Gore: by his numbers, ye shall know him

I predicted this in the essay Oh yeah, I forgot. This is on.

Yesterday I got this fantabulous self congratulatory email from Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project:

Gores_CRP2013_numbers

Note the link to the recording in green at the bottom. That is something Charles the Moderator pointed out to me a couple of days ago, right after his live broadcast ended. I’ve been watching it since. Unfortunately for Gore, a giant chasm has opened between his claims and reality.

Gore, like last year, claimed really impressive numbers. Last year, we pointed out on WUWT that Gore’s number were likely inflated with bots:

…independent analysis of the data suggests that some electronic virtual viewers were involved, concluding from a mathematical analysis of the numbers that “At least 85% of total views were bots cycling every 10 seconds.”.

We’ve no reason to suspect any different this year, especially when his star is fading on the Internet and in the news. Here is how Gore is trending on Google related to his keywords:

gore_CRP2013_GoogleTreends

Source, Google Trends: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Climate%20reality%20project%2C%20Al%20Gore%2C%20Climate%20Change%2C%20Cost%20of%20Carbon%2C%20Global%20Warming&cmpt=q

It seems he didn’t even make a blip in news stories interest.  Maybe he should try twerking onstage:

AlGore-vs-Miley

Maybe, just maybe, we’ll see Gore try to get an endorsement for his cause out of Miley. Can’t wait.

For the real viewers of Al’s CRP, it seems that many views were transient, i.e. people just getting a quick look, but not bothering to stick around to take in the whole show, or even a portion of it. It seemed then, that many of the “views” were simple people engaging in “short attention span theater”.

This year seems no different. Compare the huge number of views and impressions Gore claims for his 2013 Carbonhatingpalooza with the number of views he’s getting on YouTube for his Climate Reality Project recordings. Here are the numbers from his “Climate Reality” channel on YouTube:

CRP_Youtube_views

Ouch. The New Nostradamus of the North also notices the numbers.

His headliner video, “The Cost of Carbon” compares favorably to the number of views (6773)I got for my talk on climate in July, posted on August 15th, and I don’t have his million$ to promote it, just word of mouth: (click for the video)

AWatts_DDP_numbers

It seems that Gore isn’t getting traction anymore, he’s getting the cold shoulder from news media and engaged viewers.

Maybe it’s a case of the Gore effect?

About these ads
This entry was posted in Al Gore and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

96 Responses to Gore: by his numbers, ye shall know him

  1. Pamela Gray says:

    If it was a typo keep it. A pun intended, keep it. Your honest opinion, keep it.

    You wrote: It seemed then, that many of the “views” were simple people engaging in “short attention span theater”.

    Yes, I would agree. Those folks are pretty simple with short attention spans.

  2. Jeff Alberts says:

    I’m wondering if there was ANY reality presented in his “project”. But you can bet a lot of “carbon” was spewed from the power plants running all those servers.

  3. Fred says:

    Poor Al, can’t even lie well any more.

    Putting the “B” in buffoonery.

  4. Michael D says:

    Please please do not encourage Al Gore to twerk on stage. Even the imagining of that is a malicious assault on your readers.

  5. Gary says:

    I noticed that the comments that were cycling through were generic repeats, different users saying the exact same thing over and over. You couldn’t scroll down and look because every time a new comment was added it knocked you back to the top. So I just watched. Yeah, there were occasionally some unique looking comments, but easily half (and more) were total repeats. Streams of different users making the exact same comment. That’s disingenuous, tricksey and just flat out dishonest. But I expect nothing else from Al Gore.

  6. Bloke down the pub says:

    Al who?

  7. Alan Robertson says:

    I tried watching (less than 2 minutes,) but some African droning on about giving them (him) money was too much for even my simple- minded short attention span.

  8. Bob Tisdale says:

    “Maybe he [Al Gore] should try twerking onstage”

    Made me shiver with revulsion.

  9. Alan Robertson says:

    Al Gore is thoroughly corrupt in even the smallest things. I encourage those who still give All Gore a voice to keep at it- take all the rope you need.

  10. Joe says:

    I’d always wondered what happened to Comical Ali since the fall of Saddam. Looks like he may be writing press releases for Climate Reality now!

  11. Bob Greene says:

    Bob Tisdale says:
    October 26, 2013 at 9:31 am
    “Maybe he [Al Gore] should try twerking onstage”
    Made me shiver with revulsion.
    ___________________________________________________________________
    Now, that’s something I’d have paid NOT to see. Glad my attention span was too short remember that it was on.

  12. Bryan A says:

    I wonder…
    How many of those 21K tweets were negative or how many negative tweets were “Scrubbed”
    If the page automatically refreshed every 30 or 60 seconds and then recounts the visitor numbers
    …(minute 1 = 30 current visitors, Minute 2 = 29 current visitors (but 59 total) Minute 3 = 35 visitors
    …(but 94 total) Minute 4 = 6 current visitors (but 100 total) even though they could be 6 of
    …the original 30 visitors or no more than 35 actual visitors.
    As for the Twitter/Facebook impressions, the majority of accounts will automatically retweet things to their “Friends” accounts. 10 tweets to the right 10 people would spread like a virus

  13. David J says:

    Gore twerking?, you bruised my minds eye, my imagination may be concussed.

  14. SadButMadLad says:

    Anthony, you do yourself a disservice by comparing his 30 second video trailer with your hour long in depth talk. It’s dead easy to get 7299 (when I checked) viewers on his video, especially when it plays when you visit his youtube page. Yours requires viewers to find it and watch it, so to get 6773 for yours is a good work, very good work.

  15. Duke C. says:

    24 Hours of Reality:Asia 245 views
    24 Hours of Reality:Europe 61 views

    YouTube viewers prefer a very attractive Asian woman to Al Gore by 4 to 1. I’m shocked and surprised.

  16. JimS says:

    Mr. Gore’s problem in losing popularity is that the untruths he tells are just not big enough. He should take some lessons from James Hansen, or, at least some advice from the man. For instance, if Gore said, “According to consensus of climate scientists, due to climate change, the world’s oceans are going to boil away by 2038 and it will be the end of mankind!” Now THAT would get great media attention, and people would start believing again, and would pay attention to him.

  17. richard says:

    Hello Everyone, this is the wrong place for the following but just had to pass it on. As you know my knowledge is pretty limited but like to throw a few thinks out there that takes my fancy.

    I had a brief exchange with WOTTSUPWITHTHAT to get a feel for the site. so i started with the effect of co2 (1000ppm increase) in greenhouses and those without. I questioned very politely the replies from WOWT, as they admitted they do not know why the greenhouses with and without show the the same temps as there are too many variables, i pointed out that there were even more in an open atmosphere.

    My politeness was finally rewarded with this reply,

    “I have quite an open policy with respect to comments. However, I’m not interested in an exchange with someone who appears to completely deny the greenhouse effect”

    I actually never even denied it, I just asked questions.

  18. richard says:

    things not thinks!!

  19. F. Ross says:

    Before the event, if I were to have predicted the number of Gore watchers, that prediction would have been… umm, say, 666.

  20. Peter Miller says:

    How on Earth does ~32,000 views* get to become 20,000,000.

    625 times the real figure – Even by climate alarmism standards, that’s a pretty serious exaggeration.

    * Assumed average of 112 viewers at any one time (the average of the 6 examples shown) with a viewing time of 5 minutes over a 24 hour period.

  21. Tom J says:

    ‘Maybe it’s a case of the Bore effect?’

    I was going to try and make a comment on the line above that I copied from the post, but every time I’ve tried to to copy it the spell check on my smart phone keeps changing the ‘G’ in front of ‘ore’ to a B. So I guess I can’t comment

  22. Prince Albert was all over Yahoo Finance this week, touting his thesis that the days of carbon-based energy are over, nor it appears does Fat Albert like hydrogen any better.

  23. walnut says:

    Not related, but- solar wind has been averaging amazingly low for a long time now, during the ‘zenith” of Cycle 24. I am starting to really think that earth is likely going into an ice age. Large or small, don’t know.

    So, the AGW people are simply whistling past the graveyard at this point, don’t they know that their world is collapsing?

  24. Auto says:

    F. Ross says:
    October 26, 2013 at 10:00 am
    Before the event, if I were to have predicted the number of Gore watchers, that prediction would have been… umm, say, 666.

    =====
    Yes, and in Australia, by the same logic there would be 999 [the Number of the Antipodean Beast].
    Adding the two numbers – 996 + 666 = 1665. Don’t you love numerology – that’s the year, the very year, of the Great Plague of London [the fire was the next year].

    And, do you know, I missed the Gore-a-thon completely.

    Auto

  25. Alan Robertson says:

    milodonharlani says:
    October 26, 2013 at 10:16 am

    Prince Albert was all over Yahoo Finance this week, touting his thesis that the days of carbon-based energy are over, nor it appears does Fat Albert like hydrogen any better.
    ____________________________
    Hydrogen isn’t really a fuel, per se. Energy must be expended to convert water into Hydrogen to be used as fuel, with attendant efficiency losses. Therefore, Hydrogen is more of a battery.

