• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth sequel stresses spiritual argument on climate

Abdul Alhazred

Philosopher
A
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
6,023
Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth sequel stresses spiritual argument on climate
Guardian (UK)

Al's Gore's much-anticipated sequel to An Inconvenent Truth is published today, with an admission that facts alone will not persuade Americans to act on global warming and that appealing to their spiritual side is the way forward.

In his latest book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis, the man who won a Nobel prize in 2007 for his touring slideshow on disappearing polar ice and other consequences of climate change, concludes: "Simply laying out the facts won't work."

...

"I've done a Christian [-based] training program; I have a Muslim training program and a Jewish training program coming up, also a Hindu program coming up. I trained 200 Christian ministers and lay leaders here in Nashville in a version of the slide show that is filled with scriptural references. It's probably my favourite version, but I don't use it very often because it can come off as proselytising," Gore tells Newsweek.

...
Click to expand...

Yes he's very spiritual. Like Oprah. :cool:
 
This is absolutely absurd.

I don't think it's right to manipulate a person's religious beliefs in order to advance one's agenda. It happens all the time, sure, but I don't think it's right. Granted, I don't believe in religion, but I still believe it to be wrong.

Remember Bush's Faith Based Initiatives? David Kuo's "Tempting Faith"
 
Last edited:
This is why deniers call AGW people cultists. Oy.

But, in a way Al Gore is correct in that in order to persuade people on any given issue is that you have to learn to talk their lingo. Most people don't care about raw data and scientific thinking. That's not really what they want to hear. What people really want to hear is about how such an issue will affect their lives personally, and whether or not it will be disruptive or not.
 
It’s sad that facts and science are not enough for some people, but true nonetheless.
 
My impression is not that Gore is trying to prove that global warming is credible by citing scripture, but attempting to motivate people to do something about it.

Consider the James Watt logic: Yes, it's a scientific fact that drilling for oil and mining for ore in national parks will destroy the parks, but since Christ's return is imminent, there is no need to be concerned about the future of the parks.

Some religious groups are comfortable saying, "Yes, we're destroying the planet. So what?" and it sounds like he's modifying his rhetoric for different audiences, based on what they value.

Skeptics do this all the time with other topics, such as healthfraud or business fraud.
 
The real issue isn't a scientific one.

It's whether a particular mix of profiteering, totalitarian state capitalism masquerading as socialism, and enforced poverty is a worthwhile solution.

Something must be done. This is something. Therefore it must be done.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:
It's whether a particular mix of profiteering, totalitarian state capitalism masquerading as socialism, and enforced poverty is a worthwhile solution.
Click to expand...
Only people who lack imagination in innovative technologies and policies will assume "totalitarianism" and/or "enforced poverty" are required for an adequate solution.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:
The real issue isn't a scientific one.

It's whether a particular mix of profiteering, totalitarian state capitalism masquerading as socialism, and enforced poverty is a worthwhile solution.
Click to expand...

No your delusions do not count as real isssues at this time.
 
Wowbagger said:
Only people who lack imagination in innovative technologies and policies will assume "totalitarianism" and/or "enforced poverty" are required for an adequate solution.
Click to expand...

You beat me to it. But it is important to point out that there is indeed a highly vocal wing of 'environmentalists' who believe just that.

Note that vocal != influential.
 
Last edited:
Is he saying that his audience are too stupid to be convinced by the science or is he saying that his grasp of the science is so weak that he has to scare mongering people with threats of H E L L if they don't replace their lightbulbs with energy savers?

I would have thought the man who 'took the initiative in creating the internet' would be able to do better.
 
BenBurch said:
What color is the sky on the planet where you live?
Click to expand...

He is the former VP of the USA. He is not a non-entity. You want to ignore because as a Democrat partisan you are embarrased about him.

I'm sure McCain feels the same about Palin.
 
Eyeron,

But, in a way Al Gore is correct in that in order to persuade people on any given issue is that you have to learn to talk their lingo. Most people don't care about raw data and scientific thinking. That's not really what they want to hear. What people really want to hear is about how such an issue will affect their lives personally, and whether or not it will be disruptive or not.
Click to expand...

Well, then, why not tell them how this will affect their lives personally without using religion as an argument?


INRM
 
gtc said:
He is the former VP of the USA. He is not a non-entity. You want to ignore because as a Democrat partisan you are embarrased about him.

I'm sure McCain feels the same about Palin.
Click to expand...

He has zero significance to me or to any of my friends who are Democratic Party activists. He seems to be a very significant character to unbalanced people on the Right, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom