There must be, I guess, some sort of prize out there for the person in the world with the most chutzpah. How else to explain that Al Gore, the man responsible for the disgraceful An Inconvenient Truth, is up for a sequel!
For a few moments, An Inconvenient Truth looked to many people like a serious piece of work. But then people started fact-checking it. It is riddled with errors, and the internet is full of debunking analyses; see for example, The Daily Caller, The Blaze, NewsBusters, Natural News. More authoritatively, the High Court in London declared it seriously flawed as “not supported by current mainstream scientific consensus.” The Artic has nor melted, nor have the snows of Kilimanjaro, and extreme weather events are down, not up, with no runaway global warming.
One of Gore’s rabbits has been Michael Mann, the inventor of the now-discredited “hockey stick” – the graph that attempted to hide the fact that it was hotter in Medieval times than today. Mann had a rough time this week in the US Congress’ Committee on Science, Space and Technology. A couple of examples:
CONGRESSMAN CLAY HIGGINS: “Are you affiliated or associated with an organization called The Climate Accountability Institute?”
MICHAEL MANN: “No. I mean I may have corresponded with people.”
CONGRESSMAN CLAY HIGGINS: “You’re not affiliated nor associated with them?”
MICHAEL MANN: “I can provide – I’ve submitted my CV – you can see who I’m associated with and who I am not.”
His CV (he called it “Biographical Sketch”) did not list The Climate Accountability Institute as an organisation with which he has been associated. Unhappily for his credibility, they do:
The point is important, because of the CAI’s policy of seeking to prosecute anyone who points out the flaws in the alarmist case. He also sought to mislead the Committee, having been challenged about his ethical standards and repeated insults of those who challenge his views, when he said this:
MICHAEL MANN: “I do not believe I called anyone here a denier”
He was at that moment sitting next but one to the highly respected Dr Judith Curry. And equally unhappily for his credibility, the chairman had read page 6 of his written testimony, which included this:
…allegations were also published on the blog of climate science denier Judith Curry (I use the term carefully—reserving it for those who deny the most basic findings of the scientific community, which includes the fact that human activity is substantially or entirely responsible for the large-scale warming we have seen over the past century—something Judith Curry disputes).
In other words, Michael Mann, leader of the Alarmist troupe, is not a man to be trusted. Hmm…
The full hearing is available online.
It is interesting that the American legislature is ready and willing to allow open debate before it, and to hear evidence, about these issues. In Australia, it would never happen. In the rare occasions when an Australian politician challenges the Alarmists, they are howled down. And it is also interesting that these American proceedings were relatively balanced, it being generally accepted (not by all) that climate science is not well settled, and that there is real doubt about the extent to which the climate change in the latter half of the last century was caused by human activity.
Meanwhile, world-wide interest in the topic is waning fast, and carbon dioxide is being pumped out like never before. Which is proving very good for agriculture, so whatever side you take on the issue, people are less likely to starve.
 When he ran for President in 2000, he filed a public financial disclosure report that revealed that his net worth was somewhere between $700,000 and $1.9 million