Gore advisor to British Government on Global Warming

Isn't it interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore will be an advisor to British on global warming...

Film on Global Warming Is Challenged
Wednesday April 25, 3:22 pm ET
By Raphael G. Satter, Associated Press Writer
Scientists Demand Changes to Global Warming Skeptic's Film


LONDON (AP) -- A group of British climate scientists is demanding changes to a skeptical documentary about global warming, saying there are grave errors in the program billed as a response to Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth."

"The Great Global Warming Swindle" aired on British television in March and is coming out soon on DVD. It argues that man-made emissions have a marginal impact on the world's climate and warming can better be explained by changing patterns of solar activity.

An open letter sent Tuesday by 38 scientists, including the former heads of Britain's academy of sciences and Britain's weather office, called on producer Wag TV to remove what it called "major misrepresentations" from the film before the DVD release -- a demand its director said was tantamount to censorship.

Bob Ward, the former spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain's academy of science, and one of the letter's signatories, said director Mark Durkin made a "long catalog of fundamental and profound mistakes" -- including the claim that volcanoes produce more carbon dioxide than humans, and that the Earth's atmosphere was warmer during the Middle Ages than it is today.

"Free speech does not extend to misleading the public by making factually inaccurate statements," he said. "Somebody has to stand up for the public interest here."

Durkin called the letter "loathsome."

"This is a contemptible, weasel-worded attempt to gag scientific criticism, and it won't work," he said. "I don't believe they're interested in quality control when it comes to the reporting of science -- so long as it's on their side."

Durkin acknowledged two of the errors highlighted by the scientists -- including the claim about volcanic emissions -- but he described those changes as minor and said they would be corrected in the expanded DVD release.

But the scientists do not want the DVD released without edits to completely remove the material they object to -- something Ward said would fatally weaken the film's argument.

"The fact is that it's a very convincing program, and if you're not very aware of the science you wouldn't necessarily see what the errors are," Ward said. "But the errors are huge. ... Without those errors in, he doesn't have a story."

Ward has also complained to Britain's media regulator, which said it was investigating the matter. British broadcast law demands impartiality on matters of major political and industrial controversy -- and penalties can be imposed for misrepresentations of fact.

The decision to broadcast Durkin's documentary on Channel 4 was an unusual move in a country where the role of man-made carbon emissions in heating the globe is largely taken for granted and politicians regularly spar over which party has the greenest environmental policy.

As for the former vice president, Gore has been hired as an adviser to the British government, which plans to send copies of his film to schools around England...

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070425/global_warming_film.html?.v=1

Climate of Fear

Glenn Beck: Exposed the Climate of Fear

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/gb.html

Hilarious there has not been any more warming of the planet for ten years (a little under, nine years) says the Skeptical Environmentalist author on Beck's program...

but after reading and re-reading do not miss the fact that it isn't President of the United States Al Gore is sweating for, it's President of a New World Order. Don't believe? Just read the original United Nations Charter and material put out by the World Federalists. It's been going on 15 years since I've learned about the plan for a new Constitution of the World. A smattering of my research ongoing, at Truth Online, includes bibliography.

Bloodless Revolution: A More Perfect Treason

http://dirtline.tripod.com/ArticleVbib.html

Al Gore You Tube video testimony Congress

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo7rmajxxnc

clip and re-read again and again in the early dawn

CNN GLENN BECK
Aired April 5, 2007 - 19:00:00 ET
BECK: At this year`s Academy Awards, Al Gore got nothing by love, riotous applause for his efforts on behalf of Planet Earth. Well, unfortunately for Al, those days seem to be over. The real story is, Al Gore is still getting a vocal reaction during his appearances to warn all of us about the apocalyptic effects on, you know, the warming of the globe, but nowadays the cheers have been replaced with boos, and not just from the right, but from the left, as well.

As I give you this story, I`m going to try really hard not to gloat, but I`m not making any promises. Concordia University, it`s in Montreal, Canada -- remember, Canada, a university. They just gave Al Gore an honorary doctorate. And during his address, he was stopped twice by angry cries of dissension and disbelief from the crowd. Sacrebleu, in Canada, really?

