By what metric should we grade/rate/assess this work?

AGW (or ACC) grade on facts (the presentation of) and science: F

Examples: A temp increase of about 0.9F, which is minor, is often labeled as GW, but only half of that can be claimed, which is false, as AGW. Temps rose by about 0.5F since 1945 when CO2 started increasing much. There was about a 0.4F temp increase from 1880 to 1945, while CO2 increased very little.

There are not more "extreme weather events" as the media & others claim. There is more reporting & such out of the alarmism fears. Weather is very variable and climate (measured as a 30-year average of weather) always changes.

The hockey stick graph is wrong. The temps used for the last few decades are taken from tree cores, which is inaccurate, being a bad measure of temps. The MWP & the BC warm period during Roman dominance is ignored too. Both were warmer than now.

There were times in the past millions of years when CO2 was much higher (17+) and temps were mot considerably higher.

CO2 is a GHG, but it has diminishing effects in terms of warming. Most of the warming (reflecting back certain light waves) are in the first 100 ppm. So each next 100 ppm has much less affect than the first 100 ppm.

Grade on propaganda, data misinterpretation, media manipulation, politics connections (ie more spending & taxing)and the overall largely exaggerated alarmism: A

Specifically, in the movie there were 35 "inconvenient" errors. Search & learn.

Two examples: Snow on Kilimanjaro has reduced. True, but not due to warming. The temps in the top thousands of feet have been above freezing. The snow/ice loss is because of sublimation and lower precip to replace.

The correlation for the last 800,000 years between CO2 & temps is reversed in order, Higher temps (varying by 22F) occurred first, and CO2 increased later, due to ocean out-gassing [of CO2]. During that 800,000 years the CO2 level varied 180 ppm - 280 ppm, prior to early 1900s. The CO2 level has been climbing since 1945 and is 400 ppm now.


 