Gore to throw insults on 60 minutes

There will be a story featuring Al Gore and his climate views on CBS 60 minutes this weekend. Normally I don’t pay much heed to this program, but Gore is publicly calling those who question the science “…almost like the ones who still believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona and those who believe the world is flat…”.

To me, a person who has at one time been fully engaged in the belief that CO2 was indeed the root cause of the global warming problem, I find Gore’s statements insulting. In 1990 after hearing what James Hansen and others had to say, I helped to arrange a national education campaign for TV meteorologists nationwide (ironically with CBS’s help) on the value of planting trees to combat the CO2 issue. I later changed my thinking when I learned more about the science involved and found it to be lacking.

I’ve never made a call to action on media reporting before on this blog, but this cannot go unchallenged.

The press release from CBS on the upcoming story on Gore is below. You can visit the CBS website here and post comments:


See the video clip here

But let’s also let the producer, Richard Bonin, know (via their communications contact) what you think about it, as I did when Scott Pelley aired a whole hour long special telling us Antarctica was melting. They did no follow up.

Kevin Tedesco KEV@cbsnews.com
Director, CBS News Communications (”60 Minutes”)
That email is listed on the CBS website, so it is fair to send comments to it. In fact, here is a contact list they have on their website where you can comment about this story. I feel it is important to respond and to spread the word to others. While I have not seen the video segment, let us hope that it has some semblance of balance, because the press release certainly does not.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Frank Ravizza

The Noble Laurite would never commit to a forum where his view could be challenged. After all, those who believe the climate is affected by natural forces, are “fringe elements, flat earth believers, moon landing conspiracists, holocaust deniers”. I don’t expect 60 minutes to be at all subjective by letting any opposing view point be heard.

Where did The Alliance for Climate Protection get $300 million to throw away on ads? That’s a mind boggling number.

George M

You will notice that she did not ask him how much profit his carbon credits business is expected to make. I am trying to get that business compared to Enron’s rise and fall.

Larry Sheldon

If my wife can’t get me to watch the Adams programs (it is thought that I am a decendant, I am very interested in that history) what hope is there y’all will bet me to watch 60 minutes.
Not going to happen.
There is no chance that anything useful will be aired without fatal flaws.

This is the same network that reported the “forged but accurate” memos from Bush’s days at the air national guard.
Even worse, CBS cancelled Jericho – twice!
So don’t expect much.

Alan D. McIntire

In response to Frank Ravizza: I DO expect CBS to be SUBJECTIVE, not objective- I made it a point to never watch any CBS “news” stories back in the 1980s, after they did that scurrilous hit piece on General Westmoreland- A. McIntire

Kristen Byrnes

It’s too bad the show will not be on tomorrow. We’re getting 8 inches of snow tonight and another snowday from school so I would have time to watch it.

This is pathetic. Al Gore has refused every offer to debate the evidence, and yet feels entitled to insult those who disagree with him.
As an aside, it only just occurred to me that a large proportion of the people going into environmental science are already going to be favorably disposed to the notion of man as destroyer of nature, and so favorably disposed towards the man made global warming nonsense, even before they look at the evidence (if they even bother)

John Andrews

When the IPCC and friends figure out the role of clouds in climate and understand how to model it for the coming century, then and only then will I become a believer in their prognostications. In the meantime, they are hacks, and true believers, but still hacks.
I’m sorry to see CBS and others in the TV media giving only one side to this multifaceted question.
John Andrews, Knoxville, Tennessee


A $300 million ad campaign? Sorry but I’m calling shenanigans. That is allot of money.
I would love to do the auditting on that.


No, no not “carbon credits”. Indulgences. Wipe away your carbon sins for a few florins.
He’d burn the heretics at the stake but, your know, CO2…


More apt, BarryW, would be to focus sunlight through giant lenses on the heretics.


I would like to know if the financial books for The Alliance for Climate Protection are open for public record. If they are closed (as I suspect they are), then him giving it money is realy just a tax shelter. Anyone know if the answer to this one?


