Paul Mulshine writes in the New Jersey Star Ledger about Al Gore’s recent ducking of an inconvenient question at a Wisconsin event:
He tells McAleer that the judge actually ruled in favor of the movie, stating that it could be shown in British classrooms.
Not quite. In fact ABC news reported that the judge ruled “screening the film in British secondary schools violated laws barring the promotion of partisan political views in the classroom. But he allowed the film to be shown on the condition that it is accompanied by guidance notes to balance Gore’s ‘one-sided’ views, saying that the film’s ‘apocalyptic vision ‘was not an impartial analysis of climate change.’”
That’s hardly a victory for Gore. And an analysis of the case by a genuine journalist, the Washington Post Fact Checker, revealed much shoddy work by the Gore team, both in the movie and in attacking the judge’s ruling. A Gore spokeswoman, for example, said the judge had not cited “errors” in the film while the Fact Checker quotes the judge using that exact word.
The Fact Checker goes on to note that “Scientists sympathetic to Gore have effectively conceded several errors or omissions in the movie.”
No wonder Gore ducks questions on the accuracy of his masterpiece. And when McAleer starts to get the better of Gore on the question of whether polar bear populations are increasing, the conference directors cut off his microphone. Meanwhile Gore gets away without answering the actual question asked: Has he made an attempt to correct the errors in this movie?