This is a spinoff page which uses material that was once found on either the Global Warming Page or the page about Cultural and political bias in motion pictures. Hollywood is notorious for political propaganda disguised as entertainment, and nothing makes for a disaster movie like an environmental catastrophe, whether real or imaginary. Unfortunately, many of today's poorly educated young people don't know propaganda when they see it, and no matter what comes up on the screen, they leave the movie theater thinking they've just seen a documentary.
Vanishing evidence for climate change. In the runup to the Sept. 23 UN Climate Summit in New York, Leonardo DiCaprio is releasing a series of films about the "climate crisis." The first is "Carbon," which tells us the world is threatened by a "carbon monster." Coal, oil, natural gas and other carbon-based forms of energy are causing dangerous climate change and must be turned off as soon as possible, DiCaprio says. But he has identified the wrong monster. It is the climate scare itself that is the real threat to civilization. DiCaprio is an actor, not a scientist; it's no real surprise that his film is sensationalistic and error-riddled. Other climate-change fantasists, who do have a scientific background, have far less excuse.
"Global Warming, the Movie" Starring: Freezing. A funny thing happens when Hollywood tries to portray the horrific negative consequences of global warming: they tend to end up showing an Earth that has frozen over. I noticed this the first time in 2004?s The Day After Tomorrow, where global warming supposedly leads to a global atmospheric inversion that buries New York City under a mountain of snow. It was a striking image: a global warming movie whose poster features the hand of the Statue of Liberty poking out of the top of a glacier.
Obama and Showtime Admit to Exploiting Extreme Weather Events to 'Shift' Public Opinion. The finale of Showtime's "Years of Living Dangerously" wrapped up a long effort to push climate alarmism with an interview between New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman and President Barack Obama. Friedman and Obama agreed on the need to connect extreme weather events to climate change in order to sway public opinion, showcasing the partisan political goal of the Showtime series.
9 Problems with Aronofsky's 'Noah'. Noah doesn't merely get the story wrong; like all Biblical adaptations, it's bound to do that (although some aspects of the film are out and out ridiculous). It gets the morality of the story wrong, and in the process turns God into Gaia and morality into radical deep green environmentalism.
'Gasland' scandal ignited at EPA. HBO viewers thought they saw Steve Lipsky, a Parker County, Texas, home-owner, holding his garden hose belching fire from his methane-contaminated water well. The flaming water was terrifying and "Gasland Part II" blamed it on fracking done by Range Resources, a Fort Worth-based shale gas driller. What viewers actually witnessed was Lipsky holding a hose secretly connected to a gas vent, not a water line. This fraud came out in a lawsuit filed by Steven and Shyla Lipsky against Range for $6.5 million in the 43rd State District Court of Texas.
Science Council Debunks More Environment Scares from 2013. In 2010 filmmaker Josh Fox released the "documentary" Gasland, igniting anti-fracking hysteria as an "environmentalist" mass movement. The key moment in that movie, shown over and over again on screens large and small, was a homeowner in protective goggles turning on his tap water and setting it on fire with a match. The scene resulted in the widespread mythology that the "new" technology, fracking, involved dangerous procedures leading to leakage of toxic chemically treated water at high pressure into aquifers, well water, and tap water. [...] In conclusion it should be noted the tap-water flame so famously highlighted in Gasland was confirmed to be a result of naturally occurring methane in the nearby Colorado water table, and not related to any fracking activity.
Anti-fracking film littered with inaccurate and misleading claims. Gasland Part II, the new documentary by environmental activist Josh Fox, premiered on HBO Monday night. The film, a sequel to Fox's Oscar-nominated 2010 film Gasland, has drawn significant attention to the supposed dangers of the oil and gas extraction technique hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking. Many of its claims rely on faulty data, mischaracterizations, or outright falsehoods. Four of those claims, made in his new film and repeated elsewhere, stand out.
The Top 5 Lies About Fracking. Gasland Part II, the sequel to director/activist Josh Fox's earlier anti-fracking docudrama Gasland, will run on HBO next Monday. It appears to have rounded up the usual corporate villains and appealing victims of profit-hungry capitalist skullduggery, rather than telling the more substantial story: that fracking combined with horizontal drilling has unleashed a bonanza of cheap natural gas.
Frack to the Future. There's gas in the earth. That's why it's called "natural gas." Some gets into well water. Environmental officials investigated the flames shown in "Gasland" and concluded that the pollution had nothing to do with fracking.
