Fat, scientific consensus and AGW

Not much I can add to this post courtesy of QanO which links to the NY Times admission that the great fat scare is just that. Sadly, it took a lot of empirical data to supplant the myths surrounding fat, diet and health, and still much more will have to be done to offset the effect that dogma has on public consciousness.

But science will eventually dispel ecomyths: AGW included...eventually.

Particularly if citizen's continue to take Gore's movie to the courts before it is shown in schools. A recent test case in the UK concluded that:

• the film must be distributed with new guidance notes for students and teachers to prevent "promoting partisan political views".
• The judge said that Stewart Dimmock, a Kent school governor with two children and a member of a political group called the New Party, had "substantially" won his case because without new guidance to schools from the government, it would have been in breach of the law." (EducationGuardian.co.uk)
• In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that:

1. The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
2. If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
3. Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

The specified inaccuracies are:

• The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming.
  The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
• The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years.
  The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by years.
• The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming.
  The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
• The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming.
  The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
• The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice.
  It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
• The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age
  The Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
• The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching.
  The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
• The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously.
  The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
• The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting
  
The evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
• The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people.
  In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
• The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand.
  The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

Thanks again to junkscience for the posting and the excellent commentary.