Al Gore

[Lucy]

Haven't read that one - what did he say: Israel did it? Israel knew about it in advance but didn't do anything about it? Still like his articles, though.

That it was a US/Israel conspiracy ie they did it.

I am sure someone of your worldliness and vast political nous enjoys his twitterings.

[Old Greg]

That it was a US/Israel conspiracy ie they did it.

I am sure someone of your worldliness and vast political nous enjoys his twitterings.

Was he writing this recently? Not read him for a little while. Might look it up.

Edit: must be the article on 25/08/07 "Even I question the 'truth' about 9/11"

Won't open - must be a conspiracy.

[DBA_bloke]

Hey, I'm not trying to defend her by any means. My point merely is that I judge people on who they are themselves, not the raving looney they marry. If I did then a handful of my friends wouldn't be my friends any more.

I think you missed the important point. She and her turd pals got their equally crap hubbies to get hearings etc. for something that nobody, apart from a group of unelected bitches and a few Christian wankies, wanted. It was fairly big in the US at a the time, because it was so obviously policy-by-blowjob.

[DaveB]

I just read that his oscar winning film contains several dollops of bullsh1t. Now it cannot be shown in schools unless his technical inaccuracies are pointed out.

Not quite according to the beeb report on it. The case was around whether it was biased or not, it clearly is, and as such should it be shown in schools without information from the sceptics camp to balance it. The Judge decided that provided guidlines were issued with the film to include the opposing viewpoints it could still be shown. The "technical innacuracies" are actually some of the points that the two sides disagree on and there is no firm conclusion as to whether they are innacurate or not.

[Old Greg]

No, it's not that Fisk article. Doesn't even mention Israel, and he writes about conspiracies saying the US pulled it off:

'My final argument – a clincher, in my view – is that the Bush administration has screwed up everything – militarily, politically diplomatically – it has tried to do in the Middle East; so how on earth could it successfully bring off the international crimes against humanity in the United States on 11 September 2001?


Well, I still hold to that view. Any military which can claim – as the Americans did two days ago – that al-Qa'ida is on the run is not capable of carrying out anything on the scale of 9/11.'

So, it's not that (although he's now become a bit of a nutjob in my eyes for going on about the temperature kersosene burns at and steel melts at, but there you go).

So, Lucy, when did Fisk start 'saying 9/11 was a conspiracy of Israel'? You can make a convert against Fisk if you show me.

[wendigo100]

Not quite according to the beeb report on it. The case was around whether it was biased or not, it clearly is, and as such should it be shown in schools without information from the sceptics camp to balance it. The Judge decided that provided guidlines were issued with the film to include the opposing viewpoints it could still be shown. The "technical innacuracies" are actually some of the points that the two sides disagree on and there is no firm conclusion as to whether they are innacurate or not.

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers so that nine inaccuracies are specifically drawn to the attention of school children. And these do sound like inaccuracies to me, rather than just bias:

1. The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

2. The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The UK High Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

3. The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.

4. The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.

5. The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

6. The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

7. The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

8. The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

9. The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

[KathyWoolfe]

He's just won the Nobel Peace Prize jointly with the UN

[DaveB]

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers so that nine inaccuracies are specifically drawn to the attention of school children. And these do sound like inaccuracies to me, rather than just bias:

I stand corrected.

[wendigo100]

I stand corrected.

I'm not arguing against his central claim, just that he should have used proper evidence. Then again, the film would have been a bit boring without drowning polar bears and such I suppose.

[Old Greg]

I'm not arguing against his central claim, just that he should have used proper evidence. Then again, the film would have been a bit boring without drowning polar bears and such I suppose.

I expect he personally drowned them.