FrackNation Debunks Fantasyland. In a jammed-packed 70 minutes of video, [Phelim] McAleer interviews a wide range of experts and cites data that debunk virtually everything put forth in the 2010 pseudo-documentary Gasland. As for Gasland producer Josh Fox, McAleer leaves no doubt that he is a pretense of a journalist who favors theater over facts about a technology that frees gas from tightly bound shale formations thousands of feet underground.
Eco-terror advocate bashes climate 'deniers' on film. Last Friday [3/8/2013], Big Green's entertainment division churned out yet another attempt to turn that around with a panicky new global-warming documentary. It opened on 51 screens with a weekend gross of $45,000 (that's $882.25 per screen, according to the Internet Movie Database). It was produced at an estimated cost of $1.5 million and comes with a screaming title: "Greedy Lying Bastards."
Greenie lying bastards. Pathetic and desperate. There's no other way to describe the new "we hate-industry" movie, Greedy Lying Bastards. Producers spent nearly $2 million to complain about climate skeptic money, in yet another Big Green attack on anyone who disagrees with the climate fanatic industry, which is itself a multi-billion-dollar global enterprise that seeks to impose anti-energy policies in the name of preventing climate change.
"Promised Land": Anti-fracking Propaganda. The story line in the new theatrical release Promised Land is obviously intended to leave audiences with a very dim and scary view of fracking and the companies that use this new method of drilling to tap vast amounts of oil and natural gas that otherwise would be inaccessible. But the depiction in Promised Land is so fantastic that the intent could backfire. Indeed, by the end of the film, moviegoers may be left annoyed and offended by the blatant attack on fracking.
Target of global warming agitprop unconcerned, amused. [Greedy Lying] Bastards is premised on an ambitious conspiracy theory that has been spun so often it's become a cliché: Exxon Mobil and Koch Industries, which Rosebraugh absurdly calls "the biggest company you've never heard of," are deploying paid shills including think tankers and politicians to obstruct solutions to and deceive the public about climate change. But, after laying the groundwork, the film has trouble delivering.
Meet the "1%" Funding Anti-Fracking Hysteria. It's the classic David vs. Goliath story. According to a new report, the anti-fracking movement is just as well-funded by highly organized environmental groups backed by deep-pocketed liberal philanthropists and even Middle East oil money. According to a new report titled "The Environmental Movement vs. the Marcellus Shale," the anti-fracking movement, using its friends in media and in Hollywood, has carefully crafted a "little guy" image when the reality is something quite different.
The unkindest movie review of all:
'Promised Land' fares poorly at theaters. Fracking gets natural gas out of the ground, but it isn't bringing people into movie theaters. Big stars and political controversy didn't translate into a significant box-office haul as "Promised Land," a new movie exploring environmental concerns about the gas-production method known more formally as "hydraulic fracturing," fared poorly in its nationwide opening.
Can UAE-Backed Film Shut Down U.S. Fracking Boom? As the U.S. changes the balance of power by exporting some of its abundant natural gas resources, a Hollywood propaganda film debuts claiming the technology making it possible will poison America's small towns.Frack film's flim-flam. 'Promised Land," a new movie from Matt Damon and John Krasinski, attacks fracking — a new way of getting oil and gas out of the ground, which has become the latest villain of the environmental movement. Last week, I revealed the film's co-writers, Damon and Krasinski, have gone to enormous lengths to twist the narrative to make American energy corporations the villain. At the time, their efforts could be just passed off as just another Hollywood leftist fantasy to explain why the world is not how they think it should be. But now a more sinister possibility has emerged.
Matt Damon's troubled anti-frack film. Matt Damon and John Krasinski ran into a big problem while making their film "Promised Land"; how they solved it tells us a lot about Hollywood. Some time ago, the two actors decided to make a movie about fracking — a method of getting once-inaccessible oil and gas out of the ground that has become the bête noire of many environmentalists.
Matt Damon's Anti-Fracking Movie Financed by Oil-Rich Arab Nation. A new film starring Matt Damon presents American oil and natural gas producers as money-grubbing villains purportedly poisoning rural American towns. It is therefore of particular note that it is financed in part by the royal family of the oil-rich United Arab Emirates.
