|Page 7 of 51:||               |
|Index||504 reviews in total|
In the fall of 1968 Al Gore claimed that he'd influenced the nomination
acceptance speech of Hubert Humphrey through conversations with a
Chicago Sun columnist. Al Gore asserted he was Humphrey's ghost writer,
but the columnist said that he had nothing to do with that speech. Al
Gore's claim wasn't true.
In 1987 Al Gore told the DesMoines Register as he began his Presidential campaign that his youthful reporting had led to the indictment and imprisonment of several people, but that wasn't true.
In August 1987 the Los Angeles Times reported that Gore had bragged that half of his Presidential Campaign staff were women, but it wasn't true.
In February of 1988 the Washington Post quoted Al Gore that he been shot at in Vietnam. It wasn't true. That claim was shot down by Newsweek in December of 1999.
In April 1988 Al Gore told a League of Women Voters gathering that he had written the law of Superfund. Recently he changed his story because the real author of the Superfund law was James Florio.
On October 30, 1992, Gore denied that there was a dump on his father's farm, but national television showed the pictures.
On December 15, 1997, Time magazine reported that Al Gore claimed that he and Tipper had served as role models for the Eric Segal novel, Love Story. That wasn't true.
On March 9, 1999, Al Gore told Wolf Blitzer on CNN that "I took the initiative in creating the Internet." It wasn't true. The Department of Defense got the Internet underway in 1969. Al Gore was 21 in 1969.
On April 25, 1999, Al Gore told the Detroit chapter of the NAACP that his father was a fighter for civil rights, but he didn't tell them that his father had voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
On June 1, 1999, at a Women for Gore event, Al Gore said he'd always been pro- choice, but that wasn't true. As a Congressman he had voted pro-life on many occasions.
On October 14, 1999, Al Gore's website proclaimed that he'd worked for the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty for 20 years, but that claim wasn't true. As late as 1992 Al Gore had opposed that Treaty on the Senate floor.
On November 1, 1999, Time magazine reported that Al Gore had claimed to have authored the Earned Income Tax Credit. That wasn't true. The Earned Income Tax Credit was passed into law in 1975 and Al Gore didn't even enter Congress until 1977.
On November 24, 1999, The New York Times reported that Al Gore claimed to have been a co-sponsor of the McCain Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Bill. But Al Gore never served in the Senate with Senator Feingold. It wasn't true.
In June of 2000 Al Gore said "I introduced the very first free t.v. legislation in the Senate in 1988," but more than 150 bills on that subject had been previously introduced in previous Congresses. It just wasn't true.
At a convention of Teamsters on September 18th, Al Gore said that one of the lullabies of his that he'd been sung to as a child had been a union song. Then he sang a few words of it, but the song he sang wasn't written until Al Gore was in his 20s. It simply wasn't true.
On September 22nd Al Gore told the Associated Press that he'd been part of a discussions on strategic petroleum reserve since the days it was first established. But that reserve was established in 1975 and Al Gore did not enter Congress until 1977.
In a presidential debate, Mr. Gore said that he'd accompanied Jamie Lee Witt, the head of the federal government's emergency response team, to catastrophic fires in Texas, but that wasn't true. He didn't accompany Mr. Witt and he didn't go to those fires. He made it up. It wasn't true.
The New York Times quotes a professor of psychology in saying that Al Gore's record is "like the false memory syndrome where people end up believing that they were abducted by aliens."
The head of the California Democratic Party says that he cannot explain Al Gore's behavior because he is not a "psychiatrist."
Now, Al Gore presents us this film which is filled with many more examples of his pathological penchant for making things up and lying. Gore refuses to debate any climate scientist not on his payroll.
One thing that will disabuse any thinking person of being sucked in by the man-made global warming scam is this: Volcanoes have caused more atmospheric pollution than all of human created CO2 in history...sometimes with a single eruption cycle! The natural filter of ocean algae converts CO2 into oxygen. When there are large amounts of CO2, more algae thrives. Human activity causes only minimal amounts of CO2...0.001% of the atmosphere...not enough to get excited about unless you want to make people feel guilty so they will give you money and the power to tax and control evil capitalists...
Temperature variations of earth's climate are mainly caused by the sun...but this fact does not fit the agenda of Gore and his followers.