Gore responded by saying, "I don`t know if you guys are from the left or the right wing." You know why that is, Al? Because both sides now know you`re full of bull crap!

Those on the left who do agree with the perceived immediate dangers of global warming think you`re a hypocrite. Not only does your palatial mansion use more electricity in a month than the average American home does in a year, but the meat-eater that he is also contributes to cattle emissions, which are infinitely worse than driving a fully loaded Hummer.

Now, that`s not my opinion. That`s the opinion of those crazy conservatives at the U.N.

Now, those on the right have long believed that, you know, something is going on with the Earth`s climate, but it`s impossible to deny that so much of Al Gore`s science is unsubstantiated and his doomsday language is just out of control and counterproductive.

Even the "New York Times" has said that Al Gore is writing checks that his research couldn`t cash. Usually the only thing you find out about Al Gore in the "New York Times," love letters.

Al, the world is onto you. Your self-promotional, politically motivated science fiction -- I say, forget, you know, the diet, grow the beard back, invite your old friends, Ben and Jerry, over for a little reunion. The jig seems to be up!

Chris Horner, he is the author of the "Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism." Chris, aren`t you absolutely shocked that the mainstream media didn`t pick up a story about protesters at Al Gore`s speech from the left?

CHRIS HORNER, AUTHOR: Well, wait a second. It took the "New York Times" about 15 months to pick up on the fact that his movie was pure science fiction before they found some scientists who were willing to say this, so I expect in another year or so they`ll figure out that maybe it`s worth reporting, because we`ll figure out -- in about a year, it will be almost 10 years since we`ve experienced any warming, Glenn. You have to remember that it hasn`t warmed since 1998.

Maybe on that anniversary that they will notice that, in fact, some college students jeered him. And the reason that`s odd is -- you`re noting he does tend to now speak only before reliably left-wing audiences, sure, but typically elites.

College students may come from the elite strain, but they aren`t yet there. They haven`t figured out that his agenda is really about other people. They realize they`d like to create wealth, and he`s going to make it quite difficult for them.

BECK: Let me go -- because you said it`s been 10 years, almost 10 years, been nine now since we`ve experienced any warming in the globe. Let me show you that we seem to have collective Alzheimer`s. From the "Washington Post," greenhouse doomsday, the year is 2035. Phoenix is in its third week of temperatures over 130 degrees. Holland is under water. Bangladesh has ceased to exist. This is not science fiction. It`s based on current projections.

At what point do the projections start to catch up on them?

HORNER: Well, when they assign years to them. I believe that article assigned 2035, so back then it was a long time in the future. Right now, remember, Al Gore has been saying for nigh on five years that we`ve got 10 years to live, so pretty soon, you know, those chickens are going to come home to roost.

BECK: I don`t know if you saw this, but in "USA Today," I think it was yesterday, the lead story in the "Life" section was scientists say it`s too late, it`s too late to turn this around.

HORNER: Right.

BECK: I thought, "Well, I should go buy the Hummer then."

HORNER: That`s when the schism starts in the movement, because at that point, the funding drives up. What`s the point? Remember, Glenn, we spent $5 billion with a "b" researching this that`s purportedly settled and now it`s too late. Why don`t we spend the money productively to help with adaptation, which is how successful societies have always dealt with something that they always face, climate change.

BECK: Chris, thank you. I want to leave you with one quick quote here. It is from "Discover" magazine. "We have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have," "Discover" magazine, 1989. Seems like the playbook...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/05/gb.01.html

And there's more re-read late night to keep you laughing

That`s "The Real Story" tonight. And in the spirit of equal time, I want to give Al Gore a chance to respond, and I mean this sincerely. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL GORE IMPERSONATOR: I want to talk to you today about global warming. We all know the dangers it presents, so I`m not going to try and scare you. I`m just going to present you with the facts.

