Al Gore has obviously done a great deal to increase concern and interest in reducing the change in climate. While the polls show a large majority are now basically on his side, much of the pro and con derives from other political positions rather than any real scientific analysis before opinions of the average person are formed.
Recently an article was written that made sense to me saying that Republicans disbelieve Gore because he is the “un-Bush,” turning out to accurate in almost every case where Bush was not, from global warming to the outcome of invading Iraq.
Fewer and fewer scientists questions that climate change is largely human caused, but “the skeptics,” who have much more than just a cottage industry in sowing confusion on the issue, seize on just about anything to advance their defense of business as usual. Most recently, it has been a court case in the United Kingdom.
Real Climate looks at the court case, but more about the accuracy of the points in “An Inconvenient Truth.” Convenient Untruths. By Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann.
Tim Lambert in his Deltoid blog is one of the few who seems to have actually read the court case. An ‘error’ is not the same thing as an error.