Gore ‘Inconvenient Truth’ Film Contains Nine Factual Errors, UK court decision finds
Gore ‘Inconvenient Truth’ Film Contains Nine Factual Errors, UK court decision finds
Newly-minted Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth contains nine significant errors of fact which absent guidance and an opposing point of view, would be sufficient to ban the film from being shown in UK schools.
The case was brought by school governor Stewart Dimmock.
The BBC has more:
Mr Justice Burton told London’s High Court that distributing the film without the guidance to counter its “one-sided” views would breach education laws.
The Department for Children, Schools and Families was not under a duty to forbid the film, provided it was accompanied by the guidance, he said.
“I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act”, he said.
The nine errors alleged by the judge included:
- Mr Gore’s assertion that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of ice in either West Antarctica or Greenland “in the near future”. The judge said this was “distinctly alarmist” and it was common ground that if Greenland’s ice melted it would release this amount of water – “but only after, and over, millennia”.
- Mr Gore’s assertion that the disappearance of snow on Mount Kilimanjaro in East Africa was expressly attributable to global warming – the court heard the scientific consensus was that it cannot be established the snow recession is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.
- Mr Gore’s reference to a new scientific study showing that, for the first time, polar bears had actually drowned “swimming long distances – up to 60 miles – to find the ice”. The judge said: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.”
Gore climate film’s ‘nine errors’
See also, Do several convenient half-truths make “An Inconvenient Truth”?
If anyone in blogurbia has a link to the complete decision, please post it in comments below.
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Usenet sock-puppetry on rec.games.chess?
Crossposting with one clarification per the comments below, my posting to the nytimes chess blog, Gambit:
Regarding this blog item and the article, Chess Group Officials Accused of Using Internet to Hurt Rivals, in Oct 8 2007’s New York Times:
Reading the thread from rec.games.chess.politics archived on Google, the evidence as presented suggests this is another case of sock-puppetry which has become such a bane on Wikipedia and elsewhere.
Usenet is not sponsored by Google! This is an inaccurate statement which should not have appeared in the Times. Usenet started in 1979! Google was founded around 1996 as a project by a 23 and 24 year old graduate student. The founders of Google were only about 7 years old when Usenet started. Very precocious of them to have sponsored Usenet! :)
The quote attributed to “David Ulevitch, founder and chief executive of OpenDNS” is misleading as it refers to internet NAMES, which are resolved to numbers through Domain Name Service (DNS). Not the same thing at all as internet NUMBERS which are at issue here. Those are controlled locally through policies on routers and globally through BGP broadcasts.
Contrary to what is stated above, it is NOT trivial to forge numeric ip addresses… one would have to have control of an intermediate router between sender and receiver and pretty specific technical knowledge to accomplish this sort of man-in-the-middle attack. There are probably much easier and more convincing-to-the-layman methods of framing someone. Easier, for instance, would be to fake the logs, but again, to what purpose?
If the log excerpts are genuine, there is an ethical question as to whether the “volunteer system administrator” acted rightly in posting selected information from the logs back onto Usenet. He is doing the right thing now in trying to get permission from the Federation to release them. I would have probably advocated going to the Board, or their legal counsel with this. But I don’t know the entire history.
I don’t know the individuals involved in this dispute as far as I know and have no more than a passing interest in the affair. I just wanted to give some perspective on the technical arguments being raised.
HENRY EDWARD HARDY
Ann Arbor, MI
scanlyze.wordpress.com
Interview With the U.S.C.F. President; a Chess Sponsor Says He’s Had Enough
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Spartacus Reigns Supreme
Spartacus Reigns Supreme
by Henry Edward Hardy
Spartacus (1960) is one of director Stanley Kubrick’s best films. Starring a buff Kirk Douglas and darkly handsome Lawrence Olivier, this panoramic spectacular tells the fictionalized story of the Third Servile War of 73-71 BC, the last of the great slave revolts against the Roman Republic.
Douglas plays Spartacus, the leader of the slave rebellion, as a rather simple man who through ability and circumstance comes within a hairsbreadth of overthrowing the Roman slave system. There is a sweet love-story of his romance and marriage to Varinia as played by Jean Simmons, which contrasts to his rise from gladiator slave to a military leader who shattered legions.
It is not clear from the historical records of the real Spartacus that he had the ambition to overthrow slavery as a system, nor the Roman state. He may simply have wished to leave Italy with his followers in order to escape slavery and return to his home. However, in the movie there is a strong political subtext.
The script was written by Dalton Trumbo. Trumbo was a well-known author and Hollywood scriptwriter who was a member of the Communist Party USA. He had refused to give evidence against others to the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in 1947. In consequence, Trumbo had been blacklisted and unable to publish work under his own name for 13 years until Kubrick and Douglas, who produced the film, allowed him to put his name on Spartacus.
