Is the Al gore movie a documentary or science fiction ?

Question

Why are schools required to show the movie to students ?

If carbon dioxide levels went from 300-370, but may have been 700 before the last ice age because the samples only go back 70,000 years, why is this significant ?

If carbon dioxide is the biggest factor of the 1 degree climate change during the past 200 years , why did more than 60 % of the warming occur before the increased levels of Co2 ?

If the tide lines on the Florida coast haven't changed since the Spanish land deeds were drawn in the 1600's why did the movie show most of the earth flooded ?

Why did the graphs on the movie have no numbers ?

Why was the Sahara Desert used as an example when the climate hasn't changed for thousands of years ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/390097.stm

No one wants the planet to melt, but this crap is being crammed down our throats as gospel and its always the fault of The U.S. because "everyone else in the world " says so .

I conserve more energy than the average American air head liberal .

Answer 1

Al Gore has spoken: The world must embrace a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." To do otherwise, he says, will result in a cataclysmic catastrophe. "Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb," warns the website for his film, An Inconvenient Truth. "We have just 10 years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tailspin."

Graciously, Gore tells consumers how to change their lives to curb their carbon-gobbling ways: Switch to compact fluorescent light bulbs, use a clothesline, drive a hybrid, use renewable energy, dramatically cut back on consumption. Better still, responsible global citizens can follow Gore's example, because, as he readily points out in his speeches, he lives a "carbon-neutral lifestyle." But if Al Gore is the world's role model for ecology, the planet is doomed.

For someone who says the sky is falling, he does very little. He says he recycles and drives a hybrid. And he claims he uses renewable energy credits to offset the pollution he produces when using a private jet to promote his film. (In reality, Paramount Classics, the film's distributor, pays this.)

Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.

Then there is the troubling matter of his energy use. In the Washington, D.C., area, utility companies offer wind energy as an alternative to traditional energy. In Nashville, similar programs exist. Utility customers must simply pay a few extra pennies per kilowatt hour, and they can continue living their carbon-neutral lifestyles knowing that they are supporting wind energy. Plenty of businesses and institutions have signed up. Even the Bush administration is using green energy for some federal office buildings, as are thousands of area residents.

But according to public records, there is no evidence that Gore has signed up to use green energy in either of his large residences. When contacted Wednesday, Gore's office confirmed as much but said the Gores were looking into making the switch at both homes. Talk about inconvenient truths.

Gore is not alone. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean has said, "Global warming is happening, and it threatens our very existence." The DNC website applauds the fact that Gore has "tried to move people to act." Yet, astoundingly, Gore's persuasive powers have failed to convince his own party: The DNC has not signed up to pay an additional two pennies a kilowatt hour to go green. For that matter, neither has the Republican National Committee.

Maybe our very existence isn't threatened.

Gore has held these apocalyptic views about the environment for some time. So why, then, didn't Gore dump his family's large stock holdings in Occidental (Oxy) Petroleum? As executor of his family's trust, over the years Gore has controlled hundreds of thousands of dollars in Oxy stock. Oxy has been mired in controversy over oil drilling in ecologically sensitive areas.

Living carbon-neutral apparently doesn't mean living oil-stock free. Nor does it necessarily mean giving up a mining royalty either.

Humanity might be "sitting on a ticking time bomb," but Gore's home in Carthage is sitting on a zinc mine. Gore received $20,000 a year in royalties from Pasminco Zinc, which operated a zinc concession on his property until 2003. Tennessee has cited the company for adding large quantities of barium, iron and zinc to the nearby Caney Fork River.

The issue here is not simply Gore's hypocrisy; it's a question of credibility. If he genuinely believes the apocalyptic vision he has put forth and calls for radical changes in the way other people live, why hasn't he made any radical change in his life? Giving up the zinc mine or one of his homes is not asking much, given that he wants the rest of us to radically change our lives.

Answer 2

Well, it is mostly a pessimistic prediction based on circumstantial evidence. There are many factors Algore left out. Like the temp of the sun in not a constant. The weather always cycles. Hurricanes have been just as bad as the past and the Global Warming is not consensus in the scientific community. There is something called the Oregon petition that a group of scientist signed to say they do not believe that we can conclude global warming is man made. And out of the 17000 scientist that signed only 2 have extremely limited ties to oil companies. By the way libs have you ever thought about how much money the "environmentalists" are making and why it would be as much in their interests to perpetuate the myth as it would the oil companies to debunk it? Remember your open-mindedness before you rush to answer...

Answer 3

Well you have to call it for what it is fiction our ecosystem is allot like an air condition unit on its most basic levels
we use precipitation to cool and the suns warmth to heat well the global warming model doesn't take into account any form of precipitation or any activity on the sun so how can it be correct when it ignores the two biggest natural factors
also several planets in our universe are suffer global warming at higher rates then we are.....hmmm don't remember see an SUV dealer on mars during the last rover pictures

Answer 4

Public schools show the movie because they are outlets for a liberal agenda, which includes blaming humans and overpopulation for global warming.

It's significant because Al Gore says it is...

That's a good question. Goes right along with the one that if the Earth's climate is warming, why are there still high temperature records from 100 years ago?

The graphs have no numbers because you would have to scale it if you did, and it's not nearly as dramatic if you do that.

Answer 5

It isn't significant. Global warmnig and ice ages have been happening for millions of years without the help of humans. To honestly believe that we are the major reason for global warming is sheer ignorance. And Al Gore has proven that.

And yes, the Sahara Desert used to be a lush forest, however, changed climates to a deset due to the Earth axis shift. This is a known scientific fact. Relating this to global warming is like saying the sky is blue because apples have seeds. That's right, NO CORRELATION.

Answer 6

go to google video and watch the Great Global Warming Swindle for some other scientists opinions. You have to be open minded though, and you have to realize the people who are saying the earth is in trouble have only been here for a hundred years at the most.. These scares have happened before. Look to history.

Answer 7

That movie, and the michael moore films fall into a category I'm calling Propagandumentary. It's documentary, but without the objectivity- like a whitehouse press briefing.

Schools are not required to show the movie. If the teachers find value in it, they may choose to do so- but it's not mandated.

Answer 8

Yes because he is using his imaginary Internet he invented to get the facts! His flagrant misuse of resources makes his rantings hard to believe. People need to recycle as much as they can and I do but I have a hard time believing a man that heats and ac's more home than he can use and runs around in a private jet as a caring individual. Telling people do as I say and not as I do just don't work.

Answer 9

There is no global warming unless you count Al Gore as the biggest producer of hot air around.

Answer 10

fiction! While I haven't seen it because I don't want to waste my money, I bet he doesn't mention how scientist in the mid 1970s were certain that we were about to have an ice age due to global cooling. Nope, that would hurt his "theory" and the "theory" of others.

Answer 11

It's a documentary. Documentaries are not held up to high standards of factual accuracy, and much of what it presented was speculation, anyway. The Day After Tomorrow was science fiction.