significant? Is that how dinosaurs died? If so, how are we doing anything to  make it happen if it happened so long ago?

Let me ask you something in order to prove my point. Lets say, I'm a scientist, but I'm not rich. But, I want to be rich. Well, one thing I might want to do is tell you (government) that I believe there is a cure for oabstracasism (fake disease). And you say to me "what do I care about oabstracasism?". Then you would have to prove to me that oabstracasism was a threat to my health. That's the way the global warming 'theorisists' view global warming. It's called job security. It can't be disproven,  nor can it be proven. It's the perfect meal ticket for scientists. And basically, depending on which side of the arguement you are on, determines who funds you.

When you say the scientists that disagree are the ones that are paid to, I think differently. I think the scientists who agree are the ones who are paid to agree.