Judge Finds Against Nobel Gore

Earth Change Weekender - October 12 2007

Former US vice-president Al Gore was awarded the Nobel Prize this week - a week in which a British judge came out with a scathing review of his documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."

So this article was written with slightly clenched teeth but also with tongue in cheek.

But first, let’s set the scene.

For some reason an Englishman has succeeded in having the British High Court come up with a judgment on Mr Gore's work - which he has presented as a PowerPoint lecture to over 1000 audiences.

In dispute have been some of Mr. Gore’s assertions and interpretations of data.

Mr. Gore has had the temerity (or the cojones) to assert that melting Arctic ice will raise sea levels and stall the Great Atlantic current. Soon.

Much of that ice is coming from Greenland. So let’s look at Greenland from a satellite perspective in 2006 and 2007.

Now let’s look at it again in July 2007

Sea ice (right) had fractured into geometric blocks, and small chunks of ice are scattered in some fjords like confetti. Text and image courtesy of NASA's Earth Observatory.

So why did Al Gore’s documentary find itself under a High Court judgment in Britain?

Because there was a dispute over some of the ‘facts’ he reported.

It’s enough to make you clench your teeth. Because while the world is melting around us, people on all sides of this debate on global warming are fighting to decide who is “right” and who is “wrong.”

Most of us would rather be “right” at any cost, than “wrong.”

It’s a prestige thing. An image thing. A political thing.

And a very divisive thing.

What everyone does seem to agree on is that global warming is happening.

The disagreement is only over – how quickly, how soon, how fast how serious and how long can we delay taking meaningful action?

So why this nit-picking ongoing argumentative debate on being “right”?

Seeing it all in terms of “right” and “wrong” is like seeing smoke for the first time and arguing that it is either caused by natural forces, or it is man made.

You could argue one way or the other forever, and forever remain blind to (or simply ignore) the fact that the smoke is generated by a fire, and that fire is consuming everything around it more and more rapidly.

And while you’re standing there arguing about smoke and fighting over who is right and who is wrong you’re completely missing the point. Until the fire suddenly starts scorching your feet. Both of you. Both Mr. Right and Mr. Wrong.

At which point, you’d suddenly wake up to the fact that the smoke was a natural warning preceding the arrival of the flames. You might even realize that being right or wrong about smoke was completely irrelevant.

You might even realize, as you took your last breath, that instead of arguing, you should have prepared to deal with the fire. Immediately.

To some extent that is working - despite the skeptics and critics, including a judge in Britain who says there are some “serious flaws” in Al Gore’s documentary.

It’s reported in The TimesOnline which says “Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary was littered with nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled yesterday.” (Oct 04 07)

Littered with?

Mr Justice Barton of the High Court was assessing whether the documentary should be shown in schools.

Partisan?

Impartial?

Mr. Gore should be impartial about events that are destroying our planet?

And the rest of us should stay cool and go on about our daily lives with no regard for what we are destroying? We should all ignore the future? We should have no care for what sort of world we are creating right now for our children to inherit?

Be Impartial? I don’t think so.

The judge – who has never been a scientist - said it was alarmist to talk about rising sea levels because of melting ice caps because (said the judge) this is only going to happen over millennia.

Mr. Gore looked at the data he received from various scientists and concluded that sea levels can be expected to rise by 20 feet or seven meters in the immediate future.

The judge says this is not in line with the scientific consensus.

Question: Does a consensus equate to being fact, or simply a majority opinion – which is far from being a fact?

Should those who take a different point of view be accused of untruths? Of being alarmist?

As for the documentary’s claim that atolls in the Pacific had already been evacuated – the judge said there was "no evidence.."

No evidence?

If the judge had simply punched “Pacific atoll evacuations” into his Google search thing, he would have found this immediately: "Papua New Guinean authorities are trying to convince thousands of Polynesians to abandon their homes on two atolls that appear to be sinking into the Pacific Ocean.

“Emergency food supplies are to be sent later this week amid conflicting reports on the plight of the 2,000 people living on the Tulun (or Carteret) Islands, and the 400 on Takuu (or Mortlock) Islands, northeast of Bougainville Island."

And that report has been on the Internet since 2003.

Also, the TimesOnline says:- "Mr Gore’s suggestion that the Gulf Stream, that warms up the Atlantic ocean, would shut down was contradicted by the International Panel on Climate Change’s assessment that it was ‘very unlikely’ to happen."

Very unlikely?

And that’s a scientific rebuttal?

Because the IPCC scientists say it is 'very unlikely' they have the 'facts' and Al Gore is wrong?

Well Mr. Judge – what would you expect government servants to tell us? That they’re from the government and they’re here to help us?

[Sidebar:The IPCC was joint winner of the Nobel Peace Prize with Mr Gore].

