Global Warming: Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Generalization’

By April 23, 2006Global Warming

As many of you know, former VP and erstwhile Presidential candidate Al Gore has now entered the world of moveimaker, and has made a movie on global warming entitled, “An Inconvenient Truth”. There appears to be no really threat that “Truth” will pose a box office threat to “Scary Movie 4“. Although we’ve not yet seen it, the reviews would indicate that “An Inconvenient Set of Sweeping Generalizations” might have been a more apt title, but maybe not as grabby.

For our part, we throw in with yesterday’s Wall Street Journal editorial on the topic, and their view of poor Al’s crusade for relevance. And, we remind you new readers to click on this link for a more balanced view of global warming. it is, remember,a theory, with no real consensus on it’s cause, it’s effects, or solutions, if any.

Join the discussion 7 Comments

  • TokyoTom says:


    Maybe you can help me – I’m having a hard time figuring out what is going on. You and NAM keep on making a yeoman’s effort to present that balanced view of climate change skeptics, but then when I look at the PEW’s Center of Climate Change, I find that all of the following captains of industry have decided that it’s worth taking action TODAY on climate change (they’re listed as members of the “Business Environmental Leadership Council”):

    Air Products
    Alcoa Inc.
    American Electric Power
    Baxter International Inc.
    California Portland Cement Co.
    Cummins Inc.
    Deutsche Telekom
    DTE Energy
    Duke Energy
    Hewlett-Packard Company
    Holcim (US) Inc.
    Interface Inc.
    John Hancock Financial
    Lockheed Martin
    Ontario Power Generation
    PG&E Corporation
    Rio Tinto
    Rohm and Haas
    Royal Dutch/Shell
    SC Johnson
    United Technologies
    Whirlpool Corporation
    Wisconsin Energy

    Come on – BP, Boeing, DuPont, GE – what is wrong with those guys? Are they really cowards who have given into the rabid enviros who want to destroy Americs and to use all of our tax dollars for ridiculous research, all to usher in a new age of global socialism? Or are they just pretending to be concerned?

    It’s really puzzling to me that they are not following NAM’s principled and stawart leadership. Can you clarify what is wrong with these companies?



  • Who are you going to believe, the vast majority of the world?s climate experts, with their mountain of observation and analysis consistent with theoretical physics, or a small army of right wing pundits and professional global warming skeptics spinning a tidal wave of agenda-driven denial and shameless misrepresentations of fact? You haven’t seen the movie, but you know it’s nothing but sweeping generalizations? I’ve seen the science. It’s specific, compelling, and irrefutable: global warming is the necessary consequence of rising levels of greenhouse gases of human origin. The effects are clear and present, and will only increase as human activity changes the atmospheric chemistry of the earth by burning massive quantities of fossil fuels. Melting polar sea ice, dying sea coral, and disappearing glaciers are only the beginning. You’ve been warned.

  • Jonathan Winns says:

    Pat Cleary,

    NAM has obviously been infiltrated by the fascist, frat boy Christian-centric white trash logic that has been so rampant in this country since the time of our second worst president (next to Bush), Ronald Reagan.

  • free lessons says:

    there are a lot of proof , ask the gaz companies

  • Steve Ochs says:

    It’s quite the opposite actually; global warming is good for the planet. It’s right up there on the legacy list with torture, deadly lies and crushing debt. Good God, I don’t even have kids and I’m bothered by what will happen to yours! If being a sociopath narcissist were against the law, prisons would be protecting the planet from thick-headed, self-serving lowlifes like you!

  • Herbert Glass says:

    No proof exists that lower emissions reduce global warming.