Washington Times: Climate-change film fails to repeat success of ‘Inconvenient Truth’
“Even Hollywood could not give Gore’s climate turkey sequel a mention at the Oscars,” said Climate Depot’s Marc Morano, author of “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change,” slated for release Feb. 26 by Regnery. “When a politically correct film like Gore’s is dissed, it means it was below even minimal entertainment standards,” he said in an email. “Gore’s dismal sequel did the impossible, it made Hollywood turn a blind eye to climate change issue!” The snub capped a somewhat disastrous year for Hollywood films with climate-change themes such as “Downsizing” and “Blade Runner 2049,” which flopped at the box office.
The skeptics’ website Climate Depot challenged more than a dozen of the film’s assertions in an extensive fact-check, while climate blogger Joanne Nova accused Mr. Gore of relying on “cherry-picked extremes.” Mr. Gore, the former Democratic vice president, has not responded publicly to the criticism.
“An Inconvenient Sequel” is among the most controversial and polarizing titles of the year. Because of the politics surrounding Gore and climate change, the film divides men and women, critics and fans, and even people who saw the movie and people who are just rating it.
Gore is a capable documentarian, but he’s also a guy for whom 51 million Americans voted and 50.4 million other Americans voted against1that one time. Climate change is equally divisive. And those politics are coloring the film’s internet reception. Of the 2,645 IMDb users who rated the film as of August,2 over 38 percent gave the film a 1 out of 10. Of those same 2,645 IMDb users, just under 34 percent gave the film a 10 out of 10. In short: 72 percent of people who rated the movie gave it an extreme score, a 1 or a 10...It’s frankly impressive for a single film to stand astride so many fault lines.'
Vegans were left scratching their heads at Al Gore's new movie An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, which despite looking at environmental issues, almost entirely overlooked animal agriculture's giant contribution to global warming. It's particularly surprising, given that Gore has been following a plant-based diet for several years.
"A number of recent climate change reports even failed to mention polar bears in their discussion of Arctic sea ice decline. The polar bear does not get mentioned once in the draft of the US Climate Science Special Report, even in the fifty page discussion on changes in the Arctic. And NOAA’s annual Arctic Report Card has not mentioned the polar bear since 2014, in spite of highlighting the dangers faced by bear populations in every issue since 2008. Even Al Gore seems to have forgotten to include the plight of polar bears in his newest climate change movie. Though it had a prominent role in his 2007 documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, the polar bear example was left out of An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power. It doesn’t even get a mention. After years of campaigners’ and researchers’ claims that populations were in terminal decline, the ‘canary in the coal mine’ has been retired. It is now widely understood that polar bears are not suffering as predicted from years of low summer sea ice. There have been no new reports of falling polar bear numbers, and images of fat, healthy polar bears abound."
Climate Depot reviews Gore's sequel: 'Stand up and cheer' moment when U.S. exits UN Paris pact - 'Unexpected hero of the film -- Trump!' - 'A tour de force' to see U.S. exit UN Paris pact.
'Who would have thought that a film that featured weather disasters and apocalyptic predictions of climate doom would have a happy ending! The ending has a stand up and cheer moment when President Donald Trump announces the U.S. is exiting the UN climate pact.'
'A tour de force to see the U.S. executive branch under Trump returned to a pro science agenda by rejecting UN treaty and EPA climate regulations!
Gore exploits victims of Typhoon Haiyan in Philippines: 'The most single most disgusting moment of the sequel. The viewer cannot help but feel that Gore is shamelessly exploiting the victims and using their pain to score unscientific political points about Typhoon Haiyan.'
Harvard Mag: These are all important questions—but even they ignore a central certainty that no one appears to be addressing: what Dan Schrag calls “climate change’s dirty little secret.” “Even if we could become carbon-neutral tomorrow,” says the director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, “the climate will keep changing for thousands of years, the ice sheets will keep melting, and the seas will continue to rise.”
Climate Depot's Marc Morano: "So now an allegedly esteemed Harvard professor admits that controlling the climate is futile. Are we supposed to be surprised at this 'secret' that climate skeptics have always known? Even the climate activists will now have to concede that the climate will not stop changing if we refuse to enact the UN Paris pact and the Green New Deal."
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of Biogeography at the University of London, points out that “climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor [CO2], is as misguided as it gets. It's scientific nonsense."