And did you come across this information which has been out for the past five years: “The (US) National Academy of Sciences--the board of scientists established by Congress in 1863 to advise the federal government on scientific matters--compiled a comprehensive report in 2002 entitled "Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises."

"The 244-page report, which contains over 500 references, was written by a team of 59 of the top researchers in climate…."

Are they being ‘alarmist’ like Al Gore when they say: "Ocean and lake sediment data from places such as California, Venezuela, and Antarctica have confirmed that these sudden climate changes affected not just Greenland, but the entire world.

"During the past 110,000 years, there have been at least 20 such abrupt climate changes.

" 'Normal' climate for Earth is the climate of sudden extreme jumps--like a light switch flicking on and off."

Isn't it time the lights went on?

For some, that has happened. But for thousands of scientists, there is no career future in being bold about what they have discovered.

It also appears that so far, despite spending billions on research, scientists cannot predict when the next abrupt change will occur. Maybe they would like to. But it takes more study and more research funds to do more modeling and more research using models that to date have failed to predict what we are suddenly experiencing.

Imagine What The Judge Would Have said About This - Earth Changes AND ETs!!!

It contains a lot of very scientific input about how serious things are on our planet - every bit as serious as Al Gore has said - and much more serious than a High Court Judge can imagine.

It is an uplifting story. A true story. A message of hope. Supported by the best scientific animations available that show how rapidly the earth is changing - and that, will change, your world.

Courtesy of a link sent in by subscriber Brett in South Africa, we discover the following:-

"Craig Lambinon, spokesperson for the NSRI told BuaNews Tuesday, 'We received a report from a fishing vessel, called the Ntini, late on Monday which spotted an iceberg 35 Nautical Miles from the Eastern Cape coast. According to the report the iceberg is 25 meters in length and 20 meters in height.'"

In order to travel so far from the Antarctic, that iceberg would have had to drift 2400 nautical miles. And that's a straight line distance.

The sighting has at this point not been officially confirmed - but if it is, it will make it no less remarkable that a chunk of Antarctic ice has found its way to 34.32S 25.40E - almost exactly half way to the Equator.

However, we should not be alarmist about this. South Africa is temporarily safe from an ice age. (See what I mean about tongue in cheek?).

Maybe Mr. Judge didn’t watch the BBC news this week either.

So he would have missed the report from a journalist who is traveling with a team of scientists investigating the ice-melt and the opening of the Northwest Passage through the Arctic.

The ice has melted so fast that according to one scientist on the spot "none of our models have predicted this."

And you should have seen the look of surprise on his face and the concern in his voice as he said it.

Earth Change Midweek also included a link to an article in which other scientists were expressing absolute amazement at what is happening in the Arctic.

"The ice is moving at 2 meters an hour on a front five kilometers long and 1,500 meters deep.

"That means that this one glacier puts enough fresh water into the sea in one day to provide drinking water for a city the size of New York or London for a year."

And that’s only one glacier. Only one. (Read the full article here:)

The glaciers are melting so rapidly that no model on earth can simulate what they are doing.

That fast-melting ice is doing two things, much faster than any model can possibly predict. It is raising sea levels. And it is rapidly cooling the North Atlantic current.

That means it will stall.

Soon.

Much sooner than Mr. Justice High Court Barton believes it will.

He has ruled. He has found. He has spoken.

But there are no prizes for being right.

Footnote: [Courtesy a link from Subscriber Larry in Montana USA]. While the judge was judging Mr. Gore, Mr. Gore was ignoring the judge and getting on with business.

He is obviously more concerned than ever about what’s happening in the Arctic.

On October 4 he invited himself to a private discussion with the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)on the University of Colorado at Boulder campus.

According to the NSIDC press release he had "an extensive and lively discussion with NSIDC research scientists" and "encouraged NSIDC scientists and the larger climate science community to be direct about their research results."

Anyone who has been a newsman since 1960 sees the code within that release: "Lively discussion" may mean some raised voices– or genuinely animated people talking to those who understand a subject in depth.

Encouraging scientists to "be direct about their research results" suggests they might have been taken to task for issuing soft prognoses when in the former vice president’s view, it’s time for a reality check. Time to be open. Honest. Bold. "Direct." Right now.

Be aware.

Prepare.

(c)2007 Michael Knight

Editor - Earth Change Report

Director - Contact Has Begun

About the author: Michael Knight has been a writer/journalist and documentary director since 1960. He is Director of the DVD documentary "Contact Has Begun," and Editor of "Earth Change Report," at www.buycontacthasbegun.com . email michael_knight@buycontacthasbegun.com

Time For Readers To Be Right///Rite////WRite.

My thanks to those who have sent in news leads, and questions and comments. They help us all.

A couple from this week....

Q: "Should and when the major event takes place, and our U.S. Treasury is underwater, so to speak, what should one do to prepare for barter, purchase, and exchange?

