that in England and other European countries, they can't show it to their school children without explaining that there are 9 factual lies in the movie and there they require the movie to be balanced, presenting both sides.

Only here in America do we attempt to brainwash our children in our schools to accept this movie as factual.

Try this at home. Fill a glass to the brim with ice cubes and water, and as the ice melts, watch how much water over flows from the glass. Yet Al Gore tells us that New York is going to be flooded as the ice caps melt.

Another fact: When the Vikings discovered Greenland, they named it Greenland because it was green lush farm land with wild grapes growing everywhere. Today, there is a mile and a half layer of ice on top of Greenland. Did the Vikings drive SUV's or was it their light bulbs that caused it?

First, I'm pretty sure its only in the UK not other european countries that the film is shown in science classes (per government order). There are factual inaccuracies yes, but if you look at the ruling they are not considered lies per se. For example, the judge cited the pictures of modern cities being flooded. His beef is that the flooding is not projected to occur for hundreds of years and thus it could confuse schoolchildren to see modern day cities underwater.

Second, we aren't making American school children watch this movie in a science class, so why would we issue a clarification to them that the science in it is not perfect?

Your ice cube example is misleading. Water will rise from two reasons. First, as the liquid water heats up it will expand slightly. Secondly and more importantly, much of the ice is currently locked up on land (not floating in the ocean). When this ice eventually melts it will flow into the sea and raise ocean levels.

Finally, you are just wrong about the Vikings and Greenland. The original explorers used a bit of propaganda to misdirect others towards greenland while describing iceland as terrible and uninviting. The smart ones then went to iceland.

You left this out. How convenient (for you):

"In particular, he (the Judge) agreed with the main thrust of Gore’s arguments: “That climate change is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide (‘greenhouse gases’).”

The other three main points accepted by the judge were that global temperatures are rising and are likely to continue to rise, that climate change will cause serious damage if left unchecked, and that it is entirely possible for governments and individuals to reduce its impacts."

<link>

And this is in England only. Get your facts strait, dipstick.

to explain why the climate on Mars is warming at the same rate here on Earth?

Lets think about this...what do Earth and Mars have in common.....SUV's? Light Bulbs? Sun?

Just takes a little common sense people. While I realize common sense has no place in Liberalism....I also know Liberalism can't survive when the light of truth shines on it.

Right -- and that conservatism you're so proud of shines so brightly when there is light.

When liberals are faced with common sense, they are forced into name calling and attempting to discredit the facts they can't dispute. So typical.

Liberalism requires hatred and dishonesty to survive. Slate is a great forum for that!

All of your other claims have been debunked here and in previous threads. I expect you will keep on making them though.

This one about Mars is new to me. Got a link?

been debunked, except the idea that global warming is man made.

Liberals have their agenda, continue to spread lies and deception and attack anyone that dares to question them.

You guys are excellent examples.

Seriously. There are refutations of your points just a bit further up the page here. You will probably keep on using that silly ice cube in a cup analogy though and never respond to anyone that points out the underlying fallacy. Or if you do your response will be like this one, a non-response and an insult.

I didn't think you would come up with helplful data for the Mars assertion, so heres what i could find:

"Despite the absence of a time series for martian global temperatures, K.I. Abdusamatov has asserted that "parallel global warmings -- observed simultaneously on Mars and on Earth -- can only be a straightline consequence of the effect of the one same factor: a long-time change in solar irradiance."[47] Abdusamatov's hypothesis has not been published in the peer-reviewed literature, and it is not clear as to what time period he is referring. His assertion has been dismissed by other scientists, who have stated that "the idea just isn't supported by the theory or by the observations" and that it "doesn't make physical sense."[48]. Other scientists have proposed that the observed variations are caused by irregularities in the orbit of Mars.[49]"

Here is an article regarding climate change on Mars that took about a minute's searching to find. Relevant quote: The mechanism at work on Mars appears, however, to be different from that on Earth.

My related research suggests this myth may be perpetuated by Neil Boortz, and others have taken the time to address the claims. (If you check out the link, see #4.)

This is otherwise known as a distraction, SOP for the GOP when presented with facts they don't care for.

and how much land is under the ice caps? Nobody knows for certain that there is any!

<link>

so the ice cubes in a glass of water would work the same way.

I realize this information doesn't fit your political agendas....but facts are facts and lies and propganda are the basis for the entire global warming theory.

Your google must not be working properly. There is tons of documentation. Here's one you should have trouble disputing:

<link>

LOL!

"according to one scientist's controversial theory."

This is hilarious.