RealClimate Reviews the Science of An Inconvenient Truth
by Michael Graham Richard, Ottawa, Canada 
on 05.14.06
The climate scientists at RealClimate.org have posted a short review of the science in the upcoming Al Gore movie about global warming: An Inconvenient Truth. The verdict? "For the most part, I think Gore gets the science right, just as he did in Earth in the Balance. The small errors don't detract from Gore's main point, which is that we in the United States have the technological and institutional ability to have a significant impact on the future trajectory of climate change." ::Al Gore’s movie See also ::An Inconvenient Truth Trailer Available at Apple, ::Grist Interviews Al Gore, ::Movie Review: Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth", ::An Inconvenient Truth - Al Gore Is A Hit With Enviro-Film At Sundance
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
There's no doubt that we have the technological capabilities, but we face a huge disadvantage in comparison to some Western European countries.
I read an interesting article from the co-creator of ecological footprints, in which he said the infrastructure places us at a disadvantage. We are an urban sprawl where transportation is needed, unlike some areas that have inherited compact cities and sustainable living (old cities that had no real means of transportation). Local markets, sense of community, and a lack of highway infrastructure contribute to this.
I also think that this inherently places the U.S. at a disadvantage because it's what people know. Change is going to be painful, but like Machiavelli (sp?) said, it's best to use drastic and widespread change instead of a drawn out, slow, and painful change.
When can I get to see this in the UK?
OK... I'll attack the science then, if no-one else will :-)
See http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2007/01/grumpy_review_of_an_inconvenie.php
1) Gore presents lots of graphics of 5m sea level rise. Nowhere is explcitly stated that this will occur, or when, but the clear implication is that its a problem. I think audiences will come away with the idea that it is "soon" - within the timeframe of everything else - ie, next 100 years. But that is wrong.
2) Among the extinctions bits there is a picture of a dodo. Why?
3) He shows graphics of w nile virus spreading across the US. Since it spreads across the entire US, its obviously not very climate sensitive. Hence unlikely to be much affected by GW
Uh, where' the dodo?