As I begin writing this blog post, it’s 94°F and partly cloudy here in Yalaha, Florida on the 4th of July, which only goes to prove the validity of man-made global warming. Maybe if I hadn’t driven my Dodge Durango as much or even better, if no one was allowed to drive a Dodge Durango the planet would be cooler and the glaciers wouldn’t be melting.
If you’re one of those unfortunates who’ve been propagandized your whole life beginning in school and then later in life by the mainstream media, then you probably already worship at the altar of climatism and your patron saint is Al Gore. If so, then give me a loud “Amen!” You might have even been a disciple sitting at Gore’s feet during one of his “Come to Climatism” revival meetings held somewhere in the world. Yes, climatism is the new religion of the political Left.
I referred to Al Gore and his film: An Inconvenient Truth in my previous post on Climatism but now I’m going to provide my impressions of the film after having watched the DVD just a few days ago. The film is a 96 minute [pseudo] documentary that [Green] fueled the current climate alarmism craze. As I’ve already mentioned, the film’s star is none other than Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States and former presidential candidate who lost the 2000 general election to George W. Bush.
Let’s start with the DVD packaging.
The really clever cover image in Figure 1 says it all. You don’t even have to watch the DVD to see the clear implication that natural weather events, such as Hurricane Katrina (not so subtly derived from an image shown on the DVD back cover), are being directly caused by industrial activity, that is, human activity. Notice the stark image of the factory, or worse yet a coal fired power plant, in the foreground spewing pollution into the air—reminds me of the 1910 London scenes from the movie Mary Poppins. Because of humans indiscriminately pumping tons of pollution (i.e., CO2, but we’ll get to that later) into the atmosphere, Mother Nature had no choice but to take her revenge out on the immoral, unsuspecting citizens of New Orleans by punishing them with a devastating storm. Ironically, Katrina caused more harm to poor folks and black folks than to high-income, white folks according to a 2005 Gallup poll,1 Seems that Mother Nature has a warped sense of justice. Why is that?
The title of the film, An Inconvenient Truth, leaves no doubt that the theory of man-made climate change is not just a theory but a fact, an immutable fact no less. And, it’s also a call for immediate action, as indicated by the emphasis placed on the word “Inconvenient” in the title printed in red font indicating alarm or urgency as enforced by the subtitle: A Global Warning.
To add a touch of credibility and to discount any notion of political influences, the cover contains a very emphatic quote by Roger Friedman—from Foxnews.com of all places. By the way, when has any Democrat or liberal ever considered Fox News as a legitimate news source? Also, in case you haven’t checked, Roger Friedman is not a scientist or weather authority, but a film critic and entertainment news journalist who created the FOX411 news column on Foxnews.com.
Now, on to the film…
An Inconvenient Truth. DVD. Directed by Davis Guggenheim. Hollywood, CA: Paramount Home Entertainment, 2006.
Early in the film, Gore presents a cartoon of a child stepping out of a store front eating and ice cream cone which then immediately melts into a pool of liquid on the ground in front of him. The child is confused, but then along comes an enlightened adult who explains to him why his ice cream melted, it was global warming! Yea, that explanation really convinced me…not. Don’t most people go out for an ice cream in the summer when it’s hot? Didn’t you ever have to hurry up and lick the ice cream to prevent it from dripping down the cone in the hot weather? Global warming, really?
My overall impression after watching the entire DVD was that the film seemed to place almost as much emphasis on Al Gore’s life and his failed attempt to be President of the United States than with the global warming issue. The film even went so far as to include video segments from the 2000 contested election including the scenes of the Florida recount and the infamous dangling chads.
In addition, let me say that the film left me a little bit confused. I expected it to contain a certain degree of dramatization and there was, but what I wasn’t necessarily expecting to see was the obvious bias and propagandizing throughout. I understand that I’m making a strong accusation but unlike many of the “true believers” shown in the film who accept the false notion of man-made global warming unconditionally, I did a little bit of homework before watching the film. So, wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that if the theory of man-made global warming is really a solid scientific fact shouldn’t it be able to stand up to strict scientific scrutiny? Of course, in the film, everyone in Gore’s audience is right on board, as the saying goes, he [Gore] “was preaching to the choir.”
Because I had already done some research into the topic before viewing the DVD, I approached the film from a different perspective. Therefore, it was difficult for me to take seriously Gore’s thesis that climate change or global warming is being caused by human CO2 emissions, since I would have expected to see a serious debate between Gore and one of the so-called “deniers” like S. Fred Singer or Roy W. Spencer. But since this film is about propaganda and not science, there would have been no point in presenting opposing positions. On the other hand, when Gore did allude to some of his opponents it was in a mocking, condescending manner. Gore is no stranger to Alinsky’s teaching that “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”2
Since Gore passionately presents only one side of the debate, it’s as if to say that if you don’t believe in man-made global warming then you’re like one of those “Flat Earthers” who are either unaware, unenlightened or just plain stupid. Or, to put a twist on an old saying: “Stupid is as stupid believes.”
