Students Sent To See Gore's Movie

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

BEVERLY HILLS HIGH SENDING 1500 STUDENTS TO SEE GORE'S 'GLOBAL WARMING' FILM - DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2006® (http://www.drudgereport.com/flash5ic.htm)

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU MAY 18, 2006 08:19:23 ET XXXXX

BEVERLY HILLS HIGH SENDING 1500 STUDENTS TO SEE GORE'S 'GLOBAL WARMING' FILM

**Exclusive**

School is nearly out for summer, but before the break, students at Beverly Hills High will get a "Heat Day" -- when they get to ditch class to see Al Gore's new movie!

On May 24, 2006, 1,500 Beverly Hills High School students will be boarding 30 gas-guzzling buses across town to see Al Gore's new global warming film 'AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH' at the Arclight Theatre in Hollywood, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

[Rhino]

When I saw the title of the thread I thought to myself, sounds like Kalifornia. I was right.

[Naturalized-Texan]

The leftist indoctrination of our young people cotinues apace with AlGore's Big Lie Propaganda. AlGore has learned his lessons well at the feet of his fellow leftist and master propagandist, Josef Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda.

[sunsettommy]

The funny part is that evidence of a sustained cooling trend coming soon is being posted recently in various places.

The climate in the Pacific Northwest is already showing signs of a cooling influence of the cooling Northern Pacific waters.

Precipitation is way up this year and there has been little sustained heat waves this year.

How inconvenient is that?

:hahaha:

[markus3622]

The leftist indoctrination of our young people cotinues apace with AlGore's Big Lie Propaganda. AlGore has learned his lessons well at the feet of his fellow leftist and master propagandist, Josef Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda.

Interestingly, Merriam-Webster describes "indoctrination" as "to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments" or to "teach". I thought that was what schools were about. Would it be better if they were only given information from the oil industry?

[ThomasMore]

Interestingly, Merriam-Webster describes "indoctrination" as "to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments" or to "teach". I thought that was what schools were about. Would it be better if they were only given information from the oil industry?

Markus, I thought you were serious for a minute when you wrote that. I guess you were trolling -- you certainly read the rest of the definition of indoctrinate (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=indoctrination) at M-W.

Of course you can also provide us the thousands of examples of junk science, scare tactics, and millions of pages of effort made by the oil industry to spread false propaganda among the population at large. Suppose you'd care to share a few?

[markus3622]

Markus, I thought you were serious for a minute when you wrote that. I guess you were trolling -- you certainly read the rest of the definition of indoctrinate (http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=indoctrination) at M-W.

Thomas, of course I knew that NT was using "indoctrinate" in the perjorative sense.

Of course you can also provide us the thousands of examples of junk science, scare tactics, and millions of pages of effort made by the oil industry to spread false propaganda among the population at large. Suppose you'd care to share a few?

Of course. All you have to do is look through most of the evidence cited on any conservative website about global warming and see who's being cited.

The usual suspects I could list are

The Marshall Institute
The Competitive Enterprise Institute
Tech Central Station
Cooler Heads Coalition
Global Climate Coalition, etc, etc.

Nearly everything cited by the "skeptics" is somehow related to this network, funded largely by oil companies, conservative donors. They write in the National Review, Washington Times, Wall Street Journal. There has been an orchestrated campaign to muddy the waters, play up any uncertainties. I believe it to the reason why so many are misinformed about climate change. On a poll on this site, 50% don't even believe that the earth is warming. In reality, only a small number of active researchers are skeptical about global warming.

A good website that shows this network is

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/

Exxon even had a memo admitting this campaign.

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/3860_GlobalClimateSciencePlanMemo.pdf

I found it on this site here.

http://www.environmentaldefense.org/article.cfm?contentid=3804&CFID=12065816&CFTOKEN=55661173

The plan is so transparent that one site came up with Skeptics Bingo

http://timlambert.org/2005/04/gwsbingo/

[Naturalized-Texan]

So, if a bunch of wild-eyed, left-wing, conspiracy-theory web sites say that something is so, then it is in your mind. No surprise there.

t's clear that you believe that our students should be indoctrinated by left-wing Big Lie Propaganda by being forced to attend AlGore's propaganda film. No surprise there either.