This film gives a very interesting view on global warming. The issue of global warming have came up a number of times in the past and is a matter of great controversy. The film is very much like a lecture. While it does provide good argument and reasoning, the movie may prove to be dull to some viewers simply because of its style. Global warming is a issue that are believed by many scientists to be caused by solar ray, volcano, and other factors that really have nothing to do with human input of carbon dioxide. While the film is mildly entertaining and somewhat educational, it may potentially get the viewers all fired up about global warming, which is something that we could have nothing to do with. I think, before further scientific evidence are provided, this film should not be viewed too seriously.
This was an excellent documentary on climate change and how we are
influencing it. It was so interesting that I wish I could have seen it
The way that Al Gore presents the information is both engaging and entertaining, he uses terms that are easily understandable and the whole documentary would be well suited for any member of the public to watch.
Al Gore is definitely an inspirational person, and the message about climate change that he is trying to send is one of great importance in our current times. It is a message that people should listen to and try to follow.
I see little reason for negative reviews of this documentary, unless it is just political bias or skepticism regarding global warming. The only issue that I had was that his personal 'biography' segments weren't entirely necessary, but they were still interesting.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
First off, Al Gore has been for years, and is, a lackey for globalist
bankers and elitist eugenicists. That is why he made this film. This
movie is one of the most appalling pieces of dishonest and (dare I say)
evil propaganda ever produced in the history of our world. Its a damn
shame that we all fell for it so easily. But now, after billions have
been wasted and Gore has been made an extremely wealthy man, the truth
is beginning to come out about this massive farce. Honestly, if the
world were a just place, Gore and the producers of this movie would be
thrown in jail for the money they swindled from the public with this
piece of garbage.
I do not have room to provide all of the supporting evidence for my claims. The part about Gore being a globalist lackey is my personal opinion, but the stuff about this movie being false is quite provable, below are some links to check out if you don't believe me:
One of the main climate scientists in charge of research at East Anglia University admits the earth is not warming, among other things:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn- Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data- organised.html
The Global Warming Swindle: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647#
Not Evil, Just Wrong: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTQ2ODQ0ODky.html
In the early 90's the CIA changed its charter from monitoring the
Soviets to looking at all serious threats to the nation. Out of this
came Project Medea, focused on climate change. Using classified
intelligence much of it still classified this large project
concluded absolutely that global warming was occurring and that it was
an immanent threat to the nation. This was reported in public by the
Director in 1996.
When Bush came to power, the project was dismantled by Cheney who as Secretary of Defense fought the establishment of Medea. The results were buried and denied and Bush went on record saying that climate change was a hoax. (Both he and McCain now admit that climate change is occurring but that we need to "be deliberate" and "cost effective" in responding. You know what that means.)
Some of the material from Medea is used in this movie: the Arctic Ice Cap thickness survey, but if Gore (who was briefed at the time) could have used that larger material, his case would have been even stronger. It is strong enough, despite a few unnecessarily dramatic photographic effects that bend the context here and there. That classified science might not have made for a cinematic presentation because much of it deals with extinction-scale pandemics.
The presentation program used here is KeyNote, Apple's competitor to Microsoft's PowerPoint. Its worth noting that it is a very snazzy product. Apparently much of the design from that period came from the wishes of Gore for this project and the demands of Steve Jobs for his own keynote speeches. Its a great story by itself.
In terms of narrative construction, there are two stories here. One is the story of the collapse of the Earth's weather system. Frankly, I think he could have done a better job on this. The science is complex but overwhelming. But it does not lend itself well to pictures or simple predictions.
To make this palatable, you need a wrapper story, a framing narrative. What's refreshing about this is that the usual choice wasn't made: to focus on the "conspiracy" of climate change deniers, a couple of outlier scientists and a passel of industry groups and ideologue political organizations. Instead, they chose to wrap the slideshow with a story of redemptive idealism about the presenter. I think it works, but it carries baggage.
About two fifths of the electorate voted against this guy, and many of those did because they preferred a different myth, a different story. That's a pretty heavy burden to overcome if what you want to do is lubricate the essential message. I had only a little trouble with it because I know how truly earnest he is. But earnestness and dedication isn't science, and facts, truth is supposed to be the issue at core.
You cannot be successful in advertising that with personal voyages and memories.
But so far as the slide show. Its definitely worth watching.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
This movie is so bad I hardly know where to start. After watching it
and reading the viewer reviews, I can't believe the average rating is
First, this isn't primarily about global warming: it is really a PR piece for Al Gore with global warming just a teaser to get you in the door. But it isn't even a good PR piece. What we learn is that Gore still has a chip on his shoulder about losing the election. Do we really need to hear about all of his family history, tragedies and near tragedies? Does it help global warming to find out he grew up on a farm where they grew tobacco? (Tobacco?!!)
