• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Yes, let's prosecute climate change fruad

KLATTU

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
12,468
Reaction score
4,020
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
If propounding pseudoscience in pursuit of self-serving goals is a crime, here are some hardened offenders.



So if Harris and Schneiderman are up for suing people who’ve made piles of cash peddling exaggerations and distortions, let’s roll out some test cases. I’ve got three ideas: United States v. Al Gore. Ten years ago, the former vice president of the United States launched an extraordinarily lucrative career by selling climate doomsday. While promoting his Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, he made a shockingly false statement. He said that unless the world took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse gases, it would reach a “point of no return” in ten years. RELATED: Apocalypse Delayed Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the wor
Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the world has reached a “point of no return?” No? Gore’s documentary grossed almost $50 million worldwide. I’d suggest that number as a starting point for damages. But of course you’ll need to subpoena all his business records and communications. We wouldn’t want him hiding his ill-gotten gains, and goodness knows that public schools could use some cash.

Read more at: Climate-Change Prosecution: Liberals Should Be Liable
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,735
Reaction score
11,510
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
If propounding pseudoscience in pursuit of self-serving goals is a crime, here are some hardened offenders.



So if Harris and Schneiderman are up for suing people who’ve made piles of cash peddling exaggerations and distortions, let’s roll out some test cases. I’ve got three ideas: United States v. Al Gore. Ten years ago, the former vice president of the United States launched an extraordinarily lucrative career by selling climate doomsday. While promoting his Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, he made a shockingly false statement. He said that unless the world took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse gases, it would reach a “point of no return” in ten years. RELATED: Apocalypse Delayed Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the wor
Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the world has reached a “point of no return?” No? Gore’s documentary grossed almost $50 million worldwide. I’d suggest that number as a starting point for damages. But of course you’ll need to subpoena all his business records and communications. We wouldn’t want him hiding his ill-gotten gains, and goodness knows that public schools could use some cash.

Read more at: Climate-Change Prosecution: Liberals Should Be Liable

Be careful what you wish for, in a court of law one would have to prove that Climate Change is a Hoax and if you fail the shoe would be on the other foot.
 

KLATTU

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
12,468
Reaction score
4,020
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Be careful what you wish for, in a court of law one would have to prove that Climate Change is a Hoax and if you fail the shoe would be on the other foot.

Not at all .


Gore's already been taken to court in the UK and gotten his jowls slapped.
 

longview

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
30,808
Reaction score
10,228
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Not at all .


Gore's already been taken to court in the UK and gotten his jowls slapped.
Mann and Steyn, are currently in a case, and it is the alarmist Mann who keeps seeking delays.
 

Casper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
26,735
Reaction score
11,510
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Not at all .


Gore's already been taken to court in the UK and gotten his jowls slapped.

If you are feeling lucky by all means go for it, just don't say you were not warned.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
34,184
Reaction score
22,934
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
If propounding pseudoscience in pursuit of self-serving goals is a crime, here are some hardened offenders.



So if Harris and Schneiderman are up for suing people who’ve made piles of cash peddling exaggerations and distortions, let’s roll out some test cases. I’ve got three ideas: United States v. Al Gore. Ten years ago, the former vice president of the United States launched an extraordinarily lucrative career by selling climate doomsday. While promoting his Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, he made a shockingly false statement. He said that unless the world took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse gases, it would reach a “point of no return” in ten years. RELATED: Apocalypse Delayed Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the wor
Ten years have passed. Is there a scientific consensus that the world has reached a “point of no return?” No? Gore’s documentary grossed almost $50 million worldwide. I’d suggest that number as a starting point for damages. But of course you’ll need to subpoena all his business records and communications. We wouldn’t want him hiding his ill-gotten gains, and goodness knows that public schools could use some cash.

Read more at: Climate-Change Prosecution: Liberals Should Be Liable

The movie has been through the court. Deniers tried to block it being shown in schools. It was found to be largely accurate with 3 minor errors of scale, rather than fact. They lost, and the film was shown in schools across the country.
 

KLATTU

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
12,468
Reaction score
4,020
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The movie has been through the court. Deniers tried to block it being shown in schools. It was found to be largely accurate with 3 minor errors of scale, rather than fact. They lost, and the film was shown in schools across the country.


Thankfully, Al Gore invented the internet so we could all call people like you on your BS.
The judge ruled that the film can still be shown in schools, as part of a climate change resources pack, but only if it is accompanied by fresh guidance notes to balance Mr Gore's "one-sided" views. The "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change, he said

· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

· It spoke of global warming "shutting down the ocean conveyor" - the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was "very unlikely" that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down

· Mr Gore had also claimed - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts"

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: "It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from ... population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability"

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that"

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned "swimming long distances to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm"
Gore's climate film has scientific errors - judge | Environment | The Guardian
..and remember this came from a very pro-warmist court.The UK is way more infected with liberals than the US.

· The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult

· The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was "distinctly alarmist"
 

polgara

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
20,215
Reaction score
17,786
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
Thankfully, Al Gore invented the internet so we could all call people like you on your BS.
The judge ruled that the film can still be shown in schools, as part of a climate change resources pack, but only if it is accompanied by fresh guidance notes to balance Mr Gore's "one-sided" views. The "apocalyptic vision" presented in the film was not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change, he said

· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

· It spoke of global warming "shutting down the ocean conveyor" - the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was "very unlikely" that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down

· Mr Gore had also claimed - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts"

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: "It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from ... population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability"

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that"

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned "swimming long distances to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm"
Gore's climate film has scientific errors - judge | Environment | The Guardian
..and remember this came from a very pro-warmist court.The UK is way more infected with liberals than the US.

· The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult

· The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was "distinctly alarmist"

Greetings, KLATTU. :2wave:

Excellent! We need to see more posts like this one! :thumbs:
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
34,184
Reaction score
22,934
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Al Gore is traditionally vilified in order to negatively obfuscate the debate, as above. Personal attacks on him shift the debate away from climate science for which he has no responsibility, claim, or blame.
I stand corrected. There were actually no points in the movie found to be in "error", political overemphases were simply corrected by inclusions in the programme notes. The judge nonetheless found the movie "broadly accurate".
 

LowDown

Curmudgeon
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Mann and Steyn, are currently in a case, and it is the alarmist Mann who keeps seeking delays.

I appears that Mann doesn't want to have to submit to discovery. He made those claims and then refused to show anyone his methods. If the day ever comes when he is finally forced to release that it ought to be interesting. As it is, he's attempting to beat Steyn by attrition through repeated delays.

It doesn't much matter anymore, though. Mann has no support for his case in the scientific community at all. Not one organization or individual submitted a brief in his favor for his case. Dozens of briefs have been filed against him, though, mostly because his efforts are seen as a threat to free speech.

Other scientists are sick of Mann and his self-centered screeching:

Because Mann's conduct has been an utter and complete disgrace. He's lied about being a Nobel laureate, he's lied about being multiply exonerated, he's lied about other scientists, and tried to bully and smear and intimidate anyone who refuses to defer to him.

And the only reason he gets away with this is because of the respect that good people, like Mr Huertas, rightly and properly have for science and the scientific method. Science is hard, tough, poorly paid, and often thankless work. It's also the thing that actually advances our species from the savannah to the skyscraper. It's quite right and proper to have a healthy respect for this.

And Mann's abusing it. He is trying to cash in on that respect for his own ends.
 
Top Bottom