I agree that the logical conclusion of the movie appears to be that we're all doomed, but Gore himself does not make this conclusion. He states that people tend to go straight from denial to despair without stopping to figure out how they might take positive action to actually solve the problem. Thus I believe the intent is to be motivational rather than fear-based.

Sent by Lynda | 3:54 PM ET | 06-25-2007

If you don't like Al Gore's approach or the way he frames his argument --- or if you don't like his politics, then bypass him and go straight to the scientists. (Preferably the ones not employed by carbon-emitting industries).

Sent by Tom Strobel | 4:07 PM ET | 06-25-2007

I haven't seen this movie, but it doesn't seem to be a contradiction to say that, on the one hand, there's too much fear-mongering out there but, on the other hand, some things are worth being afraid of.

Sent by Mark | 4:36 PM ET | 06-25-2007

All sides of most every debate use fear to persuade. They use selective facts. They use emotional appeals. They act really serious and concerned. They mock and mischaracterize the other side. Everyone has their own dystopian nightmare scenario. "Left Behind". "The Handmaid's Tale". "An Inconvenient Truth". It's all pretty much the same.

Sent by MWorrell | 4:45 PM ET | 06-25-2007

Emily Yoffe missed the point. It is very inconvenient to have to face this issue, but it is serious enough that we do not really have a choice. I am sure, however, that the day looks good to Emily, and as long has she is having a good day, we really have nothing to be concerned about.

Sent by E. Pelto | 5:49 PM ET | 06-25-2007

Tom Strobels comment is spot-on. Gore did an accurate job with the science. And a close reading of the science is even more depressing than what he communicated. We have alot of work to do. I found the solutions part of his film to be way-too short and did not adequately communicate the many options we do have.

Sent by Bill | 6:26 PM ET | 06-25-2007

Our own EPA says that half of Americans live in areas where the air is unfit to breathe. Half of Americans! It's killing people, no question. For example EPA says in Los Angeles alone, 5400 "extra" people die of lung disease each year becuase of poor air quality. Thousands of people are dying from the smog and pollution, so says our own Environmental Protection Agency. So if Al Gore is right about global warming, then thank him for bringing the problem and solutions to light. Even if he is not right, our air is still seriously polluted and it needs help in the form of fossil fuel conservation and alternative energy plans. Al Gore in any case is not a fearmonger. Watch his movie carefully and listen to his message. You may call him a scientist or a moralist but you cannot call him a fearmonger.

Sent by Kevin | 7:23 PM ET | 06-25-2007

Folks are missing the point of the blog's question. The author is not disputing the existance of global warming. The question is...is Gore using in Inconvenient Truth the very methods he faults in Assualt on Reason? I haven't yet finished the book, but so far...yes. Interesting. I admire the guy, always have, but I am very interested in seeing how the book plays out.

Sent by Steve G | 8:37 PM ET | 06-25-2007

I would rather be afraid and take action than be dismissive and let my future generations pay. I've seen the movie by Al Gore and there is nothing he does to spread unnecessary fear. It is necessary and all who want to ignore it and smear the man, may do so as they wish.

Sent by Subodh Mishra | 11:26 PM ET | 06-25-2007

Al Gore is a liar. I find it sad, that because the top two scientists in the world in Meteorology have come out and said mankind has nothing to do with any climate change. Yet, the a typical answer to that from an agenda driven liberal is that these scientists somehow work for companies trying to hide something. The exact opposite is true. People who even say it exists are paid to constantly research something that does not exist. Since 1998 the temperatures have been going down slightly. The scientific definition of global warming is a 10 degree rise in temperature over a 100 year span. It rose 6 tenths of a degree over the last 107 years, and now it is going down.
It has been turned into a religion and it has absolutely no factual basis whatsoever.

Scientists study in 400 year cycles. Gore skewered his report by starting in the middle of a cycle instead of where it should have been started.

The hottest times on record were in the 1500's. There was no industry then.No cars etc. Its a lie.Your better question is why are they lying.

Sent by Dennis Thompson | 5:56 AM ET | 06-26-2007

Mr. Thompson has presented the most fanciful group of "facts" I've ever seen. It's too bad none of them comes with references, as do Mr. Gore's.
In my opinion, fear-mongering is done when an appeal is made to people's desire to be protected from change; it's appealing to a sort of inchoate fear that things are changing in ways that aren't predictable. Presenting facts with references from the literature, while it may be disputed with other references, isn't fear-mongering; it is communicating.

Sent by Cynthia Weehler | 8:04 AM ET | 06-26-2007

Um, when two points are correctly plotted on an x and y axis, they are facts. Facts are true. As to the matters plotted, they are the whole truth.

Is she saying that facts aren't true because she doesn't like math? On Slate, she confessed to first grade math skills, which is what is needed to write on science for the Washington Post.

I thought Gore was against a culture of exaggerated and manufactured fear used to mask facts, but apparently Yoffe concludes he just was arguing that fear is a useless emotion, no matter what the facts.

All I want from a newspaper is reasonably qualified reporters and editorialists who check the facts and make reasoned arguments, instead of a string of cliches and ad hominems. Obviously, it is too much to ask for.

Sent by Don | 3:19 PM ET | 06-26-2007

Number of peer reviewed scientific articles and studies that dispute anthropogenic global warming: 0

Number of oil companies and coal producers who dispute global warming with ad hominem attacks, lobbyists and campaign contributions: all

Number of planets available for humans to live upon: 1

Number of misinformed lunatics on internet message boards: uncountable

Sent by Kevin | 6:20 PM ET | 06-26-2007

Al Gore has been right for over 20 years. All the blabber idots that cannot see what is in front of their noses do not deserve a reply. Idots are idiots.
Like all those who voted for Bush are idiots like all those who supported Hitler. It takes a few intelligent people to change course and legislation to restrain the psychotic neocons.

Sent by Aldo Vidali | 12:40 AM ET | 06-27-2007

Re: "Al Gore has been right for over 20 years." and "Mr. Thompson has presented the most fanciful group of "facts" I've ever seen. It's too bad none of them comes with references, as do Mr. Gore's."
Take a look at the following:
NASA Chief Questions Urgency of Global Warming...I understand that the bulk of scientific evidence accumulated supports the claim that we've had about a one degree centigrade rise in temperature over the last century to within an accuracy of 20 percent. (Morning Edition, May 31, 2007, www.npr.org)
The Scientist he "interviewed" are upset and do not support him. "Gore on Climate Change: Scientists Respond...Yes, in fact, in his documentary he talks about what the world will look like ??? Florida and New York ??? when the sea level rises by 20 feet. But he deftly avoids mentioning the time frame for which that might happen. When you look at the forecast of sea-level rise, no one's expecting 20 feet of sea-level rise in the next couple of centuries, at least." (Morning Edition, March 21, 2007, www.npr.org) There is ALOT more to go on. Look up interviews with the scientists he interviewed.

Sent by Ken | 7:40 PM ET | 11-09-2007