Important Finding from Al Gore’s Global Warming NGO: Propoganda, the cult of personality, and single-minded devotion by membership works to spread climate alarmism.
Al Gore’s global warming NGO, The Climate Project (TCP), recently released a study it did on the impact that the organziation was having on the global warming debate. The study commissioned by TCP was conducted by Milepost Consulting in collaboration with Stork Marketing and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The report concludes that TCP is having marked effects on public attitudes towards climate change. The report finds that:
those who previously did not identify as “environmentalists” underwent the greatest mental shift, becoming more likely to support emissions reduction and to reduce their carbon footprint. Moreover, the evaluation suggests that TCP, an international non-profit founded by former Vice President Al Gore, has created a new, unique environmental movement by customizing its message by region and community.
Other key finding from the report’s Executive Summary include:
• Approximately 34,000 presentations have been delivered to nearly 3.4 million audience members spanning the political and social spectrum throughout the U.S.
• Many of those who participated in TCP trainings during 2006 and 2007 were already very concerned about climate change, but lacked a specific mechanism for acting on that concern. TCP training, personal encouragement from Vice President Al Gore and participation in a community of individuals with a shared goal, worked to give these motivated individuals the skills and emotional encouragement they needed to take effective action.
• TCP training increased presenters’ awareness and understanding of climate science and the key issues of the climate change problem—and their ability to convey that information to others.
• By devoting hundreds of hours to research, preparation and delivery of presentations; speaking out to family and friends; and creating change within their professional networks, presenters made climate change work an important part of their lives.
According to TCP’s website, thousands of volunteers have been trained to “present a version of the slide show featured in the Academy Award-winning film An Inconvenient Truth.” One wonders if those trained by the TCP and/or their apparently malleable audiences have been given any information about the fallacies a British Court ruled were contained in Al Gore’s movie, or if the fallacies are simply left unaddressed?
For those of you not familiar with the story (easy to imagine if you rely on the mainstream press for important news), in 2007, British truck driver Stewart Dimmock challenged An Inconvenient Truth from being shown to British schoolchildren. His claim was based on the theory that the movie was not settled science, but rather a work of political indoctrination, which violated section 406(1)(b) of the Education Act 1996 which prohibits “promotion of partisan views in the teaching of any subject in schools.”
The Court ruled in favor of Dimmock and determined that:
1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
3.) Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.
These inaccuracies are:
- 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.
- The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
- 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.
- 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.
During the trial, the defense’s expert witnesss, Professor Robert Merlin Carter testified that that An Inconvenient Truth actually contained 20 verifibale errors (“20 separate departures from the scientific consensus”). It makes for interesting reading and I include the testimony below:
If, in fact, the climate change alarmists have not addressed the findings in this decision, hoping it just goes away, I wonder what their tactics will be in addressing ClimateGate, recent revelations that some of the lead alarmist scientists were willing to ignore important data in order to maintain an illusion of consensus about global warming.
For an overview of ClimateGate I recommend these links:
Statements by University of Colorado climatologist Roger Pielke Sr.
And for a good quick rundown of the scandal: Christopher Booker’s Telegraph blog.