Media Ignore Weather Channel Founder's Intent to Sue Gore for Fraud on Global Warming

By Richard Newcomb | March 14, 2008 - 13:15 ET

Al Gore has made a lot of money and publicity with his crusade against global warming. I have written in the past how this whole crusade seems to be based on a Big Lie, and its real purpose appears more intended to get global government so the rest of the world (ie. the United Nations) can gain control over the United States' many assets without having to go through the awkward exercise of actually getting a their authority recognized by the US Congress.

However, there has been a backlash against the Gore Warming crusade (fueled partly by Gore's own hypocrisy in using large motorcades, private jets and his lavish lifestyle- none of which are designed to show others that he is serious about the entire issue. Not that the press has bothered to do any real reporting- they have fallen in line with Gore's crusade lock, stock and barrel- refusing to report on critics and making statements equating said critics with Nazis and other undesirables. However, the evidence is mounting that Gore and his global warming friends are no more accurate in their claims than Newsweek was in its new ice age campaign in the 1970s.

Recently the critics are becoming more vocal. And today, Fox News is reporting that the founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, is preparing to sue Al Gore for fraud. According to the report on FoxNews.com,

John Coleman, who founded the cable network in 1982, suggests suing for fraud proponents of global warming, including Al Gore, and companies that sell carbon credits. "Is he committing financial fraud? That is the question," Coleman said. "Since we can't get a debate, I thought perhaps if we had a legal challenge and went into a court of law, where it was our scientists and their scientists, and all the legal proceedings with the discovery and all their documents from both sides and scientific testimony from both sides, we could finally get a good solid debate on the issue," Coleman said. "I'm confident that the advocates of 'no significant effect from carbon dioxide' would win the case."

 

Coleman is a long-time skeptic of the entire global warming campaign. Based on his history, there is no doubt he is far better positioned to understand the idea's truth or falsehood than Al Gore- a man whose money came largely FROM the oil companies. In addition, Gore's massive insincerity has been on display before- remember his claim to have invented the Internet? So if the chips were down, I would believe Coleman before I would place credence in Gore. But the Press obviously believe otherwise.

Throughout the controversy, the press has been consistently against any criticism of the global warming meme, muzzling critics and refusing to present a balanced picture of the issue. Only global warming advocates are allowed air-time to present their views- opponents are tarred as being owned by 'Big Oil' and presented as akin to Holocaust-deniers.

Today's story was front-page news on Fox News, and was linked to by the Drudge Report. But the other so-called 'mainstream' media have pointedly ignored this. I could find no mention of the story on the main pages of the following news outlets- CNN, ABC News, CBS News, MSNBC or the New York Times.

So, it would seem that the media are ignoring what should be a headline story. The question is whether they are ignoring it due to their invested interest in promoting the global warming meme, their known political bias or pressure from their friends in the environmental movement. Any of these rationales makes a mockery of their claims to be professional and unbiased. But we knew that a long time ago, didn't we? Cross-posted on StoneHeads.

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.

A goal too far

With the state of our court, and jury systems - with the inability of most jurors to understand complex science issues, a lawsuit could prove to be counterproductive - particularly with media assistance in scuttling the effort.

We can hope for better exposure of the lies behind this socialist scam, but I doubt its efficacy.

 

 

BUT, the Media would have to Cover Both sides/news Conf. talk

OR, I would hope each side would get Equal coverage..? 

I could Hope for CHANGE....can't I ?

Equal coverage!

I just went thru this with my 15 year old daughters "Global
Issues" teacher.

I found out last Monday that this guy was showing the
students "An Inconvenient Truth" while discussing man made global warming
without any opposing view point.

I wrote and email stating "This type of indoctrination
imposed on our children without any opposing view is uncalled for and action
shall be taken if this is the case."

Along with the email I sent him links to some great
material that blows holes in Pope Algores flick.

This is a public school folks!

I also wrote, "Please understand that I believe everyone is
entitled to their own opinion. However indoctrination and bias opinions taught
to our children as "fact" in the public school system warrants every parents
concern."

He never responded back but Wednesday we had the semesters
parent teacher conferences. HeeHeeHee

FYI, my daughter is a straight "A" student and involved in
almost every sport including band.

Needless to say he was a little taken back by my presents
when I introduced myself.

Mr. Adams and his student teacher admitted that they had
not planned on showing any opposing views but that the kids do have an
opportunity to bring "something in".

I said, "BULL SH!T".

It's HIS job and responsibility as a publicly paid school
teacher to provide that information. However, I did tell him that I would provide
100 minutes worth of opposition video and that I (as a tax paying citizen)
expect him to show it to his class.

He agreed without any hesitation. I seriously believed he
was shaking in his boots afraid that I would bring this to the school board or
Bill O'Reilly.

So get this.