  26. lorne50 says:

    For the real viewers of Al’s CRP, it seems that many views were transient, i.e. people just getting a quick look, but not bothering to stick around to take in the whole show, or even a portion of it. It seemed then, that many of the “views” were simple people engaging in “short attention span theater”.

    spell check you missed the “A” in there. ;>)

  27. Jeff Alberts says:

    Tom J says:
    October 26, 2013 at 10:15 am

    ‘Maybe it’s a case of the Bore effect?’

    I was going to try and make a comment on the line above that I copied from the post, but every time I’ve tried to to copy it the spell check on my smart phone keeps changing the ‘G’ in front of ‘ore’ to a B. So I guess I can’t comment

    The trick is to be smarter than your phone. ;)

  28. Jeff says:

    As William F. Buckley said, “I’d rather be gored by a boar than bored by a Gore”….

  29. lorne50 says:

    Seems there be only 1 lorne 50 and 2 Jeff s on this boggle. ;>)

  30. G. Karst says:

    It is simply a God complex. There are many who think they can speak reality into existence. GK

  31. milodonharlani says:

    Alan Robertson says:
    October 26, 2013 at 10:25 am

    I should have explained. I was referring to the increasing share of hydrogen in the hydrocarbons upon which humans rely, ie from wood to coal to oil to gas.

  32. Policy Guy says:

    What an expensive, purposely deceptive Joke he has capitalized on for his own financial reward. He doesn’t see jail time because i’m not aware of anyone who has ever pulled off a scam against the world, of this size, ever before.

  33. Grant says:

    Don’t much care if he inflated the numbers. I don’t think people will pay any more attention to this press release than they did his gore-a-thon. He’s the Paris Hilton of climate change, and it pays off monetarily for him. That’s the whole point of the press release- to make sure the donations from the faithful keep rolling in. All that he has to do is stroke those egos and the hearts of people who really think that CAGW is a global catastrophe, and his jet setting, look at me I’m Jesus life continues without a hitch.
    They are, after all, Clinate Champions.

  34. lorne50 says:

    Grant says:
    October 26, 2013 at 11:57 am

    Yes Yes just buy your own carbon credits from yourself for your house’s and privet jet all good in GORE WORLD . ;>)

  35. lorne50 says:

    sorry private
    not privet damm

  36. John Whitman says:

    Gore has a messianic replacement, he is just unaware that he has almost been replaced. He hasn’t been sent the memo.

    His replacement is . . . Dana.

    Which is the ultimate insult to Gore. He has been replaced by a Cookbot.

    John

  37. elmer says:

    Another Convenient Lie by big Al.

  38. u.k.(us) says:

    So, you lose out on the Presidency because your voters can’t figure out how to punch a ballot.
    Then, those who are a bit more informed stop listening to you.
    Maybe democracy does work !!

  39. Gunga Din says:

    Notice the shift in terminology. “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”. Now CO2 to just “Carbon”. Even Mann used it in his recent twit. Is this the next “bait and switch”?
    People noticed the globe wasn’t warming like they said it would. Switch to demonizing normal weather changes.
    CO2 rising didn’t do what they said it would. Switch to just Carbon.
    They’ve got to control something to justify preventing something.
    To paraphrase the old “Dragnet” TV show:
    “The story we’ve just told you is spew.
    The names are changing to exploit the innocent.”

  40. KNR says:

    Nether the BBC or Guardian even mentioned it on what was a slow news day so even in friendly areas it passed by without notice.

  41. rogerknights says:

    “Do you have Prince Albert in a can?”

    Yes.

    “Well, don’t let him out!”

  42. TomL says:

    I wanted so badly to watch the Gore-a-Thon but priorities you know…
    that sock drawer needed sorting.

  43. George McFly......I'm your density says:

    Anthony, I think you made a typo. You wrote Al’s CRP…..I think it should be Al’s CRaP…

  44. Otter says:

    ‘Even Mann used it in his recent twit.’

    Gunga Din, there’s nothing recent about mann’s twit-ness.

  45. tango says:

    Al Gore blame PM Tony Abbott for the Sydney bush fires what a load of bull dust, the greenies are the blame because they stopped burning and the fuel load is at danger levels.http://www.news.com.au/national/al-gore-enters-nsw-bushfire-climate-debate-criticises-pm-tony-abbott/story-fncynjr2-1226745826229

  46. MrX says:

    If Gore doesn’t present reality when talking about climate change, why would he stop there?

