Quote:
Originally Posted by Juventus3
explain how it's inaccurate...
The science behind the thoeries used in this film are questionable, and very much up for debate. Gore is a genius for jumping on the environmental bandwagon. His timing was a bulls-eye. The issue is very important and it's a positive sign to see it at the forefront of American culture right now. However, the underlying purpose of the film was to use scare tactics to jolt Americans into the reality of the situation. Why else would they invite a politcal figure such as Al Gore to narrate and be a spokesperson?
Scare tactics are not useful educational tools.
The interesting part about this films (and the science presented) critics are that they are not Americans, but rather Europeans, Asians, etc.
....and if the shoe fits...
- from wikipedia.
|
Too bad that Gore has been on this environmental bandwagon since he was in university. He is no "johnny come lately" to this subject. So you're dead wrong there. Also, for something to be propaganda you must be able to gain benefit from the "propaganda" you spread. What is Gore's motivation? Does he own companies that manufacture solar panels? Is he backed by an ultra-powerful lobby that guarantees him a huge salary? Does he have political ambitions and is running for office on this platform? You have no motive, so there is no crime. So far, Gore's only crime has been trying to show people that we need to be more responsible about what we do to the planet we live on and make sure the biosphere remains capable of sustaining life. Ooooh, what a nasty fellow!