[markus3622]

Oh, the irony. You've given up even trying to dispute the facts on global warming.

If a school sets up a field trip to go and see a film about a current issue, I don't see that as a particular concern. It might encourage them to think about the issues, and become more informed in the process. However, it's information that's the real threat to your argument.

[sunsettommy]

Oh, the irony. You've given up even trying to dispute the facts on global warming.

If a school sets up a field trip to go and see a film about a current issue, I don't see that as a particular concern. It might encourage them to think about the issues, and become more informed in the process. However, it's information that's the real threat to your argument.

So even though you never seen the "documentary" it is ok anyway because we all know Albert Gore is completely free of bias.

So even though his past publication Earth in Balance was exposed as trash will not influence your bias you have favoring a school trip to see a one sided presentation.

:rolleyes:

Oh the irony.

[markus3622]

Where did I say Al Gore was free of bias? I'd like to see a school trip followed by the opportunity to debate the subject. I'd be worried if they were being shown junk science, but it appears they're not.

[Rhino]

If a school sets up a field trip to go and see a film about a current issue, I don't see that as a particular concern. It might encourage them to think about the issues, and become more informed in the process.If the film were factual, I would tend to agree. But Gore has demonstrated that he is far from factual on this issue. He presents conjecture as facts, and deliberately misleads as a result. That's not education. It's indoctrination.

However, it's information that's the real threat to your argument.No, it's disinformation that we have a problem with. Factual information is no problem at all. Unfortunately, that's not what Gore offers.

[markus3622]

I'll agree with you that Al Gore was basing some of his opinions on speculation ten to fifteen years ago, however, he has been proven right (within the scientific community). I'll accept that perhaps he got lucky.

I'd be interested to see, on balance, how his film is reviewed by scientists. No doubt, there will be bits where, perhaps, he's missed a qualifier, but I doubt we'll see many significant errors. He's been touring the show for a while and it's been reviewed by scientific advisors.

[Rhino]

I haven't seen him proven right on anything. I don't expect surprise from the scientific community. Those that agree with him will laud the film, while those that disagree will pan it. Par for the course.

[markus3622]

I'll see the film myself. However, we know the CEI/Heartland Institute/Exxon crowd will dismiss it, and moveon.org/sierra club will love it. If we ignore those, it would interesting to see what the scientific community says.

[Naturalized-Texan]

Oh, the irony. You've given up even trying to dispute the facts on global warming.
What facts? Your hypothesis that global warming is being caused by human activities that is supported ONLY by speculation and supposition? Or the real fact that there is no scientific evidence that global warming is being caused by human activities?

If a school sets up a field trip to go and see a film about a current issue, I don't see that as a particular concern. It might encourage them to think about the issues, and become more informed in the process. However, it's information that's the real threat to your argument.
Forcing several busloads of students to see a political film that is nothing more than left-wing Big Lie Propaganda smacks of Nazism. It's something that Hitler would have done. Come to think of it, AlGore does remind me a lot of Hitler when he speaks. Give him a little square mustache, and the resemblance would be striking.

[sunsettommy]

Oh, the irony. You've given up even trying to dispute the facts on global warming.

If a school sets up a field trip to go and see a film about a current issue, I don't see that as a particular concern. It might encourage them to think about the issues, and become more informed in the process. However, it's information that's the real threat to your argument.

So being taught from a man who has a history of presenting onesided presentations on the issue from his days as a Senator to writing a crappy book to making speeches filled with doom and gloom to a documentary that emphasises the very worst scenarios that the media commonly pushes but not the IPCC.Is a deluded man you are.

You make me sick with your selective irrationality.

[sunsettommy]

What facts? Your hypothesis that global warming is being caused by human activities that is supported ONLY by speculation and supposition? Or the real fact that there is no scientific evidence that global warming is being caused by human activities?


Forcing several busloads of students to see a political film that is nothing more than left-wing Big Lie Propaganda smacks of Nazism. It's something that Hitler would have done. Come to think of it, AlGore does remind me a lot of Hitler when he speaks. Give him a little square mustache, and the resemblance would be striking.

I prefer this image of dear blowhard al.

[sunsettommy]

I'll agree with you that Al Gore was basing some of his opinions on speculation ten to fifteen years ago, however, he has been proven right (within the scientific community). I'll accept that perhaps he got lucky.

I'd be interested to see, on balance, how his film is reviewed by scientists. No doubt, there will be bits where, perhaps, he's missed a qualifier, but I doubt we'll see many significant errors. He's been touring the show for a while and it's been reviewed by scientific advisors.

Some already have seen it and they say it is a poor work.

The Fox News documentary was much better as it even had the gall to present various viewpoints.

Gore presents just ONE viewpoint.

That difference is what you miss over and over.

[sunsettommy]

Where did I say Al Gore was free of bias? I'd like to see a school trip followed by the opportunity to debate the subject. I'd be worried if they were being shown junk science, but it appears they're not.

How would you know that it is not junk science?

You have yet to see it.

:uhh:

[sunsettommy]

Deleted

[Rhino]

DeletedAw! Was it something good?

[markus3622]

I think I've unearthed the source of NT's funny Al Gore - Goebbels quote

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/23.html#a8404

Classic.

[sunsettommy]

Aw! Was it something good?

It was very good but the link was useless to post.

[Rhino]

Drat!!!

[Naturalized-Texan]

I think I've unearthed the source of NT's funny Al Gore - Goebbels quote
What the hell are you talking about. I never made or alluded to any AlGore - Goebbels quote.

However, it IS obvious that AlGore is a disciple of Josef Goebbels with his Big Lie Propaganda about global warming. AlGore learned his lessons well at the feet of his master who originated the Big Lie - tell a big enough lie often enough and soon people will start to believe it. It's also clear that the junk scientists, who claim over and over and over again that human activities cause global warming without ever providing any evidence, are also disciples of Josef Goebbels.

[Naturalized-Texan]

markus:

Anyone with even the tiniest sense of what is going on in the world should be much more inclined to believe research partly supported by Exxon, et al., with no strings attached, than research sponsored and paid for by the UN for the following reasons:

1) The UN has zero credibility about anything.
2) The UN, through its Commission on Global Governance (CGG), has as its stated goal world government under UN control.
3) The IPCC is wholly under the control of the UN and its conclusions are what the CGG tells it to conclude.
4) Exxon, et al., is investing billions of dollars in research in means to produce alternative fuels.
5) Exxon, et al., is investing billions of dollars in research to reduce emissions.
6) Consequently, Exxon, et al., will make huge profits even if the UN manages to fool the people of the world into believing that we humans can do anything to stop global warming.
7) Exxon has a vested interest in not destroying the American economy based on nothing more than the speculation and supposition by junk scientists beholden to the UN, despite the fact that it will still be profitable no matter what happens.

Bottom line: Exxon, et al., have infinitely more credibility than the UN (IPCC).

[dPrasse]

The leftist indoctrination of our young people cotinues apace with AlGore's Big Lie Propaganda. AlGore has learned his lessons well at the feet of his fellow leftist and master propagandist, Josef Goebbels, Hitler's Minister of Propaganda.

agreed , NT ... I remember being forced to watch "The Lottery " movie when I was in 6th and 7th grade ... it was a pro euthanasia movie ... then we had to talk about it ...

I got an F for saying that it might be ok in Communist countries ...

[sunsettommy]

For you Markus,
Inconvenient Truths Indeed<!--sizec--><!--/sizec-->

By Dr. Robert C. Balling Jr.
24 May 2006
TCSDaily.com

(excerpt)

Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" opens around the country this week. In the film Gore pulls together evidence from every corner of the globe to convince us that climate change is happening fast, we are to blame, and if we don't act immediately, our Earth will be all but ruined. However, as you sit through the film, consider the following inconvenient truths:


(1) Near the beginning of the film, Gore pays respects to his Harvard mentor and inspiration, Dr. Roger Revelle. Gore praises Revelle for his discovery that atmospheric CO2 levels were rising and could potentially contribute to higher temperatures at a global scale. There is no mention of Revelle's article published in the early 1990s concluding that the science is "too uncertain to justify drastic action." (S.F. Singer, C. Starr, and R. Revelle, "What to do about Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap. Cosmos 1 (1993) 28-33.)


