An Inconvenient Truth?

Question

I just finished watching it and I think it's amazing... I've believed in global warming and tried researching it ever since I first heard about it, but this movie takes the prize. I just wanted to know what others think of it and if ANY of you are doing anything to help change global warming I'd love to hear about it and join in your efforts. Right now there's such a vast array of things to do I have NO clue where to start (besides the fact I just turned our thermostat down :P) So I wanted to know what others my age are doing to help. I'd love to help you too!!

Answer 1

Wow I actually just finished watching it in science class in June.....what a movie don't you think? Al Gore did a great job as well......I actually did a powerpoint on it as well........I think I can help........But first a did you know........that a major part of the global warming problem is do to the methane released from cow farts Im not kidding!.......Well to make things simple many things you can do that play a huge part probally many you already knew Car pooling is huge try having a fellow co-worker take you to work.....recycle this plays a huge role......obviously use less power turn lights off when your not using them.....if you really want to get involved make your voice heard do something to help our economy find alternative methods to fossil fuels.....We really can all do our part...hope this helps

God Bless,

Evan

P.S. Don't know if im your age or not but im 17

Answer 2

Al Gore has admitted to exaggerating the truth in the film:

Q. There's a lot of debate right now over the best way to communicate about global warming and get people motivated. Do you scare people or give them hope? What's the right mix?

A. I think the answer to that depends on where your audience's head is. In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/05/09/roberts/ (Interview with Grist Magazine’s David Roberts and Al Gore about An Inconvenient Truth)

Others have as well:

Scientist’s need “to get some broader based
support, to capture the public’s imagination...that,
of course, entails getting loads of media coverage.
So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make
simplified dramatic statements, and make little
mention of any doubts we may have…each of us
has to decide what the right balance is between
being effective and being honest.
Stephen Schneider, Senior Fellow at the Center for Environment Science and Policy of
the Institute for International Studie, and Professor by Courtesy in the Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering at Stanford University, Discover Magazine.

Answer 3

Well, since you didn't tell your age, I can't focus on things that might be related to that. But here's some general things:

>switch to the compact-flourescent (CF) lightbulgs. These use about 75-80% less energy. They aren't all that expensive now (I got a pack of 6 at Loew's a couple of weeks ago of the inexpensive ones for $10) aand they last longer as well--helps the environment and saves you money as well.

A lot of the things you can do are like that--conserving energy means somebody somewhere ISN'T shoveling coal into a furnace to produce that electricity--and it saves you money besides. Even simple things--making sure doors and windows are properly sealeded with weatherstripping--can make a big difference.

A lot of people talk about using only enrgy-efficient appliences,e tc. Here, though, is where you have to start using some common sense. Most people can't afford to throw out their fridge, stove, dishwasher, AC, etc. But what you can do is this: make a list of all the "gadgets." Over tiee, they're going to need to be replaced. Whenn they do, get energy-efficient models. the logic is that the only extra money you spend will be the difference in price between a regular model (you'd spend that money anyway) and the "efficent" version. And that difference is small enough you can pretty much count onthe savings in utility bills more than paying for it.

Other simple stufff--one thing I did was break the habit I had of leaving the back door open when I went out to dump the trash, pick up the mail, etc. No sense in letting the cold (or warm) air spill out!

Another thing anyone can do--become a "political activist"--by watching what legislation is being considered by Congress or your state/local government. Then e-mail your representatives and tell them what you think. Believe me, they watch those. Even if a politician isn't interested in the environment, if he/she starts getting more and moe messages from thepublic telling him they care--they will start paying attention. Remember--bottom line is politicians can only go so far in NOT listening--becase we can fire them if we get mad enough! :)

Here's the place to start: you can get the e-mails and other contact info for members of congress at these two sites:
house.gov
senate.gov

Each state and almost every local government has similar contact information online now, as well.

Answer 4

Al has his heart in the right place but his data is off. The movie is great because it brings attention to our changing climate. Some of the connections he makes, such as the connection between global warming and stronger hurricanes, are a bit far fetched.
The movie is still worth watching.
If you want a really good picture of what is going on with our climate do you own research and form your own ideas. Don't get all your information from one source.

Answer 5

i dont subscribe to the global warming therory, but do believe in doing everything a person can to help out the enviroment. things dont have to be broke to take care of them. we tune up our cars before they stop running kind of the same thing with the planet.

as for the movie, be careful in what you watch and take as fact just becuase someone has the money and backing to make a film doesnt mean it is all true. case in point.

the film talks about the melting of the polar ice caps. well the area they talk about in the movie is just a snapshot model of the area. meaning that they took a small area (under 5% of the total ice caps) and reported on what was going on there and made it seem as though it was wide spread. when in actuallity in a majority of the ice caps there are record freezing and cold temps. the area the film deals with is a small southwest area of the ice caps. Remember the message comes from a man who thinks planting a few trees allows him to live in a house 20 times bigger than his family needs and also burns more energy in a day than entire villages elsewhere. how concerned is he about the problem. actions speak louder than words

Gore said people in the future will ask questions on what we did for global warming I think people will ask why the guy heading up the movement didnt lead by example...

but like i said doing your best for the enviroment is always good i Recycle, buy organic, compost my waste from kitchen, use ecover organic cleaners for my house, mass trans when possible

My message do your own research do let one movie tell you they have the facts...

