“To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable.” -Barry Goldwater
No, the English court ruled _for_ Gore's movie.The original plaintiff brought the case because he didn't want the movie shown in an educational environment, and submitted an extensive list of items he claimed were "errors" within the movie.The court found only nine items on this list to be controversial at all, much less "errors". In it's ruling, it specifically noted it was not analyzing the actual science (and thus not determining if something was actually an error), simply determining whether or not there was sufficient debate on a specific point to merit noting, on that individual point, opposing viewpoints exist.I.e., with fairly minor additions to a guidance sheet, the movie is still being shown in English schools.Further, of the nine points the judge ruled had significantly opposing viewpoints, on several he simply misunderstood what Gore said, on at least one he is just outright wrong (the polar bear issue), on several more there is some debate, but the weight of evidence favors Gore's claim. The only one of the nine which actually has full merit (in my eyes) is the Kilmanjaro one, where I do think Gore's claim from the movie is wrong.
Oh ... I think (not sure though) this ruling came down the same day Gore received the Nobel prize ... which if so, is kind of ironic.
I'm sure the evil minion Algore's title is the product of a most Freudian slip.Truth is almost always inconvenient for the Ds and libs in general.
Nah, we embrace reality ...it's Republicans who have publicly disavowed it. :)
Post a Comment