Environmentalist Movie Funded by Oil-Rich Royalty. Matt Damon turned to oil-rich Middle East royalty to finance his film attacking domestically produced natural gas. The environmentalist screed, Promised Land, received a chunk of its funding from the United Arab Emirates, an oil kingdom known for its lavish spending on man-made islands and the world's tallest building, according to the Heritage Foundation.
Abu Dhabi Media's Hollywood Propaganda. As Heritage has pointed out, The Promised Land, the troubled piece of lefty Hollywood agitprop aimed at the domestic oil industry is actually financed by the international oil industry.
Hollywood fracks up. [T]he sad truth is that this lame-assed, eco-propaganda movie has nothing whatsoever to do with the genuine threat of wind farms but with the almost wholly imaginary one of fracking. Fracking has been a godsend to the US economy, blessing it with clean, cheap, abundant energy which has enriched those states lucky enough to have big shale gas reserves, created jobs and increased America's energy security by reducing its reliance on imported gas from unstable countries. What's not to like about shale gas?
Fracking flop. The anti-affordable energy crowd has suffered another setback. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Wednesday [7/25/2012] released the results of extensive testing that found nothing toxic in the water in Dimock, Pa. That's the town where the anti-drilling documentary "Gasland" filmed dramatic images of a homeowner lighting his tap water on fire. The film blamed the strange occurrence on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a procedure that uses a pressurized mixture to extract natural gas from shale rock formations.
'Frack nation'. Thanks to the Oscar-nominated documentary "Gasland," many people believe fracking — a process of getting natural gas out of rock — pollutes water and creates wastelands wherever it is used. But like so many documentaries nowadays, Gasland is high on anecdote and emotion but low on science and fact. One of the most dramatic images in "Gasland" is footage of a resident lighting his tap water with flames shooting out of the faucet. As a journalist, I wanted to learn more, so I went to a Q&A with Gasland director Josh Fox. As I questioned him, Fox eventually admitted that he knew people could light their tap water in these areas decades before fracking came on the scene.
More about fracking.
Indisputable Proof. When Gasland was released in 2010, many people said that natural gas had contaminated well water long before fracking became a common practice, but these statements were ignored or downplayed by the media. [...] The producers of Gasland have a web site asking people to contact regulators to have fracking stopped. Perhaps it would be helpful if the regulators were made aware of the August 1980, National Geographic Magazine picture that predated the Gasland movie by 30 years.
Commercializing Anti-Consumerism. It's a triumph of commercial chutzpah that the just-released Illumination Entertainment animated film manages to tie what Stephen Colbert calls a "little orange tree hugger" to 70 corporate partners, from IHOP pancakes to Mazda's CX-5 SUV, to Seventh Generation disposable diapers, to an HP printer app. Nothing draws multinationals like a green sponsorship opportunity. Even if it's orange. The Lorax is hardly the first anti-consumption or counterculture messenger who's been turned to commercial use.
Dr. Seuss's The Lorax: Entertaining with an Environmental Agenda. Dr. Seuss' The Lorax is a film about the disappearance of trees, which have since been replaced by imitations, and the pursuit of two teens anxious to get their hands on some real live greenery. Therefore, there is a predictable environmentalist undertone coupled with anti-capitalist sentiment. ... The reason Thneedville is so polluted is because of the Once-ler, the town's industrialist who created a garment made from the threads of the Truffula tree, called thneed. The items became so popular that the region eventually lost all of its trees. In other words, using natural resources to create products for consumers will end in catastrophe. And to drive the point home, there is an upbeat children's song.
The Lorax: Candy-Colored Radical Environmental Castor Oil. With The Lorax, the entertainment industry and the federal government have joined forces to produce a candy-colored dollop of castor-oil. ... Unsurprisingly, given the rigid earnestness behind it, The Lorax isn't much fun to watch. Every time you think it's starting to get a little heavy-handed, it gets heavier still. The Lorax (voiced by Danny DeVito) features in both ascension and resurrection scenes, there is a hymn to greed called "How Bad Can I Be?" that would have embarrassed Bernie Madoff, and the bad guy, O'Hare (Rob Riggle), who wears a severely geometric 'do suggesting the epic hairstyling errors of Moe Howard, Ringo Starr and Rooney Mara, is a loathsome little creep who has made a fortune selling bottled air.
Lou Dobbs bashes 'The Lorax' and 'Secret World of Arrietty' for 'indoctrinating liberal agenda'. Dobbs lambasted Disney's "The Secret World of Arrietty," a Japanese film that opened last Friday [2/17/2012], for its story about a 4-inch-tall family of "borrowers" who take items from humans without paying for them. Universal's "The Lorax," opening March 2, "is about a woodland creature who speaks for the trees and fights rampant industrialism," Dobbs said, emphasizing the last two words.
