| Title | : | An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 1594865671 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9781594865671 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 328 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 2006 |
| Awards | : | Green Earth Book Award Honor Book (2008), Grammy Award Best Spoken Word Album (2009) |
An Inconvenient Truth: The Planetary Emergency of Global Warming and What We Can Do About It Reviews
-
I really wish I hadn't used the F word so much last week so I could say, "I can't F-ing believe this" and it would have some umpf to it!
When i see this book i imagine someone grabbing it off the shelf at Borders, paying for it, slipping it into a corn bi-product plastic bag, heading out to their car with it happily swinging from their arm as their free hand cracks open another water bottle.
ugh! ugh! ugh! on the same day Gore was announced to receive is big woopin-to-do award i read an article in the paper about a woman and her ecologically friendly house. She was siting there in her living room that was probably big enough to fit my entire house, talking about all her environmentally friendly products, from the place mats that were made from recycled bags, to the cork floors that were made from tennis shoe scraps found on Nike factory floors, to mahogany wood harvested in parts of the rain forest specifically designated for cutting, to her vintage jewelry.
so I'm getting this picture of these little bloated bellied kids running into the Nike factory after their parents have finished their 15 hour shift and they're on their hands and knees picking up all the little scraps so that they can be bundled up and flown to some other factory that can then glue them all together and then fly it to this woman's house where her kids can walk around bare foot (bare food by choice, not necessity) on their lovely, recycled cork floor.
and I'm wondering if they had some super strength birds that flew those mahogany boards to her eco-lovin abode or if maybe, just maybe she utilized a few more resources than would have been necessary if she'd stuck with the wood floors that were already in her house- ?
Possibly my favorite part of the article was where she congratulated herself on not throwing out her plasma t.v. or her stove even though she doesn't cook or watch t.v. because she doesn't want to contribute to land fills. Perfect!!! don't stop purchasing, just don't throw out what you purchase and certainly don't give it to someone else, because while you may be OK with getting all your meals made by someone else you may want to, at some point, drop something out from that Styrofoam container you got your left overs in and heat them up for breakfast.
what does all this have to do with Al Gores book - well when i see his book, i am reminded of him standing up at the Oscars in front of 50 kazillion light bulbs telling us to change our light bulbs and i think him and her would get along fabulously. I think he could take her for a ride in his limo, maybe Mr. DiCaprio could follow in his Prius and he could show her where all his mines used to be and how he's changed his ways and they could swap ideas on how to save the world without actually compromising their lifestyles in any way shape of form. -
The Importance of being Inconvenient
A good test of truth is to see if an idea/opinion/economic suggestion is an "Inconvenient Truth", especially if it is inconvenient for the speaker.
If it is not, chances are that the expounder is just playing to his own and his audience's biases.
"Because economic and social phenomena are so forbidding, or at least so seem, and because they yield few hard tests of what exists and what does not, they afford to the individual a luxury not given by physical phenomena. Within a considerable range, he is permit- ted to believe what he pleases. He may hold whatever view of this world he finds most agreeable or otherwise to his taste.
Numerous factors contribute to the acceptability of ideas. To a very large extent, of course, we associate truth with convenience — with what most closely accords with self-interest and personal well-being or promises best to avoid awkward effort or unwelcome dislocation of life."
~ John Kenneth Galbraith, commenting on "Conventional Wisdom"
+++
Earlier Review:
Not as well compiled as the 2006 Documentary, but still very exhaustive and informative. Does get repetitive and preachy at times and is an almost exclusively US oriented book, but inspite of all that this is still a must read for the concerned. -
I've just finished reading Al Gore's book on climate change, and I have to say that I was not particularly impressed. I hadn't expected a great piece of literature, and I wasn't wrong. But I'm not going to pick holes Gore's turgid prose style (though I do wonder if the text was even looked at by an editor). My problem is with Gore's representation of the scientific data on global warming.
