Controlling Legal Authority


So, it seems that Al Gore is peddling some facially absurd mythology initiated by his spokeswoman after the UK High Court threw out every single money claim in An Inconvenient Truth. That is, he says the Court actually vindicated his movie and its claims, and thereby Gore (h/t Marc Morano at Climate Depot). This is false.

The Court asked for evidence on (that is, considered the veracity of) 11 money claims. Three involved melting things so these are typically distilled as 9 money claims. Each one, tossed. Each. And. Every. One.

Gore’s spokeswoman claimed that the Court supported “thousands of other claims” in the movie. In fact, not only was it just a 90-minute movie (it just seemed like forever . . . ) – so there weren’t “thousands of claims” – but the Court affirmed not one claim. Not one. Not one claim affirmed, upheld, or found supportable.

Gore’s line of claims, the High Court ruled, “arise in the context of alarmism and exaggeration in support of a political thesis” (wow . . . can’t afford many more such victories, Al).

We posted the opinion on when it was first handed down, as did others. But Gore hasn’t posted it. He just spins tales about it, as is his wont.

Here’s an idea, instead of spinning, let the people read it. Post the opinion, Al. It supports you. Post it.


Subscribe to National Review