The Secret Alchemy of Dr. Seuss. The Lorax is one of Dr. Seuss' explicitly rhetorical books, one that he himself classified as "propaganda." It is a classic cautionary fable structured around a flashback narrated by the villain, the capitalist Once-ler, to a nameless young boy who has come to the Once-ler's dilapidated Lerkim to hear the tale. The story is set in a dark, murky, post apocalyptic landscape caused by the Once-ler's wholesale exploitation of the ecosystem, which was supported in a former time by Truffula trees.
The Lorax — Entertainment or Propaganda? The Lorax contains adorable Dr. Seuss graphics and fun sound effects; however, in my mind, its purpose appears to be more propaganda than entertainment. The message: Big Business will destroy our land and kill our creatures unless you do something about it.
EPA & Hollywood Use Lorax To Brainwash Kids On Green Energy And Anti-Capitalism. Universal Studios is releasing "Dr. Seuss' The Lorax" on March 2 to theaters throughout the U.S. Partnering with Universal is the EPA, which is using Lorax to teach children how to be green and to fight rampant industrialism (capitalism, the engine of progress). The Lorax character is a creature who "speaks for the trees" and fights against the capitalist system. How cute.
I Am The Lorax! I Speak for the ... Kids? You'd think that in producing a remake of Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax," Universal Pictures had fulfilled its liberal propaganda obligations for at least this fiscal quarter. After all, "The Lorax" is an environmentalist classic. Alas, "Mr. Wells' 4th Grade Class" of Brookline, Mass., wasn't satisfied, and thousands of left-wing zealots agreed, signing on to the kids' change.org petition. The petition went after Universal Pictures because the movie trailer and website didn't preach enough about the environment. The movie's website has already been changed to incorporate green tips.
Film Adaptation of 'The Lorax' Keeps Core but Adds Love Story. Originally penned in 1971 by Theodor Seuss Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss, the children's picture book "The Lorax" tells the story of a magical creature of the same name who guards a land of brightly colored Truffula Trees and cheerful animals like Humming-Fish and Bar-ba-loots. One day, industry moves in and chops down all the trees, in the process polluting the air and water.
Dr. Seuss' The Lorax. The Lorax is competent but not particularly moving or incisive or even hilarious. It's a movie that — unless you really love or loathe its environmental message — doesn't do much more than distract the kiddos for 94 minutes. That sounds overly disparaging for a Dr. Seuss story, I realize, so let me get to the flip side: For families really in need of those 94 minutes of distraction — and aren't put off by the environmental preachiness — The Lorax is a solid choice.
Dubious Environmental and Anti-Capitalist Message in The Lorax. [Scroll down] In fact, The Lorax movie's official website encourages kids to change their Facebook profile pictures to help save the trees, to "go green," and to participate in the National Education Association's "Read with the Trees" program. (Notably, they have a donation button so that Lorax fans can contribute to the NEA as well.) They also helpfully include education plans for teachers to use with their students, including one which helps students understand that "individual choices contribute to climate change.["]
Why Businessmen Wear Black Hats in Today's Movies. For sci-fi and horror movies, there are always invaders from alien universes and zombies from another dimension, but even here it doesn't hurt if they are in the greed business. In the 2009 movie "Avatar," a greedy mining corporation is behind the use of avatars to destroy the environment, culture, and natives on the planet Pandora. This proved a lucrative decision, since the movie earned a large share of its revenue in foreign countries concerned about corporate exploitation of their resources and environment. But for reality-based politico-thrillers, the safest remaining characters are lily-white, impeccably dressed American corporate executives.
Movie Review: Al Gore's Polarizing, Misleading 'Climate Reality'. In "24 Hours of Climate Reality," first airing Wednesday [9/14/2011] at 8:00 pm Eastern Time, Gore presented an hour-long sequel to his disastrous "An Inconvenient Truth," followed by 23 hours of semi-reruns of essentially the same presentation. By hour three, it felt like being stuck in the Twilight Zone forced to watch 24 straight hours of the same Family Matters/Urkel rerun on the WB — only worse. At least Urkel is annoying and mildly amusing on purpose; Al is these things by accident.