The "facts" presented went through a fine sifter where any questions, contradictions and doubts about global warming were carefully removed. The result is not a scientific report; it is pure propaganda intended only to promote his cause. Where is the discussion about the Earth coming out of a mini ice-age, warming occurring on Mars, sunspot activity? We see polar bears falling in the water, but he doesn't mention that the polar bear population has been increasing for the last few years. By the way, polar bears swim to hunt and for recreation. Much blame was put on global warming for Katrina, but you hear little mention of the low hurricane activity since then.
Simply judged as a movie, this effort fails miserably. Only the true believers can make it through this boring lecture without dozing off. This wouldn't even qualify as a halfway interesting college lecture let alone something you would rent for entertainment. The Academy Award it received is proof of the political agenda of the movie Academy.
I don't understand how anyone can listen to Al Gore's call to action with a straight face while knowing that he lives in a huge mansion that uses as much energy as a small hotel, rides in a Cadillac limousine and flies alone in a gas guzzling private jet. If everyone lived Al Gore's lifestyle the planet would be barren. And how about his tobacco farm: how many people have died as a direct result of the product he grew?
If this movie was entered in a high school science fair, it would not receive a passing mark.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
As a Media Studies student, I've approached this movie critically.
Watching Al Gore dish out the facts and the somewhat shocking
statistics was very effective. Yet I found myself questioning the
validity of his sources, the gathering of his evidences and wondering
how he could've presented the opposing arguments with their statistics
and then defuse them. He didn't do that consistently. However, I did
find the first 40 minutes of this 'documentary' quite engaging. Then
his arguments became repetitive and tedious.
Don't get me wrong. Al Gore is a brilliant narrator with a flair for explaining his arguments precisely, effectively and user-friendly. He broke down these complex discussions into simple and understandable terms and theories. I liked the part where he talks about the natural climate change and links it with Global Warming, thus introducing small measures of opposition arguments. I also admired him for linking the changes in Population and Nuclear Arms with his topic. The film itself is brilliant from a technical perspective and the filmmakers use film theories on effectiveness flawlessly. If this was a fictional film, I would award it a much higher rating.
It was those filler clips with Al Gore's personal and professional life completely eliminates this film as a serious documentary investigating the topic of 'Global Warming'. What these clips represent to me, is Al Gore's production team creating an emotional connection with the audience that is completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion. E.G. The overlong sequences of him with his kid, talking about growing up on his farm, of Hurricane Katrina - which was a serious and terrible tragedy - but I felt Al Gore was using this as an excuse to emotionally blackmail people into believing him while highlighting the failure of the Bush Admin. I even managed to catch a clip towards the start of the film where the camera frames his finger with his wedding band in clear view, and also when he choked at the mention of World Trade Center and linking it - trivially - to his topic by saying that the memorial would be underwater was despicable. This was a clear and deliberate sign that propaganda was at work.
In then end, I feel that Al Gore could've tackled this in a lot of different ways. Particularly, the human element that he failed to deliver in this film, could've been approached with him motivating the audience into action by showing ways to help combat Global Warming. This part of the topic is restricted into the last 20 minutes. 'An Inconvenient Truth' promises a lot, but delivers little. It is a disappointment as is he. Why 4.5/10 then? I still believe that his research and the arguments he did provide were enlightening and admirable that he is attempting to make a difference but these qualities are greatly overshadowed by the obvious propaganda he tries to stir. Perhaps a less questioning generation would have appreciated and accepted this alleged documentary.(I believe he addresses this issue too, saying that doubting articles make the consumer confused - true, but do we really want to live in a society where information is not questioned? Where it is not regulated?) My personal affiliations with the topic are somewhat ambiguous; I want to help 'save the environment' but I don't know how and will I even be able to go through with the 'right thing' procedures. Before watching this film, I did and still do believe in Global Warming. However, this 'documentary' did not offer anything for me: I expected him to make the issue into a substantial global alert but what I got were some references to other parts of the world with most of it featuring the problems in North America. Some may argue that Al Gore, being an American who has dabbled in U.S. politics would concentrate on that continent with a special interest in China, the world's fastest growing economy. Once again I have to ask, then what does this documentary offer to me and to viewers like me?