(2) Gore discusses glacial and snowpack retreats atop Kenya's Mt. Kilimanjaro, implying that human induced global warming is to blame. But Gore fails to mention that the snows of Kilimanjaro have been retreating for more than 100 years, largely due to declining atmospheric moisture, not global warming. Gore does not acknowledge the two major articles on the subject published in 2004 in the International Journal of Climatology and the Journal of Geophysical Research showing that modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro was initiated by a reduction in precipitation at the end of the nineteenth century and not by local or global warming.


(3) Many of Gore's conclusions are based on the "Hockey Stick" that shows near constant global temperatures for 1,000 years with a sharp increase in temperature from 1900 onward. The record Gore chooses in the film completely wipes out the Medieval Warm Period of 1,000 years ago and Little Ice Age that started 500 years ago and ended just over 100 years ago. There is evidence from throughout the world that these climate episodes existed, but on Gore's Hockey Stick, they become nothing more than insignificant fluctuations (Gore even jokes at one point about the Medieval Warm period).

(more)

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=052406F

See the obvious crap Gore pushes?

The Hockey Stick has already been refuted.

[dPrasse]

I think Albores SNL opening skit was closer to the truth than anything he claims to be truthful ...

[sunsettommy]

From the Washington Times,

Gore's inconvenient lie

By Patrick J. Michaels
May 24, 2006

Excerpt:

The word's out: Puffing up global warming is scientifically acceptable, a legitimate activity required to get people's attention on this important issue.

The latest example is Al Gore's global warming horror show, "An Inconvenient Truth." Most people with a standard American science education (i.e. none) will leave convinced that the world is going to come to an end from climate change -- or, rather, that it has already started to do so.

It's a sad fact that some scientists, and scientist wannabes (like Mr. Gore) take this tack, because it will only weaken the public's growing distrust in what they perceive is a scientific elite that leaves them out of the feedback loop. Presumably safe drugs develop unforeseen and fatal side effects. Engineers charged to protect a major city build levees that crash in what (in New Orleans) was a modest hurricane. Their hybrid cars don't get the mileage EPA says they will.

So here's what Al told Grist Magazine about global warming: "I believe it is appropriate to have an overrepresentation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."
It would be nice to think he came up with thisde novo.But exaggeration of global warming has long been considered virtuous.

(more)

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20060523-105312-2838r.htm

A few CO2 Global Warmers with the wrong approach in science.

Surprised anyone?

[Naturalized-Texan]

Questions for Al Gore (http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=052506C)

Dear Mr. Gore:

I have just seen your new movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," about the threat that global warming presents to humanity. I think you did a very good job of explaining global warming theory, and your presentation was effective. Please convey my compliments to your good friend, Laurie David, for a job well done.

As a climate scientist myself -- you might remember me...I'm the one you mistook for your "good friend," UK scientist Phil Jones during my congressional testimony some years back -- I have a few questions that occurred to me while watching the movie.

1) Why did you make it look like hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires, floods, droughts, and ice calving off of glaciers and falling into the ocean, are only recent phenomena associated with global warming? You surely know that hurricane experts have been warning congress for many years that the natural cycle in hurricanes would return some day, and that our built-up coastlines were ripe for a disaster (like Katrina, which you highlighted in the movie). And as long as snow continues to fall on glaciers, they will continue to flow downhill toward the sea. Yet you made it look like these things wouldn't happen if it weren't for global warming. Also, since there are virtually no measures of severe weather showing a recent increase, I assume those graphs you showed actually represented damage increases, which are well known to be simply due to greater population and wealth. Is that right?