Libs beclown themselves over Muppets:
Oil companies make convenient scapegoats for liberals. On Fox Business News, Dan Gainor of Media Research Center, pointed this out: "It's amazing how far the left will go just to manipulate your kids, to convince them, give the anti-corporate message. They've been doing it for decades. Hollywood, the left, the media, they hate the oil industry. They hate corporate America. And so you'll see all these movies attacking it, whether it was 'Cars 2,' which was another kids' movie, the George Clooney movie 'Syriana,' 'There Will Be Blood,' all these movies attacking the oil industry, none of them reminding people what oil means for most people: fuel to light a hospital, heat your home, fuel an ambulance to get you to the hospital if you need that. And they don't want to tell that story."
On the Commumuppet Menace: Some conservatives have complained that the new Muppet movie has a left-wing bias because the bad guy in the movie is an evil oil developer who wants to tear down the Muppets' decrepit and nearly abandoned studios and drill for oil. ... The Washington Post rebuts that environmentalism isn't even mentioned in the movie because they want to save the Muppet theater for reasons of historic preservation and nostalgia. This is unpersuasive because it is a given among environmentalists that oil serves no productive purposes and that oilmen are bad guys. Does the Post really think they picked a rich Texas oilman at random? Why not a zinc tycoon?
Movie Review: Dolphin Tale. Though the film focuses on a young boy and an injured animal, it is carefully not to stray into territory that would label it too "cutesy." It manages to be inspiring and emotional without being too over the top. One of the film's potential downfalls, however, is its attention, however brief, to issues that seemingly have little if anything to do with the film, including healthcare, the war, and medical care for the troops.
The Editor says...
Dolphins are second only to polar bears in their use as emotional props in environmentalist movies. Third place goes to the humpback whales.
Long list of environmental propaganda movies.
Under the Sea. Excellent show, with educational info about sea creatures. A bit heavy on the "save the oceans" propaganda. Could have been a bit more light hearted, considering this theater is primarily in a tourist area for vacationers.
James Cameron's Avatar - Socialist NWO Environmental Propaganda Film? So far the reports are that it's going to be a capitalist-bashing, environmental propaganda film on the greedy old capitalists ruining the poor people called 'Na'Vi,' and so, get this, a botanist is evidently the hero of the story, who recruits a team of humans who enter the world of Pandora where the Navi live and save the planet and plants. Wow, what an original story.
In 'Cars 2,' John Lasseter Says Big Oil is the 'Uber Bad Guy'. I kept thinking about, "OK. A spy movie in the world where cars are alive. What would be a really good kind of über bad guy? Who is an über bad guy?" I kept going to big oil. ... And so I thought, well, that could be really cool in that you could have big oil versus alternative fuel. That's when we kind of crafted the bad guy's story.
'Furry Vengeance' Tells Your Kids Al Gore's a Hero. Certainly I'm all for balance between nature and man. I don't want everything paved over. But by portraying businessmen and developers as cartoonish thugs with no redeeming characteristics, what kind of message are kids supposed to take away from this movie? That people are inherently bad because they build houses and shopping centers and buy things?
Children's Movie 'Furry Vengeance' Preaches Eco Message. Young adults of a certain age will remember the 1992 environmental agitprop movie "FernGully," in which inhabitants of the last rainforest fight to save their environment. Well, bad ideas die hard. "Furry Vengeance," a new live-action children's movie starring Brendan Fraser and Brooke Shields, picks up where "FernGully" left off, thinly veiling its tree-hugging agenda with cheap laughs and cute, furry animals.
"Carbon Nation" and "I am"
New Climate Alarmist Movies About To Hit. Both movies discuss ways that Someone Else can take action, preferably at the hands of Big Daddy Government. But, excuse me for being rather skeptical, but, doesn't showing movies use quite a bit of power, generating vast amounts of CO2? All the people heading to the theaters in their fossil fueled vehicles, electricity for the movie house, and so on? Perhaps instead of doing this, they could all live their lives like it is 1299, like they want everyone else to do.
Avatar: Avatar is big, loud, and bodacious — and totally bankrupt as a cinematic experience. ... [T]he eyes sort of collapse from the fatigue of watching vacant characters talk in a strange language (with subtitles) best described as the ramblings of an environmentalist college professor delivered by a befuddled fairy godmother. That all of this happens in 3D makes it a real slog.
