Target practice
Target sighted..load…take aim…fire!
Al Gore has provided a target-rich environment of deceptions in his new movie, says Roy Spencer.
After viewing Gore’s most recent movie, An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, and after reading the book version of the movie, I was more than a little astounded. The new movie and book are chock-full of bad science, bad policy, and factual errors.
So, I was inspired to do something about it.
I’d like to announce my new e-book, entitled An Inconvenient Deception: How Al Gore Distorts Climate Science and Energy Policy, now available on Amazon.com.
After reviewing some of Gore’s history in the environmental movement, I go through the movie, point by point.
One of Gore’s favorite tactics is to show something that happens naturally, then claim (or have you infer) that it is due to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions. As I discuss in the book, this is what he did in his first movie (An Inconvenient Truth), too.
For example, sea level rise. Gore is seen surveying flooded streets in Miami Beach.
That flooding is mostly a combination of (1) natural sea level rise (I show there has been no acceleration of sea level rise beyond what was already happening since the 1800s), and (2) satellite-measured sinking of the reclaimed swamps that have been built upon for over 100 years in Miami Beach.
Continued here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Jo Nova: One day when Al Gore gets some evidence he won’t need to call everyone names
Al Gore creates more skeptics everyday
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/08/one-day-when-al-gore-gets-some-evidence-he-wont-need-to-call-everyone-names/
Spencer cites a paper by Jevrejeva et al. for his claim that there has been no acceleration in sea level rise due to anthropogenic CO2. However, the abstract of this paper (http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/504181) states an average acceleration of 0.02 +/- 0.01 mm per year^2 since 1807. Is Spencer any more trustworthy than Gore?
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/08/an-inconvenient-deception-how-al-gore-distorts-climate-science-and-energy-policy/
That flooding is mostly a combination of (1) natural sea level rise (I show there has been no acceleration of sea level rise beyond what was already happening since the 1800s), and (2) satellite-measured sinking of the reclaimed swamps that have been built upon for over 100 years in Miami Beach.
http://www.honolulumagazine.com/Honolulu-Magazine/June-2017/Everything-You-Need-to-Know-About-Hawaiis-Record-Breaking-King-Tide/
“The tides are also being elevated a very small amount over time by rising sea levels associated with global warming,” Marra says, “so, at some point in the future (20 to 30 years), what you are seeing now as a result of the anomaly will eventually be what you see all the time at high tide.”
########################################
Global warming isn’t the whole explanation, but will play a role more and more in king tides.
####################################
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/study-reveals-acceleration-of-sea-level-rise-20055
The oceans have heaved up and down as world temperatures have waxed and waned, but as new research tracking the past 2,800 years shows, never during that time did the seas rise as sharply or as suddenly as has been the case during the last century.
The new study, the culmination of a decade of work by three teams of farflung scientists, has charted what they called an “acceleration” in sea level rise that’s triggering and worsening flooding in coastlines around the world.
The findings also warn of much worse to come.
The scientists reported in a paper published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that they have greater than 95 percent certainty that at least half of more than 5 inches of sea level rise they detected during the 20th century was directly caused by global warming.
#####################################
I have read about accelerating sea level rise from many sources. I don’t think Roy Spencer’s conclusions about sea level rise agree with the main stream science.
Hi Tallbloke, Roy goes on about fact checking, he should do some himself. Subsidies to RE are a drop in the Ocean compared to handouts, subsidies and tax breaks to Fossil Fuel industry.
The UKs Government of PM David Cameron announced £4 billion over 4 years. Check out the figure for Global subsidies and tax breaks put out by IEA from the Fossil Fuel industries own figures.
You can huff and puff all that you like, but tell the people living in Bejing, Mumbai, and a few other major global cities, with air that they can hardly breath that Fossil Fuels are not a problem. The smog can be seen in photographs, which is reminisient of black and white photos of London in the late 1940s and early 1950s. London from millions of coal fires, Bejing from hundreds of Coal fired power stations close to the city.
Burning Fossil Fuels/Hydrocarbons to create energy is not limited to transport and as you say SUVs FF/hydrocarbons are burnt on a monumental scale to generate electricity and cause at least 5 to 8 times the pollution than cars,vans,trucks, buses etc.
Yes that is over supply of NOx but it clearly shows that we cannot continue to dump Giga tonnes of gasses into the atmosphere. Yes CO2 does occur naturally and has done so for millions of years, however, humans have chosen to use a energy format which uses hydrogen but includes carbon stored over millions of years and that is causing a far greater increase in CO2 in the atmosphere than the bio can absorb without problems. Add to that farming/agriculture and methane release and it is clear that there is a limit.
Suggest that you redirect your waste water and sewerage into your swimming pool and see how long before you stop your children swimming.
Let me ask what it is specifically that you have against RE/Clean energy, because I cannot for the life of me see what is wrong with developing a hydrogen based energy systems which does not have the carbon content or spew out NOx. CO2 and Methane which may or may not be warming the Planet, or NOx which most certainly is affecting people and especially children.
Are you one of the people who still maintain that smoking tobacco does not have any health effects resulting in early death. Or that lead in petrol or used in paint did not get into the blood stream of people and mainly children, affecting brain tissue and the nervous system.
I am going to turn it around, “Please make your position clear.”
” What is it that you see in the continued use of Fossil Fuel energy systems, which causes health issues affecting millions of people, that is better than a RE/Hydrogen Clean Energy system, which does NOT cause health issues for anyone?”
No need for an essay in reply, to obfuscate, keep it to one sentence please.
Just in case you cannot understand the question, “What is the benefit for people globally by continued use of Fossil Fuels to create energy?”
Fossils Fuels issues in use……………..Giga Tonnes of gasses emitted into the atmosphere
….Millions of Tonnes of NOx emissions health issues in cities
Renewable Energy & hydrogen issues in use………..No gasses emitted Wind, Water or Solar in use
Hydrogen emissions Water.
Ongoing use of Clean Energy in Industry, will result in reduced emissions in the manufacturing of RE mechanisms to reduce the carbon footprint overall.
Gore’s previous attempt at climate propaganda/entertainment…
Daily Telegraph: Al Gore’s ‘nine Inconvenient Untruths’
Al Gore’s environmental documentary An Inconvenient Truth contains nine key scientific errors, a High Court judge ruled yesterday.
The judge declined to ban the Academy Award-winning film from British schools, but ruled that it can only be shown with guidance notes to prevent political indoctrination.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/3310137/Al-Gores-nine-Inconvenient-Untruths.html
– – –
Roy Spencer: ‘The new movie and book are chock-full of bad science, bad policy, and factual errors.’
Well, it’s a sequel 😉
TONY THOMAS – August 14th 2017
Inconvenient Truths for a Gore Groupie
http://t.co/2pre1TMrVZ
Al Gore claimed the opposite of this would happen…
Twenty Five Years Since A Category Five Hurricane Hit The US
Posted on August 20, 2017 by tonyheller
This week in 1992, Hurricane Andrew hit Florida with 146 MPH winds. It was the last category 5 hurricane to hit the US.
http://realclimatescience.com/2017/08/twenty-five-years-since-a-category-five-hurricane-hit-the-s/
oldbrew says:
August 20, 2017 at 11:10 pm
Al Gore claimed the opposite of this would happen…
Twenty Five Years Since A Category Five Hurricane Hit The US
Posted on August 20, 2017 by tonyheller
###################################
There are some things Al Gore did get wrong. Yet doubters like yourself are repeating wrong things about climate every day with solid conviction that what you say is true. I have sat in two of Al Gores climate reality lectures, and his science recitation is very accurate to the main stream science. When are you going to fess up to your own inaccuracies?
‘his science recitation is very accurate to the main stream science’
Main stream science uses climate models which have proved to be inaccurate, so it’s no use complaining when people point this out.
For a run-down of some of Gore’s ‘inaccuracies’ see Roy Spencer’s e-book.
Some natural climate variation to ponder…
Old Bore is at it again…
Al Gore says Brexit was caused by… climate change
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/08/al-gore-brexit-caused-by-climate-change/
Poor rg, all it has is models. They cannot provide data. The are proven wrong, and never even validated as any honest model must be. Poor us, really, inflicted with such drivel….
Such as: http://notrickszone.com/2017/08/21/10000-to-5000-years-ago-global-sea-levels-were-3-meters-higher-temperatures-4-6-c-warmer/
The refutations are so endless it’s boring. But the Null Hypothesis has not even been touched by pushers of failed ‘renewables’ etc.. Good luck with stealing poor people’s money and causing them to die of cold. That is all you do.
@renewableguy,
I love your energy but it is wasted when you defend the indefensible. Al Gore won’t admit his many errors so nobody should take him seriously.
For example sea levels have been rising for the last 15,000 years. Initially the rate was >1 meters per century but for the last 5,000 years it has averaged ~0.3 meters per century:
In spite of mankind’s use of fossil fuels the rate of sea level rise is not accelerating.
Interesting: but what if both sides are fundamentally wrong?
gallopingcamel posted an interesting graph. ‘Meltwater pulse 1A’ is the prelude to the YD — and to the last interglacial. Most of the ice caps melted by the time it reached 7200BP. Now its ramping down for many Kyears into another glaciation. The problem no one sees coming is ‘how it will evolve’. The last million years (with four repeated cycles – see link below) it has never been ‘plain sailing’. Archaeology shows that between 7200 and 4200BP it was very rough. the Earth ratchets back-and-forth to extreme conditions in chaotic ways.
Note; polar glaciation cannot occur at an obliquity of 22-24deg. WUWT thread here is very informative when dissected.: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/04/paleoclimate-cycles-are-key-analogs-for-present-day-holocene-warm-period/
Cool reception for Gore, but e-book sales hotting up for Spencer 😉
Skeptic Beating Al Gore on Amazon
August 24th, 2017 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
Al Gore’s new movie, An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, has been in theaters for about a month now, and has received rather tepid reviews.
The Kindle e-book version of Gore’s movie, despite being very colorful, has been doing even worse and is currently running at #20,768 overall on Amazon, and is not ranked #1 in any sub-category.
But the skeptic take-down of Gore’s new movie and book, An Inconvenient Deception: How Al Gore Distorts Climate Science and Energy Policy, is at #956, and is #1 in three sub-categories.
What makes the discrepancy even worse is that An Inconvenient Deception was self published, with no paid advertising.
Maybe people are finally wising up to Mr. Gore.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/08/skeptic-beating-al-gore-on-amazon/