[DiSaidSo]

There were so many threads this could've gone in.... Looks like Bill.aam posted this in the global warming/science thread. It could've just as well gone in the media bias thread, too. But I think this precious gem really deserves its own thread.

AP Wrongly Cites Scientists in Support of Al Gore's Movie


Posted by Greg Sheffield on June 27, 2006 - 20:28.
The Republican majority on the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works released a joint press release about an AP article entitled "Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy."
The press release takes issue with the scientists the AP cited, as well as scientists it ignored.

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

The AP also chose to ignore Gore’s reliance on the now-discredited “hockey stick” by Dr. Michael Mann, which claims that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere remained relatively stable over 900 years, then spiked upward in the 20th century, and that the 1990’s were the warmest decade in at least 1000 years. Last week’s National Academy of Sciences report dispelled Mann’s often cited claims by reaffirming the existence of both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. See Senator Inhofe’s statement on the broken “Hockey Stick.”

Gore’s claim that global warming is causing the snows of Mt. Kilimanjaro to disappear has also been debunked by scientific reports. For example, a 2004 study in the journal Nature makes clear that Kilimanjaro is experiencing less snowfall because there’s less moisture in the air due to deforestation around Kilimanjaro.

When I saw that AP story, I couldn't help think to myself how sad it was for such a reputable news agency to print something so slanted and biased, ruining any credibility they previously may have had with me. I mean, if they'd just named names. That's all that had to happen.

[bill.aam]

I was thinking it needed its own thread also, but I had a chance in the global warming/science thread to quote the original story posted by Linskyjack..

[DiSaidSo]

Well you must take your opportunities, sir. I gave you a shout-out, though.

(Actually, the real reason was that I didn't want to go back and read that entire thread all the way through. )

(Not really. It needed its own thread. It's not JUST global warming we're debating here.... also the ludicrous media bias that goes on. Completely unbelievable!)

[Stoner]

This is exactly the problem of the influence of politics on the issue. Distortion for the purpose of electability.

AP's getting a black eye for the slant, which they certainly appear to deserve.

[Chicon]

Hi Di,

It's getting more and more tricky to get the truth in the medias as they are from right to left slanted. Even apolitical and areligious branches like science aren't spared.
I won't be surprised that someone will say one day that the square root of a number is either a conservative or a liberal invention !

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Chicon

Hi Di,

It's getting more and more tricky to get the truth in the medias as they are from right to left slanted. Even apolitical and areligious branches like science aren't spared.
I won't be surprised that someone will say one day that the square root of a number is either a conservative or a liberal invention !

Been done....
It's called 'creation science'........

[Chicon]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Been done....
It's called 'creation science'........

LOL ! You're right !

[DiSaidSo]

Something just occurred to me.... as it is wont to do from time to time....

If Ann Coulter is a bad person for allegedly profiting off of "other people's pain," then how come Al Gore isn't a bad person for profiting off of a trans-generational, global catrastophe just waiting to happen?

Also: bump!

[linskyjack]

Miss Global Warming Expert---have you taken the time to read the White House Commissioned report on Global Warming (Thats your boy Bushie's commission). Of course not---because it just might make you think again before making these brilliant statements. (Check out the recommendations the commission made---and see how your boy Bushie ignored them!).

When you are done reading that, read this-----Report: Earth Hottest It's Been In 2,000 Years


By John Heilprin
Associated Press Writer
Fri, Jun. 23 2006 01:31 PM EST[-] Text [+] Subscribe to Newsletter Print E-Mail More on Topic WASHINGTON (AP) - The Earth is running a slight fever f rom greenhouse gases, after enjoying relatively stable temperatures for 2,000 years. The National Academy of Sciences, after reconstructing global average surface temperatures for the past two millennia, said Thursday the data are "additional supporting evidence ... that human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming."
Enlarge this Image
(Photo: AP / NASA)
This satellite image released by NASA shows the minimum concentration of Arctic sea ice in 2005. On September 21, 2005, the sea ice extent dropped to 2.05 million square miles. The National Academy of Sciences said the Earth is running a slight fever from
Other new research showed that global warming produced about half of the extra hurricane-fueled warmth in the North Atlantic in 2005, and natural cycles were a minor factor, according to Kevin Trenberth and Dennis Shea of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a research lab sponsored by the National Science Foundation and universities.

The academy had been asked to report to Congress on how researchers drew conclusions about the Earth's climate going back thousands of years, before data was available f rom modern scientific instruments. The academy convened a panel of 12 climate experts, chaired by Gerald North, a geosciences professor at Texas A&M University, to look at the "proxy" evidence before then, such as tree rings, corals, marine and lake sediments, ice cores, boreholes and glaciers.

Combining that information gave the panel "a high level of confidence that the last few decades of the 20th century were warmer than any comparable period in the last 400 years," the panel wrote. It said the "recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia," though it was relatively warm around the year 1000 followed by a "Little Ice Age" f rom about 1500 to 1850.

Their conclusions were meant to address, and they lent credibility to, a well-known graphic among climate researchers — a "hockey-stick" chart that climate scientists Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes created in the late 1990s to show the Northern Hemisphere was the warmest it has been in 2,000 years.

