I'm shamed to be Norwegian..(Al gore gets the peace prize)

[bradclark1]

It amazes me that depending on which way you lean to find out what this judge actually said. I tried reading the actual document but could not read the whole thing as it's a pretty boring thing to read. I'll supply links that to me most closely resembles what the judge stated.
I use quotes.

The judge said nine statements in the film were not supported by mainstream scientific consensus.
In his final verdict, the judge said the film could be shown as long as updated guidelines were followed.
These say teachers should point out controversial or disputed sections.
................................
"It is important to be clear that the central arguments put forward in An Inconvenient Truth, that climate change is mainly caused by man-made emissions of greenhouse gases and will have serious adverse consequences, are supported by the vast weight of scientific opinion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...on/7037671.stm

Despite finding nine significant errors the judge said many of the claims made by the film were fully backed up by the weight of science. He identified “four main scientific hypotheses, each of which is very well supported by research published in respected, peer-reviewed journals and accords with the latest conclusions of the IPCC”.
In particular, he agreed with the main thrust of Mr Gore’s arguments: “That climate change is mainly attributable to man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide (‘greenhouse gases’).”
The other three main points accepted by the judge were that global temperatures are rising and are likely to continue to rise, that climate change will cause serious damage if left unchecked, and that it is entirely possible for governments and individuals to reduce its impacts.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle2633838.ece