This CBS froofraw and the $300m ad campaign are just more fuel for the fire. Let the boobs and flatheads caterwaul. They will, in due course, get gobsmacked by the facts on the ground. (It’s beginning to happen already.)
All this nonsense is a repeat of panic cycles from the recent past (Population, Pollution, Cold War, Resources). They faded away fairly quietly. But then, none of them really got the same the publicity this GW shindig is receiving. As a result, it will not be so easy to cause the elephant to tippytoe away quietly stage-left.
But in order for society-at-large to learn the lesson properly, it is necessary that the hooting and hollering be long and loud. What Gore is doing is going to result in a grand intellectual self-imollation. I advise that we stand well back and enjoy the bonfire–while carefully staking out our position on the blogosphere and elsewhere.
We will sit back and grin as we archive the juicier quotes for future use. We are not going to meekly turn the page when the wheels come flying off this jalopy. Not this time! We are going to strike a blow for empiricism, interdisciplinarianism, and traditional scientific method and against the “new scientism” that is going to echo for decades.
This object lesson alone may prove worth all the $trillions that these chickenheaded chuckleheads blow on this foolishness. Fortunately (for the lives of millions), India, China, and Africa (so far) are more or less ignoring the claptrap.
In the meantime, sticking a few pins in CBS is well advised. We have to make them aware of our objections beforehand, so they won’t be able to accuse us of being Johnny-come-latelies. We must deploy ourselves in proparation for a devastating “told you so” stern-rake.
But be of good cheer, Rev. This is going to be fun. One of those “bigger they are the harder they fall” deals. Think “elephant off the Empire State building”. And (like it or lump it) your role in the New Enlightenment–mankind’s Restoration of Reason–is not going to be forgotten!

Unlike Anthony I have never bought into the belief that CO2 was the root cause of global warming, nor have I bought into the belief it is any more a problem than the climate of 1998, 1987, 1978, 1856, 1432, etc. However, like Anthony, I consider myself a dedicated environmentalist. I too am offended and insulted by the statements Mr. Gore makes regarding those who disagree with his AGW views.
I want to see money spent solving a real problem, not a rallying cry. Right now I see Mr. Gore and the media engaging more and more in a form of doublethink. Perhaps we call it doublescience. With apologies to Orwell, doublescience is:
To tell deliberately create data while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact or datum that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably necessary.
I truly fear that focusing on the “global warming” rallying cry is going to end up discrediting environmentalist causes when the incredibly alarmist and dire predictions don’t pan out.


KB: Har! Har!
No, no not “carbon credits”. Indulgences. Wipe away your carbon sins for a few florins.
“Further sins require further expense.”


kim (18:55:00): I’m with ya. Burning heretics at the stake is so 20th century.
Come to think of it, I don’t suppose it would be that hard to fit spits around the concentrator tubes on the new solar thermal plants that are beginning to spring up like weeds in the southwest desert. Metaphorically speaking, it could lead to a beef jerky Renaissance. In fact I have a whole Bubba Gump menu working out in my head. How about this: Nattering Nabob Kabobs. Jamaican jerked deniers. Honey baked heretics. Blackened rednecks. Grilled Inhofe, tomato, and cheese melt (with or without jalapenos, of course).

Mike C

Is it just me or is Al looking older and angrier? Perhaps because not even scientists at the IPCC believe his claims?

Steve H

Eagles up!
Document how much this has cost you personally and what Albert Gore claims as his achievements.
I smell a personal lawsuit in the future…

Bill in Vigo

A very sad day for Television News Journalism.
I agree with John G. this may cause great damage to environmental concerns and it will certainly make laughingstock of many institutions that have jumped on the band wagon for monetary reasons. The great concern is will the fall out against “real climate scientists” include those that were truly telling the truth and will it overpower other scientific disiplines.
History shows that times of global cooling are generally times of loss of knowledge as the priorities change to more survival mode. In this case it appears that there are some “scientists” that are causing this distrust almost intentionally while chasing the glory and the treasure.
It amazes me that these folks ignore any data less than 8 years old. while telling us that the decision must be made now using the best data available. I think that we are in trouble because we are being led down a warm path to the deep freeze.
John the only differences is that there may be dire consequences but they will be from lack of fuel and food.
I pray that I am wrong but I am convinced that we are headed for hard times.
Bill Derryberry

Wow – there’s an amazing amount of activity on the 60 Minutes/CBS discussion forum, there’s no way good comments are going to get noticed by anyone at CBS. I think Email is the way to go, but I imagine the piece is in the can already. I’m going to send my “Science, Method, Climatology, and Forgetting the Basics” essay via USPS mail to Stahl, and anyone else who needs to Learn the Basics. Except Gore, he’s a lost cause.
Then maybe follow it up with the March 2008 global temperature average assuming things stay cool.


Imagine the witch hunt this guy would carry out on people like our host Mr Watts and similar sites such as Climate Audit etc, as well as those of us that support them, if he got the presidential nomination. I’m sure Macarthyism was worse, but it would be ugly, what with their total and utter intolerance and zealotry.