Avatar: Avatar, we are told, does things with cameras and computers and actors that have never been done before. ... What they didn't tell us is that Avatar is blitheringly stupid; indeed, it's among the dumbest movies I've ever seen. Avatar is an undigested mass of clichés nearly three hours in length taken directly from the revisionist westerns of the 1960s — the ones in which the Indians became the good guys and the Americans the bad guys.
Matthews Urges James Cameron To Trash 'Dangerous' Global Warming Deniers in 'Right Wing Media'. Chris Matthews spent an entire segment of Monday's Hardball sucking up to director James Cameron as the MSNBC host prodded the "Avatar" director to trash those in the "right wing media" who deny global warming, like Glenn Beck, as "very dangerous to this country." Cameron, who was on to plug the DVD version (coming soon to a landfill near you) of his pro-greenie fantasy flick, warned the Earth was being imperiled by not only the United States but also a rising middle class in places like India and China, and urged viewers to combat the "professional deniers" like Beck who are thwarting his fight against the "clear and present danger" of climate change.
"Avatar:" Eco-Marxist Eye Candy. On the surface it's a rather mundane "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back," action/adventure flick. What sets it apart from the run-of-the-mill examples of the genre, is its beautiful graphics; which combined with the film's storyline, make for cleverly compelling eco-propaganda. And eco-propaganda is, of course, also Far Left anti-capitalism/anti-democracy/anti-free enterprise, Marxist/Fascist propaganda.
A remake of "The Day The Earth Stood Still"
Movie Reveals Truth About Environmentalism. Over the weekend, I watched The Day The Earth Stood Still, a 1950's sci-fi classic retooled for the present day... if by retooled one means transformed into a nauseating smorgasbord of left-wing cliches. Yowser, this puppy has everything from the Good Muslim to the Trigger-Happy Military to the Evil Guy With The — Ooooh! — Flag Lapel Pin, and those are just for starters.
Global Warming Horror Flick Put on Ice. How embarrassing is it when you produce a horror movie based on global warming and when the time comes to release it, the planet is experiencing some of the coldest weather in decades? Such is the case with The Thaw starring Val Kilmer.
Critics Pan 'Day the Earth Stood Still' Remake With Global Warming Theme. Although the words "global warming" are never actually uttered in the remake, that is what the producers mean as the threat posed being posed by humans along with the other environmental problems. Perhaps the worst environmental problem posed by this movie is the waste of good film stock as you can see in the devastating reviews ...
Wall-E doesn't say anything. I'm a conservative, and I just love the movie "Wall-E." That makes me an outcast among many of my fellow conservatives who have judged Pixar's post-apocalyptic cartoon about a trash-compacting robot to be a carbonphobic, Al Gore-worshiping, global-warming panic-mongering assault on capitalism, President Bush and U.S. prosperity.
Wall-E: Disney is a company rooted in political correctness, so it's not surprising to see Wall-E is full of PC capriciousness. The PC arcs out like sparks from a fork-in-a-toaster as we see what Eeeeevil Corporations have done to the planet, leaving little Wall-E behind to clean up the mess. The Earth has been trashed -- literally. ... This may be the bleakest view of the future Walt Disney Inc. has ever put on celluloid. Capitalism is bad. Capitalists are bad people. Corporations (specifically American ones) are evil entities bent on destroying the planet for profit. I know this, because Hollyweird tells me so.
Leonardo DiCaprio's Eco Movie Bombs. I hesitated to say before "11th Hour" actually opened how mind-numbingly dull it was for fear that I would ruin it for those interested in the subject of global warming. But at Cannes, when the film by Nadia Conners and Leila Conners Petersen was shown to journalists, nearly the entire room fell asleep. "The 11th Hour" is grindingly boring. Basically, a series of scientists, one after another, warn the audience that the world is coming to an end. These talking heads are interspersed with stock footage of melting glaciers.
Animal planet: Evan Almighty suggests that God is unhappy with how we have treated the environment. In Evan God is sending a flood because we cut down too many trees — an idea that's tired not because it's a lie but because it is a Hollywood cliché.
This is an original
compilation, Copyright © 2013 by Andrew K. Dart
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that even most believers in the global warming theory would call this misleading at best. "The vast majority of the world's scientists" don't even work on climate. Among those scientists who do, "the vast majority" DO NOT claim "we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe."Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb. If the vast majority of the world's scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced.