  47. Graham of Sydney says:

    “It seems that Gore isn’t getting traction anymore, he’s getting the cold shoulder from news media and engaged viewers.”
    Save our lickspittle climate crazy ABC, that is. If you have the stomach for it, watch the chiselling asp perform on the video of our 7.30 Report, especially his resort to the infantile tobacco-cancer crock.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-23/al-gore-weighs-into-debate-over-bushfire-climate-change/5041776
    Tim Blair has his measure at
    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/oil_and_smoke/

  48. Matthew W says:

    “It seems that Gore isn’t getting traction anymore, he’s getting the cold shoulder from news media and engaged viewers.”

    And yet he is still raking in a fortune !!

  49. SanityP says:

    The Gore/Bore effect, is that the same as an inverse Streisand?

  50. Steven R. Vada says:

    Al Gore came forth before the nations declaring himself to be a messenger of light;

    of a giant infrared light on, in the atmosphere, 24/7/365.25.

    A giant infrared light: he came with a message: the light is the proof of your sins!

    Pay me money, says Mr Gore, for your sins. The light is evidence of your evil.

    But now we have all checked.

    And the light you claimed you were a messenger of
    isn’t there.

    It’s not there for any set of instruments known to mankind;

    not to the infrared astronomy groups of the world eagerly looking for sign of your Backerdistical glowing burner on, in the sky.

    Not the infrared sensor field, which looked in vain for fourteen years, for the

    magic light

    you try to tell the real science and real scientists of the world is there,

    too bright to not be afraid of,

    too dim to even move an infrared sensor specifically designed to detect it.

    N.O.A.A. themselves checked your story for fourteen years.

    There was a magical light connected to CO2. As CO2 rose, so also would the magic light.

    They checked your and their own story.

    Guess what Mr. Gore.

    Where you and the deceivers of all mankind claim there is more and more light,

    N.O.A.A. discovered there was only darkness. For where you said there was more

    there was less. That is, as in “less light, more darkness.”

    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2011JCLI4210.1?journalCode=clim

    Unto all of you who believed in the deceivers who claimed they were messengers to you about a great light:

    they were
    and are
    all lying.

  51. wayne says:

    ( Peter Miller… ‘²’ )

    Don’t tell him (et al) that they have been ‘square’d. lol.
    Their ‘reality’ has its ‘root’s in today’s evil that you see and produces 0 good.
    What lying souls they are.

    ‘Crypt’ic enough for al (et al) to understand?

    Maybe all of that only means that Al Gore and masters should square root the egos and leave mankind alone.

    ( Monitoring Al? Got that good advice ol’ Al baby? Doubt it. )

  52. John Whitman says:

    Al’s theology, which creates the pagan climate religion called CAGW (aka CACC), is based on three kinds of lies: each, every and damned always.

    John

  53. Lew Skannen says:

    “I don’t have his million$ to promote it, just word of mouth: ”

    and TRUTH.

  54. Tom Harley says:

    Gore’s popularity with the ‘simple’ folk must be waning. As one of the Conservation Council of WA’s (Neville Numbat) ‘friends’, I received a Facebook invite to their event. Despite almost 5000 friends, only 9 saw fit to ‘like’ the few photos taken. Their Fb page says nothing else about it, which is most unusual. Just a few images: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152001843429595&set=at.10150658848374595.446855.546019594.100000323898370&type=1&theater
    Their next campaign is something to do with banning plastic or … simple is right.
    Of course, I didn’t go, despite the comedy it would have offered, I had to clip my toe-nails instead, as I don’t wear socks to fold.

  55. philjourdan says:

    The gore effect is a chill. So metaphorically it could be. But it seems closer to the ACA Website effect.

  56. Lew Skannen said @ October 26, 2013 at 3:59 pm

    “I don’t have his million$ to promote it, just word of mouth: ”

    and TRUTH.

    Sorry to have to contradict you old bean, but you are wrong. None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly. What Anthony appears to possess in great measure is integrity:

    Uncompromising adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

  57. My previous comment is still in moderation over an hour after I made it. I must have said something bad I guess, though I can’t imagine what was bad about my comment. Divided by a common language…

  58. Murphy Mahoney says:

    Regardless of your view on whether human activity is contributing to climate change, I hope we can agree that the flaring of waste natural gas from North Dakota oil and gas fields is a terrible waste that should be quickly addressed. See nyt article at. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/business/energy-environment/oil-companies-are-sued-over-natural-gas-flaring-in-north-dakota.html?_r=0 see photo USA at night at https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=669252339766791&set=a.363261490365879.89584.299041440121218&type=1&relevant_count=1

  59. Alan Robertson says:

    The Pompous Git says:
    October 27, 2013 at 1:40 am

    Sorry to have to contradict you old bean, but you are wrong. None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly
    __________________________
    I couldn’t disagree more. The glue of tyranny is the idea that the truth of a circumstance is malleable.

