MovieChat Forums > Cool It (2011) Discussion > Sounds Like Propaganda To Me...

Sounds Like Propaganda To Me...


I just watched this documentary hoping to learn something new and this is just a propaganda much like every other documentaries out there. The guy spits out random numbers, but doesn't really explain how he got them. At one point, he says Al Gore's projection that melting of Greenland will cause 20 ft rise in sea level is rubbish and that actual number is close to a 1 ft. He doesn't really explain how he got that number, but I read that this guy used outdated numbers to make his figure work rather than using the most up to date numbers provided by Climatologist.

Speaking of Climatologist... Maybe I missed it, but did anyone else find it interesting that his panel of so called "experts" to discuss problems had a Nobel Laureate Economists, Politicians, MDs, etc., but I didn't see any climatologist on his panel... People that actually deal with climate change. It seemed like there was a lot of name throwing in this movie to make Bjorn Lomborg more credible.

reply

"At one point, he says Al Gore's projection that melting of Greenland will cause 20 ft rise in sea level is rubbish and that actual number is close to a 1 ft. He doesn't really explain how he got that number, but I read that this guy used outdated numbers to make his figure work rather than using the most up to date numbers provided by Climatologist."

Here is a quote from Christopher Walter's report on the innacuracies of Gore's movie using (in this argument) the same scientific data from The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that Bjorn uses in his argument in the matter of sea level rise that you have pointed out:

Gore says that a sea-level rise of up to 6 m (20 ft) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland. Though Gore does not say that the sea-level rise will occur in the near future, the judge found that, in the context, it was clear that this is what he had meant, since he showed expensive graphical representations of the effect of his imagined 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise on existing populations, and he quantified the numbers who would be displaced by the sea-level rise.

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says sea-level increases up to 7 m (23 ft) above today’s levels have happened naturally in the past climate, and would only be likely to happen again after several millennia. In the next 100 years, according to calculations based on figures in the IPCC’s 2007 report, these two ice sheets between them will add a little over 6 cm (2.5 inches) to sea level, not 6 m (this figure of 6 cm is 15% of the IPCC’s total central estimate of a 43 cm or 1 ft 5 in sea-level rise over the next century). Gore has accordingly exaggerated the official sea-level estimate by approaching 10,000 per cent.

Ms. Kreider says the IPCC estimates a sea-level rise of “59 cm” by 2100. She fails to point out that this amounts to less than 2 ft, not the 20 ft imagined by Gore. She also fails to point out that this is the IPCC’s upper estimate, on its most extreme scenario. And she fails to state that the IPCC, faced with a stream of peer-reviewed articles stating that sea-level rise is not a threat, has reduced this upper estimate from 3 ft in 2001 to less than 2 ft (i.e. half the mean centennial sea-level rise that has occurred since the end of the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago) in 2007.

Ms. Kreider says the IPCC’s 2007 sea-level calculations excluded contributions from Greenland and West Antarctica because they could not be quantified. However, Table SPM1 of the 2007 report quantifies the contributions of these two ice-sheets to sea-level rise as representing about 15% of the total change.

The report also mentions the possibility that there may be an unquantified further contribution in future from these two ice sheets arising from “dynamical ice flow.” However, the Greenland ice sheet rests in a depression in the bedrock created by its own weight, wherefore “dynamical ice flow” is impossible, and the IPCC says that temperature would have to be sustained at more than 5.5 degrees C above its present level for several millennia before half the Greenland ice sheet could melt, causing sea level to rise by some 3 m (10 ft).

Finally, the IPCC’s 2007 report estimates that the likelihood that humankind is having any influence on sea level at all is little better than 50:50.

The judge was accordingly correct in finding that Gore’s presentation of the imagined imminent threat of a 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise, with his account of the supposed impact on the present-day populations of Manhattan, the Netherlands, Bangladesh, etc., etc, was not a correct statement of the mainstream science on this question.

Walter's full report can be found at this link: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

reply

Speaking of Climatologist... Maybe I missed it, but did anyone else find it interesting that his panel of so called "experts" to discuss problems had a Nobel Laureate Economists, Politicians, MDs, etc., but I didn't see any climatologist on his panel... People that actually deal with climate change. It seemed like there was a lot of name throwing in this movie to make Bjorn Lomborg more credible. -sant

Always difficult to get anyone actually involved with an industry to do or say anything which would harm their livelihood or beliefs. Not likely to find any climatologists who are willing to say the main source of their funding is wildly exaggerated and they need to be put out of business. I also don't expect priests to admit god doesn't exist or NFL football players to say the sport is too violent.

I believe Lomborg's panel was dealing with many more problems in the world than just climate change. The point was to find the best ways to use our resources which would benefit us the most....not "talk about climate change".



~Sig~

reply