It's clear that the temperature of the earth has been increasing in recent decades. And it's also clear that human activities, in particular the production of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, have contributed to this increase in temperature. It is not entirely clear how much of this change in temperature can be attributed to human activity. Gore however, never mentions that natural, non-anthropogenic factors may contributing to climate change. He leaves the reader with the impression that the increase in global temperature is entirely anthropogenic (see pages 66 and 67, for example).
This is not the scientific consensus. The scientific consensus, as cited in Naomi Oreskes
survey study (mentioned approvingly by Gore), is:"Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations."
So, not "all" but "most" climate change is attributable to human causes. A substantial portion may well be due to natural causes. That's not entirely surprising given that there were substantial shifts in global climate well before the appearance of mammals, let alone Homo sapiens. I think this is an important distinction, and one that Gore should not have omitted.
Don't get me wrong, I'm generally in agreement with taking steps to ameliorate climate change. People who buy Porsche SUVs are not especially bright (tasteless idiots -- who drives off the lot with a
Cayenne rather than a
Boxster?). Counter-climatic air-conditioning (the thermostat set to "Fires of Hell" in winter and "Everest Base Camp" in summer) is a massive waste of energy. Quite apart from their effects on climate change these types of wasteful energy use offend my sense of frugality, and also result in old-fashioned environmental pollution.
But I do think that if we are ever to take significant steps toward ending or slowing climate change an honest accounting of the scientific evidence is necessary. And I don't think An Inconvenient Truth provides that.
Finally, a quick note to Al: New Zealand isn't part of Australia -- can you fix up page 251 in the second edition? Thanks. -
UGH! Not much more to say. If you like situation ethics, flawed logic and reading, and quasi-science... this is your read....
-
My first degree was in science and I continue to have an abiding interest in it. I regularly read articles and books related to the sciences. My biggest problem with this book is that the "science" is embarassingly absent. The problem for me is, subtracting politics, and just looking at the studies, etc. the book bases its premises on, most have been found to be meritless, skewed and in a couple of cases actually falsified (not by Gore, by the scientists).
I soldily believe we DO need to care for this planet, but please lets base our discussions on facts, not computer models that aren't even accurate enough to predict the weather a week out let alone years or decades. -
...I don't even know what to say about this except...Al Gore owns a jet...
-
I enjoyed reading Mr. Gore's slide show about global warming, the causes, and seeing the before and after pictures of various parts of the world was truly amazing. I would like to have seen a month with the years that the pictures were taken, though. I thought the information was presented in a clear, concise manner. I learned a lot more about global warming. The presentation clearly shows "we" have a problem and if "we" don't wake up real quick and do something about the planet "we" will be leaving a mess for our future generations.
This is a quick book to read, a lot of full color before and after pictures of various parts of the world, satellite imagery, etc. There are a few short stories about Mr. Gore's life: when he was younger, with his wife as newlywed's, about his dad (Al Gore, Sr), the accident involving his son when he was young and I enjoyed reading them.
There is a section involving hurricanes, typhoons, and cyclones (with lots of pictures) and information showing how the warmer oceans are generating more powerful and frequent storms. Pictures explaining the ocean currents, heavy salt in the Atlantic that acts as a pump now slowing down, corral reefs, ice caps on mountains (before and after), homes up north built on permafrost--now melted. Extinction. At the end, there are suggestions and websites for alternative sources of energy. Clearly, we have the ability to use the alternative energy sources: wind, hydro, geothermal, corn oil, sewage, etc and we need to encourage our leaders to shift to these before it is too late.
Numerous quotes by Winston Churchill and Mark Twain that I enjoyed.
Here's one: "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt." by Mark Twain
-
Gore's Magnum Opus on the reality of global warning, how he came to his position and the key changes in his life that influenced his stance. Great book… if you haven't read it… you should! 7 out of 12.
-
Al Gore is perhaps the best know American politicians that people still respect around the world. What he said and wrote in 1992 is not only proven today but we find that he underestimated the severity of the affects on this world. In this new book he demonstrates using the most simplistic method of cause and effect that it is used today in 5th and 6 grade classrooms. He clearly demonstrates that the only time that our earth has seen this kind of die-off we are experiencing today was 65 million years ago. And again he explains the difference between normal long term global warming that takes thousand of years, and the fifty to one hundred year time span that we have now. Volcanic activity impacts our world for only a few years. What he is saying is that most species will not have enough time to move to more favorable environments, that krill the base of the ocean food chain are no longer abundant as our ice shelves disappear.
And conservatives still make fun of him; Un-bloody believable! -
Excellent book. A good starter for the climate debate.
In closing, I would like to say Man-Bear-Pig. It's scary folks. -
The CO2 is not the cause of/for global warming; sorry, if that's inconvenient.
With Ice Growing At Both Poles, Global Warming Theories Implode
in:
http://principia-scientific.org/ice-g...
UPDATE
Just to report he's been in Oporto for 2 cups of Porto-wine and a 1-hour talk on his specialty: "global emergency, beware!!!"[]
Plus, he came to affirm Trump is "unstable" and the British politicians are cowards for not having a second (Brexit) referendum.
One can always wonder about the wine effects....
PS Next time I hope he'll bring AOC () along. (S)He'll surely have more impact. -
Before I started reading this book, I had no solid background of the subject of global warming. Some how, after I finished reading it, I wished I never read it at all. Before I knew anything about global warming, I was in a state of denial of the damage the human population is making towards the big planet we live in. At first, I didn’t find it logical that human wastes could negatively impact such a big planet. However, this book taught me my obligations towards the environment that I am living in.
The book is illustrated in a way that makes it easy for the readers to be convinced of the threat of global warming. Statistical data, comparison pictures and facts were used to support their message. The book is also rich of definitions concerning the environment for those who are new to this topic.
Frightening scenarios were illustrated in this book of the threats of global warming, and the outcome if it were not reversed on time. From flooding, climate changing, and health related problems. This book is good for all ages, especially for young children to gain knowledge that would shape their characteristics into a more environmentally friendly person when they grow up. -
so is global warming a hoax? is it just a natural fluctation of the Earth's climate? hmmm. Food for thought. Here's my take. If you lock yourself in a garage with a running vehicle, you die. It's ignorant to think we are not creating health problems (asthma, cancers, autism) and environmental issues (3 headed frogs and "confused" bees) with pollution. It's ignorant to politicize the whole thing instead of working together, making things better for everyone. That's all from your tree loving, otter scrubbing, bunny hugger.
-
This is a point/counterpoint essay I wrote on global warming for my energy & the environment class:
I read the Inconvenient Truth and watched the documentary when they first came out a few years ago, and I have been very concerned about climate change since then. I’ve calculated my carbon footprint and taken steps to reduce and I encourage others to do the same. At first glance, I thought that this assignment might be similar to the evolution vs. creationism/intelligent design debates. On the one side you have overwhelming scientific evidence and consensus across the scientific community, while on the other side you have merely human conjecture, speculation, and religious conviction as “evidence.” The argument that they should both be given equal weight and time in science classes in our public education system is absurd. However, when I watched the Global Warming Swindle, I was surprised at how many holes it managed to poke into my previous certainties about the causes of global warming. After doing more research on the Internet though, I think I’ve managed to patch up those holes. But I’m even more concerned now that there are other people out there who are looking for a reason to dismiss the urgency of global warming and that this film will give them an excuse to continue their complacency. Don’t get me wrong—I would love to believe that global warming doesn’t exist or at least that there is no human factor in the equation. We could just continue to guzzle fossil fuels at even faster rates and dump pollutants indiscriminately because it would really make no difference one way or the other on our environment. But the fact of the matter is what we do does make a difference because it does have an impact on our planet, our health, and even the future of our species.
The first topic of disagreement between the videos that caused me to do more research on my own was the role of the sun in the warming of our planet. The Inconvenient Truth didn’t mention the idea that the sun’s activities might be a cause for varying temperature on earth, but the Swindle video suggests that changing solar activity is much more closely correlated with the earth’s changing temperature than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. From the charts in the video, that would appear to be so, but in my later research I found out that the Swindle video had blurred out the data from 1980 on, because from that point on the two greatly diverge. The earth’s temperature continues to rise while solar activity remains relatively stable. In fact, the scientists who did that study concluded that the sun can’t be causing global warming because solar activity and the earth’s temperature have not correlated with each other for the last 30 years! The fact that the Swindle video would deliberately withhold this data because it doesn’t prove that particular theory (in fact it disproves it) is itself a fraud and a swindle. That point alone did a lot to discredit the video for me.
The second point that the two videos disagreed on was whether the recent warming trend is a natural part of the earth’s temperature fluctuations or whether human activity has had an influence on this trend. Europe was warmer in the middle ages and there was a “Little Ice Age” in the 17th and 18th centuries. This was kind of a “no duh!” point to me: I realize that the climate on our planet has varied over the hundreds of millions of years it has been around. However, the question is what is causing the current warming trend now—is it the usual natural causes of climate warming (solar activity, volcanoes, etc.) or is there something else coming into play? The research indicates that none of the usual suspects of nature climate warming are to blame for the current warming trend. But there is a situation on the earth right now that has never happened before—specifically 6 billion little earthly inhabitants who pull carbon out of the earth at increasingly faster rates and dump it into the atmosphere. The Swindle makers say it’s arrogant of us to think that tiny little insignificant people could have an effect on a huge thing like the earth’s climate. Perhaps we are tiny and insignificant individually, but collectively we are a force to be reckoned with. And I think it’s naive to think nothing we do could ever have an impact on this planet.
The third topic of disagreement was the amount of consensus among the scientific community on whether recent warming trends could be attributed to human activity. Al Gore cited Dr. Oreskes’ study of the peer-reviewed science journal articles on global warming from the previous 10 years. Of the 928 articles that were sampled, 0% were in doubt as to the cause of global warming. The Swindle video seemed to suggest that there was much more variation in the scientific community and that it is even difficult to get funding for a study unless you can somehow tie it to the global warming bandwagon. I had a hard time swallowing the idea that so many scientists in independent, peer-reviewed studies could have been duped into the same faulty conclusions. The dissenting scientists on Swindle did seem to be credible and had stated that they never got a cent from big oil or big coal for raising doubt, I found some pretty damning evidence against several of the spokespersons in Swindle on a web site that debunked the video. It turns out that nearly all of them have received payments from fairly large energy companies—especially those that are anti-environmental organizations. And many of the Swindle scientists have not been published in peer-reviewed journals in several years. It appears they are not as credible as they might seem.
The last topic of disagreement that I would like to address is the correlation of carbon dioxide measurements in the earth’s atmosphere with the temperature of the earth. In the Inconvenient Truth video, it seems quite evident that they are closely correlated. In the Swindle video, it says carbon dioxide measurements actually lag behind temperature rise measurements—that it would appear it’s the rise in temperature that causes increases in carbon dioxide, not the other way around. It’s difficult for me to understand the exact science behind it, but from what I learned it is not one way or the other. They are both true—carbon dioxide both lags and amplifies temperature. One thing I read that helped me understand was that chickens both hatch from and lay eggs—showing one does not disprove the other.
There are two other things about the Swindle video that I would like to address here: one that I strongly agreed with and one that I strongly disagreed with. It was maddening to watch as the United Nations people fly into poverty-stricken, third-world areas and tell people what kind of energy they need to use. The doctor at the one run-down village health clinic described how he could not use the light and the refrigerator at the same time with the energy from the solar panel that they had. It’s ridiculous to think that developing nations are ever going to get anywhere with energy sources that are too expensive and too difficult for developed nations to implement themselves! I firmly believe that developed nations have to take the lead in renewable energy sources and shoulder the burden of the cost for implementing them. Poor countries need to use the cheapest and most available energy sources available to them. It is their right. We will never convince other people to do what we can’t (or won’t) do for ourselves.
That being said, I also strongly take issue with the portrait of all environmentalists as fundamentalists who (since the fall of our beloved communism?!?) have needed something to yell and scream about, hence we latched onto the global warming scam. There may be a strand of environmentalism that goes to extremes and gives everyone in the movement a bad name. I consider myself to be an environmentalist, but all I want is to have clean air and water for myself, my children, and people 500 years from now. I see a connection between the health of the environment and the health of human beings. I don’t think that means we have to go back to horse and buggy or churn our own butter. I rather enjoy new technologies and the modern conveniences of life. But I think we need to enjoy the earth’s resources in a responsible and sustainable way and come up with innovative ways to reduce the strain of our ever-growing population on our environment. I’m not one to think we have to save the planet—this planet has been around a long time and will continue to be around in whatever form we leave it in. Whether we as a species continue to be around and thrive on this planet is the question that remains to be answered. -
The book is easy to read and gives a good insight in to the often overlooked problem of environmental impact human beings make. It would have been better to see some citations instead of some vague sentences such as “scientists agree” etc. The link made between before and after the human impact at multiple cites could have been better illustrated if the month when the picture(s) were taken also mentioned along with the year.
Anyway, the problem of global warming or manmade impact on the environment is brought to the attention of the reader very well. The following information, however, is a good support.
Number of peer-reviewed articles dealing with “climate change” published in scientific journals during the previous 10 years: 928
Percentage of articles doubt as to the cause of global warming: 0%
Articles in the popular press about global warming during the previous 14 years: 3543
Percentage of articles in doubt as to the cause of global warming: 53%.
This supports my belief that the media has a negative influence on the constructive work and/or the current media is not as responsible as it should be; also that the concerned parties that have power look for personal gains sometimes possibly at the cost of humanity (and environment). -
I am currently going to school for environmental science; therefore, I try and read as much as possible on global warming and on the environment in general. This book though was a complete waste of my time. It took me only a few hours to get through, as it reads like a middle-school child's book ; however, in that time, I learned that "cities are getting bigger" and "glaciers are melting", all from huge one-liners that take up an entire page. No way right? So unless you are living under a rock, which you probably wouldn't be reading this then, this is all common knowledge.
-
Since when I read this I had only a basic knowledge of the entirety of global warming, it was an eye opener for me. Obviously not meant to be a literary masterpiece. So I was the target audience and it revved me up and got me angry and involved. Thanks Mr V.P.
-
Although the book is now over 12 years old, it's still worth a read. Climate science has changed, developed and become a lot more knowledgeable since Al wrote this, but the basic, easy-to-understand principles he outlines still remain today.
I found it most fascinating how many scientists and government advisers knew about the issue in the 80s, 90s and 00s, yet today, climate change is treated as if it is a new issue that was unbeknown to governments before about 2010.
There were a lot of sections in the final 75 pages that I thoroughly enjoyed. My favourite of all:
"One prominent source of disinformation has been the Bush-Cheney White House. They have attempted to silence scientists working for the government who ... have tried to warn about the extreme danger we are facing. They have appointed "skeptics" recommended by oil companies to key positions, from which they can prevent action against global warming ...
At the beginning of 2001, Bush hired a lawyer/lobbyist named Phillip Cooney to be in charge of environmental policy in the White House. For the previous six years, Cooney had worked at the American Petroleum Institute and was the person principally in charge of the oil and gas companies' campaign to confuse the American people about this issue.
Even though Cooney has no scientific training whatsoever, he was empowered by the president to edit and censor the official assessments of global warming from the EPA ... Cooney had diligently edited out any mention of the dangers global warming poses to the American people ... [A memo he wrote regarding this was leaked, and he resigned] The next day, he went to work for Exxon Mobil." -
We can observe our (humans) negative impact on our environment everywhere. Bad air (7 million people died last year due to this), more violent weather, larger spread of virus like Zika, death of animals (and humans) and even extinction of species.
But we all can contribute and try to do something about this. We can be less wasteful, eat less meat, purchase ecological & bio products, invest in green energy, use our cars less and/or switch to electrical vehicles. But even asking for an e-invoice is a contribution. We can also talk more about this and try to keep a long term mind set, not looking for short term gains all the time. At least we should stop being so ignorant and educate ourselves better.
I have personally significantly reduced meat consumption (almost vegetarian), I prefer bio products, I’ve introduced electrical vehicles in my companies, push for ecological products in Bean&Buddies and started to invest in and joined companies like SunRoof.
I hope our next generation will say “you had a lot of courage changing your behavior and investing in clean tech” and not “how could you do this, how could you destroy our planet”.
Remember, there is no planet B!!!
Book challenge: 142/1000 -
It is ironic how in the introduction Al Gore writes (pharaphrased) "Imagine that you have traveled 17 years ahead to year 2023 and are talking with your children. Will they be angry and ask why we didn't do anything, when we had the facts and tools?" Living in this future, I see that the kids are angry and disappointed that still nothing more than promises and discussions are held, and still there is so little action outside outreach (which has also been done in 1960s, 1990s, 2000s and more).
This is more of a picture book of the world and how our actions are changing it. A book you show to your kids or grandparents to explain, what is happening. It is simple, factual and makes you feel the doom. And it was written in 2006 so the doom didn't even feel so bad at that time. Also, it is written for the Americans, but what can you expect from ex VP. -
i really dont know if the book came b4 the movie or vice versa. all i know is that everything al gore said on screen was similar if not little compared to the book. though the movie was much more louder because of the animations, the book was good too becase it had the stuff that al gore might have went through too fast, or i dint catch a lot of stuff.
however, running through this book actually made me think about things again. because the first time i heard it, i was like yeah i know this, and then i continued to watch the movie, and i was like damn i did not know this stuff.
so then i borrowed the book form of the movie, and i really read it through. i mihgt not know every single detail, but i know enough to stop instigating bad behavior such as littering or even recycling in my building. -
موضوع الكتاب مهم جدا ، طريقة عرضه جميله لوجود الكثير من الصور والألوان،
يحتوي على نتائج اخر الدراسات والاحصاءات الخاصة بموضوع الاحتباس الحراري.
أعجبني اهتمام الكاتب الواضح بالموضوع ، والقسم المخصص بالحلول التي يمكن للفرد العادي أن يفعلها ليسهم بدوره في المحافظة على البيئة ووجود الكثير من الروابط الالكترونية ليطلع القارئ على المزيد من المعلومات.
لم يعجبني عدم وجود فهرس للكتاب !
وهدر الكثير من الصفحات لعرض الصور بحجم كبير والتي كان من الممكن تصغيرها لتؤدي نفس الغرض ، لا سيما وأن من ضمن ما ينصح به في الكتاب تقليل الهدر من الموارد الطبيعية ومن ضمنها الورق المصنع من الأشجار.
وأيضا يحتوي الكتاب على العديد من الصفحات السوداء والكتابة عليها باللون الأبيض وهذا يؤدي الى صعوبة التخطيط على الورق للرجوع الى النقاط المهمه والرئيسية.
فيما عدا ذلك كمحتوى ومادة أجده شيق وأنصح به، لنستطيع اتخاذ مجموعة من الخطوات لننقذ به عالمنا وكوكبنا .. الأرض -
I did not expect to like this book very much. I had heard all the bad press about Gore being preachy and hypocritical and just plain wrong. Well, I actually liked his tone. I enjoyed the short personal vignettes that came sparingly with the material from his famous "slide show." I believe that he loves the earth and that he did his best in trying to do his part to make the world a better place. He took a lot of heat for doing so. I didn't find him preachy. I found his material human and relatable and accessible. I'm not a scientist, so I can't judge his science. He may well indeed travel by jet and limo and have a big house, but I'm not in the business of judging that either. I liked the book. It read easy, went down easy, and gave me practical ideas and inspiration for being a better person.