  60. richardscourtney says:

    Alan Robertson:

    In response to The Pompous Git having said the obvious reality

    None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly

    at October 27, 2013 at 7:22 am you say

    I couldn’t disagree more. The glue of tyranny is the idea that the truth of a circumstance is malleable.

    Really?
    Whose “truth” would that be? The victor’s? The loser’s? Yours? Or …?

    Richard

  61. rogerknights says:

    The Pompous Git says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:38 am

    My previous comment is still in moderation over an hour after I made it. I must have said something bad I guess, though I can’t imagine what was bad about my comment. Divided by a common language…

    Your post contained our host’s name in unaltered form. Such posts are always held for inspection because they might be an attempt to contact him directly. Use something like “Ant–ny”.

  62. Alan Robertson says:

    richardscourtney says:
    October 27, 2013 at 7:33 am

    Alan Robertson:

    In response to The Pompous Git having said the obvious reality

    None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly

    at October 27, 2013 at 7:22 am you say

    I couldn’t disagree more. The glue of tyranny is the idea that the truth of a circumstance is malleable.

    Really?
    Whose “truth” would that be? The victor’s? The loser’s? Yours? Or …?

    Richard
    _________________________
    The reports of a circumstance are not to be regarded as the truth of the circumstance.

  63. richardscourtney says:

    Alan Robertson:

    It is good to have reached agreement of all parties.

    The Pompous Git had said the obvious reality

    None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly

    Following discussion, at October 27, 2013 at 8:30 am, you have now said

    The reports of a circumstance are not to be regarded as the truth of the circumstance.

    Yes, and sometimes a circumstance is reported by our own eyes and ears.

    Richard

  64. “What is Truth?” Is it felt in the glands?
    Is it bracketed by error bands?
    Do you make a decision
    “It is thus, with precision!”
    And then walk off and go wash your hands?

    I suspect that we’re saying two things:
    There’s a truth that good evidence brings
    “Did he say these words? Yes.”
    It is more than a guess
    But in science, a different truth rings.

    “What’s this measurement here?” “‘Bout an inch.”
    But it’s greater or less by a pinch
    ‘Till you get quantum-scaled
    Then precision’s derailed
    And you can’t be exact. That’s a cinch.

    In the climate arena we try
    To get “truth” from the sea, land and sky
    But to our great frustration
    We have approximation
    Of too few points: Partial-truth lie.

    Then we feed too few points to a model
    Which we run again, tinker and coddle
    Clouds and sea waterboarded
    ‘Till it’s all quite distorted
    If that’s “truth,” someone’s hitting the bottle!

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  65. Alan Robertson says:

    Richard,
    My response to you did not alter my original statement in any way. We proceed with either knowledge, or belief (and doubt.) The Git (bless ‘im) was alluding to a philosophical stance which proclaims a lack of human ability to understand the reality of a circumstance, through our varied perceptions. I disagree with that philosophy. Truth of a circumstance is like a stone wall… anyone believing that the truth of the wall is illusory can prove their “truth” by walking through that wall.

    The world gives us many examples of those who would substitute belief, or doubt, for knowledge. Stalin famously airbrushed old photos to delete the visages of those he had murdered. His new “truth” did not alter the reality of the original circumstance. One can occasionally witness this or that public figure alluding to the illusion of truth- in such instance, beware. That individual has picked up the glove of Lenin and Goebbels and Caesar.

  66. Alan Robertson says:

    Keith DeHavelle says:
    October 27, 2013 at 9:50 am
    “…”
    _______________
    Well done.

  67. rogerknights said @ October 27, 2013 at 7:47 am

    Your post contained our host’s name in unaltered form. Such posts are always held for inspection because they might be an attempt to contact him directly. Use something like “Ant–ny”.

    Aah! The penny drops. How obtuse of me. Yet another terminological inexactitude is called for.

  68. Alan Robertson said @ October 27, 2013 at 9:56 am

    Richard,
    My response to you did not alter my original statement in any way. We proceed with either knowledge, or belief (and doubt.) The Git (bless ‘im) was alluding to a philosophical stance which proclaims a lack of human ability to understand the reality of a circumstance, through our varied perceptions. I disagree with that philosophy. Truth of a circumstance is like a stone wall… anyone believing that the truth of the wall is illusory can prove their “truth” by walking through that wall.