Here`s fact number one. If you don`t act soon, the Earth will suffer many, many explosions! Deaths! It`s going to be Hell on Earth. Your skin is going to bubble. You`re going to burn alive, and you`re going to be dead, dead! So dead you won`t even believe how dead you are!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This message brought to you by the Committee to Keep Al Gore`s Ongoing 2012 Presidential Campaign Secret.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/05/gb.01.html

Meanwhile

Beware of Newt Gingrich watch closely what he says... April 10 debate...

Don't have to warn of Kerry, he can't tell the difference between a joke and a slur...

Kerry, Gingrich announce climate showdown
By Jeremy Jacobs
April 05, 2007
Former House Speaker and possible presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and 2004 Democratic nominee Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) are set to square off on climate change next week, their staffs announced Thursday.
The debate, hosted by New York University’s John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress, will take place next Tuesday, April 10, at 10 a.m. in the Russell Senate Office Building.

Kerry, who bowed out of the 2008 presidential race earlier this year, has been dubbed an “environmental champion” by the non-partisan League of Conservation Voters. His website touts a long record of fighting for the environment. He and his wife Teresa Heinz Kerry also recently wrote This Moment on Earth, which addresses climate change and preserving the environment.

"Newt’s a guy who has spent a lot of time wrestling with climate change and the environment. He reads about it, he teaches about it, he writes about it,” Kerry said Thursday. “We don’t see eye to eye about everything, obviously, but that’s what makes for a good debate.

“As a father, when someone tells me that within the next decade, if we don't deal with global warming, our children and grandchildren may deal with global catastrophe, that tells me I damn well better do whatever I can to help make Washington deal with this responsibly,” Kerry added. “We need these good old-fashioned debates and forums and discussions to get everyone thinking creatively on both sides of the aisle.”

Gingrich, the architect of the “Contract with America” that led to the Republican takeover of the House in 1994, recently teamed up with conservationist Terry Maple to author A Contract with the Earth. Like his Contract with America, A Contract with the Earth, due out Nov. 1, 2007, is based on a 10-point “contract” calling for a bipartisan approach to solving climate issues.


http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/kerry-gingrich-announce-climate-showdown-2007-04-05.html

Ronald Bailey admits ownership 50 shares Exxon Mobil

Ronald Bailey should come clean about all of his financial investments... and include such on every article he writes... start a new trend in public disclosure...

In Brother, Can You Spare 22 Terawatts?, Ronald Bailey, November 24, 2006, Bailey admits

Disclosure: I own 50 shares of ExxonMobil stock. So what!

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116887.html

So what? Reason's environmental science correspondent/staffer switched his skeptical position on global warming August 11, 2005 noting such in his article:

We're All Global Warmers Now, Ronald Bailey, August 11, 2005

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34079.html

Prior to that time, had Bailey invested in Exxon Mobil? Or was an investment in Exxon Mobil made after Bailey wrote We're All Global Warmers Now?

Bailey mentions his switch again most notably in

An Inconvenient Truth Gore as climate exaggerator Ronald Bailey June 16, 2006

I have long been a critic of former Vice-President Al Gore, but as a recent convert to the view that humanity is contributing significantly to the current increase in average global temperatures, I was trying to keep a somewhat open mind about his new global warming movie, An Inconvenient Truth...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116471.html

Bailey also reveals (apparently for the first time)(that we can find)

Disclosure: I own a small amount of ExxonMobil stock and I am looking forward to investing in biotech cellulosic ethanol production someday.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116471.html

However, in the May article, Bailey has no such disclosure about Exxon Mobil stock ownership...

Peak Oil Panic
Is the planet running out of gas? If it is, what should the Bush administration do about it? Ronald Bailey | May 2006 Print Edition

...If ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobil, or other private companies actually owned the reserves, the world would be in a much more secure position with regard to oil production. Instead, we are subject to the whims of figures like Chavez, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and must worry about the doubtful stability of their personalities and regimes. (To be sure, even a private reserve under such a regime would face the constant threat of nationalization or other interference.) In the mid-1990s, the world had more than 10 million barrels per day of spare production capacity. That figure has fallen to between 1 and 2 million barrels, which means that any significant disruption in supplies can cause prices to soar...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/36645.html

As well, notice how he treats the science skeptics vs. the pro-global warming camp:

He simply doesn't provide a link to the "few" scientists, his term...

