the court system found 9 innacuracies (mostly just things that have not been proven), but ruled that the movie's basic message is a fact.
2007-10-25 09:32:46 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
dialect, the court ruled that humans were causing it.
why are cons now saying the court system was wrong? they didn't say the court system might be wrong when they were posting the "9 lies in gore's movie" questions
2007-10-25 09:38:14 · update #1
voodoo, you need to look it up. he ruled it fact
2007-10-25 09:43:04 · update #2
"substantially founded upon scientific research and fact."
the judge's quote. [for voodoo]
2007-10-25 09:44:19 · update #3
They found that Global Warming is fact,,,, what the inaccuracies are about is the Man Made part... and it is disputed in the scientific community 50-50. So it is not a fact. I believe everyone bought into Darwinism too,,, and now scientist are beginning to doubt it, and yet no one wants to debate this one at all...hmmm another conspiracy brewing on the horizon.....
2007-10-25 09:37:21 · answer #1 · answered by libsticker 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's funny that conservatives will accept the British court's ruling when it criticizes the film, but as soon as you point out that the ruling stated that the film was mostly based on fact, they say 'oh well who cares what the British court thinks?". LOL!
2007-10-25 17:34:34 · answer #2 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one disputes that over the last 100 years that the temperature has risen between .5 and 1 degree F. The argument is whether or not humans are somehow causing the change. It's pretty ludicrous to think that we are. We just don't have the power to pull that off!
2007-10-25 16:37:26 · answer #3 · answered by Random Precision 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
so we should throw our entire economy in the tank because an English Judge (glorified Lawyer) says the earth is heating up.
sign me up
sorry I have never referenced the british courts rulings on anything. am I exempt to laugh at this or do I have to follow what other "cons" have said
2007-10-25 16:38:52 · answer #4 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The judge didn't rule that it was a fact. He ruled that the central thesis was supported by mainstream scientific consensus and the nine inaccuracies were not.
I'm not sure why you continue to ask questions about global warming. You conveniently overlook any facts presented to you about the subject.
2007-10-25 16:41:08 · answer #5 · answered by VoodooPunk 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
In case you hadn't noticed, It has been along time since it mattered to many people around here what British courts think.
Now run along back and report that to King George
2007-10-25 16:37:02 · answer #6 · answered by CFB 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's a fact that the climate is gradually shifting. What's still controversial is the extent to which human activities contribute to it.
2007-10-25 16:36:37 · answer #7 · answered by Buying is Voting 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
and if they didn't rule it as a fact would you believe that it wasn't a fact?
do you believe everything the british court system says?
2007-10-25 16:35:24 · answer #8 · answered by nothing 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because it is not a conspiracy but and it is accepted by the scientific community.
2007-10-25 16:36:19 · answer #9 · answered by Lindsey G 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Manchester United
That's all I know about GB.
2007-10-25 16:35:54 · answer #10 · answered by PNAC ~ Penelope 4 · 1⤊ 5⤋