nbcrusader said:
Don't Believe the Hype
{quote]Al Gore is wrong. There's no "consensus" on global warming.
[q]Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" Movie: Fact or Hype?
Stefan Lovgren
for National Geographic News
Updated May 25, 2006
The message in An Inconvenient Truth, the new movie starring former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, is clear: Humans are causing global warming, and the effects are devastating.
Most scientists agree that the Earth is heating up, due primarily to an atmospheric increase in carbon dioxide caused mainly by the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and petroleum.
But how accurate are some of the scientific claims made in the documentary?
In an attemp to clear the air, National Geographic News checked in with Eric Steig, an earth scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, who saw An Inconvenient Truth at a preview screening.
He says the documentary handles the science well.
"I was looking for errors," he said.
"But nothing much struck me as overblown or wrong."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/060524-global-warming.html
[/q]
[q]Exx-Cons
by the Editors
Post date 05.25.06 | Issue date 06.12.06
Al Gore seems to have touched a nerve. An Inconvenient Truth, his new documentary about global warming--a simultaneously frightening and inspiring film--hadn't yet arrived in theaters last week when a guerrilla movement to discredit the movie had already begun. A network of oil-funded think tankers and conservative media outlets have joined arms to launch the most massive offensive against a PowerPoint presentation ever recorded by man. But there is one salutary effect of this new campaign. The Swift-Boating of An Inconvenient Truth has brought into public view yet another shining star in the right's anti-science constellation. While the fundamentalist theo-conservatives sowed doubts about evolution during the debate over "intelligent design," the Exxon conservatives are storming into battle against global warming....
https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=20060612&s=editorial061206
[/q]
[q]Case Closed: The Debate about Global Warming is Over
Issues in Governance Studies, June 2006
Gregg Easterbrook, Visiting Fellow, Governance Studies, Economic Studies
Executive Summary
Here's the short version of everything you need to know about global warming. First, the consensus of the scientific community has shifted from skepticism to near-unanimous acceptance of the evidence of an artificial greenhouse effect. Second, while artificial climate change may have some beneficial effects, the odds are we're not going to like it. Third, reducing emissions of greenhouse gases may turn out to be much more practical and affordable than currently assumed.
This brief will address the three points above and, in an appendix, offer non-jargon explanations of the most important recent findings of greenhouse science. But the pressing point of this briefing is not so much scientific as it is practical—that action against artificial global warming may not prove nearly as expensive or daunting as commonly believed. Greenhouse gases are an air pollution problem, and all air pollution problems of the past have cost significantly less to fix than projected, while declining faster than expected. This gives cause to hope that artificial greenhouse gases can be controlled reasonably cheaply and without wrenching sacrifices to the global economy. And if there is a chance of an economical approach to greenhouse-gas reduction, then what are we waiting for? Let's start now.
http://brookings.edu/views/papers/easterbrook/20060517.htm
[/q]
but keep trying -- one day you'll find someone who isn't published in a right wing, anti-environmental/pro-business newspaper, magazine, or journal (like the WSJ) who denies global warming.