Steven J. Milloy Says Al Gore Does Not Deserve Nobel Prize

As Al Gore is basking in the euphoria of winning the Nobel Prize for Peace, Steven J. Milloy is sneering at him and the Nobel Prize Committee.

A BBC Report and a British Court have joined the critics of Al Gore in disputing the justification for giving him the Nobel Prize for Peace, because, they have found Al Gore’s "An Inconvenient Truth" to be inconsistent with the truth.

Steven J. Milloy has issued a press release to question the crediblity of Al Gore's prize winning documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth" and a BBC Report raised more issues to contradict Al Gore's hypothesis.

The following is the full text of Steven J. Milloy's press release.

11 Oct 2007 19:34 Africa/Lagos


Al Gore Should Win the Nobel Prize for Propaganda, Says JunkScience.com, New BBC Report Says Gore Knew 'An Inconvenient Truth' Presented False Facts

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A new BBC report indicates that Al Gore knew that his alarmist global warming movie presented false facts, says JunkScience.com. Al Gore apparently didn't want to include any uncertainty in his movie because it would only fuel opponents of global warming regulation, the BBC report said.


"If this is true," said JunkScience.com publisher Steve Milloy, "then Al Gore should win the Nobel prize for Propaganda."


The report comes in the wake of a British judge's ruling that "An Inconvenient Truth" can only be shown in British schools if there is a warning label about the film's nine major factual inaccuracies and on the eve of the announcement of the Nobel Peace Price, for which Al Gore has been nominated.


The BBC Report.


"The BBC report and judge's ruling came as no surprise," said Milloy. "Our YouTube video debate, entitled 'Al Gore Debates Global Warming,' between Gore and expert climatologists spotlights the false assertion by Gore that carbon dioxide drives global temperature," Milloy explained.


Here is the video on YouTube.


"We call on the Norwegian Nobel Committee, which awards the Nobel Prize Committee to award the prize to a deserving candidate, rather than someone who plays fast and loose with the facts to advance his personal agenda," asked Milloy. "Also, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences should revoke the Oscar 'An Inconvenient Truth' won for best documentary," Milloy said.


"The real 'inconvenient truth' is that Gore seems to have intentionally omitted it from his movie," Milloy added. "The Norwegian Nobel Committee and Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences ought not risk their brands on Al Gore's chicanery," Milloy concluded.


Steven J. Milloy is the founder and publisher of DemandDebate.com, JunkScience.com and CSRwatch.com; an investment adviser to the Free Enterprise Action Fund; and a columnist for FoxNews.com.


Source: JunkScience.com

CONTACT: Audrey Mullen, +1-703-548-1160, for JunkScience.com

Then a British Court says Al Gore's hypothesis is more of a political treatise.

9 Oct 2007 20:30 Africa/Lagos


British Court Rules 'Inconvenient Truth' Represents 'Partisan Political Views,' Requires School Disclaimer

CHICAGO, Oct. 9 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --

On October 2, 2007 a British court found Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, to be politically biased, and it ruled teachers must warn students of that bias before showing the film.


In the statement below, James M. Taylor, senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute, elaborates on factual errors in the film identified by the court and comments on the ruling. You may quote from this statement or contact Taylor directly at 941/776-5690, taylor@heartland.org.


"Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, represents 'partisan political views' and must be treated as such by teachers in British schools, a British High Court judge has indicated.


"The British court was swayed by numerous factual inaccuracies portrayed in the movie. Among them:


-- The film claims global warming is responsible for the gradual retreat of the alpine glacier atop Africa's Mount Kilimanjaro. Scientists have conclusively demonstrated no such link exists.


-- The film presents graphs indicating that fluctuating carbon dioxide levels have always preceded and caused global temperature fluctuations. In fact, temperature changes have always preceded carbon dioxide changes.


-- The film suggests global warming caused Hurricane Katrina. Few hurricane experts believe this, and substantial scientific evidence indicates global warming is having no impact on hurricane frequency or intensity.


-- The film asserts global warming is causing Central Africa's Lake Chad to dry up. In fact, land use practices are causing the drying up of Lake Chad, and Central Africa is in an unusual and prolonged wet period.


-- The film asserts global warming is leading to polar bear deaths by drowning. Yet the only documented drowning deaths occurred due to a freak storm, and polar bear numbers are growing substantially.


-- The film claims global warming threatens to halt the Gulf Stream and initiate a new ice age. The vast majority of scientists who have studied the issue have determined such a scenario is implausible.


-- The film asserts global warming is causing the destruction of coral reefs through bleaching. Scientists have identified other causes for coral bleaching and have additionally noted bleaching is a natural process by which coral continually selects ideal symbiotic algae.


-- The film asserts Greenland is in danger of rapid ice melt that will raise sea levels by 20 feet or more. The scientific consensus is that any foreseeable Greenland ice melt will be gradual and will take centuries to substantially raise sea levels.


-- The film asserts the Antarctic ice shelf is melting. In fact, only a small portion of Antarctica is getting warmer and losing ice mass, while the vast majority of Antarctica is in a prolonged cold spell and is accumulating ice mass.


"Also highlighted in court arguments was Al Gore's admission in Grist Magazine that 'I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it [global warming] is.'


"As a result of the partisan political nature of Gore's film, school teachers will not be allowed to show the movie without telling their students the film is scientifically controversial.


"The British High Court properly recognized that Al Gore's movie is nine parts political propaganda and one part science. Virtually every assertion that Gore makes in the movie has been strongly contradicted by sound science.


"The British court decision should guide teachers in the U.S. to similarly treat Gore's movie as the inaccurate and misleading propaganda tool that it is."


For more information about The Heartland Institute, please contact Harriette Johnson, media relations manager, at 312/377-4000, email hjohnson@heartland.org.


Source: The Heartland Institute

CONTACT: Tom Swiss of The Heartland Institute, +1-312-377-4000,
+1-773-485-9477, tswiss@heartland.org