The AP Conducts A “Scientific” Poll

Now this is quite funny. Seth Borenstein writes for the AP today about Gore’s movie. Take a look at the headline:

Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy

Piqued your interest? Read further:

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

Your by now thinking “no way” right? Of course this is directed at those with common sense, not the leftists in the crowd.

So if your thinking “no way”, check the following couple paragraphs out:

The former vice president’s movie – replete with the prospect of a flooded New York City, an inundated Florida, more and nastier hurricanes, worsening droughts, retreating glaciers and disappearing ice sheets – mostly got the science right, said all 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie or read the book and answered questions from The Associated Press.

The AP contacted more than 100 top climate researchers by e-mail and phone for their opinion. Among those contacted were vocal skeptics of climate change theory. Most scientists had not seen the movie, which is in limited release, or read the book.

So let me get this straight. Out of 100 contacted, only 19 had seen the movie. And all 19 of them agreed with Gore.

That’s 19%…..19 freaking percent agreed with Gore, and he has the gall to write this article in such a way as to convey that ALL the top scientists back Gore.

How much you want to bet those 19 agreed with Gore before they saw the movie. Now how much you want to bet the other 81 didn’t want to see the movie because its fiction?

As Dafydd at Big Lizards said:

(While AP is quick to note that some of those they contacted were “vocal skeptics of climate change theory,” you may notice they oddly fail to mention how many of the 19 who responded to them were among those “skeptics.” At a guess, I’d have to say — zero?)

If you’re a climatologist — and even if you more or less support the IPCC position on global climate change — how likely would you be to seek out a showing somewhere of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth? Most scientists I know cringe at such populist caricatures, even if they agree with the basic premise… especially if they agree.

Scientists tend to be irritated anyway by the depiction of science in movies, even so-called documentaries: everything from orbits that “decay,” to explosions that can be “outrun,” to a rotating space station that produces a gravitational-like force… directed along the axis of rotation.

But they’re even more skeptical of science when the subject is controversial within the scientific community (which anthropogenic global warming certainly is) — and in spades and doubled when the moviemaker is not himself a scientist but a politician with no formal training in any math or science beyond what he learned in high school (which, considering Algore’s GPA at St. Alban’s and at Harvard, was probably not very much).

What does Al Gore have to say to this?

“They are quite literally afraid to know the truth,” Gore said. “Because if you accept the truth of what the scientific community is saying, it gives you a moral imperative to start to rein in the 70 million tons of global warming pollution that human civilization is putting into the atmosphere every day.”

Yeah, that’s the reason Al.

UPDATE

Oh lookie, the Senate has issued a rebuttal:

The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled “Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology.

AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”

In the interest of full disclosure, the AP should release the names of the “more than 100 top climate researchers” they attempted to contact to review “An Inconvenient Truth.” AP should also name all 19 scientists who gave Gore “five stars for accuracy.” AP claims 19 scientists viewed Gore’s movie, but it only quotes five of them in its article. AP should also release the names of the so-called scientific “skeptics” they claim to have contacted.

The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore, having viewed the film at a private screening at the invitation of the former Vice President. In addition, Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP. See http://www.junkscience.com/feb06.htm

[…]Here is a sampling of the views of some of the scientific critics of Gore:

Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia, on Gore’s film:

“Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.”

“The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.” – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press, June 12, 2006

Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:

“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore’s approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” – Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal

But hey, according to Seth, They ALL agree with Gore.

Sigh

UPDATE II

The Anchoress makes a very good point about the left dismissing Bush’s attempt at a tackling the problem:

But the fact remains that if Al Gore or Bill Clinton or whoever else is ringing the sky-is-falling alarm bells were serious about Global Warming…if they really, actually believed that it was real, that it was, as Clinton says, “the most urgent issue of our time, more urgent than terrorism…” then rather than ignore this program, they’d have applauded this effort between co-operating nations.

Instead, the story got sniffed at with disdain, was pronounced some sort of political manuever and then strangled to death from a lack of oxygen. Certain quarters are very good at suffocating stories that don’t fit memes.

So, you know…if the big boys of Global Warming aren’t really taking the issue seriously…if they find it so unserious as to allow the issue to be used as a political wedge or a rabble-rousing sound-bite, and that’s all…well, then I don’t have to take it seriously, either.

UPDATE III

I’ve put up a new post with a video from Friends Of Science, it’s close to 30 minutes long but it debunks EVERYTHING that Gore and the rest of the losers are trying to scare us with. Check it out here.

Other’s Blogging:

• The Anchoress
• Michael Fumento
• Bookworm Room
• Powerline
• Amy Ridenour’s National Center Blog
• Brutally Honest

So let me get this straight. Out of 100 contacted, only 19 had seen the movie. And all 19 of them agreed with Gore.

That’s 19%…..19 freaking percent agreed with Gore, and he has the gall to write this article in such a way as to convey that ALL the top scientists back Gore.

Curt

See author page