Why do people think they can discredit the movie The Inconvenient Truth because of Gore’s luxurious lifestyle?

Question

Gore pollutes more than the average person..in fact much more than the average joe. But you can't use that to nullify his movie. It’s like saying that Marie Curie’s work on radioactive isotopes should be invalidated because she was infected by radiation poisoning during her experiments. Now I know Al Gore shouldn’t be compared with a brilliant scientific such as Curie. But the fact remains that Al Gore displayed to us information about climate change that is generally agreed upon. So the scapegoatist who use Gore’s lifestyle as an excuse to reject the scientific research he recounts really shouldn’t do so. They’re only focusing on the trivial so they can avoid talking about the escalating evidence that shows that climate change is a reality and is a serious concern.

If Gore couldn't find polar bears (if that animated thing is true) in distress that must mean they're all doing fine and dandy by your logic!

Hehe... no one has even answered my question yet. Put your personal feelings about Gore away and answer the fawking question!

What LINDZEN doesn't think global warming exists...well that's it...if this one guy doesn't then we all musn't.

Answer 1

I don't know of anyone who uses Gore's luxurious lifestyle to try to discredit his movie. They use his lifestyle to show his major hypocrisy on the subject of global warming.

To discredit his movie, they use scientific arguments. For instance, Gore's suggesting that CO2 has caused warming trends in the past has been disproven. Gore's suggestion that the polar bear population is declining rapidly has been disproven. Gore's theorization that the sea level could rise by 20 feet in the next 50 years has been disproven.

The scientific facts show that an increase in the sun's output, following a period of reduced solar output, has caused most of the warming over the last century.

Answer 2

The reason is that if Al Gore was really serious about global warming and givin the fact that he discounts technological fixes to replace fossil fuels (he wants bans and restrictions on a global scale), he would not live that lifestyle, period. I can't afford that style yet I am living comfortably without Al Gore's lifestyle. That is a huge contribution to my suspicion of Al Gore's real reason for his endeavor (power and control).

Answer 3

The arguments used against Al Gore by deniers are classical fallacies of the "tu quo que" and "ad hominem" type. They have no bearing on the truth of anthropogenic global warming. They do, however, have emotional resonance that can be used to forestall essential changes in our energy infrastructure.

In fact, the denier arguments made on this site provide good examples of almost all classical fallacies. The most common is the "argument from ignorance", where the person making the argument suggests that some aspect of Global Warming cannot be understood, and therefore anthropogenic Global Warming cannot be happening. An example of this is provided by jim z, below.

Answer 4

thank you to have an open ideas!! Why do no longer you do a splash learn and discover out who's investment the contest to the information surrounding international warming? you will discover it incredibly is the comparable prosperous adult males who do no longer choose their grasping organization practices hindered ie;oil marketplace exec's etc who earnings from the persisted use of their product and don't choose a small factor like the wear and tear their product produces to inflict harm on the base line-earnings!! it incredibly is no longer approximately Al Gore, it incredibly is approximately scientists international attempting to artwork on ideas and monitoring of those warming developments and the customary result to people everywhere. do a splash learn. As a youthful man or woman you would be saddled with the tip effect for longer than maximum.

Answer 5

two basic reasons I discredit his movie, one he is not a scientist, two he doesn't practice what he preaches.

But I do have to say his movie didn't allow for opposing views by scientists that are just as much scientists as his scientists to present their findings and let the people decide for themselves. I did watch it and I have to say I got about half way through and wanted to puke. it sounded like propaganda to me not sound science. if a person cares about truth they will show all sides all known and unknown facts present them fairly and let people decide for themselves. help people to think for themselves, rather the movie was more of this is fact and if you don't believe it you are stupid. No one wants to be stupid.

It is easy to turn real known facts (katrina caused alot of damage well duh it was a hurricane which are not unheard of in the gulf) and spin it and make it sound like it was unatural degree of hurrincane. Or to blame the fires out west or whatever if you just tell half truths and whole lies and deliberatly leave out other explanations that are just as valid if not more so. What politicians are noted for is telling half truths picking and choosing what they want and filling in the rest with lies, that is fraud. It can be classified as double talk if you are intending to deceive,

'This is just another tactic to use fearmongering to get more wealth flowing upward from the masses and keeping the mass subservient and poor. After all we outnumber the pharoahs by 100,000 to one. We the hebrews must be kept in line and all baby boys must be killed if we don't want the gods to be angry and destroy us.(sound familiar?) we are practically in the same boat here.

only this time the fear is global warming, nuclear holocaust or weapons of mass destruction or terrorists. So all the boys (wealth) must be taken from the parents(the workers) to avoid them over powering the pharoahs (bankers).

of course if we remember the story then we knew it took an outside power to free them, I would say truth would fit the bill, the truth about what really is going on.

RRRR

Answer 6

I guess like Gore, they like to waste everyone's time.

Gore just repeats old news (stuff he claims to have known in 1998, but didn't mention when he was running for president). The information he's trying to capitalize on had been around decades before he came into the picture (sort of like the Internet). If there were people who didn't know until they saw this movie, I guess it's better late than never. It may be a sign of the times that people get their information in ways like that.

Answer 7

Generally arguments for global warming contain very little facts. They whine that there is a consensus while they try desperately to shut up any skeptical voices but the fact of the matter is that they have very little science on their side. They list scientists yet the actual science is sparse. In fact, if they were honest, they would admit that there is very little that we can forecast beyond 5 days from now with any certainty. Pretending that they can predict and change the climate is delusional or dishonest in my opinion. Al Gore is guilty of many delusions from inventing the internet to having Love Story written about him. Al Gore is the poster child for Global Warming but he should be the poster child for little rubber rooms.

Answer 8

i'm a skeptic, and i don't say that. but i imagine that people that do say that, say it not to discredit it's message, but rather to show that gore is being hypocritcal. as for the statement that the evidence for global warming is escalating, please read my question posted not long ago entitled "global warming advocates" and tell me what you think after reading it through.

by the way, i don't mean that in a rude way, simply trying to have a normal discussion.

Answer 9

The one thing that really upset me about his movie was that he just touched on the fact that global warming "CAN" produce more hurricanes and make them more powerful,

BUT then he went on for like a 20 minute RANT about the horrors of Katrina and New Orleans. It was PUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRE propaganda to the 100th power.

Answer 10

very simple. marie curie DIED for her work.

al gore should try just living what he preaches.

if he was REALLY worried that GW was occurring, you'd think he'd do everything in his power to stop it (lifestyle wise).

isn't that what a leader is supposed to do? lead by example?

instead he acts like a carnie peddling snake oil.