The market has spoken: Climate change and global warming are real! (Thanks Stephen Colbert for the line!) The book is companion to the eponymous movie and follows the same powerpoint, complete with photos etc. Gore plainly outlines the scientific evidence that has led to the conclusion that climates have been changing around the world. This book and the movie, mark a sea change in public opinion regarding climate and human interactions with it. ( )

I wanted to read An Inconvenient Truth again now that climate change is a more mainstream topic and the hoopla over the movie has passed. My reread reminded me of how moving I found Al Gore's personal story and how inspiring I found his view that the climate crisis "offers us the chance to experience what very few generations in history have had the privilege of knowing: a generational mission; the exhilaration of a compelling moral purpose, a shared and unifying cause; the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put aside the pettiness and conflict that so often stifle the restless human need for transcendence; the opportunity to rise." While it may strike some as overly dramatic, in light of recent events I find this insight from 2006 eerily prescient.

Often books dealing with environmental issues and current events become quickly dated. An Inconvenient Truth mainly deals with the scientific data behind global warming, laying out the case that human activities are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, causing global warming and ultimately endangering the natural systems that regulate the planet. All of this data still seems relevant. The book still makes the case for taking action on climate change very eloquently (and convincingly in my opinion) with words, charts and graphs, maps and stunning photographs. Its layout and typography seem fresh and contemporary, but serious and scientific at the same time. It closely mirrors the movie and at times leaves the reader with that same "Powerpoint Overload!!!" feeling. Nonetheless, I find it an excellent presentation overall.

To me, it is the fact that only 20 of 320 pages are devoted to solutions that makes the book seem dated. I like to think that most people who would be inclined to take action on an environmental issue now accept the reality of global warming. The only serious points of debate that remain are about the most expedient and equitable way to do so and the book provides little of relevance to this debate. ( )

I have a huge amount of respect for Al Gore and everything he is trying to do to make people more aware of global warming and it's harmful effects on our planet. That said, I felt this book could have been a lot better. There wasn't a whole lot of information in this book that I didn't already know, and he didn't go into a lot of depth on any of the topics. There were a lot of pictures, though, which was nice. Sometimes, a visual example can have more impact that even the most drastic of scientific calculations.

There was also little information given on what we can do to help stop global warming. He gives a few examples at the end, such as using fluorescent light bulbs and driving hybrid cars, but fails to even mention recycling or using cloth bags rather than the plastic grocery bags, ideas that are simple enough for everyone to take part in.

All in all, I like the idea behind the book, but I feel it's mostly meant for people who have little to no knowledge of the effects of global warming. I'm hoping Gore will come out with another book that explains the "inconvenient truth" in greater depth. ( )

Recommended Ages: Gr. 5-9

Plot Summary: Al Gore addresses the scientific causes and effects of global warming in an easy to read format with lots of diagrams, charts, graphs, and photographs.

Recurring Themes: global warming, geography, math, science and scientists, human-environment interaction

Controversial Issues: Gore addresses the reasons why some people do not believe in global warming and explains why we need to take it seriously.

Personal Thoughts: I didn't know there were people who didn't believe in the concept of global warming until recently, and this book only made me believe stronger in the need for humans to take care of our earth. While better source notes would be appreciated, I believe this is a quick, informative read. ( )

Review of film on which book is based.

We saw Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth this weekend (July 17, 2006). I had actually already read the book, and was curious to see his Apple Keynote based presentation, just to see what state of the art is in presentations (not a bullet-point to be seen), as well of course to be warned that the world as we know it is coming to an end, and if I do nothing, it is my own damn fault. The movie basically stars Keynote, with Al Gore as a supporting actor.

Lots has been said about if this Al Gore was what we saw in 2000, ... maybe he would have been elected President. I am not sure the average American really wants to hear about environmental problems though, but at least he wouldn't have been quite so stiff or in search of himself. He certainly could have pulled some votes from the left, but would he have lost the center?

Unfortunately, this movie is an eye-opener for people. I say unfortunately, for their eyes should have been opened before. The CO2 data is not new, though some of the pictures of receding glaciers are.

The movie remains a brilliant piece of propaganda. (It is propaganda, not science, not even science reporting, since it is in the end a call to action, not merely information). Al Gore asserts consensus in the scientific community about the direction of global climate change (on average it is getting warmer and more carbon dioxidic) and in a bit of a shell game implies there is also consensus about the magnitude of change, and its consequences.

In particular, it is worthwhile to consider the Daisyworld Model as a possible framework for considering consequences.

What happens when CO2 goes up? Temperature rises. What happens when temperatures rise? Things that thrive in a warmer environment are more successful. One question is, does that success then dampen the increase? I.e. does the life in the warm environment (e.g. the increased proliferation of life in what once was polar bear country, the giant frozen landmasses and sheets of ice of the northern hemisphere) then absorb more CO2, limiting the effect? The second question is: how long does it take? (And what people and what species get displaced in the meantime).

The Figure used from the Vostok Antarctica ice core, which was also in the movie, correlates dust, CO2 and temperature over the past 400,000 years. Note that every increase is followed by a crash (there does not seem to be a secular trend). (Interestingly the rises are faster than the falls.)

Some of the variation is due to solar-earth variations, e.g. (Milankovitch cycles), clearly an exogenous source (the earth's weather and biology is not changing the Earth's tilt (we hope)), but that must be coupled with biological responses.

A manmade exogenous force (CO2) might be expected to have effects on climate as well, but perhaps those are self-limiting (see Daisy World or the cyclic evidence), or maybe they will run amok (see the planet Venus), we don't know. It is all very complicated.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't act, but why do humans need propoganda and false certainties presented to us to act?

So, see the film, and act. Or don't see the film and act. Or see the film and don't act. Or don't see the film and don't act. Those are your choices. ( )