"Would you expect our current currency or investment accounts to have any use or value?" – Larry. Montana.

A: Great questions.

The answer to the second question is "No." But as to when the "no" might kick in – if you start now, there’s a good chance you can beat the heat. Or the cold.

As to the first. Given that my internet order of pipe tobacco failed to arrive before I ran out, I would say pipe tobacco would be a definite barter item. Right now you could probably exchange an ounce of tobacco for a pound of flesh.

There is nothing backward or primitive about barter. It has simply been driven underground by a monetary system that we have been conditioned to for hundreds of years.

That system is a self-sustaining illusion that keeps the world spinning on an economic axis which is getting as much out of kilter as the planet itself.

Whether it was engineered or not, the Great Depression happened.Another one is inevitable.

It’s likely that the world economy will nose dive in the next couple of years. Right now, gold and silver prices are on the up, though without a lot of media attention.

The present emphasis on using corn as an alternative fuel source is naturally going to drive up food prices (and do nothing to solve our global warming problem).

Couple that with ever-higher oil prices and the trickle-through effect this will have because of the increasing costs of transporting everything everywhere – and we’re looking at an ever-decreasing purchasing power of whatever currency we use.

But these things – like earth changes – are survivable. Especially if you prepare ahead of time.

Therefore we should indeed make a list of what we need in the way of goods for ourselves.

Then make a list of what might be barter items. Tobacco being Number One. Other stuff that people really 'need' comes to mind as well. Like liquid stuff that keeps forever.

But first I'd go for things like wheat in buckets for yourself and family, and then an extra bucket or two would no doubt be a great barter item. Whole hard red wheat is good. Keeps well. Much longer than flour. But you'll need a wheat mill too.

Yard sales are great places.

Last weekend I bought a collapsible Coleman picnic table, six six-volt deep cycle batteries, an exercise bike, a Coleman cooler, and a three-burner RV stove/oven for a total of $12.

You don't have to be rich to do this.

Garden tools, construction tools, mechanics tools – screws and nails - all worth buying for later trading.

If you have the ability (property, either owned leased or shared) to own meat animals and breed them, consider this.

We just invested in three Dorper ewes and an unrelated Dorper ram. (Dorpers are hair sheep so they don't need shearing. They drop their coat in summer). Total cost $500 (a steal of a deal).

These ewes will provide us with at least 10 offspring in the next 18 months.

Grass, which comes for free, will feed them all.

Each lamb will be worth $100 at some point.

Do the math: an investment of $500, recovered twice over in 18 months – providing meat, some to sell (as long as there’s money around) and some to barter, plus additional breeding stock.

And when you have breeding stock, they keep breeding and giving – unlike a bank account which keeps bleeding and taking.

For those with an eye to using what time is left before the markets go totally belly up, I’d suggest looking in on George Ure’s web site.

He’s aware of earth changes and is into sensible self-sufficiency.

He’s also an unconventional economics writer – but as far as I know, the only one around who is prepared to tell you what he’s doing, and whether his investments (commodities, puts and all that) do well or not. Not that he ever gives “advice.” You’re on your own in that regard.

Here's a sample of his free online daily blurb (he also has a subscription newsletter):

Budget Deficit

"It's smaller than expected, so quite predictably, republicorps and The Decider himself are saying lower taxes are the reason. Others (more rationally) think the weaker dollar might have had something to do with it.

"Around here, though, we know better. It's common knowledge that lower taxes cause global warming...OK, just seeing if you're awake yet."

_______________________

Mia culpa Mia culpa!

….....

Vitina writes:

"I feel I must tell you it grossed me out, your account of slaughtering and cutting apart one of your animals. Please cancel me from the subscription.

Thank You,

Vitina

Response: Vitina: Personally, I would prefer to have a Star Trek food synthesizer in my kitchen. But until someone invents the real thing - which can coagulate energy into Twinkies or flapjacks or whatever recipe you want - well....that's the way it is.

Anyone who is serious about what's ahead must be prepared to face a few 'gross' situations if they are to survive.

Killing one's own food is a perfectly natural - and essential - thing to do.

But does one have to like it? No. I certainly do not.

Especially since I learned that experiments have been done using a polygraph on plants. They show that plants 'scream' when they are cut. We just can't hear them with our ears.

Fruit reacts the same way when we bite it. The juice is the blood of the fruit. Just a different color.

Since I shot my first rabbit as a boy to put meat on the family table - and many other animals since, for the same reason - I have come to understand that all things contain the Life Force.

I would truly love to live in a world where we do not have to kill to eat - but until we invent the synthesizer, it just has to be done.

This is why I bless seeds as I put them in the garden and bless my food when I kill it - be it a lettuce or a lamb or a goat or a deer - and thank them for giving me continued life and health.

Best wishes on your journey.

Michael.

Join Subscribers From 40 Countries - Don't Be Alone