It had compared the sharp curve of the hockey blade to the recent uptick in temperatures — a 1 degree rise in global average surface temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere during the 20th century — and the stick's long shaft to centuries of previous climate stability.

That research is "likely" true and is supported by more recent data, said John "Mike" Wallace, an atmospheric sciences professor at the University of Washington and a panel member.

Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (news, bio, voting record), R-N.Y., chairman of the House Science Committee, had asked the academy for the report last year after the House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman, Rep. Joe Barton (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, launched an investigation of the three climate scientists.

The Bush administration has maintained that the threat f rom global warming is not severe enough to warrant new pollution controls that the White House says would have cost 5 million Americans their jobs.

"This report shows the value of Congress handling scientific disputes by asking scientists to give us guidance," Boehlert said Thursday. "There is nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad scientific consensus on global climate change."

The academy panel said it had less confidence in the evidence of temperatures before 1600.

But it considered the evidence reliable enough to conclude there were sharp spikes in carbon dioxide and methane, the two major "greenhouse" gases blamed for trapping heat in the atmosphere, beginning in the 20th century, after remaining fairly level for 12,000 years.

Between 1 A.D. and 1850, volcanic eruptions and solar fluctuations had the biggest effects on climate. But those temperature changes "were much less pronounced than the warming due to greenhouse gas" levels by pollution since the mid-19th century, the panel said.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private organization chartered by Congress to advise the government of scientific matters.

[bassetman]

Senate Committee Launches Taxpayer-Funded Misinformation Campaign About Gore Movie
Your tax dollars are being used to fund a misinformation campaign about Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a press release headlined “AP Incorrectly Claims Scientists Praise Gore’s Movie.” It doesn’t substantiate the claim. The AP contacted 100 climate scientists, including noted “climate skeptics,” and of the 19 that had seen the movie, all commended its accuracy.

The Committee release faulted the AP for not cherry-picking the handful of scientists around the world who make a living questioning the scientific consensus on global warming. For example, an Australian scientist named Bob Carter told an obscure Canadian paper that Gore’s arguments are “so weak that they are pathetic.” How could the AP exclude this kind of incisive analysis?

The release is also full of misinformation about global warming science. Here are just three of the most blatant errors:

...http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/28/...ormation-gore/

-------------------------

Scientists OK Gore's Movie for Accuracy

By SETH BORENSTEIN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 27, 2006; 9:15 PM

WASHINGTON -- The nation's top climate scientists are giving "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore's documentary on global warming, five stars for accuracy.

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.



In a file photo former Vice President Al Gore makes talks to the media as he walks into a screening of the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" in Boston Tuesday, April 25, 2006. The nation's top climate scientists give the movie based on Al Gore's book, "An Inconvenient Truth," five stars for accuracy. He mostly got the science right, say 19 climate experts who had seen the moive or read the book. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola) (Elise Amendola - AP)

Special Report

Read complete Post coverage on the science and politics surrounding the threat of human-induced climate change.

» FULL COVERAGE


Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Ceridwen
ROBBLOG
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical??


Full List of Blogs (7 links) »


Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web


Save & Share
Tag This Article


Saving options
1. Save to description:
Headline (required)
Byline

2. Save to notes (255 character max):
Blurb

3. Tag This Article

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.

But those who have seen it had the same general impression: Gore conveyed the science correctly; the world is getting hotter and it is a manmade catastrophe-in-the-making caused by the burning of fossil fuels

....http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062700780.html

Looks like SOMEONE is fibbing!

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Stoner

This is exactly the problem of the influence of politics on the issue. Distortion for the purpose of electability.

AP's getting a black eye for the slant, which they certainly appear to deserve.

Had you seen what I just posted?

[bill.aam]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Looks like SOMEONE is fibbing!

Originally Posted by LANMaster

..... but who really cares about the truth?

Yeah, What Lan said....

[plschwartz]

DSS

Could you share the sources that you have that contradick either the movie or the AP review.
Do you have any background in the sciences involved in investigating global warming.
Do you in fact have any background in sciencewith which you can rationally evaluate the science presented in the Gore Movie.

Or are you so riddled with hatred of thoser who are knowledgable in these areas that you are happy to swift-boat them to build up you and your political views.
The knowledge is there to evaluyate it if you want to do the hard work.But it seems that you are happiest sitting on your tuffet making pronouncements in the manner tyhat five year old girls specalize in.
Your life probably would have been more useful before the left-wing feminist revolution

[grandpaw7]

Originally Posted by DiSaidSo

There were so many threads this could've gone in.... Looks like Bill.aam posted this in the global warming/science thread. It could've just as well gone in the media bias thread, too. But I think this precious gem really deserves its own thread.



When I saw that AP story, I couldn't help think to myself how sad it was for such a reputable news agency to print something so slanted and biased, ruining any credibility they previously may have had with me. I mean, if they'd just named names. That's all that had to happen.

"We're not only politicians but we are from the Republican majority in Congress, so you know you can trust us.".

Guess who swallows that hook, line and sinker?

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by LANMaster
..... but who really cares about the truth?

Originally Posted by bill.aam

Yeah, What Lan said....

Lan is constantly trying to blur the truth!