    I reiterate what I posted on another thread:

    “What we should do, I suggest, is to give up the idea of ultimate sources of knowledge, and admit that all knowledge is human; that it is mixed with our errors, our prejudices, our dreams, and our hopes; that all we can do is to grope for truth even though it be beyond our reach. We may admit that our groping is often inspired, but we must be on our guard against the belief, however deeply felt, that our inspiration carries any authority, divine or otherwise. If we thus admit that there is no authority beyond the reach of criticism to be found within the whole province of our knowledge, however far it may have penetrated into the unknown, then we can retain, without danger, the idea that truth is beyond human authority. And we must retain it. For without this idea there can be no objective standards of inquiry; no criticism of our conjectures; no groping for the unknown; no quest for knowledge.”

    ― Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

  69. richardscourtney says:

    Alan Robertson:

    I am copying all your post at October 27, 2013 at 9:56 am because I think it important so I don’t want people to have trouble finding it.

    Richard,
    My response to you did not alter my original statement in any way. We proceed with either knowledge, or belief (and doubt.) The Git (bless ‘im) was alluding to a philosophical stance which proclaims a lack of human ability to understand the reality of a circumstance, through our varied perceptions. I disagree with that philosophy. Truth of a circumstance is like a stone wall… anyone believing that the truth of the wall is illusory can prove their “truth” by walking through that wall.

    The world gives us many examples of those who would substitute belief, or doubt, for knowledge. Stalin famously airbrushed old photos to delete the visages of those he had murdered. His new “truth” did not alter the reality of the original circumstance. One can occasionally witness this or that public figure alluding to the illusion of truth- in such instance, beware. That individual has picked up the glove of Lenin and Goebbels and Caesar.

    Yes, and Keith DeHavelle provides an excellent introduction to the large subject of “what is truth?” with his poem at October 27, 2013 at 9:50 am.

    Truth is that which IS and it exists independently of any understanding and/or perception of what it is.

    We seek truth but can never know if we find it.

    Knowledge is what our best understandings and evidence indicate to be truth. Science is a method which attempts to find the knowledge which is the closest available approximation to objective truth.

    Belief (or faith) is what our understandings of our experiences indicate. Religion is a set of methods which attempt to provide the closest available approximation to subjective truth.

    But we can never know if our knowledge and our faith are ‘truth’. They are tools which we use in our search for truth.

    Falsehoods are statements which divert from truth. Not all falsehoods are lies. Some falsehoods are misunderstandings or errors of those who provide them.

    Lies are deliberate statements which purport to provide knowledge or faith but – in reality – are attempts to divert people away from truth. Evil people lie and they do it in attempt to acquire power, influence, riches or some other personal desire.

    The problem is that when we observe a falsehood then we cannot always tell if it is a lie. And, as you say, there are people throughout history who have made use of that to promote lies. Therefore, as The Pompous Git had reminded us, we need to be constantly aware that

    None of us have access to TRUTH, though we may peer at such through a glass darkly

    Richard

  70. Alan Robertson says:

    The Pompous Git says:
    October 27, 2013 at 10:14 am

    “…grope for truth even though it be beyond our reach…”
    __________________________
    We’ve wandered into a mind field.

  71. Alan Robertson said @ October 27, 2013 at 10:27 am

    __________________________
    We’ve wandered into a mind field.

    Ain’t that the truth? :-)))))

  72. John Whitman says:

    The Pompous Git on October 27, 2013 at 10:34 am said,

    Alan Robertson said @ October 27, 2013 at 10:27 am

    We’ve wandered into a mind field.

    Ain’t that the truth? :-)))))

    - – - – - – - -

    The Pompous Git & Alan Robertson,

    Yeah, but some of the mines when stepped on, result not in chemical explosions but in comical explosions of laughter.

    For an example of the latter kind of mine, consider seriously claiming the knowledge that humanity cannot by its nature know the truth. It begs the eternal question of the truth of the claim. What premise allows that paradoxical claim?

    A very funny one.

    John

  73. richardscourtney says:

    The Pompous Git:

    Thankyou very much indeed for your post at October 27, 2013 at 11:17 am which says

    Beware perception; it’s imperfect:
    http://www.123opticalillusions.com/pages/albert-einstein-marilyn-monroe.php

    That is a superb demonstration – better than a thousand words – of what I meant when I wrote of

    The reports of a circumstance are not to be regarded as the truth of the circumstance.

    saying

    Yes, and sometimes a circumstance is reported by our own eyes and ears.

    Now, is there any truth in the assertions of Mr Gore?
    Or is Mr Gore promoting falsehoods?
    If he is promoting falsehoods then is he a liar or does he see ‘Marilyn’ when everybody else sees ‘Albert’?

