Al Gore challenged to international debate on global warming

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2007-03-22 10:41pm

Al Gore Challenged to International TV Debate on Global Warming

Mon Mar 19, 9:30 AM ET

To: ENVIRONMENTAL EDITORS

Contact: Audrey Mullen, +1-703-548-1160, for Center for Science and Public Policy

PERTH, Scotland, March 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- 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." (http://ff.org/centers/csspp/docs/20070316_monckton.html)

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."

Monckton and Gore have once before clashed head to head on the science, politics, and religion of global warming in the usually-decorous pages of the London Sunday Telegraph last November.

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."

The arena of the glittering "Second Great Debate" will be the elegant, Victorian-Gothic Library of the Oxford Museum of Natural History, which was the setting for the "Great Debate" between the natural scientist T. H. Huxley and Bishop "Soapy Sam" Wilberforce on the theory of evolution, following the publication of Darwin's Origin of Species. Lord Monckton says he chose this historic venue "not only because the magnificent, Gothic architecture will be a visually-stunning setting for the debate but also because I hope that in this lofty atmosphere the caution and scepticism of true science will once again prevail, this time over the shibboleths and nostrums of the false, new religion of climate alarmism."

Lord Monckton's resounding challenge to Al Gore reads as follows --

"The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley presents his compliments to Vice- President Albert Gore and by these presents challenges the said former Vice-President to a head-to-head, internationally-televised debate upon the question, 'That our effect on climate is not dangerous,' to be held in the Library of the Oxford University Museum of Natural History at a date of the Vice-President's choosing.

"Forasmuch as it is His Lordship who now flings down the gauntlet to the Vice-President, it shall be the Vice-President's prerogative and right to choose his weapons by specifying the form of the Great Debate. May the Truth win! Magna est veritas, et praevalet. God Bless America! God Save the Queen!"

Well. If nothing else, this should be entertaining.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2007-03-22 10:44pm

Because the best test of science is popular reaction.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » 2007-03-22 10:58pm

I say let them debate and better yet invite those two here to debate

Considering we never got the much wanted Bush vs Ahmadinejad, this one must go through.

Monckton is up for an ass kicking as Gore isn't running for office and can unload on his ass without repercussions.

Winston Blake · Post by **Winston Blake** » 2007-03-22 11:11pm

"The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley presents his compliments to Vice- President Albert Gore and by these presents challenges the said former Vice-President to a head-to-head, internationally-televised debate upon the question, 'That our effect on climate is not dangerous,' to be held in the Library of the Oxford University Museum of Natural History at a date of the Vice-President's choosing.

I can imagine Viscount Monckton thinking that those terms somehow represent the highest standards of debating. Head-to-head simply means evidence is unverifiable and limited to what they bring with them. 'Internationally-televised' just supports slogan-slinging style-over-substance sophistry. Both mean a short duration that makes it both easy to absorb and unable to cover the scope of the issue.

What's with this 'ROAR, me fight you in front of tribe!' mentality? Don't forget everybody - debating is a matter of who's prettier and better at persuasion, not which position is right.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-03-22 11:32pm

If I were Al Gore, I'd invite some scientists to lend a hand with any fine details and then issue a counter-challenge to debate in the manner of Lincoln, with point/counterpoint essays, which would be published, in full in the newspapers. Point out that scientific debates are always written, because there is less room for grandstanding in a written debate.

NeoGoomba · Post by **NeoGoomba** » 2007-03-22 11:51pm

Darth Wong wrote:If I were Al Gore, I'd invite some scientists to lend a hand with any fine details and then issue a counter-challenge to debate in the manner of Lincoln, with point/counterpoint essays, which would be published, in full in the newspapers. Point out that scientific debates are always written, because there is less room for grandstanding in a written debate.

What sort of time constraints went into those debates?

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2007-03-23 09:06am

NeoGoomba wrote:
What sort of time constraints went into those debates?

