|
|
An Inconvenient Truth
|
 |
| List Price |
: |
CDN$ 37.99 |
| Our Price |
: |
CDN$ 2 |
| You Save |
: |
CDN$ 35.99 (95%) |
| |
|
|
| 1 Used |
: | from CDN$ 14.00 |
| 7 New |
: | from CDN$ 19.95 |
| |
|
|
| Availability |
: |
Usually ships in 24 hours |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Editorial Reviews: | | |  | | With the fate of our planet arguably hanging in the balance, An Inconvenient Truth may prove to be one of the most important and prescient documentaries of all time. As he jokingly refers to himself, "former President-elect" Al Gore felt an urgent personal calling to draw attention--as he had been doing throughout his political career--to the increasingly desperate crisis of global warming, and this riveting documentary is basically a filmed version (by respected TV director Davis Guggenheim) of the PowerPoint lecture that Gore has presented (by his own estimate, well over 1,000 times) to attentive audiences all over the world. Considering Gore's amiable, low-key approach to charts, graphs, statistics, and photographs that leave no room for doubt regarding the reality (not "theory") of global warming as Earth's ultimate environmental crisis, many viewers will be surprised by just how fascinating and convincing this no-frills film really is. As we learn about the milestone events that shaped his character (including his sister's death and young son's near-fatal injuries after being struck by a car), Gore sheds the stiff demeanor of his 2000 presidential campaign and impresses us as a man with a mission, transcending partisan politics with an impassioned plea for common sense, ethical forthrightness, and passionate purpose in reversing the harmful effects of global warming through personal and political responsibility. Some may accuse Gore of exploiting global warming as a Democratic platform, but his honest conviction regarding this "inconvenient truth" (i.e. overwhelming evidence of global warming that's troublesome to those whose interests are threatened by Gore's irrefutable message) is likely to silence all but the most obtusely stubborn detractors. By taking the high road and discreetly avoiding a full-on assault against the George W. Bush administration (which has steadfastly avoided "the inconvenient truth" with obfuscating spin control and policies favoring the oil industry), Gore effectively rises above political differences with a stern but hopeful eye toward a better future for our children.--Jeff Shannon | |
| Custom Reviews: | |
|
| Politics aside, surprisingly well presented | |
| | This presentation makes a strong fact based backing of what can or is already the consequences of global warming.
I have been to a few of the locations pointed out in the video, including Glacier National park. And if I had just watched this video I may have been skeptical of a one sided argument that was packed or spun for ulterior motives. But seeing the results here and now this becomes really spooky. The thing that makes Stephen King stories so scary is that he keeps them just n the realm of reality; so if there is any credence to the global warming we are now in the middle of a Stephen King scenario.
The film is not just a scary we are doomed message but offers reasonable sounding practical alternatives.
The first step in any action is awareness.
What do you think?
What will you do?
| | "Consensus as the one that has developed around [global warming] is rare in science" | |
| | XXXXX
"Out of 925 recent articles in peer-review scientific journals about global warming, there was no disagreement [that it is occurring]. Zero."
The above is just one of the facts you will learn from viewing this Academy Award-winning, riveting, easy-to-understand, and surprisingly non-boring documentary about climate change, specifically global warming. It features former U.S. vice-president Al Gore standing on a stage before a large screen lecturing to an audience.
Generally, Gore reviews:
(1) the scientific evidence for global warming (he has access to many scientists)
(2) the politics of global warming
(3) the economics of global warming
(4) its consequences (those happening now and those that are predicted)
There seems to be some confusion as to what exactly the contents of this film entails. To alleviate this problem, I will give the title of each scene below and where I feel is necessary, a comment in parenthesis:
(1) The river (this is one item in an introductory sequence)
(2) Continental drift (at one time major land masses were together but slowly drifted apart)
(3) Basic science of global warming ("traditional explanation")
(4) Global warming cartoon ("better explanation")
(5) Professor Revelle (first person who proposed to measure carbon dioxide--a major culprit causing global warming-- concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere. Gore attended classes given by Revelle)
(6) Carbon Dioxide measures since 1958
(7) Glaciers receding (around the world)
(8) Ice cores (can be used to measure carbon dioxide concentrations for a particular year in the past)
(9) Carbon dioxide levels back 650 thousand years
(10) *Albert's accident (Gore's son)
(11) Rising temperatures
(12) Hurricanes (as well as tornadoes and typhoons)
(13) *2000 election (Gore versus Bush)
(14) Precipitation and Evaporation (these are increasing and relocating due to global warming)
(15) *The Gore farm
(16) The Arctic (predictor of global warming)
(17) The ocean conveyer (responsible for heat transfer)
(18) *Resistance to change (humans find it difficult to change their ways)
(19) Troubling signs (of global warming)
(20) Antarctica (another predictor of global warming)
(21) Sea-level rise
(22) *China (contrary to what you may hear, China is doing its part to curb global warming)
(23) (Human) population explosion (puts pressure on Earth's resources)
(24) Old habits + new technology (= dramatically altered consequences)
(25) *Working tobacco
(26) Is there (really) a controversy (with regard to global warming)? (Gore talks about skeptics who want to "reposition global warming as a debate")
(27) Science fraud (just like that which perpetuated the myth that smoking cigarettes does not cause lung cancer)
(28) Balancing the economy and environment (or money versus the Earth)
(29) *City by city (Gore goes to cities around the world with his message)
(30) The solutions are in our hands (to solve the problem of global warming)
(31) Are we (humans) capable of doing great (environmental) things?
(32) Our only home (the planet we call------EARTH)
(*These items are personal in nature.)
Gore is an engaging person thus making this documentary (on a serious subject) a treat to watch. The pictures, graphs, animation, etc. that appear on the screen behind Gore are well done and illustrate exquisitely each point he's making.
The accompanying book of the same title is more detailed than the documentary. The book reached #1 on the New York Times bestseller list in July 2006.
The film's distributor, "Paramount Classics," is donating 5% of the box office receipts and Gore is donating all his proceeds from this film to "The Alliance for Climate Protection." Also, this was the third highest documentary at the U.S. box office (at the time this review was written).
Finally, the DVD (the one released in 2006) is perfect in picture and sound quality. It has many interesting extras.
In conclusion, I want to leave you with the words of the late, great Dr. Carl Sagan that I feel summarize Al Gore's fascinating documentary:
"Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. [To see that the Earth is truly a "speck," refer to the picture of the Earth as seen from about 3.5 billion miles by the Voyager 1 spacecraft. Gore includes this astonishing picture both in this documentary and his book.] In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
The Earth is the only world we know so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which [the human] species could migrate. Visit yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we must make our stand."
(2006; 1 hr, 35 min; wide screen; 32 scenes)
<>
XXXXX
| | | Since he reportedly gets $100K per talk, doesn't walk his talk and there are billion$ in carbon credit trading hanging in the balance how believable is he?
There is a strong correlation between sunspots and earth(as well as mars) temperatures, none with CO2 emissions.
Pollution we need to do something about, man made CO2 emissions I don't think so, and if we really do, peak oil will force reductions.
| | My opinion on Global Warming (Not so much on the film, but the film sucks.) | |
| | Here's my opinion on Global Warming, and why it isn't real. Global Warming is probably one of the biggest fabrications of the last century. If you'd read my essay, I'll explain why I believe, and why I think you should believe, Global Warming isn't real.
I bet many people nowadays think Carbon Dioxide is a pollutant. It isn't. On junkscience.com, they had a global warming FAQ. Here's what it said: "Question: But we're responsible for all the carbon dioxide greenhouse effect?" They answered: "Gracious no! Humans can only claim responsibility, if that's the word, for abut 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually, the rest of it is all natural." They also said, "Half our estimated emissions fail to accumulate in the atmosphere," "disappearing" into sinks as yet undetermined." Jerry Taylor, director of natural resource studies at the CATO institute, says: "The warming will be relatively moderate, about 2-3 degrees in the next hundred years, which is relatively manageable..."
Carbon dioxide is one of the biggest building blocks of life. Trees need carbon dioxide to thrive, it's in rain, we breath it out of our bodies. Wikipedia defies Carbon dioxide as: "... a chemical compound composed of one carbon and two oxygen atoms. It is often referred to by its formula CO2. It is present in the Earth's atmosphere at a low concentration of approximately 0.038% and is an important greenhouse gas. In its solid state, it is called dry ice. It is a major component of the carbon cycle." Also according to Wikipedia, the Earth's atmosphere is, "78% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.038% carbon dioxide, trace amounts of other gases, and a variable amount (average around 1%) of water vapor."
The hypocrisy of global warming astounds me. People like Al Gore will tell us that as Global Warming progresses, we will require personal sacrifice. I doubt many people will change their lifestyle as a result of this event. As far as I can tell, no one has, and even if they did, it is very, very minor. The only things I see people doing are carpooling or turning of a light when they leave a room. That, all in all, isn't going to do much to our electrical consumption. Patrick Moore, again, a former president of Greenpeace, said "I think the environmental is basically elitist."
I'd like to bring up what happened a couple months ago. We found something that might take away from your view as the so-called "Global Warming Strike Leader:" Patrick Moore, a life long environmentalist and a former president of Greenpeace, said, "Basically they are using sensation, misinformation, and scare tactics." This is what Al Gore is using. Here's an article from USA Today:
Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.
A point http://www.kafalas.com/urbcol74.htm had was: "Climate change takes hundreds (or thousands) of years. For us, with lives spanning only a few decades, it's hard to see the forest for the trees." When you think about it, it seems literally impossible for the temperature to rise that quickly in merely a decade. Over the years, our pollution has actually gone down, and we've gotten better. In the 70's, the smokestacks produced, well, smoke. Nowadays, almost all of the smokestacks produce steam. Our cars are much more fuel efficient and produce less emissions. Don't you think global warming would have occurred in the 70's, or early 80's, not in the turning point of our environmentally-safe technology?
But what really gets me mad is that we're spending so much time and money on the subject, when we should be worried more so about illegal drugs, starving countries, and other, more real and less debatable issues. According to www.heritage.org, the USA government spent some $45 billion dollars on the question. 45 billion! We could have spent that money helping starving countries, our soldiers in Iraq and the Iraqi people, and gotten homeless people off the street.
I am also very angry that the schools present only one side of the argument. Our school system makes it seem as though Global Warming is an unequivocal truth and there is no side that says it isn't real. But there is. Much of the world, the IPCC, the government, and even the scientific population agree that it isn't real.
Robert J. Samuelson says, "Global warming may or may not be the great environmental crisis of the next century, but -- regardless of whether it is or isn't -- we won't do much about it. We will (I am sure) argue ferociously over it and may even, as a nation, make some fairly solemn-sounding commitments to avoid it. But the more dramatic and meaningful these commitments seem, the less likely they are to be observed. Little will be done. . . . Global warming promises to become a gushing source of national hypocrisy.''
It even says in the article in one of our Social Studies Current Events package: "...that the planet's surface is warming at a rate not seen for at least 10, 000 years..." So, do you think 10,000 years ago they had cars? This shows these climate changes have been seen before. Besides, if this change occurs, as I stated before, the temperature will only go up 1 degree, and, if the Antarctic indeed melts, the water level will only go up around a couple inches, unlike the outrageous prediction of several feet. After all, 70 percent of the world is covered in water, and I think scientists forget this water will spread out everywhere.
I also strongly urge you to watch the film "The Great Global Warming Swindle." In this film, scientists and member of the IPCC speak out on their opinions of Global Warming. Since this film is hard to find in America because it is an English film, you'll find it on Google Video or Youtube.
Thanks for reading my essay, and I hope it changed your view on Global Warming.
| | | This is a fairly interesting film, though not particularly enlightening, despite the glossy special effects. It's biggest fans, I suspect, will be those who fall asleep during the nightly news often enough not to have a basic understanding of global warming, and all that it implies, and those who might not wonder why Al Gore was so reticent about his burning passion to save the planet during his campaign for the American presidency. The sour aftertaste this film leaves behind is that here is a man who would rather talk about global warming than do anything about it, and is much more comfortable on the lecture circuit than in the White House. In the end, An Inconvenient Truth seems less a call to action in an hour of global peril than a transparent attempt at self promotion by a man who missed his hour to strut.
| |
|
|
Home
View Cart
Bookmark This Page
Contact Us