Trumbo’s Spartacus is a humanitarian, a revolutionary, and a communist who keeps the loot in a common treasury for all. The script, based on Howard Fast’s novel is scintillating, and contains veiled allusions and subtle dialog. Particularly risque and adroitly handled is the seduction scene between Crassus (Olivier) and the young Antoninus (Tony Curtis). Crassus discusses eating oysters or eating snails as a metaphor for sexual preference, indicating that it is merely a matter of taste, not of morality.
Spartacus makes great use of the wide screen. The composition of many of the shots is remarkable, and utterly brutalized by pan-and-scan versions. For instance, in an early scene at the gladiator school, the action takes place in the middle of the screen in the pit below, while from either side of the frame the sybaritic Roman elite look on and discusses the life and death struggles below in a cold and repellent, narcissistic manner.
Spartacus is a challenge to the mind, an inspiration to the spirit, a treat for the eye and a tug on the heartstrings. By all means see this great classic on the wide screen when you can.
A version of this review was published by Current.
Spartacus (1960) (IMDB)
Spartacus (wikipedia)
Spartacus (film) (wikipedia)
Spartacus (Rotten Tomatoes)
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Open Letter to an architect about drilling for geothermal heating system in our alley
Open Letter to an architect about drilling for geothermal heating system in our alley
The alleyway behind my downtown Ann Arbor, Michigan office has been turned into a mini-Mordor for the last few weeks with deafening drilling and pumping, effusions of grayish, slimy “slurry” and general disruption and using of the place as trash pit and dumping ground. This is an edited and reformatted version of my original e-mail letter to various parties:
Dear Jan Culbertson and Whom It May Concern:
I am a part-time faculty member at a local college.
In conjunction with that task, I maintain a small office at [address elided].
I am presently dissatisfied with the manner in which the planning, approval, and construction phase of this “Alley Drilling” project has been carried out.
In particular, I am having difficulty understanding why one occupant of an adjacent building, [apparently] with neither property rights nor parking spaces in the alley in question, was allowed to hijack the public right of way for private gain.
Were there any public hearings?
Were any announcements published in any paper of record?
How were my rights and interests as a commercial tenant taken into consideration and respected?
I note the following permits on register with the city which may pertain to this project:
Permits, Enforcements, Certificates
Parcel: 09-09-29-127-017
Permit(s)
10 Permit(s) found.
Number Type Status Category Applied Issued Expired â
PRW072233 Right of Way ISSUED Right of Way 09/17/2007 09/26/2007 09/25/2008
PS070130 Sign ISSUED Sign 09/28/2007 09/28/2007 03/26/2008
PM071698 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PM071699 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PM071700 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PM071701 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PM071702 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PM071703 Mechanical ISSUED Mechanical 09/18/2007 09/18/2007 03/16/2008
PB071537 Building ISSUED Commercial, Add/Alter 06/20/2007 08/14/2007 02/10/2008
PB071324 Building ISSUED Commercial, Add/Alter 06/06/2007 06/15/2007 12/12/2007source: City of Ann Arbor
09-09-29-127-017
WELLSPRING LAND COMPANY L.L.C. 210 E HURON STper Matt Naud of the City of Ann Arbor Systems Planning Unit.
The permit which seems to be associated with the past several weeks of drilling activity is PRW072233
I note that this permit, though applied for on September 17, 2007, was apparently not issued until September 26. Yet it is my best recollection that the work proceeded before this date. If so, on what theory or pretext did this occur?
I am given to understand by several city employees that there may be an agreement regarding the use of the alley right-of-way signed on behalf of the city by Mr. West, and that this document may be available from the City Clerk’s office. I would like to know under what theory the city’s right-of-way for the purpose of vehicular traffic or public utilities extends more than 400 feet deep into the earth for the purposes of the private benefit, public relations, and financial advantage of one private entity in an adjacent structure?
I do not regard this project as creating “a special downtown green space”. I regard it as a deafening, prolonged, violent rape of the earth with 400 foot poles filled with potentially toxic liquid for personal gain, public relations advantage and private profit.
On the last point, I was told several times by city officials and representatives of this project that the tubes would be filled with propylene glycol (propane-1,2-diol). I was told that this substance is “completely non-toxic”, “harmless” and “approved by the FDA to use in food… you could eat it.”
First I would point out that throughout the world there have been a number of poisoning incidents due to imported diethylene glycol being mislabeled as propylene glycol. For instance, the New York Times reported on May 19, 2007 that 136 people were killed in a 2006 diethylene glycol poisoning incident involving toothpaste in Costa Rica.
I strongly suggest that the city or another government agency independently test and assure us that the “completely safe” substance in the tubes is actually what it is represented as being (food-grade propylene glycol) and is in fact, safe and non-toxic. Methods of testing are documented in a US FDA publication from the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Guidance for Industry: Testing of Glycerin for Diethylene Glycol.