As an educator in high school I was forced (politely coerced) to
display this to my students. It was excruciating.
I consider myself an environmentalist. Having lived next to the ocean in Southern California, I have seen, over the decades, an increase in pollution along the coast. Therefore, I am very sensitive to our civilization's dire impact on what not so long ago was as pristine as it was when it first came into existence.
Enter the narcissist Gore who makes a documentary that's supposed to be scientific. I had my doubts then for the lack of scientists interviewed to substantiate his premise: that global warming is the result of human action. Now, (2009) an overwhelming majority of scientists agree that there is absolutely no reliable data that verifies any global warming at all.
Why make up such claims when there is enough concrete proof to document man's blatantly reckless abuse of the earth? The answer, some will argue, is an attempt to hastily dissuade environmental destructiveness and discourage capitalistic endeavor. But to do so with a depiction of a very cute, computer generated polar bear cub drowning in an ice-less, arctic sea, is imagery for the very naïve, and despicably, propaganda directed at the very young.
This, and an occasional interruption that chronicled Gore's personal defeat in his presidential election bid, caused me great embarrassment for him, myself and my school, and for the entire teaching profession in America. To think such a clown actually won the popular vote. . . and a Nobel Peace prize.
I am sure a more scientific and persuasive endeavor can be produced to reveal civilization's impact on the earth. Gore's film only does harm to a very important issue.
I have to say that former Vice President Al Gore takes on the global warming crisis. He was surprisingly effective. I used to call him "Gore the Bore" for his usual stiff presentation. Here, he seems relaxed and confident in argument. There is not much to persuade me. I do believe in global warming. Proof is the stronger hurricanes, tornadoes, and storms that occurred in the world. The glaciers are melting at an alarming rate and polar bears are drowning too. Gore shows a lot more than slides and presentation. He shows a side of himself that works in making him more likable. He didn't win the presidency in 2000 but maybe it was just as well. His calling has been to get the world involved in global warming and try to prevent it's eventual catastrophe. He has the knowledge and the equipment to deliver to his audience in an effective manner.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Forget all the other reality shows and get ready for the scariest one
as former American Vice President Albert Gore takes you through
saddening earth truths. Since the movie or rather the documentary has
no plot except for bringing out realities, I thought of putting down
some key takeaway points here in public interest. Gore begins by
showing an earth picture from an Apollo mission in 1972 and goes on
revealing stark truths.
On global warming, he says people believe that earth is so big, what could we do to it but in reality, that thin atmosphere is as thin as a coat of varnish on a painting and this layer is being thickened by pollutants leading to more infrared rays get trapped inside which makes the earth hotter. So, if your kid’s ice cream melts fast, blame is on global warming. Larger changes in the atmosphere are linked to growth in our civilization.
Threats, glaciers are retreating, Mount Kilimanjaro will soon have no glaciers. Himalaya that supplies water to 40% of people on earth will soon have a problem. Same fate is in store for the Swiss Alps, and those in Peru and Argentina. He mixes the story with some of his personal accounts, one where he says he lost his 6 year old son in an accident and his focus shifted to larger earth issues that are not political but moral issues.
He correlates last seven ice ages with the rise in carbon levels. With present levels way beyond what it was ever before, it is bound to hit extremes unless something is done. Also, 10 hottest years ever measured in history have all occurred in the last 14 years. Heat waves in India to storms and hurricanes including Katrina in the west, flooding in China, droughts everywhere, lakes drying up, permafrost cracking; warming is to blame.
The ice shelves melting down not just raises water levels but endangers animals that live within and while those living on ice would just drown. Ecological damage affects reproduction of migratory birds which earlier coincided with caterpillars. With both peaking at different intervals, birds now go without food and beetles are damaging crops. Many cities were set up above line of mosquitoes, are now face risk of diseases.
Showing that there are concerns bigger than terrorism too, Gore also highlights growth in world population to emissions. Relatively America, Europe, Russia and Indo-China contribute to 20, 28, 13 & 12 percent to global emissions. Critiquing lack of adequate action by the Bush Administration, he quotes Jon Sinclair “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it”
Churchill’s old quote is now a warning to the world “The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place, we are entering a period of consequences” looms large. Gore closes it saying it is our time to rise and secure our future so that kids don’t think why our parents didn’t wake up then? Shaken you up, you are asked: Are you ready to change the way we live?
|Page 7 of 51:||               |
|External reviews||Parents Guide||Official site|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|