Can anyone give me facts in Al Gores video that are untrue?

Question

I heard one about the troposphere not heating up, but the surface is, disproving his main core argument that co2 causes global warming.
Any more? and why does nobody in journalism dispute his statements and he walks away with a Nobel prize?

Answer 1

If you try to prove that Al Gore's facts aren't true, you run into the same problem as when you try to debate somebody with the opposite opinion. The facts aren't up for debate; it's the interpretation of them. You and I could look at the same set of facts and come to completely different conclusions. It comes down to questions like: whose computer model is better? Who went to greater lengths to account for any potential sources of error? Who is less motivated by political or economic ends and truly wants to interpret the data correctly. I say, don't believe anything that anybody says about global warming (either for or against). Educate yourself and make your own decisions. That's the only way you'll know for sure.

Answer 2

Like most documentary's of this nature, what is fact and whats fiction is often blurred and skewed to prove a certain bias opinion. Often the result is a highly political work that is in some way, little more then propaganda and sadly cannot be trusted. This film, like many others has a set agenda and often the facts are shaped and bent into a certain shape. This is why is very important to find out truly impartial facts of your own before making an opinion yourself about such important subjects. Not just going glibly with the crowd like a heard of baying sheep.

Answer 3

It is not necessarily about untruths. Listen, liberals and conservatives think everything is black and white. Gore didn't lie. But He did tell an incomplete story. There is some debate about global warming. The earth has been through heating and cooling cycles throughout its history. The current heating trend is within historical averages. Now, CO2 parts per million are at historical highs. The problem here is that no one is fact based any more. Everyone seems to have an agenda and everyone presents data to support whatever model they have previously conceived of instead of letting the data construct the model or revising the hypothesis as more data becomes available.

Answer 4

ok so obviously lots of people have opinions about this question. here are some FACTS which you can take and interpret for yourself:

--95% of all the "green house gases" is water, which is in natural equilibrium with the ocean. (a fact which many global warming activists neglect to mention)
--of the "green house gases" in the atmosphere, only a small precentage of the total heating capacity is anthroprogenic, the rest being naturally occuring
--on the timescales in which climate change takes place (thousands of years) we are currently at a low point and expected to naturally climb. after this, it is theorized that we will enter another Ice Age.
-- only .28% of the total "global warming effect" is anthroprogenic (see second link)

it is my personal opinion that global warming would have happened regardless of our intervention, and that the resulting disruption of the ocean currents and consequencial glacialization of the poles resulting in the next Ice Age is a natural cycle which we would be powerless to stop. We couldnt cause global warming if we TRIED

Answer 5

do no longer difficulty vacationing any of the links above. they're all conservative think of tanks and propagandists gotten smaller by utilising oil revenues. What occurs if international warming is genuine, and we've an financial crumple in 30 to 50 years? What does the international get to do to you for merchandising extra and inefficiency in our society? If we are incorrect, and international warming isn't genuine, than you may thank Al Gore in 50 years for modernizing our financial equipment, switching to renewable skill materials, and ending political strife and involvement linked with the pursuit of organic materials interior the 0.33 international. i'm confident he would be very sorry for doing that to us.

Answer 6

The appropriate question is whether everything said by both Al Gore and his conservative opponents is factually correct.

I expect Gore has spun his information a lot less than those who disagree with him.

And keep in mind that he has to address those who get their understanding of the world from 17 second news reports on the idiot box, not just those who think for themselves.

Answer 7

the best way to check on the facts regarding global warming is the Union of concerned Scientists, a group of scientists from around the world not confined to the beliefs of any one nation necessarily. We know from sites like this that global warming is real so even if all of his facts are not totally true, the prize might just be for the fact that he is fighting the battle. the link I give concerns mainly U.S. concerns but that is because we are in the U.S. and we may not see the concerns of other nations just as they may not see ours.

Answer 8

To take his argument head on is to say some of his information is right while some could be wrong. But to me the information makes a little bit to much sense to discredit. Anyone opposed to global warming who had infomation to discredit it wouldnt made their own documentary and it woulda blown up. The only documentary i heard of is the "Great Global Warming Scandal (or swindle i cant remember)" its on Youtube and Google Video and stuff u could watch it.

Answer 9

You'll hear the British judiciary's nine points before the day is out. And, while I'm at Starbucks, ponder the fact that Yasser Arafat has also won the Nobel Prize for Peace. (Milton Friedman, for Economics.)

And, oh yes, other top contenders for this year's Peace Nobel were Oprah Winfrey and Rush Limbaugh. I'm not asking you to think. I'm only asking you to ponder.

If you want me to do a point-by-point refutation of Al Gore's junk science (up to ten, only), you'll have to e-mail me, and I won't begin work until the $1,000.00 money order has cleared.

Answer 10

Maybe you should research the subject for yourself and come to your own conclusions. It sounds like you've already concluded to yourself that global warming doesn't exist and Al Gore is full of lies, but you clearly haven't read any of the research yourself.