longbough

When a documentary makes an error in the facts that's one thing. It's a complete fabrication on your part to say it was admitted to be a "flat out lie" - even in your reference doesn't dare say that.

It's easy for Ward to say Durkin presents a "long catalog of fundamental and profound mistakes" but only two errors were agreed upon and no other was mentioned in the article.

For the record Durkin also says regarding Ward's letter "This is a contemptible, weasel-worded attempt to gag scientific criticism, and it won't work," he said. "I don't believe they're interested in quality control when it comes to the reporting of science — so long as it's on their side."

Durkin's statement is no differently qualified than Ward's.

So if you want to introduce references to counter the statement about volcanic activity then I will hear them and stand corrected on the facts. But the issue of volcanic emissions aren't even the core of the argument - so that hardly breaks the thesis of the documentary.

Have all the omissions and misrepresentations of fact taken away from anybody's reverence for "An Inconvenient Truth"? I doubt if many have even ventured to question it. Have you?

__________________
"I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence." - Mahatma Ghandi