So, are we to accept the proposition that this film is not political as Roger Friedman seems to imply in his quote from the DVD front cover? Well, maybe not if you consider the following quotes from the film:
I’m Al Gore, I used to be the next President of the United States of America.
I had a grade school teacher who taught geography by pulling a map of the world down in front of the blackboard. I had a classmate in the sixth grade who raised his hand and he pointed to the outline of the east coast of South America and he pointed to the west coast of Africa and he asked, “Did they ever fit together?” And the teacher said, “Of course not that the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.” That student went on to become a drug addict and a ne’er-do-well. The teacher went on to become science advisor to the current [Bush] administration.
Went to Kyoto in 1997 to help get a treaty that’s so controversial, in the US at least. In 2000, my opponent [Bush] pledged to regulate CO2 and then…That was not a pledge that was kept.
You may be inclined to say that just three references to the Bush Administration doesn’t necessarily indicate he is politicizing the issue, but how about the liberal sprinkling of scenes from the 2001 Bush Presidential Inauguration and the SCOTUS decision handing the election to Bush; soundbites from George H. W. Bush and Ronald Regan; an article on a computer screen with the headline: “Bush Aide Edited Climate Reports;” comparisons made between CO2 and tobacco to global warming and cancer; and insinuations that man-made climate change deniers are immoral because of their belief that climate change is natural. Gore effectively drives home his point by saying, “Ultimately this [global warming] is really not a political issue so much as a moral issue. If we allow that to happen, it is deeply unethical.” Who wants to be called unethical? Politics or propaganda? You decide.
During our trip to Europe in 2014, we saw many wind turbines in Belgium, Germany, and The Netherlands. I don’t recall ever seeing any of them actually turning, but when they do turn, they kill birds and bats. According to a study, originally published by The ECO Report, wind farms in the United States kill between 13 and 39 million birds and bats per year.3 For humans wind farms are just an eyesore, but to birds and bats they’re death traps.
In addition to killing birds and bats, building wind farms contributes to deforestation—I guess that’s one of the reasons why planting trees is listed as one of “the ten things to do” to help stop global warming printed on the inside of the DVD cover. Speaking of deforestation…according to projections, the U.S. will need another 30 trillion kilowatt hours of electricity per year to meet the power demands in 2050. If wind power were to account for 10 trillion of those kilowatt hours, it would require the conversion of 600,000 square kilometers of land from forest to farm.4 So much for conservation. In order to save the forest we had to destroy it.
A fair amount of the film highlights Gore’s travels all over the world in his quest to become enlightened and to enlighten others on the dangers of global warming. However, he’s shown tooling around or being driven around in CO2 emitting vehicles—none of them a Prius as far as I can tell. And what about all those airline flights?
Throughout the film, Gore refers to CO2 as a pollutant. Can someone please explain to me how CO2 can be both a pollutant and a beneficial greenhouse gas at the same time? Wouldn’t sane people consider these concepts to be mutually exclusive? It’s one thing to say that too much CO2 in the atmosphere could influence earth’s climate but to say that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, in the same category as say, carbon monoxide (CO), is just plain ridiculous in my opinion.
On the positive side, I have to commend Gore’s commitment to preserving the environment, however misguided his methods may be. I do believe we all need to be conscious of wasteful habits and we all should try to conserve natural resources. I recycle and have been recycling for many years even before it was the “green” thing to do. Although many won’t believe this, we never set the thermostats in our home lower than 87 degrees in the summer, and we live in Florida! Can Al Gore say that?
I’m under no misconception that this short analysis of Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth will necessarily convince you otherwise if you’re already a member of the alarmist crowd. However, I would encourage you to do your own research by reading some of the books written by highly qualified authors who present an opposing viewpoint. That’s what I did and that’s why I believe man-made global warming is “A Convenient Lie.”Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2020 Gerard Sczepura
“Katrina Hurt Blacks and Poor Victims Most,” David W. Moore, October 25, 2005, http://www.gallup.com/poll/19405/katrina-hurt-blacks-poor-victims-most.aspx. ↩
Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals (Vintage), (Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, Kindle Edition), 128. ↩
“HOW MUCH WILDLIFE CAN USA AFFORD TO KILL?” Mark Duchamp, Save the Eagles International, April 2014, http://savetheeaglesinternational.org/new/us-windfarms-kill-10-20-times-more-than-previously-thought.html. ↩
S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming – Every 1,500 Years, updated and expanded edition (Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008), 247. ↩
2 thoughts on “Man-made Global Warming: A Convenient Lie?”
Thank God for people who think for themselves, in a world brainwashed by the media, which are in turn controlled by the Green Industrial Complex, the Council on Foreign Relations, George Soros and other private interests with secret agendas.
We MUST resist this undemocratic attempt to control the world through the establishment of a global, totalitarian bureaucracy unaccountable to the People.
CLEXIT (Climate Exit) is a new organisation which has vowed to fight this protracted Coup d’Etat, starting by saying NO to the ratification of the Paris Climate Treaty.
We invite honest scientists, engineers, physicians, economists, biologists and other knowledgeable individuals to join our campaign.
So the question is answered