Frank Ravizza

Re: Alan D. McIntire
Sorry, I mistyped. I believe I mis-spelled noble ‘laureate’ if you really want to be objective. I don’t typically watch 60 minutes. It’s bad for my blood pressure.

Jeff C.

“In 1990 after hearing what James Hansen and others had to say, I helped to arrange a national education campaign for TV meteorologists nationwide (ironically with CBS’s help) on the value of planting trees to combat the CO2 issue.” Say it ain’t so! Ah, that’s okay, we all have skeletons in our closets. I once attended a Greenpeace rally in an attempt to impress an activist female. It didn’t work.
I think Al is getting a little desperate as the AGW scare just isn’t catching on. From a recent poll released on 3/20/2008:
“Forty-eight percent of Americans are unwilling to spend even a penny more in gasoline taxes to help reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to a new nationwide survey released today by the National Center for Public Policy Research. ”
Think about it. A crisis of epic proportions that may end life as we know it and half of all Americans won’t even pony up a penny a gallon. You have to love the common sense of the common man.

Perfect timing! There are more than a few voices who are calling on the ssssuper-delegates to anoint Gore the Democratic nominee.


we all have skeletons in our closets
I helped plant a tree on Earth Day #1 . . .
(Maybe I’ll hunt it down and kill it someday?)


Al Gore is the last person I would have chosen to ‘trumpet’ the cause of global warming, or as Goerge Bush was advised to term it, Climate Change. He is a politician turned actor and no one should doubt his “Inconvenient Truth” was a brilliant piece of propaganda … and let’s face it, that’s all that it was.
But propaganda is used by all politicians, both from the Left and the Right, the Republicans and the Democrats, the communists and the fascists, the neocons and the liberals, whatever.
Problem is, while concern for the planet should be our basic concern, it is dictated by politics. The planet has one border, the troposphere … and if it is threatened, we should do something about it. All countries around the world are taking ‘climate change’ very seriously, regardless of their political persuasion. So too are businesses (big and small), different cultures with differing religious affiliations, and so on. Even George Bush is changing views; at least that is what is being presented to the rest of the world.
Now I may be wrong, but it seems to me (and many around the world) that a lot of people, particularly in the US, are opposed to the concept of ‘climate change’ purely based on their political, sociological or ideological preferences – not based on the science per se.
Make no mistake, whoever wins the next presidency (Rep or Dem) will do much more in engaging with the world community in tackling the war on the so called weather of mass destruction … China will follow.
I like this site, for its genuine questioning of the science. However, I see too many people ridiculing the science ostensibly because of their political bent … this is both irrational and illogical.
If Anthony was to do a survey of his following, I would not be surprised that the vast majority would be Republican. Just an observation from the land downunder.


@Evan Jones:
That’s the right attitude…recognising these people for the charlatans they are, while taking them on as a serious threat and optimisticallymoving forward with full confidence. No doubt Gore is using this as an opportunity to rally the AGW troops. With $300 million propoganda campaign expect the next months to get real ugly.


Concerning Gore:
Put the pieces together:
1. the Mann curve
2. The censored TAR
3. His propaganda piece: AIT
4. His recent intolerant comments
He’s the main link in the axis of Kooks – with the UN and radical tree-hugger groups. This lunatic is armed with $300 million! Neither underestimate him, nor the reserves he’s got in the pipeline. He’s got the MSM on his side. This is a man who does not tolerate (he even despises) one of the pillars of our democracy: opposition and opposing views.
He’s the kind of stuff dictators are made of.
If he were to become president, he’d certainly take over all national weather and climate institutions in the USA. He’d sick the IRS on those that threaten his cause. I’m sure, Anthony, you are on that hitlist – congratulations!
Gore’s backed by kooks who are calling for Nuremberg type climate trials.
This is going to get real ugly, very very ugly.
Don’t underestimate this, people. This is gravely serious.
You may laugh now, but you won’t be in the future.


I don’t know why FoxNews is just sitting around on their fat fannies and don’t retort. Whatever.
I asked earlier for a brainstorming session for countering this zealotry, but I guess this idea only went through emtpy heads between deaf ears.


“But in order for society-at-large to learn the lesson properly”
Unfortunately, these sorts of lessons tend to be forgotten pretty quickly. The sad truth is that manias, hysterias, and other fads have afflicted mankind for thousands of years.
The one difference that gives me some hope is that more and more, technology lets dissenters have a voice.