A Skeptic's Guide to 'An Inconvenient Truth': An Inconvenient Truth (AIT), Vice President Al Gore's book on "The planetary emergency of global warming and what can be done about it," is not the non-partisan, non-ideological exposition of climate science and moral common-sense that it purports to be. Rather, AIT is a colorfully illustrated lawyer's brief for global warming alarmism and energy rationing.
Scientists: Gore Goes Too Far in 'An Inconvenient Truth'. Several experts on climate change, including both proponents and skeptics of the man-made global warming theory, question former Vice President Al Gore's assertions in his Academy Award-winning documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth."
Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth": One-sided, Misleading, Exaggerated, Speculative, Wrong. An Inconvenient Truth, former Vice President Al Gore's book on "The planetary emergency of global warming and what can be done about it," purports to be a non-partisan, non-ideological exposition of climate science and moral common sense. In reality, An Inconvenient Truth is a colorfully illustrated lawyer's brief for global warming alarmism and energy rationing. It is a J'Accuse hurled at fossil fuel energy-based civilization, especially the United States, and above all the Bush Administration and its purported allies in the U.S. oil and auto industries.
A Convenient Fiction: Steve Hayward's rebuttal to "An Inconvenient Truth" won't thrill either the environmental crowd or Hollywood's liberal elite. … Hayward, as a global warming skeptic, has an advantage over [Al] Gore. Unlike Gore, he is calm and reasonable, avoids hyperbole, and sticks to the facts, some of which are confusing or contradictory. The result is that he is closer to what he calls "the general consensus" among scientists about global warming than Gore is.
Inconvenient truths: The largest single factor driving the debate on global warming is the Al Gore film An Inconvenient Truth. The movie has been marketed as a scientific documentary, but in fact it is an artful and deceptive propaganda film. The claims made in An Inconvenient Truth are either wrong, disingenuous, or misleading.
Global Warming Skepticism: In all honesty, though, there was artistic merit to the Gore film. It was, for instance, remarkably effective at humanizing Gore. As a politician he was long seen as wooden and almost sterile, unable to relate to the average person. This was reinforced by his two terms as Bill Clinton's vice president, a role that relegated him to the position of sidekick to the more affable — and important — president. But An Inconvenient Truth challenged that perception.
Will Al Gore Melt? If not, why did he chicken out on an interview? Mr. Gore's is a convenient story, but isn't it against the facts? He considers Antarctica the canary in the mine, but again doesn't tell the full story. He presents pictures from the 2% of Antarctica that is dramatically warming and ignores the 98% that has largely cooled over the past 35 years. The U.N. panel estimates that Antarctica will actually increase its snow mass this century. Similarly, Mr. Gore points to shrinking sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere, but don't mention that sea ice in the Southern Hemisphere is increasing. Shouldn't we hear those facts?
An Inaccurate Depiction of the State of Global Warming Science. Throughout the film Gore displays his passion for the global warming issue, and it is obvious that he has dedicated a substantial amount of time to learning about climate change and the greenhouse effect. This leads to an obvious question. The Kyoto Protocol was negotiated in December of 1997 giving the Clinton-Gore administration more than three years to present the Protocol to the United States Senate for ratification. Given Gore's position in the senate and his knowledge and passion for global warming, one must wonder why then Vice President Gore did not seize on what appears to have been an opportunity of a lifetime?
Propagandists shouldn't throw stones. Scientists have shown that nearly every assertion in Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth" is false, and yet Gore has the nerve to call opposing facts "propaganda."
Inconvenient Truths: Novel science fiction on global warming. Al Gore will probably win an Academy Award for his global-warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth, a riveting work of science fiction. The main point of the movie is that, unless we do something very serious, very soon about carbon dioxide emissions, much of Greenland's 630,000 cubic miles of ice is going to fall into the ocean, raising sea levels over twenty feet by the year 2100. Where's the scientific support for this claim?
Top Ten Junk Science Moments for 2006. Al Gore whipped the world into a global warming frenzy with his doomsday documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth." [Steve] Milloy personally asked Mr. Gore to help arrange a debate between scientists about the purported climate catastrophe. He declined (twice) without explanation — leaving me to wonder why global warming alarmists are unwilling to explain why they believe in non-validated and always-wrong computer guess-timations of future climate change rather than actual temperature measurements and greenhouse-effect physics that indicate manmade emissions of greenhouse gases are not a problem.
