![an inconvenient truth debunked an inconvenient truth debunked](https://smallpond.ca/jim/ref/inconvenientTruth/full/00_16_08.jpg)
Instead, he points to disinformation put out by organized climate denialists as a more likely explanation.įor Nordhaus and Shellenberger, Gore and his documentary are a favorite talking point and topic for bashing. “We simply have insufficient data,” he adds. No reputable researcher would make the claim that Al Gore contributed to partisanship on climate change, he says. Professor McCright was also dismissive of Nordhaus and Shellenberger. “As far as I can see, there is ZERO empirical evidence that supports hypothesis.” Apparently, he says, the New York Times does not fact check op-eds. “Shellenberger and Nordhaus are definitely missing what I argue in my paper,” Brulle wrote in an email. When this op-ed was refuted by one of the documentary’s expert advisors, the duo doubled down on the claim, citing multiple lines of research, including studies by professors Aaron McCright of Michigan State University and Robert Brulle of Drexel. To buttress their claims, the duo cite Al Gore, and his 2006 documentary on climate change “An Inconvenient Truth.” According to Nordhaus and Shellenberger, Gore’s documentary “contributed to public backlash and division” on climate change. In their article, Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger state that the documentary will raise public skepticism about climate change because it uses scare tactics. One writer describes them as a “program for hippie-punching your way to fame and fortune.” So it was not shocking to see their column last Wednesday in the New York Times criticizing a new documentary on climate change that was put together by award-winning journalists. The Breakthrough Institute has a clear history as a contrarian outlet for information on climate change and regularly criticizes environmental groups. Since that catastrophe, the Breakthrough Institute has ramped up their PR, doing everything they can to protect their Senior Fellow through twitter and claims that he is highly cited in the scientific literature. Responding to the outcry, Silver commissioned a counter piece written by Kerry Emanuel “ MIT Climate Scientist Responds on Disaster Costs And Climate Change,” an article that essentially debunked Pielke’s original storyline on hurricanes and climate change. In a March 19 post at Nate Silver’s new FiveThirtyEight journalism site, Breakthrough Institute Senior Fellow Roger Pielke wrote a piece titled “ Disasters Cost More than Ever-But Not Because of Climate Change.” The article was highly criticized for cherry picking information on climate change impacts, with Slate labeling it an “ Unnatural Disaster” and an embarrassment to Silver’s new venture. If you’ve been following recent news on climate change, then you must have witnessed the recent meltdown happening over at the Breakthrough Institute. A case in point is the Breakthrough Institute run by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger, which describes itself as a "progressive think tank."
![an inconvenient truth debunked an inconvenient truth debunked](https://pics.me.me/an-inconvenient-truth-a-global-not-evil-just-wrong-the-25104443.png)
Recent research has also pointed out that think tanks suffer from a lack of intellectual rigor. Apple, Elon Musk, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, among many, many others, have all said words to the effect of, as Tim Cook said in an email to all employees, “We will never waver, because we know that future generations depend on us.While sometimes functioning as shadow universities, think tanks have been exposed as quasi lobbying organizations, with little funding transparency. Gore’s stress on collective action has proven valid: states, companies, and individuals have rallied to show their support for the Paris Agreement. President Trump’s decision is profoundly in conflict with what the majority of Americans want from our president but no matter what he does, we will ensure that our inevitable transition to a clean energy economy continues. We are in the middle of a clean energy revolution that no single person or group can stop. But make no mistake: if President Trump won’t lead, the American people will.Ĭivic leaders, mayors, governors, CEOs, investors, and the majority of the business community will take up this challenge. It undermines America’s standing in the world and threatens to damage humanity’s ability to solve the climate crisis in time. Removing the United States from the Paris Agreement is a reckless and indefensible action.