The heat and light in global warming (BBC) {very sober, balanced assessment of court case}

ANALYSIS
By Roger Harrabin
BBC Environment Analyst

I have spent much of the last two decades of my journalistic life warning about the potential dangers of climate change, but when I first watched Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth I felt a flutter of unease.

Not because the central message - that climate change is happening and almost certainly caused by mankind - is untrue; but because in several points of the film, Mr Gore simply goes too far by asserting or implying facts that are contentious.

This leaves the film open to attack by the ever-dwindling band of sceptics who do not want to accept that climate change is anything to do with humans, and indeed a successful attack is exactly what has happened in the UK.

Because although Mr Justice Burton agreed in Wednesday's High Court ruling that An Inconvenient Truth is mainly based on consensus science, his judgement will be trumpeted more for finding that the film was studded with green "errors".

The judge listed nine areas where Mr Gore had swayed from the scientific consensus position, and it was the "errors" that made the headlines in the media.
***
more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7040370.stm

"If the conservative IPPC forecasts are accurate our children may rue the years we spent squabbling over climate change rather than tackling it."

It's too bad that this guy spends much of the article giving credence to neocon talking points, and then admits at the very end of the piece that it is a problem we should stop arguing about and move forward on. By doing so, he supports the system he claims to reject.