Global Warming: Fact, Fiction and Political Endgame. [Al Gore,] the doughy darling of Leftcoast glitterati has received two Oscar nominations for a junk-science production called "An Inconvenient Truth," a pseudo-documentary born of the wildly improbable pop film "The Day After Tomorrow." Gore's "Truth," however, is even stranger than the Hollywood fiction that inspired it. The celebration of Gore's film coincides, not coincidentally, with the much-ballyhooed release of a media summary of a report on global warming by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. These two events will serve as a fine backdrop for the coming cavalcade of dire ecological predictions by Gore and his ilk. Their goal will be to saturate the all-too-sympathetic media outlets with apocalyptic hysterics about a man-made global disaster.
It's good sense to avoid consensus on global warming. As it came to be watched by qualified persons, devastating critiques of the looseness of the film's science began to appear on the internet. More than 20 basic errors, some of them schoolboy howlers, were identified. From his film, Gore seemed to have lived his life on an imaginary planet where natural change didn't exist, and all change was anyway morally bad.
Save the Environment -- from school dunce Al Gore. If Al Gore were in Professor Tim Ball's classroom, he wouldn't be bringing his Report Card home. Gore's Oscar-winning film, An Inconvenient Truth will return to class when youngsters return to school next month. "They are showing his film in schools when I would give it an F even as a Grade X assignment," says climatologist Ball.
The Virtues of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide: Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth," includes some very remarkable revelations including:
1. A "computer calculated" temperature prediction curve with predictions beginning in 1938 — when neither Al Gore nor the computer had yet been invented.
2. Photos of South Sea islanders being washed from their islands by rising seas — sea level having risen 3 inches during the past 50 years.
3. Drawings of species driven to extinction by human use of hydrocarbons — including the Wooly Mammoth, which has been gone from the Earth for thousands of years.
4. A little girl's ice cream cone melting before she can eat it — as a result of the current 0.5° centigrade per century increase in temperature.
CNN Meteorologist: 'Definitely Some Inaccuracies' in Gore Film. CNN Meteorologist Rob Marciano clapped his hands and exclaimed, "Finally," in response to a report that a British judge might ban the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" from UK schools because, according to "American Morning," "it is politically biased and contains scientific inaccuracies."
Which Came First: Global Warming or Al Gore? A British court, with the help of government experts, recently found that Gore's "acclaimed" documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" contained a number of inconvenient inaccuracies, including:
• The film's misleading suggestion that ice core evidence "proves" that rising CO2 levels caused temperature increases over 650,000 years. (CO2 levels actually lag temperature increases by 800-2,000 years.)
• The implication that Hurricane Katrina is attributable to global warming. (It's not possible to attribute one-time events to global warming.)
• The claim that global warming was the cause of a great number of polar bears drowning. (Apparently Gore misread the study: four polar bears drowned due to a particularly violent storm.)
Gorgeous Propaganda, Frightening Truth. All of the events pictured in this movie have been occurring since before human activities could possibly have caused them. Glaciers have calved into seas for millions of years, storms obviously predate modern civilization and our emissions, and real-life polar bears know better than to head out into open water during the Arctic summer.
James Bowman Reviews "An Inconvenient Truth": It's true that I am a natural skeptic about prophecies of doom from scientists and other experts. And if the media buy into these prophecies and make them the subject of endless scare stories — as they did about "the population explosion" some years ago, before it became clear that it would be population implosion we had to worry about — I am even more likely to set my face against them. But the real clincher, I don't mind telling you, and the thing that is sure to persuade me there is nothing to worry about, is the presence of Al Gore as the pitchman for the apocalypse.
UKIP would ban Al Gore film in schools. Global warming 'propaganda' like the Al Gore film Inconvenient Truth will be banned in schools and public authorities will not be allowed to spend money on climate change initiatives.
Al Gore's Poison. Wednesday [8/1/2010], a gun wielding, bomb toting, eco-terrorist — who claimed to have been "awakened" by Al Gore's Oscar winning film, An Inconvenient Truth — was shot and killed by police after holding several people hostage inside the Discovery Channel headquarters in Maryland. Sadly, it's not the first incident of someone going berserk after taking in Gore's work.
More information about "An Inconvenient Truth" being shown in schools can be found here.
Reviews of other leftist propaganda films can be found here.
Back to the top of the page
Back to the Global Warming Page
Jump to the Cultural and political bias in motion pictures
Back to the Home page
Document location http://www.akdart.com/warming3.html|
Updated October 1, 2014.
Entire contents Copyright 2014 by Andrew K. Dart