Wow! A $300 million dollar ad campaign! Enough money to feed everyone in Africa for about a month. Enough money to guarantee huge returns in carbon trading scams. Enough money to keep the press silent. This is big money and should raise some eyebrows - but it won't.

Lord Monckton has challenged Gore to a debate, but Gore ignores him, instead sticking with propaganda and denial. The US press has been completely complicit, and if it weren't for the Internet we would all be doomed.

Thanks to Brett and Accuweather for keeping free speech alive. This site is by far the best at allowing both sides to present their arguments openly - in the debating tradition which made America great. I am now automatically censored from both realclimate and climateprogress, despite never violating either TOU. Those people are not interested in debate or facts. I have to wonder what their motivation is?

BTW - Gore's analogy to the flat earth is pretty good. The temperature graphs have been flat since Congress unanimously rejected Kyoto in 1998 under Gore's watch.

Who does it demean--AGW skeptics, flat earthers, or lunar-landing conspiracy theorists?

Bad use of the pronoun them!

"fringe groups" who believe the world is flat or that the 1969 moon landings never happened, try to monopolize the news and grab all attention they can. They have a single fixation to which they dedicate all their life.

Look also at those believing in chemtrails.

I do not see any such behavior from AGW skeptics. On the contrary, it's AGW believers that are constantly on the war path.

Apparently Gore doesn't keep up with current weather trends.
Watch for the backlash and lawsuits to come out of this one.

Oh Great! Al has found me out! Now where did I put that aluminum foil hat?

Patrick Henry wrote:
"Thanks to Brett and Accuweather for keeping free speech alive. This site is by far the best at allowing both sides to present their arguments openly - in the debating tradition which made America great."

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Accuweather having the courage to allow people to express all sides of the AGW debate is the primary reason I no longer look at the "other" website for my local weather and go to Accuweather.com many times per day. (That, and Kate Bilo of course)

Thanks, Brett and Accuweather!

Reply: We greatly appreciate that. Thanks!

This guy is just too funny! He is in his own little dream world. Small minority. LOL!!! Oh, by the by. Our old friend Fred Singer is hopp'n mad.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/03/28/scientist-demands-apology-abc-global-warming-hit-piece

Here's hoping he jumps on the WX Channel founder law suit band wagon against Gore, as well! You Go, Uncle Fred!

john k:

it's on my head....

To find it necessary to spend $300 million to remind people of the impending apocalypse when the debate is already settled.

Patrick Henry wrote:

"I am now automatically censored from both realclimate and climateprogress, despite never violating either TOU."

GSN responds:

HA!

Count me in as one of the "Tiny, Tiny Minority"!! I should be a charter member. Where can I get my card?

Yes, that group of people who used to think the world was flat... in other words, everyone at that time. Good analogy. The only people who did not think the world was flat was a tiny, tiny minority of people that were skeptical of that claim, and slap me on the bum, they were correct, these skeptics were.

Like Patrick said thanks Brett for keeping both sides open to present their thought but I know one thing if I wrote exactly what I was thinking you probably would not post it. It is so pathetic to give this man air time on national t.v. Of course, no talk of the other side will be discussed. It will Als doom and gloom terror stories that will attempt to scare people and then he can make some more profit. Uhhh... this is so sick, here we go again yelling fire in a crowded room, and regardless to what anyone thinks that is exactly what it is, except the people running out of the building hand him a dollar to leave. How can people not see how phony this guy is, it is almost like he is a robot, everything is programmed in his thick skull, it is bass akwards but its there. Please would one skeptic answer my questions and attempt to turn me to the dark side, does the sun play a huge factor in the earths temperatures? Why have temperatures leveled off, why have other ice ages came and gone, why is Mars experiencing the same type of climate change, why were crops in areas grown farther north hundreds of years ago than today, etc,etc..Don't worry Obi-Wan the dark side will not get me because the force is not strong on their side and no one will attempt to answer these few questions because they like DOOM and GLOOM!

It’s Al Gore!
What? You were expecting rational discourse?
Anything said reflecting his conflict of interest because of his current businesses, a political agenda and a complete lack of scientific education or understanding would just be redundant.
It's Al Gore!
Another Friday another Laugh.

I think that there exists a larger 'minority' than Al Gore may believe.

A lot of people are skeptical of AGW because of the cooler winter...and that sunspots and solar activity in thousands of years past correlates much better to temperature trends than do CO2.

Too much uncertainty to make the 100% confidence choice that AGW is only to blame.

The problem is...people with power and influence over the media are on the AGW bandwagon...because of the emotion of destruction/death/fear it triggers and the attention and MONEY it brings in.

If AGW skeptics are a "tiny, tiny minority" as Al Gore claims then why is his Alliance for Climate Protection spending $300,000,000 in an ad campaign?

Methinks "Big Foot" is telling another whopper!

PH, Great comments on the 'free speech' above.

Brett: Thanks also, I've been off and on the same sites PH has under nickname, and I can second his comments. Skeptics are responded to, if at all, with arrogance, and disdain, much like Gore is doing on this free publicity. AccuWeather is by far the best, and it is interested reading/talking to the guys/ladies on this blog whether they agree with my Skepticism or not. Most Hysterics prefer to go to the sympathetic blogs where they can preach to the converted.....where they receive nary a dissent or if they do, they stand assured that the 'dissenter' will be gang tackled withing 10 minutes.....

Also, good to have you back. First thing I check upon on awakening in the AM is the Blog....and the weather for Atlanta.

300 million, geeeeeze! Somebody really got a stake in the money to be made on this scam. Send me a, say, hundred thousand, and I'll pack up my convictions and convert...

GSN is all for censorship, ehh? How patriotic!

The only tiny, tiny thing coming out of this AGW debate is the amount of CO2 (.0087) man has contributed over the past 250 years. This is so stupid...LMAO!

Snowiest winter in 134 years for the state of NH.

Bring on the global warming, please?

I am not trying to draw a comparison between the ideology of Gore and Goebbels (totally different obviously), there is something similar though in their use of propoganda. Massive budgets thrown at indoctrination and a believe that their viewpoint is the only valid one.

Although I lean toward a believe that GW is not a man made phenomena, I realise that I might well be wrong but I find it offensive that such a budget is used to fund mass propoganda.

"GSN is all for censorship, ehh? How patriotic!"

You are wrong, Rich, and for once it's not about global climate change.

I'm not for censorship. I am all for the good old marketplace of ideas. If your idea (ie., skepticism/denialism) has no merit, you are crazy to expect an equal market share. That's just life. Boo hoo for you.

Now, I'm off to buy a box of flag lapel pins to prove to all the Rich's out there how patriotic I can be.

that man "Infomercial Al" reminds me of an old cartoon...Elmer J. Fudd, millionaire, also owned a mansion and a yacht...however, millionaire Infomercial Al is somehow a carbon footless savior of the Planet because his mansion has a solar roof...what a JOKE!!!...how he proclaims with a straight face his disproportionately excessive carbon expellation magically disappears like a fart in the wind is beyond me...his AGW house of cards is about to fold, no matter how much money he throws at it, the truth will endure in the end...it always does...have a nice day bros

All I can say is it's AL Gore, what did we expect. When I think of Al Gore and his crazy antics, I think of South Park and the "Manbearpig" episode.

Sign me up to be in the tiny tiny minority group of AGW skeptics.

It would be nice if the Al Gore organization had donated that money to a fund to help the poor and elderly pay their heat bills in a year that was one of the coldest and snowiest in many parts of the country.

It's interesting how over the relatively short time of its existence this blog has more and more become a playground for fringe denialists. It's almost as if it's being moderated with that outcome in mind, but more likely it's just the case that it has acquired a reputation as a place where the more political sort of denialist comments don't get censored. I suppose this situation shouldn't come as big surprise since AccuWeather is a privately held company with ties to some pretty right-wing Republicans.