    Richard

  74. John Whitman said @ October 27, 2013 at 11:57 am

    For an example of the latter kind of mine, consider seriously claiming the knowledge that humanity cannot by its nature know the truth. It begs the eternal question of the truth of the claim. What premise allows that paradoxical claim?

    Since you seem far more certain of what “truth” is, perhaps you could enlighten us with the one true and correct theory of truth. Is it the Correspondence theory, Coherence theory, Constructivist theory, Consensus theory, Pragmatic theory, a Deflationary theory, Performative theory, Redundancy theory, or one of the many Pluralist theories of truth? Philosophers who debate such matters seem rather divided on the issue and remain so after hundreds of years.

  75. Alan Robertson says:

    richardscourtney says:
    October 27, 2013 at 11:58 am

    Now, is there any truth in the assertions of Mr Gore?
    Or is Mr Gore promoting falsehoods?
    If he is promoting falsehoods then is he a liar or does he see ‘Marilyn’ when everybody else sees ‘Albert’?
    __________________________
    That’s funny and many suspect that you pegged that lisping *$%#@%&@.
    As to whether he knowingly promotes falsehoods- my take’s that he is a liar of the worst sort.

  76. richardscourtney said @ October 27, 2013 at 11:58 am

    Now, is there any truth in the assertions of Mr Gore?
    Or is Mr Gore promoting falsehoods?
    If he is promoting falsehoods then is he a liar or does he see ‘Marilyn’ when everybody else sees ‘Albert’?

    I’m more inclined to the view that Mr Gore is a bullshitter, rather than a liar:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit

  77. richardscourtney says:

    Alan Robertson and The Pompous Git:

    Thankyou for your assessments of Mr Gore’s veracity in your posts at October 27, 2013 at 12:31 pm and October 27, 2013 at 12:37 pm, respectively.

    Obviously, your being Americans and his having been an American Vice President, you are much better able to make such an assessment than I can.

    However, I respectfully point out that your assessments are not mutually exclusive, and from this side of the pond it seems to me that you are both right.

    Richard

  78. milodonharlani says:

    richardscourtney says:
    October 27, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    The Pompous Git is Tasmanian, with an interesting Web site of his own.

  79. Chad Wozniak says:

    @KNR -
    It doesn’t seem to have surfaced on total-leftist, total-climate-alarmist Yahoo News either – instead they ran something by the Motley Fool saying don’t listen to Bloody Mess telling you not to buy energy stocks.

    As I’ve previously posted, it appears possible that Bloody Mess is jawboning to drive energy stock prices down so that he can make money on short sales. There are enough people around who are dense enough to fall for this, and it would conform to the moral standards of a hypocrite with one of the world’s largest personal carbon footprints criticizing John Q. Public for driving an SUV.

  80. richardscourtney says:

    milodonharlani:

    Thankyou for your correction of me in your post at October 27, 2013 at 12:57 pm.

    I remember that now, and I should not have forgotten it because on another thread he told me where he lives and that he has some circumstances which inhibit him traveling for example to visit the UK which is the place of his birth.

    Clearly, my faulty memory has caused me to insult The Pompous Git. This was not intentional, I have no excuse, and I abjectly apologise.

    Richard

  81. John Whitman says:

    The Pompous Git on October 27, 2013 at 12:29 pm said,

    John Whitman said @ October 27, 2013 at 11:57 am

    For an example of the latter kind of mine, consider seriously claiming the knowledge that humanity cannot by its nature know the truth. It begs the eternal question of the truth of the claim. What premise allows that paradoxical claim?

    Since you seem far more certain of what “truth” is, perhaps you could enlighten us with the one true and correct theory of truth. Is it the Correspondence theory, Coherence theory, Constructivist theory, Consensus theory, Pragmatic theory, a Deflationary theory, Performative theory, Redundancy theory, or one of the many Pluralist theories of truth? Philosophers who debate such matters seem rather divided on the issue and remain so after hundreds of years.

    - – - – - – - -

    The Pompous Git,

    Thanks for engaging.

    My original question remains without response. “What premise allows that paradoxical claim?” How does the claimant establish it own truth value of the claim? => It cannot do so by its own claim. It is absurd.

    Now as to your redirection from my original question, you ask me what is truth in a fundamental sense? Answer: It is what reality in a fundamental sense confirms.

    Of course that answer requires a metaphysics, a treatment of what reality is. Shall we go there? That is where absurd claims about humanity’s incapacity to know truth are derived.

