An Inconvenient Truth

Climate Change / Science

There’s a post up over on Slashdot about the movie "An Inconvenient Truth".

Link: Slashdot | An Inconvenient Truth.

The scariest horror film of 2006 was a documentary.

The first thing everyone wants to know, or at least to argue about, is whether Al Gore has his facts straight. The short answer is yes, he does. There are minor errors. They don’t detract from Gore’s main point, on which the scientific debate has ended.

And the main point is scary, and almost too big to think about or talk about. The earth is warming, because of us. Sometime in the next hundred years, our environment is going to change in big ways. We can’t predict it with much accuracy yet, but the best estimates we have are that it’s going to be — measured in lives and dollars — really bad.

One of our parishioners here at the Cathedral in Phoenix has been "trained" in showing this film, and we’re having a viewing and discussion of it this coming Sunday after worship. (It seemed particularly appropriate to have this event on the Sunday where we focus our worship of the Reign of Christ.)

There’s been a number of papers published recently by scientists and economists as well about the extraordinary increase in cost to society that will be incurred by delaying any action. There’s been a concurrent increase in open discussion about this issue in the religious community – both on the "left" and the "right". In all cases there is very little serious opposition to the fundamental point; we need to action now and not later.

If you have seen the movie, what did you think of it? I’ve been asked to lead a discussion following the showing. Any things that I ought to particularly pay attention to?

The Author

Episcopal bishop, dad, astronomer, erstwhile dancer...


  1. I thought it was good at drumming up enthusiasm, but less good at effecting the longlasting changes neccesary for staving off global warming. It was also careful not to talk about how much the transition to greener practices will cost to initiate, which I noticed mostly because I’m a poor college student who doesn’t have the money to buy a fancy new Prius, buy carbon offsets, or even buy more energy efficient appliances for my house.

  2. I saw it, and found it effective. Now, some of what I was moved by was his recollections of his history. I’m also originally from Tennessee, and can remember when his father was in Congress, and when he first ran.
    I hear Jon’s concern, but I found it interesting that he talked about the jobs that might be generated in responding to the problem. It isn’t just sacrifice and loss for us. There’s a lot of that, and there should be: my “carbon footprint” is relatively large, and I need to do what I can to reduce it. But, it isn’t simply Luddite in tone.
    In any case, I certainly thought it worth seeing.

Comments are closed.