write:Ms. Kreider then says “The judge stated clearly that he was not attempting to perform an analysis of the scientificquestions in his ruling. ” He did not need to. Each of the n

that the judge himself had never used the term “errors.” In fact
the judge used theterm “errors
” in inverted commas
throughout his judgment. Next
Ms. Kreider makes some unjustifiable ad hominem attacks on Mr. Stewart Dimmock
the lorry driver
schoolgovernor and father of two school-age children who was the plaintiff in the case. This memorandum
however
willeschew any ad hominem response
and will concentrate exclusively on the 35 scientific inaccuracies andexaggerations in Gore’s movie.Ms. Kreider then says
“The process of creating a 90-minute documentary from the original peer-reviewed science foran audience of moviegoers in the U.S. and around the world is complex.” However
the single web-page entitled “TheScience” on the movie’s official website contains only two references to articles in the peer-reviewed scientific journals.There is also a reference to a document of the IPCC
but its documents are not independently peer-reviewed in theusual understanding of the term.Ms. Kreider then says
“The judge stated clearly that he was not attempting to perform an analysis of the scientificquestions in his ruling.” He did not need to. Each of the nine “errors” which he identified had been admitted by the UKGovernment to be inconsistent with the mainstream of scientific opinion.Ms. Kreider says the IPCC’s results are sometimes “conservative
” and continues: “Vice President Gore tried to conveyin good faith those threats that he views as the most serious.” Readers of the long list of errors described in thismemorandum will decide for themselves whether Mr. Gore was acting in good faith. However
in this connection it issignificant that each of the 35 errors listed below misstates the conclusions of the scientific literature or states thatthere is a threat where there is none or exaggerates the threat where there may be one. All of the errors point in onedirection – towards undue alarmism. Not one of the errors falls in the direction of underestimating the degree ofconcern in the scientific community. The likelihood that all 35 of the errors listed below could have fallen in onedirection purely by inadvertence is less than 1 in 34 billion.We now itemize 35 of the scientific errors and exaggerations in Al Gore’s movie. The first nine were listed by the judgein the High Court in London in October 2007 as being “errors.” The remaining 26 errors are just as inaccurate orexaggerated as the nine spelt out by the judge
who made it plain during the proceedings that the Court had not hadtime to consider more than these few errors. The judge found these errors serious enough to require the UKGovernment to pay substantial costs to the plaintiff. ERROR 1Sea level rising 6 m Gore says that a sea-level rise of up to 6 m (20 ft) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland.Though Gore does not say that the sea-level rise will occur in the near future
the judge found that
in the context
it wasclear that this is what he had meant
since he showed expensive graphical representations of the effect of hisimagined 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise on existing populations
and he quantified the numbers who would be displaced bythe sea-level rise.