In any case few climate scientists now contest the idea that humanity is contributing to the current warming trend. All of the various data sets, surface thermometers, satellites and weather balloons, now show global average warming of about +0.16 degrees Celsius per decade since 1979. Whether or not this rate of warming would lead to catastrophe or not is still very much an open question. So what, if anything, should we do about any future warming?

Meanwhile, Bailey does provide a link to humanity is contributing...

By leaving out a link to climate scientists who remain skeptics, despite Bailey's conversion, Bailey skews the article.

The link to catastrophe or not doesn't work...

In November, Bailey, with a new attitude, was all scheduled to attend the Climate Change conference.

He's attended those in the past where we suspect he'd undergone brainwashing , activated precisely on August 11, 2005 to coincide with the release of three articles in Science Mag.

Global warming heads up: I will be covering the United Nations' next climate change conference in Nairobi beginning on November 13.

Discussing Climate Change In Kenya
World leaders meet to discuss improbable solutions to a questionable problem that may not be solvable. Ronald Bailey November 13, 2006

...the Left-leaning British Institute for Public Policy Research issued an alarming report last week claiming that humanity has “only ten years to save the planet.” The IPPR asserts that “global emissions of CO2 peak within ten years and fall by 70 to 80 per cent by 2050, we will face an unacceptable risk of causing a rise of more than 2°C, which would result in dangerous and irreversible impacts.”...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116681.html

Oh 'm gosh, Bailey provides a link for "only ten years to save the planet."

And, while Bailey does disclose:

Disclosure: I gratefully acknowledge that the International Policy Network in Britain is paying my expenses to cover the conference in Nairobi. Here’s what the folks at Exxonsecrets say about IPN and here’s what they say about me...

Absent are any new disclosures about financial investments... how does that add to the lining in our pockets?

Carbon Reduction or Poverty Reduction, Not Both
Ron Bailey files his second dispatch from the UN global warming conference in Nairobi, Kenya. Ronald Bailey November 14, 2006

...Tomorrow—the environment ministers finally gather here in Nairobi to ratify and complete what their underlings have been negotiating for the past week which, as far as I can tell right now, isn't much. A couple of side events intrigue me so I may cover sessions on climate and forests, the role of policies the enable adaptation to climate change once the Kyoto Protocol comes to an end in 2012, and another that asks if it is time to set a long-term global climate. The last is basically asking where humanity wants to set the planet's thermostat.

Disclosure: I gratefully acknowledge that the International Policy Network in Britain is paying my expenses to cover the conference in Nairobi. Here’s what the folks at Exxonsecrets say about IPN and here’s what they say about me...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116724.html

Disappointed, again, no new investment ideas...

Pay It Forward
What can carbon markets do for economic development? Ronald Bailey November 15, 2006

...Tomorrow, I may look in on sessions updating the state of play in Europe's Emissions Trading Scheme and see what the World Bank has to say about sustainable development in a carbon-constrained world.

Disclosure: I gratefully acknowledge that the International Policy Network in Britain is paying my expenses to cover the conference in Nairobi. Here’s what the folks at Exxonsecrets say about IPN and here’s what they say about me...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116751.html

Nope, no new investment insider tips...

The Baptist and the Bootlegger
An unlikely coalition for climate control

Ronald Bailey | November 16, 2006

...

In other words, if a company can reduce its emissions below its allocation, it can make money by selling its remaining allocation to another company. Of course, a company can also make windfall profits if the government allocates it more permits for emissions than it actually needs.

So are carbon markets here to stay?...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116779.html

Hey, this is entertaining, and useful right, carbon trading markets... hmmm...

He has a link at windfall profits... hidden message in the links, that's what we're thinking...

Power tool
European energy groups involved in carbon trading are manipulating the scheme for profit, not principle, writes David Gow Wednesday May 17, 2006
Guardian Unlimited

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1829568,00.html

His disclosure...

