Interesting that this happened at the same time:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22567779-601,00.html
Nine untruths in Gore film: judge
Lewis Smith | October 11, 2007
AL Gore's award-winning climate change documentary was littered with
nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled today.
An Inconvenient Truth won plaudits from the environmental lobby and an
Oscar from the film industry but was found wanting when it was
scrutinised in the High Court in London.
Mr Justice Burton identified nine significant errors within the former
Democratic presidential candidate's documentary as he assessed whether
it should be shown to schoolchildren.
He agreed that Mr Gore's film was "broadly accurate" in its
presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change but
said that some of the claims were wrong and had arisen in "the context
of alarmism and exaggeration".
In what is a rare judicial ruling on what children can see in the
classroom, Mr Justice Burton was at pains to point out that the
"apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was politically partisan
and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change.
"It is plainly, as witnessed by the fact that it received an Oscar
this year for best documentary film, a powerful, dramatically
presented and highly professionally produced film," he said in his
ruling.
"It is built around the charismatic presence of the ex-Vice-President,
Al Gore, whose crusade it now is to persuade the world of the dangers
of climate change caused by global warming.
"It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film -
although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific
research and opinion - but that it is a political film."
The analysis by the judge will have a bearing on whether the
Government can continue with its plan to have the film shown in every
secondary school.
He agreed it could be shown but on the condition that it was
accompanied by new guidance notes for teachers to balance Mr Gore's
"one-sided" views.
The British Government's decision to show the film in secondary
schools had come under attack from Stewart Dimmock, a school governor
in Kent and a member of political group the New Party, who accused the
Government of brainwashing children.
The first mistake made by Mr Gore, said Mr Justice Burton in his
written judgment, was in talking about the potential devastation
wrought by a rise in sea levels caused by the melting of ice caps.
The claim that sea levels could rise by 20ft "in the near future" was
dismissed as "distinctly alarmist". Such a rise would take place "only
after, and over, millennia".
Mr Justice Burton added: "The armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar
as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the
immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."
A claim that atolls in the Pacific had already been evacuated was
supported by "no evidence", while to suggest that two graphs showing
carbon dioxide levels and temperatures over the last 650,000 years
were an "exact fit" overstated the case.
Mr Gore's suggestion that the Gulf Stream, that warms up the Atlantic
ocean, would shut down was contradicted by the International Panel on
Climate Change's assessment that it was "very unlikely" to happen.
The drying of Lake Chad, the loss of Mount Kilimanjaro's snows and
Hurricane Katrina were all blamed by Mr Gore on climate change but the
judge said the scientific community had been unable to find evidence
to prove there was a direct link.
The drying of Lake Chad, the judge said, was "far more likely to
result from other factors, such as population increase and
over-grazing, and regional climate variability".
The melting of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was "mainly attributable to
human-induced climate change". The judge also said there was no proof
to support a claim that polar bears were drowning while searching for
icy habitats melted by global warming.
The only drowned polar bears the court was aware of were four that
died following a storm. Similarly, the judge took issue with the
former Vice-President of the United States for attributing coral
bleaching to climate change.
Separating the direct impacts of climate change and other factors was
difficult, the judgment concluded.
Despite finding nine significant errors the judge said many of the
claims made by the film were fully backed up by the weight of science.
He identified "four main scientific hypotheses, each of which is very
well supported by research published in respected, peer-reviewed
journals and accords with the latest conclusions of the IPCC".
In particular, he agreed with the main thrust of Mr Gore's arguments:
"That climate change is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of
carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide ('greenhouse gases')."
The other three main points accepted by the judge were that global
temperatures are rising and are likely to continue to rise, that
climate change will cause serious damage if left unchecked, and that
it is entirely possible for governments and individuals to reduce its
impacts.