Answer 6

It's got the basics right, but it is a little bit exaggerated. The criticisms above are way over the top and unjustified, though.

For example, the "hockey stick". It was originally done with statistical techniques that smoothed it out a bit too much, making it look very dramatic. It has since been duplicated many times with better statistical methods. The basic story is still the same.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png

He leans on hurricanes a bit too much. But it is true that heat is the fuel of storms and global warming will, in general, make storms stronger.

The ice stuff is mixed, but he's mostly right. He's right about the Arctic. The area of Antarctica that's melting is the Antarctic Peninsula, and the melting there is very dangerous. He was wrong about Kilamanjaro, but that information was not discovered until way after the movie. A few glaciers are advancing, by far the majority are retreating.

Good websites for going beyond the movie:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 7

Before you get totally sucked into the man made global warming idea, you might want to listen to the science on the other side of the argument. Here is a documentary that was made using climatologists that believe global warming is natural and that humans have little effect on the environment.

Also, the Earth's climate has a very long history of climate change that is illustrated in the second link.

Answer 8

I just saw the movie for the first time over the weekend and I also bought the book. My father was a geologist and I remember him saying the russians did studies in the late 50's that confirmed the ozone layer was depleting back then. So I already believed global warming was occuring. I am currently purchasing 100% renewable energy through my Electric company and 10 years ago, I moved with 3 miles of my job so I only drive 8,000 miles a year in my little Toyota Corolla. I rate 3.15 at Al Gore's website under "Calculate your Impact" section. The average is 7.5, so I am very proud of my efforts. I think that even if American's don't believe in global warming, they should still use less Co2 because it is smart.

Answer 9

The film was very good in making global warming science understandable for the layperson. There were some minor inaccuracies as discussed by Bob, but the underlying science was accurate.

What I do to reduce my impact on global warming:

bike to work
bought a Prius
don't drive aggressively and don't drive often
replaced incandescent bulbs with CFLs
wrapped water heater in a blanket
improved my house's insulation
got an Energy Star fridge
turn the thermostat to 82°F in summer and around 60°F in the winter
got a low-flow showerhead
support politicians who make global warming a top priority

A number of these things I was able to do with the help of an energy efficiency program with my local electric company.

Answer 10

That movie change my life, it help me see the way we miss treated the world in a much much darker way than ever. My teacher was going over pollution, noise, air, and water. But air pollution grab me the most because it cause global warming. I wrote a children book about it, did research and everything. When I saw 'An Inconvenient Truth' I know for now the must I can do is warn people so I am warning people all over the place.
You should check this website www.liveearth.org

Answer 11

Except, of course, An Inconvenient Truth is actually just a piece of Global Warming Alarmist propaganda; it’s really not much more than a fairy story designed to con the gullible into believing the hype about climate change.

Here are some of the problems with the film…

- Gore promoted the now-debunked “hockey stick” temperature chart for the past 1,000 years in an attempt to prove man’s overwhelming impact on the climate, and attempted to debunk the significance of the mediaeval warm period and little ice age.

- Gore insisted on a link between increased hurricane activity and global warming that most scientists believe does not exist.

- Gore asserted that today’s Arctic is experiencing unprecedented warmth while ignoring that temperatures in the 1930’s were as warm or warmer.

- Gore said the Antarctic was warming and losing ice but failed to note, that is only true of a small region and the vast bulk has been cooling and gaining ice.

- Gore hyped unfounded fears that Greenland’s ice is in danger of disappearing.

- Gore erroneously claimed that ice cap on Mt. Kilimanjaro is disappearing due to global warming, though satellite measurements show no temperature change at the summit, and the peer-reviewed scientific literature suggests that desiccation of the atmosphere in the region caused by post-colonial deforestation is the cause of the glacial recession.

- Gore made assertions of massive future sea level rise that is way out side of any supposed scientific “consensus” and is not supported in even the most alarmist literature.

- Gore incorrectly implied that a Peruvian glacier's retreat is due to global warming, while ignoring the fact that the region has been cooling since the 1930s and other glaciers in South America are advancing.

- Gore blamed global warming for water loss in Africa's Lake Chad, though NASA scientists had concluded that local water-use and grazing patterns are probably to blame.

- Gore inaccurately said polar bears are drowning in significant numbers due to melting ice when in fact 11 of the 13 main groups in Canada are thriving, and there is evidence that the only groups that are not thriving are in a region of the Arctic that has cooled.

- Gore did not tell viewers that the 48 scientists whom he quoted as having accused President Bush of distorting science were part of a political advocacy group set up to support the Democrat Presidential candidate, John Kerry, in 2004.

Here’s a link (http://www.cei.org/pdf/5539.pdf ) that lists far more mistakes. To give you an idea, this report lists; 26 one sided, 15 misleading, 8 exaggerated, 26 speculative and 18 wrong statements that Al Gore makes.

As ever with global warming - don't believe the hype.