Tomorrow—The 12th Conference of the Parties (COP-12) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and 2nd Meeting of the Parties (MOP-2) to the Kyoto Protocol comes to an end. I will report whatever decisions the diplomats make and reactions by other participants to those decisions.

Disclosure: I gratefully acknowledge that the International Policy Network in Britain is paying my expenses to cover the conference in Nairobi. Here’s what the folks at Exxonsecrets say about IPN and here’s what they say about me

...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116779.html

"Climate Change Tourists" Go Home! The Nairobi global warming conference grinds to an end Ronald Bailey November 17, 2006

...

And perhaps some rethinking has been going on. Halldor Thorgeirsson, deputy executive secretary of the UNFCCC, mentioned that a South African delegate had made interesting observation. The South African turned the usual formulation of "what can we do to pursue development under the constraints imposed by climate change" on its head to "what can we do to address climate change under the constraints of the need for development and poverty eradication?"

Poverty eradication is a massive problem

...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/116805.html

Invest in poor countries?

After sifting through dozens of online articles by Bailey searching for new revelations and what he links and doesn't link, we'll find out Bailey is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderbergers, or Trilateral Commission... well he does mention a November meeting... Council of Foreign Relations... was it open to the public, or only members can attend? What does go on there?

Meanwhile, we're tracking Bailey to see when he provides a link to those windmill companies! (Were thinking of that for remote property where nagbores won't complain about destroying the beauty of the forest)

California watching

Climate Change Lemmings Jump Off The Cliff California signs onto Kyoto Protocol just as it falls apart Ronald Bailey October 27, 2006

To do this, the state is supposed to set up a carbon trading scheme modeled on Europe's Emissions Trading Scheme in which CO2 emitters are issued emission permits and then allowed to trade them...

http://www.reason.com/news/show/38405.html

Bailey nicely provides a link at Emissions Trading Scheme

Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS)

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/emission.htm

More

Pundits who contest climate change should tell us who is paying them
Covert lobbying, in the UK as well as the US, has severely set back efforts to combat the world's biggest problem

George Monbiot Tuesday September 26, 2006 The Guardian

...The story begins with a body called the International Policy Network (IPN). Like many other organisations that have received money from Exxon, it describes itself as a thinktank or an independent educational charity, but a more accurate description, it seems to me, would be "lobby group". While the BBC would seldom allow someone from Bell Pottinger or Burson-Marsteller on air to discuss an issue of concern to their sponsors without revealing the sponsors' identity, the BBC has frequently allowed IPN's executive director, Julian Morris, to present IPN's case without declaring its backers. IPN has so far received $295,000 from Exxon's corporate headquarters in the US. Morris told me that he runs his US office "solely for funding purposes".

IPN argues that attempts to prevent (or mitigate) man-made climate change are a waste of money. It would be better to let it happen and adapt to its effects...

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1881023,00.html

FACTSHEET: International Policy Network - North America, IPN

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=108

http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=155

2000 Bailey

4/20/00 12:45 p.m.
Leonardo Di Caprio, Climatologist
Earth Day is a festival of bad science.

By Ronald Bailey, science correspondent, Reason magazine, and author of Earth Report 2000: Revisiting the True State of the Planet

So what is going on with the climate? It is true that the global average temperature has gone up by about 1 degree Fahrenheit over the last century, and it is likely that a small portion of that increase is the result of warming caused by humanity putting carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. The vexed question is, How much more warming is likely in the 21st century? A preliminary draft report of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggests that the Earth’s surface is likely to warm at least 2 degrees and as much as 9 degrees Fahrenheit, and that sea level could rise between 4 inches and 3 feet by the end of this century. Keep in mind that the past century saw a temperature increase of 1 degree Fahrenheit and 8 inches in sea level rise, without causing global disaster. If the lower temperatures and lower sea level rise occur over the next one hundred years, then there’s not much of a climate emergency. It’s no wonder that those huge IPCC ranges cause a lot of sincere disagreement on the seriousness of the issue...

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment042000d.html

For more information on this issue use the search feature on this site located at the top left corner

http://netthetruthonline.blogspot.com/search?q=global+warming