Gore Pulls Slide Linking Rise in Natural Disasters to Global Warming

Photo of Noel Sheppard.
  • Bookmark and Share

Climate realists won a huge battle with Global Warmingist-in-Chief Al Gore when the former Vice President pulled a new slide he recently added to his now famous -- or, more to the point, infamous! -- presentation linking an increase in natural disasters to "climate change."

As the New York Times' Andrew Revkin reported moments ago:

The graph, which was added to his talk last year, came just after a sequence of images of people from Iowa to South Australia struggling with drought, wildfire, flooding and other weather-related calamities. Mr. Gore described the pattern as a manifestation of human-driven climate change. “This is creating weather-related disasters that are completely unprecedented,” he said.

According to Revkin, this slide has now been nixed:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Two days after the talk, Mr. Gore was sharply criticized for using the data to make a point about global warming by Roger A. Pielke, Jr., a political scientist focused on disaster trends and climate policy at the University of Colorado. Mr. Pielke noted that the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters stressed in reports that a host of factors unrelated to climate caused the enormous rise in reported disasters (details below).

Dr. Pielke quoted the Belgian center: “Indeed, justifying the upward trend in hydro-meteorological disaster occurrence and impacts essentially through climate change would be misleading. Climate change is probably an actor in this increase but not the major one — even if its impact on the figures will likely become more evident in the future.”

Officials at the disaster center, after reviewing what Mr. Gore showed and said, sent a comment to Dr. Pielke’s blog and to me. You can read their full response below. I sent it to Mr. Gore’s office and asked for his interpretation. Kalee Kreider, Mr. Gore’s spokeswoman on environmental matters, wrote back today:

I can confirm that historically, we used Munich Re and Swiss Re data for the slide show. This can be confirmed using a hard copy of An Inconvenient Truth. (It is cited if you cannot recall from the film which is now several years old!). We became aware of the CRED database from its use by Charles Blow in the New York Times (May 31, 2008). So, it’s a very new addition.

We have found that Munich Re and other insurers and their science experts have made the attribution. I’m referring you particularly to their floods section/report [link, link] Both of these were published in a series entitled “Weather catastrophes and climate change-Is there still hope for us.”

We appreciate that you have pointed out the issues with the CRED database and will make the switch back to the data we used previously to ensure that there is no confusion either with regards to the data or attribution.

What I do find fascinating is that Gore relies on information from insurers. After all, such are not impartial players in this debate.

Consider that if an insurer is involved in a disaster claim, any evidence of a link to "climate change" could reduce or invalidate said claim as another entity -- i.e. any company involved in the production and/or use of fossil fuels!!! -- can be blamed for the disaster thereby saving the insurance company money.

Kudos to Revkin for not only publishing this piece but also going out of his way to bring it to our attention.

How much press might this decision by Team Gore get from global warming-obsessed media?

Stay tuned.

*****Update: Dr. Pielke has responded...

Switching from the CRED dataset to Munich Re (and Swiss Re) data does not solve the basic problem. As we found in an expert workshop organized in 2006 with Munich Re — The Munich Re dataset has exactly the same problems as the CRED dataset. Attribution of the role of greenhouse gas driven climate change in the increasing economic costs of disasters has yet to occur. So using a different dataset does not address the underlying problem.

But here's the money quote from Pielke:

Now that Gore has admitted that including the slide based on CRED data was a mistake, it raises a more fundamental: How could it be that Al Gore presented obviously misleading information before a large audience of the world’s best scientists, which was then amplified in a press release by AAAS, and none of these scientists spoke up?

Exactly!!!

*****Update: Pielke provided more insight concerning the conflict of interest insurers have in this debate here.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This intentional snafu (as

This intentional snafu (as they will spin it) will get little or no attention from the leftist press...if they did, it would just be twisted, spinning talking points they all decide on beforehand.

What is it about statistics lying ...

Mr. Gore uses convient facts, doesn't he?

More GW Garbage

An inconvenient snafu that will not support his convenient lies.  Let's just leave it out so that nobody challenges us on the fact that we made a mistake and that our theory doesn't hold any water.

Acting President Obama

Wants to be guided by the science of glabal wamring. OK, where is the science?

If CO2 were removed from the atmosphere, all life on Earth would cease to exist. No word from Acting President Obama on what level of CO2 is deemed to be the right level for planet Earth. He needs to consult his crackpots for that answer I guess.

So Does This Mean. . .

That the scene the slide is used in An Inconvenient Truth will be edited out of future releases?  Kind of what the truthers had to constantly do to their 9/11 videos every time new information came to light that contradicted what they claimed?  

There are

too many A's and not enough S's in that picture.

Mr. Carbon Footprint Himself

How could it be that Al Gore presented obviously misleading information
before a large audience of the world’s best scientists, which was then
amplified in a press release by AAAS, and none of these scientists
spoke up?

Probably because that's where Al got the wrong information to start with, from the usual "rent a disaster" gang of scientists like Jim Hansen, Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann.

Slip of the Tongue?

Also speaking at the AAAS, Gore seems to have inadvertently admitted that the science is not settled and the debate is not over.

"Scientists
can no longer in good conscience accept this division between the work
you do and the civilization in which you live," Gore said.