Reply: This blog has nothing to do with that. No one tells me what to post and what not to post. I am given a lot of freedom to do what I think is best for this blog. Also, as some of you could of guessed, I am a Democrat. Brett

AccuWeather has a very nice-*sounding* statement on global warming (pasted below for those who haven't seen it), but the problem is that it doesn't distinguish between the science and opinions about the science. That confusion is reflected very well by this blog. It also refers to AccuWeather "scientists," but a further problem is that forecast meteorologists aren't scientists as such. Reply: We aren't? Does AccuWeather have even one climate scientist on staff? (Scientist meaning someone who is engaged in research and publication in peer-reviewed journals.) Reply: I am not totally sure, there are a lot of people who work here.

Brett, I'll close with a few related questions arising from the statement:

Notice that the discussion in the second paragraph about open commenting and debate is keyed on the opening sentence about enhancing scientific understanding. So how do discussions of purely political issues (this very post e.g.) fit into that; IOW how do they enhance scientific understanding? (Reply: I did not see this as a political post. Al Gore is not running for office. If all of my posts were purely scientific then it would get kind of boring in my opinion. I think we need to mix things up to keep it lively. The blog has shown very good growth in popularity and viewership over the past year.

Maybe more to the point, why do so many of the non-political (science-related) posts get loaded up with political commentary? (Reply: I don't know, ask the other commentators. My guess is politics are a big topic now that we are in a big election year) Why not at least keep that material in the political ones? Look for example at the current post on Hansen's discussion of the current La Nina-induced cooling. How many of the comments so far are about the science Hansen discusses in the linked document? (Reply: Not that much.) Is it possible that those comments ere solicited by the way the post was framed (i.e. about Hansen's view of the science rather than the science itself)? Reply: No, I don't think so.

-----------------------------------

"Global climate change is a matter of intense concern and public importance. There can be little doubt that human beings influence the world's climate. At the same time, our knowledge of the extent, progress, mechanisms and results of global climate change is still incomplete. New data are becoming available every day - from tree rings to deep sea samples, ice cores, glacial changes and climatological models - while the greatest minds all over the world are working to better understand climate change and its impact on life on earth.

"Scientific understanding emerges through full consideration of relevant data, appropriate debate and the application of the scientific method. Thus, we urge all scientists and members of the public to engage in the global warming discussion, including AccuWeather.com's experts. We encourage our scientists to express their personal views without the constraint of a corporate position they must follow. We are pleased to offer a major forum on AccuWeather.com for the wide-ranging consideration of this topic.

"In the AccuWeather.com Global Warming Center, you will find links to the latest research, commentary by experts with various points of view on all aspects of climate change, and a forum for you to share your own thoughts, ask questions, and interact with the best scientific minds and knowledge in this area. From time to time, we may post questions about climate change for general consideration and to further stimulate debate. We welcome your contributions to the discussion.

"We encourage you to visit global-warming.accuweather.com often to keep abreast of the discussion."

"Wow! A $300 million dollar ad campaign! Enough money to feed everyone in Africa for about a month."

We spend about $300 million of our taxpayer dollars per day looking for nonexistent WMD in Operation Iraqi Failure. Try to keep things in perspective. At least Gore is spending his money -- and not mine.

Gore is right. There are very few skeptics in the scientific community. There are, in fact, very few skeptics on this blog. Skepticism is much different than denialism.

same names everyday saying the same thing. Tiny, tiny, tiny, teeny tiny, itty-bitty, teeny weeny, tiny, tinier, tiniest, small, little clique. Good luck and keep on denyin'!

Maurizio you mention chemtrails...
"Look also at those believing in chemtrails."

I happen to study jet trails everyday for three and a half years now. I have thousands of photographs of chemtrails, contrails, cirrus clouds and their interactions. This forum is an unbiased exploration of Global Warming through public debate and analysis of data and weather. So what are you suggesting about the people who study the chemtrail controversy? Why is it taboo to suggest that weather modification and weather weapons are very real tools in the millitary industrial complex? The technology our world civilization is using has become so advanced especially with regards to weapons and war that to ignore the topic is putting ones head in the sand. I say truth is the goal here and Al Gore looks very stiff and angry. His remarks blatantly insulting. His ad campaign proof the skeptic minority is big enough to spend 300 million to stiffle with propaganda. Real Climate won't post my comments either, and I am always polite and haven't violated thier TOU either.

Conngrats Brett with the baby! Thanks to Accuweather for all your hard work!