The issue is clear. This steamroller will be hard to stop even when the world cools much more than it has in the last three months. The agenda is too important to the UN and others and the MSM will just do what they are told. The fantasy award winner and dynamite prize holder will cling onto the 98 million dollars he has accrued through propagation of the lie. There will need to be more than just “public awareness” of the weather changes afoot to stop this particular leviathan from hurting millions via starvation due to bio-fuel production and deprivation through taxation. The words Malthusian and eugenics are central to this issue and the concepts are held in such high regard that the inertia is difficult to re-channel. Sorry to appear gloomy.
In case anyone hasn’t seen this wonderful CO2 laid bare paper:

Mike Bryant

The Great and Powerful Gore… (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain). C’mon Toto… pull that curtain down.

Paul Clark

I agree with John Goetz: My greatest concern here is also the potential backlash against the entirety of environmental concerns because of this massive overhyping of AGW. I too am a life-long environmentalist/conservationist of the practical variety; like Anthony I was (and remain) a great supporter (and practical doer) of treeplanting as a general environmental benefit, and was doing this well before AGW was even on the radar.
There are still lots of good reasons for protecting and renewing our forests and planting and conserving trees in general:
– Biodiversity
– Soil conservation
– Urban pollution control
– Urban heat control (UHI!)
– Wind shelter
– Renewable supply of building materials
– Sustainable food crops
– Sustainable energy sources
– Beauty
All of these stand even if AGW turns out to be a storm in a teacup. So promoting treeplanting is not a “skeleton” in Anthony’s cupboard; he should be proud to state that he is a practical environmentalist _and_ has severe doubts about the wilder projections of AGW. Given the current climate, that takes particular bravery.


“I helped to arrange a national education campaign for TV meteorologists nationwide (ironically with CBS’s help) on the value of planting trees to combat the CO2 issue.”
Unless those trees were being planted in the tropics they actually were a net contributor to GW.

Alan Chappell

What will happen when some group/person starts a lawsuit and brings down the ex V. President Mr Al Gore ( any wiggle room here)
From what I understand about the law, if a person/company etc, makes a statement, or product that effects the wellbeing of an individual/group that individual/group has the right for regress under the law. The bases for the above has already started with law suits in London on the ‘facts’ in the movie.
Now if some unknown would kindly donate $300 million to Anthony, perhaps he could have a NBC party?

Mike C

On the MMS data that we talked about, Mosh advised that you looked into it and it’s on another tab. I can’t find, can you help please?
REPLY: I will later, full up with another project at the moment

Michael Ronayne

Since January 2008 world rice prices have doubled. I wonder what event could have occurred in that month to trigger such a catastrophic rise in rice prices? As I indicated in an earlier post in Anthony’s BLOG the news is not being reported.
The AGW playbook storyline must be preserved even at expense of millions of human lives. The 60 Minutes love-fest with the Al Gore is just another example.
Read the story referenced below. This is the type journalism we should expect as an all out effort is made to convince us to give up our freedom, what little of it still remains.
Evil requires the sanction of the victim (Ayn Rand). The Al Gore’s of the world can only win if we sanction them.
Jump in rice price fuels fears of unrest
By Javier Blas in London and Daniel Ten Kate in Bangkok
Friday Mar 28 2008 04:15
Rice prices jumped 30 per cent to an all-time high on Thursday, raising fears of fresh outbreaks of social unrest across Asia where the grain is a staple food for more than 2.5bn people.
The increase came after Egypt, a leading exporter, imposed a formal ban on selling rice abroad to keep local prices down, and the Philippines announced plans for a major purchase of the grain in the international market to boost supplies. Global rice stocks are at their lowest since 1976.
On Friday the Indian government imposed further restrictions on the exports of rice to combat rising local inflation, with traders warning that the new regime would de facto stop all India’s non-basmati rice sales.
The measures include raising the minimum price for selling abroad non-basmati rice by 53 per cent to $1,000 a tonne. Exports of premium basmati rice are likely to continue, although volumes could also suffer as the government also increased the minimum export price and scrapped export tax incentives.
While prices of wheat, corn and other agricultural commodities have surged since late 2006, the increase in rice prices only started in January.
Rice prices have doubled since January, when the grain traded at about $380 a tonne, boosted by strong Asian, Middle Eastern and African demand.

That explains the hysterical CBS reporting on that .01% of the Antarctica ice shelf collapse. No matter that it’s the end of summer down there and such things happen quite often; no matter that the overall Antarctic ice has been increasing beyond anything ever recorded before, CBS and others see their credibility going down the toilet and are pulling out all plugs to save it.
But $300 million?
WOW! Where did all the money come from – the Google Boys? Soros?
That’s what I’d like to know. Follow the money!