He then begins telling me how he's not a Democrat but a
Liberal, and that he does not impose his politics on his students. Yea right! I
thought. He continues saying that he rides his bike to work to save fuel,
changed all his light bulbs to CFL's and some other BS he does to "save the
environment".

I'm looking at this guy and he's tan as hell! We live
in Michigan!

So to be guilt free for using up power in the tanning
booth the lighting in his house sucks. LOL!!

My closing statement as I was shaking his
hand.........

 

THE DEBATE IS NOT OVER!

 

 

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"-Aristotle

Gforce - -Thank you for your action

You can Yell at your TV, or you can get up and start yelling at the first Idiot you hear . . . and sometimes the first one you find, is teaching your Kids baloney.

For every Action . . . There is an opposite Re-action 

Thanks!

Thanks Jay Tee,

The funny thing was, is that I was picking up my daughter from a canceled
soccer tryout due to, "to much snow on the field". LOL!!

That's when the topic of global warming came up.

I've been getting some positive feedbacks from friends and co-workers on this
issue.

Like Dennis Prager says, "I prefer clarity over
agreement".

 

 

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"-Aristotle

That supposed global-cooling campaign

Mr. Newcomb says, "the evidence is mounting that Gore and his global warming friends are no more accurate in their claims than Newsweek was in its new ice age campaign in the 1970s."

Global warming skeptics love to trot out the claim that belief in climate cooling was widespread in the 1970s. I refer readers to a "USA Today" article from February which examines that claim:

http://www.usatoday....

The crux of the piece is that "...Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends."

As for John Coleman's plan to sue Gore---what a delicious prospect. He and his ilk will end up more humilated than Williams Jennings Bryan and his allies were during the 1925 Scopes monkey trial.

 

 

Put up or shut up

Ahhh, a crusader! Are you just a parisioner or a preist in the Global Warming Religion? I can't speak for the rest of the bloggers here at NB but I can tell you I have experienced the coldest winter ever up here in New Hampshire. I doubt very many of you know what the hell you are talking about. I reject your theory and want you to PROVE GW exists. Show us the beef, pal.

Decentralist...is that

Decentralist...is that democrat for liberal? Or is it liberal for "is led"? You guys will belive anything "they" tell you to belive. Unable or unwilling to go and look at the data yourselves, you let others tell you what to belive. And then you take up the mantle, and rave on.

Your type are sooo lost.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Sorry. I'm old enough to

Sorry. I'm old enough to remember the claims of cooling in the 60's and 70's. I remember reading it. Hearing it in my undergraduate classes.

As far as this being a scopes trial. Remember Fred Singer got fed up with Gore's henchman Lancaster accusations. And filed suit. All because Singer wouldn't remove the name of Al Gores supposed mentor, Roger Revelle, from a work they wrote together. “What to Do About Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap,” (BTW As Al seems to have taken two science courses in college. Got a D in one. And according to Al Revelle was his mentor. Could it be that Revelle gave him that D?)

Singer won.

Coleman may also.

After all we know it isn't only the alarmist with evidence. Though they think they are.

Source

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

What's in a name?

a·grar·i·an /əˈgrɛəriən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-grair-ee-uhn] –adjective

1.
relating to land, land tenure, or the division of landed property: agrarian laws.

2.
pertaining to the advancement of agricultural groups: an agrarian movement.

3.
composed of or pertaining to farmers: an agrarian co-op.

4.
rural; agricultural.

5.
growing in fields; wild: an agrarian plant.

–noun

6.

a person who favors the equal division of landed property and the advancement of agricultural groups.

de·cen·tral·ize /diˈsɛntrəˌlaɪz/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[dee-sen-truh-lahyz]-verb, -ized, -iz·ing.

–verb (used with object)

1.
to distribute the administrative powers or functions of (a central authority) over a less concentrated area: to decentralize the national government.

2.
to disperse (something) from an area of concentration: to decentralize the nation's industry.

–verb (used without object)

3.
to undergo decentralization: The city government is looking for ways to decentralize.

—Related forms

de·cen·tral·ist, noun

Very telling.

Stultus est sicut stultus facit

Of Course, only FOX has Coverage

When I was about to go to bed last night, I was watching Hannity and Colmes, and I found on the ticker "Al Gore to get sued by Weather Channel Founder, John Coleman, for fraud." Which made me go to every other source to see if it was actually true - but Al Gore has brainwashed all of the Mainstream Media, so FOX was the only one to cover it.

The inventor of the

The inventor of the internet has been cowardly avoiding a debate challenge from Lord Monckton, on the subject of global warming, for several years now. Compared to inventing the internet and winning a Nobel Peace Prize, giving an intellectual slap-down to some relatively unknown British noble should be a piece of cake, right?

http://www.globalwar...

Pretty Suprising

Al Gore, every liberal's savior, who invented the internet - doesn't have an email address. I was about to email him on his positions on global warming to ask him about the other side, but I guess he is afraid of people like me (at least that's what Glenn Beck told me).