21 CFR § 589.1001 says that “Use of propylene glycol in or on cat food causes the feed to be adulterated and in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act”. Propylene glycol is toxic to cats.The World Health Organization sets the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 1,2-propylene glycol acetate for a human being to 0-25 milligrams per kg of body weight. (1)
21 CFR § 184.1666 indicates,
Sec. 184.1666 Propylene glycol.
(a) Propylene glycol (C3H8O2, CAS
Reg. No. 57-55-6) is known as 1,2-propanediol. It does not occur in
nature. Propylene glycol is manufactured by treating propylene with
chlorinated water to form the chlorohydrin which is converted to the
glycol by treatment with sodium carbonate solution. It is also prepared
by heating glyercol with sodium hydroxide.
(b) The ingredient meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals
Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), p. 255, which is incorporated by reference. Copies
may be obtained from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20418. It is also available for inspection at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC 20408.
(c) The ingredient is used as an anticaking agent as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(1) of this chapter; antioxidant as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(3) of this chapter; dough strengthener as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(6) of this chapter; emulsifier as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(8) of this chapter; flavor agent as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(12) of this chapter; formulation aid as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(14) of this chapter; humectant as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(16) of this chapter; processing aid as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(24) of this chapter; solvent and vehicle as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(27) of this chapter; stabilizer and thickener as defined
in Sec. 170.3(o)(28) of this chapter; surface-active agent as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(29) of this chapter; and texturizer as defined in
Sec. 170.3(o)(32) of this chapter.
(d) The ingredient is used in foods at levels not to exceed current
good manufacturing practice in accordance with Sec. 184.1(b)(1). Current
good manufacturing practice results in maximum levels, as served, of 5
percent for alcoholic beverages, as defined in Sec. 170.3(n)(2) of this
chapter; 24 percent for confections and frostings as defined in
Sec. 170.3(n)(9) of this chapter; 2.5 percent for frozen dairy products
as defined in Sec. 170.3(n)(20) of this chapter; 97 percent for
seasonings and flavorings as defined in Sec. 170.3(n)(26) of this
chapter; 5 percent for nuts and nut products as defined in
Sec. 170.3(n)(32) of this chapter; and 2.0 percent for all other food
categories.
(e) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses
established in this section do not exist or have been waived.[47 FR 27812, June 25, 1982]
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/FCF184.htmlWhere in the federal code is the specific use contemplated by A3C and the City permitted?
sincerely,
Henry Edward Hardy
[email address elided]
https://scanlyze.wordpress.com/
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy
Update on the Battle of Najaf/Kufa Farms area January 28 2007: Ten now reported sentenced to death
Back on January 28, 2007 there occurred one of the biggest battles of the post-invasion phase of the Iraq War. Hundreds of civilians were reported killed and hundreds more civilians reported captured after significant ground and air activities in the area.
I was reading the still messy and not-well-organized wiki page on The Battle of Najaf and found an interesting update:
10 Iraqi cult members sentenced to death
Middle East Times/September 2, 2007Najaf, Iraq — Ten members of an Iraqi doomsday cult were sentenced to death Sunday, and 394 jailed for their roles in a January rebellion against Iraqi and US troops that left hundreds dead, police said.
“The criminal court passed judgement on 458 accused,” Najaf police chief Brigadier General Abdel Karim Mustapha said.
“It sentenced 10 leaders of the Soldiers of Heaven to death, and decided to release 54 of them,” he said. “The rest were sentenced to jail terms ranging from 15 years to life.”
In January, the militant sect, dubbing itself the Jund Al Samaa or “Soldiers of Heaven,” clashed with US and Iraqi forces outside the holy city of Najaf, three days ahead of the Shiite Ashura festival.
The fighting left 263 sect followers dead, including their messianic leader Dhia Abdel Zahra Kadhim Al Krimawi, also known as Abu Kamar, who believed himself to be a descendant of the Prophet Mohammed.
The Iraqi security forces reportedly lost three soldiers and three policemen.
After the battle, police rounded up hundreds of sect members and put them on trial.
“With today’s sentencing, the curtain has fallen on the Soldiers of Heaven group,” Mustapha said.
Abu Kamar has also claimed to be a descendant of the Imam Mehdi, an 8th-century imam who vanished as a boy and, who, Shiites believe, will return to bring justice to the world.
At the time of the attack, Najaf deputy governor Abdel Hussein Attan said that the well-structured group planned to attack senior Shiite clerics and seize control of religious sites in Najaf, in a sign the Mehdi was about to reappear.
According to wikipedia (currently) the Middle East Times parent company is owned by the Unification Church. Can anyone confirm, add to or refute the accuracy of this MET report?
See also: Scanlyze tag Najaf
Copyright © 2007 Henry Edward Hardy