Bill in Vigo

I just went over and read the coments at CBS. most of the folks are not being kind to Gore. ( I don’t blame them.) I would coment but you have to sign up for News alerts and I just don’t care for CBS. I wonder if they will recall his NPP if the temps drop and we inter a nasty cooling phase in history. Hmmmmmm what a thought.
Bill D


I’d normally take Gore’s hyperbole to be indecorous and unwarranted. However, after reading some of the ‘analyses’ on solar activity here, I’m thinking he’s pretty accurate in his description.


This article in the Harvard Crimson shows that event environmentalists don’t think Al Gore practices what he preaches, see The author refers to people like Al Gore as “Hypocritical enviro-advocates”. Clearly Al has an alterior motive here, and if he doesn’t buy into this, why should anyone else?
I also found this interesting statement in a (and perhaps scary) section in a mostly unrelated article, but it seems quite appropriate; see by Gary M. Rubman. Sorry this is a little long …

Following the publication of his book, Earth in the Balance, the liberal media anointed Al Gore an environmental expert and political spokesman for the scientific community … When one carefully examines Gore’s writings, though, it is shocking to see the clear parallels between his views and those articulated by the Unabomber in his 35,000-word manifesto, the epitome of scientific mistrust and the leading advocate for returning society to the Stone Age. As syndicated columnist Tony Snow recently wrote, “Gore, like the Unabomber, distrusts unbridled technology. While Gore prefers to concentrate power in the hands of a wise and gigantic government, the Unabomber prefers anarchy.”
Interestingly, one of the books found in the Unabomber’s cabin after his arrest was a dog-eared copy of Gore’s Earth in the Balance, complete with copious notes in the margins and underlined sections. For some reason, federal investigators decided to leave this off of the evidence list released to the media. Could it be that Gore recognizes the similarities and is embarrassed by the fact that he is the leading defender of the same eco-hysteria as the Unabomber? The answer is obvious.”

REPLY: The link didn’t get added correctly, you may just want to paste it in and press submit.

… and still more… Gore.
PS. Link stolen from Instapundit

I totally agree with Gore’s statement and I don’t find it insulting.


Actually I think this will in the long run, benefit those of us who are “deniers”.
Here’s why, Gore is essentially “drawing a line in the sand”. As it becomes more and more apparent that we are now entering a cooling face, his arguments, cause, and statements like this, will just show how off base he is.
I see on some of the local forums here in Michigan, more and more people are questioning global warming scams, as we saw another 2-3 inches of snow here last night, after getting 9 inches last friday.
I almost liken Al Gore and the current AGW scam to the “unsinkable Titanic”. We are just gaining speed, and there can’t be any “mini ice age” out there that could possible stop us now, so “full steam ahead”. The only question will be, as the AGW scam slams head on to a solar Minimum induced mini ice age , and starts sinking fast, is how many of them will jump ship to get on the lifeboats, and how many will sink with the ship.


It seems that skeptics are dominating the comments 80-90% anyone care to do a tally?


I wonder if CBS mainstream media realize that the public may be turning?

I think this article is a very good article on science and the aggressive attitude among AGW too many (almost all?) supporters.
Daniel Muniz in NationalSummary, “Case Settled? Global Warming Myths: Part 1”:

Diatribical Idiot

If I were a scientist, I’d feel insulted. Since I’m a simple rube who just dabbles in math, science, and common sense, I am fine with being called an idiot by the likes of Gore.
I’ve done a more rigorous trend analysis of the GISS temperature anomalies from my month-end analysis. I’ve used varying trending periods and techniques to try and figure out where we’re headed over the next few months. Reasonably speaking, it looks like 2008 will end up the 9th or 10th warmest on record, but could be as low as the 17th warmest. Using 30-year trend line changes yields an unreasonable predictor value of the warmest ever. That should help indicate the validity of using 30-year trend lines. The interesting part of the analysis is that if 2008 is the 9th or 10th warmest year, it is perfectly consistent with a continued trend of declining rate in warming, or even cooling. But we all know that it would not be viewed in that light. I still have more rigorous testing to do on the predictive value of varying trend lines, so for now I just present the results as a point of interest. The anomaly values “predicted” are actually threshold points. If actual anomalies are lower, it indicates more rapid cooling than the n-month trend lines would suggest, and vice versa.