"Keep your day jobs, but get involved in the debate," he added.

http://www.sciam.com...

 

Other postings on climate

The Pielkes have been critical of the AGW drivel for years. They are truly interested in the Science and policy implications of man made climate change. Much good scientific study has gone into their comments and papers on man's effect on his environment.

The most vivid example of a man made change that resembles what they and their fellows at Colorado study, was the over farming of the Great Plains that caused the Dust Bowl in the U. S. during the Great Depression.

A more recent example of such a man made change has been the deforestation of areas for the purpose of farming within the vicinity of Mount Kilimanjaro. The man made deforestation has caused the reduction in moisture on the slopes of Kilimanjaro, resulting in dessication of the snow cap and icefields on the summit. Kilimanjaro has been used as an example of Warming when in fact the change is a result of deforestation.

Here is another site http://icecap.us/index.php  linking good solid scientists, mathematicians, meteorologists, geoligists etc. who are truly interested in good science related to climate. The site is hosted by Joseph D'Aleo, one of the founders of The Weather Channel.

 

This is another liberal conclusion looking for data

If they don't get the right data, they will just make it up, or in Gore's case, just try and baffle 'em with bulls%$!t.

The mid-ocean ridge "smokers" that have been discovered all over the planet put more CO2 into the oceans (and therefore the atmosphere) than human activity does by a factor of about 3.

Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!

Alan Keyes / Sarah Palin - 2012

Another Whoopsie

They screwed up the polar ice readings, too.

(from Drudge) 

http://www.bloomberg...

"The center said real-time data on sea ice is always less
reliable than archived numbers because full checks haven’t yet
been carried out. Historical data is checked across other
sources, it said."

Why does this sentence sound nonsensical??? Real-time data is not reliable because full checks haven't yet been carried out? So real-time data ... "what-you-see-is-what-you-get" data is no good. "Ignore the ice pack behind the curtain!!!"

Ahhh, I'm guessing those checks involve, "Hmm, this data doesn't match the cr@p we've been feeding them. Better jostle it a bit to fit Allah Gore's "model"."

"All generalizations are false, including this one.” Mark Twain

Just ask James Hansen

Just ask James Hansen about real time versus adjusted data. The actual readings of surface temperatures befor adjustments by Hansen, are level or declining. Once Hansen has made adjustments to the data, the graph magically shows increasing temperatures. This is true even with 90 some % of the U.S. surface temperature stations situated so that they don't meet NOAA critera therefore giving unrealistically high temperatures.

Here are a few sites to go to for this information:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/US_AND_GLOBAL_TEMP_ISSUES.pdf

http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/CorrectCorrections.pdf

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/20/how-not-to-measure-temperature-part-83-no-smoking-please/

http://www.surfacestations.org/

http://gallery.surfacestations.org/main.php

 This site is down right now but it is the best site for issues relating to the "Hockey Stick" graph:

http://www.climateaudit.org/

"An Inconvenient Truth" will be the size of a comic book

Gore's book, An Inconvenient Truth, will be the size of a comic book, by the time we finish ripping out the pages with errors.

ek... LOL! I hope it

ek...

LOL!

I hope it ends up more like a pamphlet you get with prescriptions...about sizes it up for me.

LOL. That's even better, bigtimer.

You wrote; "I hope [An Inconvenient Truth] ends up more like a pamphlet you get with prescriptions...about sizes it up for me."

 

 

How ironic that Gore used the word TRUTH in his book title

An Inconvenient Truth 

When a book has a title like that,  a reader might want to consider the possibility that  the author is  trying to add undeserved importance to a shaky argument.

I wonder if New England is

I wonder if New England is enjoying the 2+ feet of Global Warming they're getting right now?

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

Hunter... I wondered the

Hunter...

I wondered the same thing about the leftists that live there this morning as they try to get out there drive-ways....

Oh, wait, forgot, they forget facts so soon.

Like 2 feet of snow...

Planetary Emergency!

I wonder if they get out

I wonder if they get out and shovel or do they wait for the heat wave promised them by the Goracle.

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

Hunter... If the snow

Hunter...

If the snow happened to keep piling up, heck, they will wait until their homes, businesses collapse all around them...

...another Stimulus Bill will be passed.

Shine on me Sunshine...Walk with me World..it's a Zippity do-da-day!

"And Yahweh spake unto Noah

"And Yahweh spake unto Noah and said,'Thou dost know the evil-doers and their carbon emissions melteth the polar ice caps.

And, yeah, verily I say unto you, a Great Flood will consume all the land.'"

Wow!  Now I understand the whole Great Flood thing!  

One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

Gore needs to go back to

Gore needs to go back to his little ice float in the artic and stay there.

JAJT

A very serious problem, we know the real enemy.

There are probably other more important causes being systematically
ignored, not only for experts and researchers, but by the IPCC
dependent of the ONU, for example, the rapid upward trend of forest
fires exorbitant DIRECTLY proportional to population growth in the
world.

More information on this sites (spanish documents):(

+ http://calentamiento...

They can also read this news published in some media for months:
+ http://www.cubanuest...

Rafael Lomena, Hummm welcome to NB

Maybe you could SPAM in english?

Nevermind.

Try looking at ARSON...