Exactly as he said. The Lincoln/Douglas debates were all about point-counterpoint with citations. Generally the subject matter is given to the participants beforehand.

What Wiki Says

Oni Koneko Damien · Post by **Oni Koneko Damien** » 2007-03-23 07:21pm

Here's an idea for a counter-offer: Al Gore states that both should submit their ideas to a panel of judges/reviewers who have Phd's in the fields addressed, to look over them and determine which one is most valid in relation to reality.

Oh...wait...we already have that! It's called peer-review.

Fucking ignorant clowns, science is not a goddamn wrestling match.

SpacedTeddyBear · Post by **SpacedTeddyBear** » 2007-03-24 02:35am

You know that to the common Joe, whoever loses this "debate" means that everything that his side supported as well as the data to back it up is now wrong, because that's how science works.

OmegaGuy · Post by **OmegaGuy** » 2007-03-24 04:20am

I always wonder when people say that Global Warming is a lie or conspiracy, what do the supposed conspirators hope to gain?

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2007-03-24 04:37am

OmegaGuy wrote:I always wonder when people say that Global Warming is a lie or conspiracy, what do the supposed conspirators hope to gain?

Beachfront property as people sell up to move to higher ground?

Winston Blake · Post by **Winston Blake** » 2007-03-24 04:40am

SpacedTeddyBear wrote:You know that to the common Joe, whoever loses this "debate" means that everything that his side supported as well as the data to back it up is now wrong, because that's how science works.

After all, that's how politics works.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2007-03-24 05:23am

OmegaGuy wrote:I always wonder when people say that Global Warming is a lie or conspiracy, what do the supposed conspirators hope to gain?

Those people probably labor under the perception (delusion) that those who claim to subscribe to global warming are really just trying to convince people that consumer society is evil and we should abandon all material pursuits.

Sarevok · Post by **Sarevok** » 2007-03-24 05:52am

Al Gore debating global warming on TV ?

It is more like what his character on Futurama would do...The world continues to become a parody of itself...

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2007-03-24 09:30am

Lonestar wrote:
NeoGoomba wrote:
What sort of time constraints went into those debates?

Exactly as he said. The Lincoln/Douglas debates were all about point-counterpoint with citations. Generally the subject matter is given to the participants beforehand.

What Wiki Says

That actual looks like a good idea. Will never be done, but that style of debate would at least be more useful then a quick but mostly useless TV debate.

PeZook · Post by **PeZook** » 2007-03-24 02:06pm

Darth Wong wrote:If I were Al Gore, I'd invite some scientists to lend a hand with any fine details and then issue a counter-challenge to debate in the manner of Lincoln, with point/counterpoint essays, which would be published, in full in the newspapers. Point out that scientific debates are always written, because there is less room for grandstanding in a written debate.

Good idea. Why not send it to him? He just might use your suggestion.

Darth Raptor · Post by **Darth Raptor** » 2007-03-24 06:37pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
OmegaGuy wrote:I always wonder when people say that Global Warming is a lie or conspiracy, what do the supposed conspirators hope to gain?
Those people probably labor under the perception (delusion) that those who claim to subscribe to global warming are really just trying to convince people that consumer society is evil and we should abandon all material pursuits.

It was in the Party's February newsletter. We're not trying to make money, obviously. That would be antithetical to everything we are. We're trying to demolish the profitability of heavy industry and the feasibility of private transportation. The state-run industries and railroads are almost in sight, comrades!

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-03-24 09:32pm

OmegaGuy wrote:I always wonder when people say that Global Warming is a lie or conspiracy, what do the supposed conspirators hope to gain?

Well, for one, Al Gore owns a company that sells/creates 'pollution offsets' so that if someone feels guilty about their impact on the environment, they can give this foundation money and it will donate to various environmental causes. Of course, Gore's ownership increases in value every time someone kicks in.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2007-03-24 09:48pm

A clash of science and scepticism and other showy bullshit between....two non-scientists?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2007-03-24 09:58pm

Science is too important to be left to scientists.