1.  The first mistake made by Mr Gore, said Mr Justice Burton in his written judgment, was in talking about the potential devastation wrought by a rise in sea levels caused by the melting of ice caps.

2.  The claim that sea levels could rise by 20ft “in the near future” was dismissed as “distinctly alarmist”. Such a rise would take place “only after, and over, millennia”.

3.  Mr Justice Burton added: “The ar-mageddon scenario he predicts, inso-far as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus.”

4.  A claim that atolls in the Pacific had already been evacuated was supported by “no evidence”, while to suggest that two graphs showing carbon dioxide levels and temperatures over the last 650,000 years were an “exact fit” overstated the case.

5.  Mr Gore’s suggestion that the Gulf Stream, that warms up the Atlantic ocean, would shut down was contradicted by the International Panel on Climate Change’s assessment that it was “very unlikely” to happen.

6.  The drying of Lake Chad, the loss of Mount Kilimanjaro’s snows and Hurricane Katrina were all blamed by Mr Gore on climate change but the judge said the scientific community had been unable to find evidence to prove there was a direct link.

7.  The drying of Lake Chad, the judge said, was “far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and overgrazing, and regional climate variability”. The melting of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was “mainly attributable to human-induced climate change”.

8.  The judge also said there was no proof to support a claim that polar bears were drowning while searching for icy habitats melted by global warming. The only drowned polar bears the court was aware of were four that died following a storm.

9.  Similarly, the judge took issue with the former Vice-President of the United States for attributing coral bleaching to climate change. Separating the direct impacts of climate change and other factors was difficult, the judgment concluded.





伊藤公紀blog より

April 28 [Thu], 2011, 13:45






1. 近い将来に海面が急速に上昇する、は杞憂
2. 太平洋サンゴ礁が温暖化で沈みつつあり住民が避難している、の根拠はない
3. メキシコ湾流が止まって西ヨーロッパが氷期に入る、はおかしい
4. 65万年の二酸化炭素と気温の相関の解釈は正しくない
5. チャド湖の縮小は地球温暖化の証拠ではない
6. キリマンジャロ山の雪が消えた原因は地球温暖化、は無理
7. ハリケーン・カトリーナは地球温暖化のため、は証拠不十分
8. ホッキョクグマが溺れたのは北極の氷が減ったから、は間違い
9. サンゴ礁の白化の原因は複雑


 ところが、『不都合な真実』を教室で上映することに反対する父兄がいて、裁判を起こした。高等法院は、民事裁判を扱う裁判所で、第一審を担当している。 この裁判を担当したバートン判事は、2007年に出たIPCC第四報告書を読み、ゴア氏の主張を吟味した。その結果、「9つの誤り」を見つけ、教材として使う際にはその点を注意するように、という判決を下した。


 これはあまりにも権威主義ではないか。アラスカ大学名誉教授の赤祖父氏が、ジャーナリストの桜井よしこ氏に依頼されて、国会議員の前で講演した時、次のように言われたという。「あなたはノーベル賞受賞者のゴア氏の言うことに逆らうのですか。」 耳を疑うのは私だけではないだろう。これでは、科学立国の資格はないと言うべきだ。ただし、同じ構図は原発問題を初めとして、あちこちに見られる。




Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

3件のコメント on Al Gore’s inconvenient judgment 【アル・ゴアの不都合な判決(9つの誤り)】2007/10/11 The Times 英・高等法院のバートン判事が指摘した「9つの誤り」

  1. [...] 【参考記事→ 071011 A.ゴア 不都合な判決】 [...]


post date*