    John

  82. milodonharlani says:

    richardscourtney says:
    October 27, 2013 at 1:08 pm

    I hope TPG doesn’t consider being thought American an insult or unforgivable slight. I knew a Tasmanian woman at Oxford who didn’t consider herself Australian.

  83. richardscourtney says:

    milodonharlani:

    re your post addressed to me at October 27, 2013 at 1:13 pm.

    NO! The insult – for which I apologised – was failing to remember the personal information which TPG had provided to me. I stated that information so my meaning was clear.

    Richard

  84. John Whitman said @ October 27, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    Thanks for engaging.

    My original question remains without response. “What premise allows that paradoxical claim?” How does the claimant establish it own truth value of the claim? => It cannot do so by its own claim. It is absurd.

    Now as to your redirection from my original question, you ask me what is truth in a fundamental sense? Answer: It is what reality in a fundamental sense confirms.

    Of course that answer requires a metaphysics, a treatment of what reality is. Shall we go there? That is where absurd claims about humanity’s incapacity to know truth are derived.

    The OED defines reality as: “that which underlies and is the truth of appearances or phenomena.” Oh dear, we seem to be deep into the “mindfield” that Alan Robertson so jocularly referred to earlier. I’m afraid I have been unable (so far) to separate reality from my perceptions.

    We can, of course discuss metaphysics if you wish; it’s a subject that fascinates me immensely. At this very moment, I can happily report not being in pain. In several hours time, I will be able to report that my arthritis is causing me pain since I am about to spend some time gardening. Yet you will not experience my pain; it is entirely a matter of my perceptions. Does this mean that my pain is not real since it cannot be confirmed?

    My best friend in school was later the head of the Victorian Skeptics and now refuses to communicate with me because I do not believe that there is a singular objective reality, just our individual perceptions of such. A murky area for discussion and without the principle of charity, much room for bitterness.

  85. Alan Robertson says:

    milodonharlani says:
    October 27, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    richardscourtney says:
    October 27, 2013 at 12:55 pm

    The Pompous Git is Tasmanian, with an interesting Web site of his own.
    ______________________
    Aye, a devil, that one. :)

  86. @ Richard and milodonharlani

    I’m not in the least insulted! On any ground whatsoever. I knew a woman who was a university lecturer who claimed she was “working class” because she worked for a living. Now I was born working class in Nuneaton, Warwickshire (in the heart of the Black Country). I found the lecturer’s remark at the very least condescending and perilously close to insulting.

    Richard, you will have to try very much harder should you ever wish to insult me :-)

    And now I must away to the garden for it has rained, and rained, and blown several mighty gales before raining again for several weeks on end.

  87. Alan Robertson said @ October 27, 2013 at 1:48 pm

    Aye, a devil, that one. :)

    Though mercifully free of the dreaded facial tumour. Nevertheless, ugly enough for all that :-)

  88. DDP says:

    For a man who invented the internet, you would think he’d know that all online activity leaves an electronic paper trail. I guess he can’t fake the result of something that is out of his hands.

  89. Alan Robertson says:

    DDP says:
    October 27, 2013 at 3:08 pm

    For a man who invented the internet, you would think he’d know that all online activity leaves an electronic paper trail. I guess he can’t fake the result of something that is out of his hands.
    ____________________________
    I once heard Lesley Stahl (an American TV- news talking head) praising All Gore for his brilliance in financial matters, as he had by thenhaving made over $100 million,by “putting his money where his mouth is” (per Lesley) regarding carbon trading schemes, etc.

    I would have liked to have asked her if she also thought Bernie Madoff was brilliant.

  90. NikFromNYC says:

    Direct Instapundit plug:
    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/178209/

    “AL GORE strikes out again. / But if Al Gore strikes out, and no one is watching, does it make a difference?”

  91. Jimbo says:

    Al Gore is a dedicated climate change campaigner. He often likens sceptics to tobacco lobbyists, while he took tobacco money while his sister was dying in hospital from lung cancer. Of course his family never became rich off Occidental Petroleum which enabled them not to become rich from oil. Of course he never sold his Current TV to Qatar oil funded Al Jazeera. Of course he has not dis-invested from ‘green’ investments because he does not believe in C02 CAGW. Al Gore is not worried about climate change but about his legacy after the ‘Inconvenient Truth’ and about making lots of money, ONE BILLION or there abouts, based on scaring people.

    We must act now!!! Not me thanks. It’s a con job, A Convenient Fraud.

  92. Is AlGore still trying to get BJ’s from 60 year old masseuses??

  93. I did not know the numbers were that high…but then again Lady Gaga has high numbers as well.

  94. John C says:

    Al has and always will be, full of CRaP.

Comments are closed.