Five years of “An Inconvenient Truth” (May 24th, 2011). Anthony Watts wears his fingers down to tiny nubs hammering out Yet-Another-Criticism-of-An_Inconvenient_Truth, this time a true opus:
Executive Summary: Science Fiction
After-all Julia A. Seymour of the Business and Media Institute (staff of four) says so. And if you can’t trust an organization “devoted solely to analyzing and exposing the anti-free enterprise culture of the media“ then who can you trust? No-one, that’s who.
Denialist fixation with Al Gore and his documentary film has been both obsessive and compulsive since the first screening of the Oscar-winning documentary, and five years on it’s still “inconvenient”. Denialists have leveled every insinuation and nit-pick they can, but it still stands unbowed. As a rational person though I have to say “so what?” Even if it was proven beyond a doubt that it was filmed on the same soundstage as the Apollo Moon Landings, the abundant evidence and knowledge that supports scientific concern over Global Warming will remain. An Inconvenient Truth is simply a popular presentation of that concern.
So what do we find in 5 Years After: Networks Celebrate Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth,’ Ignore Scientific Flaws, Criticism? A sullen regurgitation of denialist attempts to undermine a popular documentary and teach them scientists a thing or two. Empty-headed gum-flapping. Here’s a few highlights:
- Personal attacks on Al “Apocalypse Al” Gore as a “movie star”, etc.
- Allegations that Gore predicted 20 ft sea-level rise by 2010 (he didn’t).
- Climate Depot’s “lengthy list of more than 1,000 scientists who dissent in some way from those claims” (classic fake survey).
- The claim that Gore’s “mentor” oceanographer Roger Revelle had “second thoughts” about CO2 and climate change late in life (misrepresenting a dead man. Read his own words).
- Accusations that the media buried a High Court of London ruling that there were “nine significant errors” in AIT (but primarily ruled that it was clear that the film was substantially founded upon scientific research and fact).
- Climategate!
- A pitch for next month’s Heartland Institute conference on “Restoring the Scientific Method.”
Wott's Up With That? 
Thanks for the summary, glad I didn’t have to read it.–Tom Gray, Wind Energy Communications Consultant
And let us not forget, most importantly, 5 years later, Al Gore is still fat.
[The most damning criticism yet made! – Ben]
A relevant 2007 article from Real Climate on the ‘errors’ in Al Gore’s movie.
“Convenient Untruths”
[Good recommendation. It shows how intellectually bankrupt the denialist movement is, still trying to pass off the same tired disproven crap four years later. – Ben]
It is starting to seem they do not have a problem with AGW but with Al Gore, let’s start a fund to get them and Al both to the court! It’d be far more progressive than what they’re doing now!