Al Gore and Scientific Method

posted at 10:41 am on October 16, 2009 by Howard Portnoy
[ Enviro-nitwits ]    printer-friendly

Do you know the name Immanuel Velikovsky? A better question is Does Al Gore? He should. Velikovsky was described by two contemporary British astronomers as “the last in a line of traditional catastrophists going back to mediaeval times and probably earlier.” Catastrophism is the idea that the earth owes its present form not to gradual geolophysical change but to a series of short-lived, violent events, several of which are identified in the Bible.

The name Immanuel Velikovsky is worth knowing not because of his scientific “contributions,” which have largely been rejected, but because of an effort spearheaded by the astronomer Harlow Shapley to suppress publication of Velikovsky’s work. As any scientist worth his degree can tell you, it is not the job of science to shut down any line of inquiry, irrespective of how illogical or disquieting its implications may be. Science thrives, rather, on the dispassionate and rigorous application of scientific method to any line of questioning. Words like fact and consensus are not part of the scientists’ working vocabulary.

The Velikovsky Affair (as it has since become known) came to mind this morning as I read a column in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on Al Gore’s recent brush with real science. As the column’s writer, Jack Kelly, notes:

Mr. Gore is someone only a liberal could regard as an expert on climate change. He took exactly two science courses as an undergraduate at Yale, scoring a D in Natural Sciences 6, and a C in Natural Sciences 118.

Gore, in case you missed it, was keynote speaker at the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists in Madison, Wisconsin last week. Also in attendance was an Irish filmmaker by the name of Phelim McAleer. Although Gore seldom sponsors a Q & A after his “lectures,” on this occasion he did, assuming he was among friends.

McAleer reminded Gore of an inconvenient ruling about his film “An Inconvenient Truth”:

Justice Michael Burton had to rule on the veracity of Mr. Gore’s claims because a parent objected to having the film shown in schools. He found nine ‘significant errors’ made in ‘the context of alarmism and exaggeration.’ Screening the film in British secondary schools violated laws barring the promotion of partisan political views in the classroom, Justice Burton said.

McAleer asked Mr. Gore what he was doing to correct the errors Justice Burton identified. After stumbling for words, Gore replied that “the ruling was in favor of showing the movie in schools.” Which was technically true, but beside the point really. The judge had ruled that the film could be shown but only if Gore’s “one-sided” views were balanced.

When McAleer pressed Gore on his evasion, McAleer’s microphone was cut off and he was spirited out of the auditorium.

Mr. Gore, meet Professor Velikovsky.

Cross-posted at Zombie Contentions

Blowback