Al Gore Challenged to International Global Warming Debate
It’s put up or shut up time for soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore who was formally challenged to defend his well-publicized global warming theories in a debate with a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
As reported by PR Newswire (emphasis added throughout):
In a formal invitation sent to former Vice-President Al Gore's Tennessee address and released to the public, Lord Monckton has thrown down the gauntlet to challenge Gore to what he terms "the Second Great Debate," an internationally televised, head-to-head, nation-unto-nation confrontation on the question, "That our effect on climate is not dangerous."
How marvelous. The press release continued:
Monckton, a former policy adviser to Margaret Thatcher during her years as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, said, "A careful study of the substantial corpus of peer-reviewed science reveals that Mr. Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, is a foofaraw of pseudo-science, exaggerations, and errors, now being peddled to innocent schoolchildren worldwide."
Just spectacular. The release continued:
Monckton calls on the former Vice President to "step up to the plate and defend his advocacy of policies that could do grave harm to the welfare of the world's poor. If Mr. Gore really believes global warming is the defining issue of our time, the greatest threat human civilization has ever faced, then he should welcome the opportunity to raise the profile of the issue before a worldwide audience of billions by defining and defending his claims against a serious, science-based challenge."
Of course, it seems doubtful that Gore will accept Lord Monckton’s offer. After all, this issue has already been decided by a so-called consensus of scientists, correct?
As such, it seems quite simple for Dr. Gore to just say he’s too busy to bother debating “facts.”
Yet, it will be interesting to see if the American media bother covering this challenge, or whether they sweep this under the rug along with most questions about this junk science. After all, their goal must be to preserve the appearance of a consensus at all costs.As always, we will know in the fullness of time