Academy Awards Oscar to 'An Inconvenient Truth'

Mon, 2007-02-26 08:23Emily Murgatroyd
Emily Murgatroyd's picture

Academy Awards Oscar to 'An Inconvenient Truth'

Last night's Academy Awards weren't as boring as I thought they would be. Admittedly I usually skip them but I was holding out for the 'Best Documentary' category to see if Davis Guggenheim et al would get the recognition they so richly deserved. And I was not disappointed.

Neither, I suspect, were millions of other human beings who got their first dose of the dangers of global warming through watching this highly acclaimed documentary. It may just be a gold statue, but it certainly represents an encouraging turn in public understanding around climate change.

Previous Comments

Ah yes - the good old CEI. The same CEI who has received over 1 million in funding from Exxon and who, coincidentally, Exxon stopped giving money to this year after the Royal Society called on them to stop funding denial groups who ”misrepresented the science of climate change by outright denial of the evidence.” Heck, when you're a full blown denier and you can't even get the largest oil company in the world to fund you who can you call on? Maybe you've got deep pockets Johan?

response from the desmogblog spin machine.
If predictable means the truth than you would be correct.

The climatologists at RealClimate found that Gore had the science right, with a few small errors. Link here.

They also noted here at this link :

“”An Inconvenient Truth,” the Davis Guggenheim documentary on global warming starring Al Gore’s presentation on the subject, provides an accurate, engaging, accessible, thought-provoking and (at times) even humorous introduction to one of the most important scientific issues of our time ( see our review of the movie). In some countries, viewing “An Inconvenient Truth” has actually become a required part of the science curriculum, and with good justification, we think…”

But VJ, what do climatologists know about good movies?
Hey, wait a second! What does CEI know about good movies? Perhaps the Academy is a better judge than even them!
Actually, I don’t think very highly of the Oscars – it’s another beauty contest of the kind “Little Miss Sunshine” seemed to be against. On the other hand, I expect less bias from the Academy than I do from CEI. Johan, how was their review of “You can’t be cool without fuel”?
Maybe you should try reading your own links for a change. The CEI piece had NO facts to back up the claims. It’s flat out contrarianism. And The National Spew? How convenient of them to leave out the ice dynamics uncertainty in their assertion of sea level rise which the AR4 separated out.

Did you know no one has ever died of AIDS? It’s a fact. It’s just not the whole truth.
Gosh! An Oscar(tm)! Now that’ll show those denialists!

This conclusively proves that there is a total consensus among Hollywood showbusiness people that human-caused global warming is as real and genuine as they are.

And that’s good enough for me!

Here’s an article by a teacher recommending a second fillm that should be shown with An Inconvenient Truth: Oil on Ice

“…The union of the two films strengthens the message of “An Inconvenient Truth” and gives students the “whole truth.”

Oil on Ice frames four main objectives in brilliant clarity and with an uplifting message of hope and possibility:

* First, it gives stinging statistics about our fossil fuel dependency. When energy guru Amory Lovins explains that the world uses a cubic mile of oil a year and the United States uses 10,000 gallons a second, the look on your student’s faces will be priceless;
* Secondly, it smashes the myth of economic havoc created by reducing and eliminating our oil addiction. From 1977 to 1985 with the implementation of CAFE standards (higher mileage for cars) and energy conservation our nation made outstanding economic growth…”

Here is the website for Oil on Ice