2) Why did you make it sound like all scientists agree that climate change is manmade and not natural? You mentioned a recent literature review study that supposedly found no peer-reviewed articles that attributed climate change to natural causes (a non-repeatable study which has since been refuted....I have a number of such articles in my office!) You also mentioned how important it is to listen to scientists when they warn us, yet surely you know that almost all past scientific predictions of gloom and doom have been wrong. How can we trust scientists' predictions now?

3) I know you still must feel bad about the last presidential election being stolen from you, but why did you have to make fun of Republican presidents (Reagan; both Bushes) for their views on global warming? The points you made in the movie might have had wider appeal if you did not alienate so many moviegoers in this manner.

{More at the link above.}

[markus3622]

It sounds as if Al Gore has done a good job. The criticisms are either wrong, or very minor quibbles.

[Eagle1]

hahahhaha, global warming

ok markus, you go ahead and sell your winter clothes and get yourself a summer home in antarctica. I'll continue sitting here and wonder why the hell it is so damn cold for this time of year.

[Rhino]

It sounds as if Al Gore has done a good job. The criticisms are either wrong, or very minor quibbles.
:hahaha:

[Naturalized-Texan]

It sounds as if Al Gore has done a good job. The criticisms are either wrong, or very minor quibbles.
I see that you are admitting that you have been brainwashed by the same left-wing Big Lie Propaganda about global warming that AlGore is spouting. You have even less credibility than the UN, which has none.

[Timberwolf]

Mr. Gore, I think we can both agree that if it was relatively easy for mankind to stop emitting so much carbon dioxide, that we should do so. You are a very smart person, so I can't understand why you left so many important points unmentioned, and you made it sound so easy.
I certainly hope he's being sarcastic in saying, "you're a very smart person"...Gore is not smart. He's deceptive, repulsive, and mad as a hatter...but not smart.

[dPrasse]

So here's what Al told Grist Magazine about global warming: "I believe it is appropriate to have an overrepresentation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience."

So , basically tell a huge lie to scare the shit out of folks just so you can ram your Commie ideas down their throats ... good plan Algore ...

[sunsettommy]

Mr. Gore, I think we can both agree that if it was relatively easy for mankind to stop emitting so much carbon dioxide, that we should do so. You are a very smart person, so I can't understand why you left so many important points unmentioned, and you made it sound so easy.

I certainly hope he's being sarcastic in saying, "you're a very smart person"...Gore is not smart. He's deceptive, repulsive, and mad as a hatter...but not smart.

It was sarcasm.

The proof:

You are a very smart person, so I can't understand why you left so many important points unmentioned, and you made it sound so easy.


Gore is already getting nailed on simple stuff and as we see Markus has nothing to support Al "easy to distort and lie" Gore pablums.

[sunsettommy]

It sounds as if Al Gore has done a good job. The criticisms are either wrong, or very minor quibbles.

Al Gore Lies and Distorts big time.

More like his incomplete movie is being exposed for its omissions and plain out of date stuff.

The Kyoto Treaty is worthless.The IPCC themselves say a very tiny reduction is all we can expect.Europe is now discovering how irrelevant it is too.

Polar Bears are doing fine up there.Recent news shows that 11 of 13 Polar bear populations are increasing.Seems Al will not allow the biologists up there to have any about it.

Hockey Stick is refuted.You knowthat by now but you are not willing to get yourself out of the mud to admit it.

History,Geology and other science and research fields long ago established the fact that Medieval Optimism and the Little Ice age eras existed and over a large area too.

You going to deny it Marky?

He presents a ONE SIDED view on the issue.That alone is a RED flag.

He tries to scare the hell out of people.Hardly a sane reasoned approach to educating the ignorant public.More like being a political boob is why he does that.Plus he has been around Nader,Brown and Ehrlich too much.Their scaremongering method is now endorsed by blowhard Al.

I can not respect people such as Gore who is following down the wrong path trailblazed by the creeps such as Lester Brown,Ralph Nader and the biggest twit of all Ehrlich.Presenting obviously flawed presentations.

Gosh Markie,They are all dead set against Nuclear Power.Something you believe in!

:hahaha: