|Index||4 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
My wife and I attended an event last night at the Greek Theater in Los
Angeles, featuring a screening of the new film and an appearance by Al
Gore, who gave in an interview and update of what's been happening
since the release of An Inconvenient Truth in 2006. What I describe
below are features and conclusions expressed in the film and by Al Gore
during his interview.
The essential truth is that climate change and the warming of the Planet Earth is not a political issue. It is not hypothetical. It is not a projection for the future. It is here. It is reality. It has been made a political issue in America by the fossil fuel industry and well-healed and powerful people who are being made richer by denying that reality. It's that simple.
The political ploys that they have used are nearly identical to those that were employed by the tobacco industry in the suppression and obfuscation of smoking related health data in the 1980's. The results have also been similar. They have spent over two billion dollars on their campaign to sway public opinion on the issue. Their efforts have have been somewhat successful. A significant segment of the population has been successfully misled, which has produced a widespread apathy to to the urgency of the situation and to the issue itself.
Science is a major proponent of truth in our civilization. It is not inherently wise, but it can tell us when something is broken, and often, how to fix it. Climate science has already shown us how to fix the climate problem physically. It has fallen short of helping enough people in power to develop the will to do something about it.
In order to fix that, it has taken a serious advocate, in the person of Al Gore, to champion the endeavor to educate and otherwise shift the awareness of people toward the truth.
The most prominent example of this is Gore's negotiations with the Indian Prime Minister Narenda Modi during around the time of the global climate conference in 2015. Modi was reluctant to lend his support for a climate accord because he felt that the Indian economy was not strong enough to shift resources toward the development of new alternative energy technologies and industries. The need for the developing nation's increase in energy production was immediate, with no room for mistakes. Modi and Parliament were on the verge of authorizing the building of 400 new coal based generation plants. Gore realized that that would be a climate catastrophe. He also realized that it was not their fault for their thinking that way. India was in a really tough spot.
So, Gore contacted Solar City's CEO Lyndon Rive about negotiating an agreement with India for the transfer of solar photo-voltaic technology to India that would benefit both India and Solar City. After intense negotiations, the deal was done, and Modi agreed to join the Paris climate accord. Now that's deal making.
Gore admitted, both to the audience and in the film, that he was often on the verge of despair regarding the trend of American politics on the matter. Still, he persevered. The history of setbacks is long.
One of the first was the cancellation of the NASA DSCOVR project. It was one of the first casualties of George W Bush's new administration. The project was intended to launch a satellite into a solar orbit that is synchronized with the orbit with the earth in order to observe the earth from a constant "full earth" perspective. It could make make measurements of the earth 24/7 which could then be analyzed to yield useful climate data. For example, it would be a constant monitor over time of the ratio of incident and reflected energy on the earth. That would yield an accurate measurement of how much energy is being absorbed by greenhouse gasses and the rise of global temperatures.
Many setbacks have occurred in America with the election of climate denying politicians to government office, and most recently, the appointment of many of them to federal executive cabinet and other high ranking positions.
On the other hand, there seems to be a global trend for the adoption of renewable energy sources. Even in the US, in Texas, no less, one town proudly touts its 100% reliance on these resources. Some states have nearly reached 100% fossil fuel independence. Across the world, the adoption and use of renewable energy is accelerating dramatically. In Chile, in the last year or so, the production of renewable energy has grown by several thousand percent. China has committed to the movement.
When asked whether a tipping point has been reached in the industrial and political adoption of renewable energy, Gore did not state unequivocally that it has, but he indicated that he thinks it's inevitable. He remains hopeful.
There were many examples shown in the movie of devastating events that have occurred worldwide since the last movie that are directly and unequivocally attributable to temperature and climate. Amid all the massive devastation, one event really stood out as a surprising and disturbing data point.
In 2015 a massive deluge was recorded in Tucson. It seemed to be an aerial view of clouds dumping water (billions of gallons?) on Tucson as if a giant barrel in the sky tipped over. You could actually make out the splash of the water on the ground. Not drops. Barrels.
I don't recall any mention of tipping points with regard to climate change itself. That is, the point at which the planet will not recover sufficiently to stop the warming progression. This was a prominent topic earlier on in the discussion.
Whether you're a fan of Al Gore or not, he isn't really the issue here. He does a great job presenting the various forms of overwhelming evidence for global warming and mankind's link to it, but he doesn't do it in a political or spiteful way. He shows global temperature and atmospheric carbon patterns, and he shows that our last 20 years have been the highest by a longshot over the previous 600,000 years. Frankly, before seeing the film, I'd heard a lot of information about global warming being a myth, but this film dispels that notion with many independent pieces of evidence.
*I will review my rating and my comment after watching it*
I just find it shameful of IMDb to allow voting on movies that are not out yet. This should not be allowed, unless the reviewer is a certified critic.
Climate Change is one of those issues that Americans either don't know about or don't know enough about. I study the science and I follow the evidence, just like most people should. And what I find is that every time I post something related to Climate Change I get people who comment back with fake news articles, misleading articles, outdated articles.
First, this movie is cold hard facts created to give back knowledge to masses, including easy to deceive right-wingers who can't think logically for themselves. The movie uses individual incidents to weave a pattern together one big massive, factual picture to inform that mortals have significant effect on this planet. It just is so. In fact, the heating of the earth's atmosphere, caused by tacky trucks and SUVs is quickly becoming the new discovery of our time! Many conventions are held worldwide where actual scientists provide documented evidence and conclusive proof that global warming is indeed serious ... unless you have a spaceship and will flee the planet. And no one is more truthful than those who say fat Trump should not destroy the planet! Once again, if money is to be made, the climate change deniers, blind, those in payola with big coal and big oil and ostriches arrive on the scene and deny evidence. This movie exists not to further enrich taxpayer subsidized big oil, but to have organizations that would benefit from climate-change denial revealed. Follow the money. Big oil, big coal, SUV manufacturers, etc. Follow the money. Follow the money. Al Gore went into this to do good, and ended up doing well--very well indeed. Honest scientists are outraged at these people who cannot even stick their heads out of the window to see what is going on and choose big payments of cash to junk science and payola so-called scientists. Al Gore correctly would have these scientists labelled "bad science" if there was a better planet to be made and there is. Notice the language that is used. I've seen the raw data on sea levels, however, if I said what the data actually show, then I'm akin to a person who cares for the planet (and deniers hate that)! If you've heard the term "climate change denier" which is used often, then you understand some people are being paid by large polluters and others just hate humanity and themselves. We need more good science, easy access on who is funding the studies and transparency on who is benefiting financially by undermining and ignoring 99% of scientists. THEN, we might begin to address the serious issue of keeping Earth healthy.
|External reviews||Official site||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|