I have no problems with the British ruling.  From what I understand, the criticisms are legitimate, but they in no way negate the thesis of the film: that anthropogenic global warming is a major world problem that we need to address now.

The students (and by extension, we) will win As long as the British teachers will focus on what is right about the movie, but still teach that the movie is not perfect.  

This is about science, after all, and science is a moving target.

Andrew Eisenberg
The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/

John Bailo, you seem to be afflicted with some form of verbal diarrhea. I'm worried for you, you should get it checked by a professional, it might be fatal.

Here are the alleged nine errors

I only count eight :O

In each of the other cases the effects of increased CO2 and the resulting warmer temperatures are clear contributors, and Gore states nothing stronger than that in the movie. Have people forgotten what rational thought means these days?

Good point apsmith but Gore's folly was because he's a technocrat who added too many little white lies to the topic, and not just eight or nine. If he had stayed of message, slowed down, and pushed the salient points that would have worked.  

But that just doesn't sell. Remember, he's making a Hollywood movie and getting scripted by union hacks and camera jockeys. Face it, a balanced and nuanced movie that was really scientific would be BORING AS HECK.

But how does one capture the minds of the young generation?  It was really effective at that.  Kids all over the world love that movie. In a way, it is a condemnation of us adults who take little responsibility, and do little to correct the situation.

And we all missed that message because we want to defend or skewer poor Mr. Al Gore for his politics.

You know, kids see right through all that fallacy and wonder about us so-called adults. The kids get the message and don't worry about the validity of Scene 221B about snow melt on some African mountain.  

Sorry to be a butthead, but the point is that we failed, utterly, and our legacy is to leave these kids with an environment that is increasingly unpredictable, too hot, too cold, or whatever.  The fact is that this cannot be reversed for 15 years even with huge reductions in CO2 today makes it even worse, given the lag times in ambient CO2 concentrations.

I mean Generation Boomer lost, man, and we're the sorriest bunch of folks that ever existed.  That's the message.  Watch the movie again.  

Onward through the fog

i think it could be a great opportunity to teach children not just about global warming but about science and activism.

This could lead to excellent discussions on what is science, what is political activism and what is simply denialism. The tactics used by these denialists need to be shown to children.

One thing I always notice with these denialists is that they seem incapable (or unwilling) to distinguish between science and politics. I think it is fine to explain children that Gore is a political activist. He also happens to get the facts right almost consistently. Then there are the activists from the "other side" who don't even bother to do science or use science. They just use lobbyists and lies.

Exposing all that could teach children some critical thinking skills...

Using a feature film to teach climate science, if that's what they're trying to do, is silly. Whatever the merist of this film, textbooks are a completely different medium. They have a different purpose, and different ways of exposing the material, than a Hollywood documentary does, and for good reason.

Now, the movie can be used quite profitably in the classroom. Compare the predictions in AIT to the IPCC's, and even other takes out there. Explore the issues that the disparities raise. Reinforce the notion that predictions are not correct/incorrect, but have probability distributions. Discuss the nature of "consensus" in science. Discuss the influence that "science" can and does have in politics.

Science class is still fundamentally for the teaching of science itself, and "issues in science" should take a second place. The issues I pointed to in the last paragraph are subtle and philosophical in nature, and it would seem hard for a class of 16-year-olds to appreciate them fully. So it has to be taught properly. But if the "debate" on global warming teaches us anything, it's that a lot of people could use a bit more knowledge in these areas.

We can be lucky to have Al Gore. He is heard and he is listened. Many other scientists are over-heard. And they tell the same or similar story.

For instance: "According to Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, conducted by 1.300 experts from 95 countries and released on 2005, about 60 % of the ecosystem resources that support life on Earth - such as fresh water supplies, fishery stocks and clean air - are being degraded or used unsustainably. Scientists warn that the harmful consequences of this degradation could increase in the next 50 years."

Has anybody heard about Millennium Ecosystem Assessment? Probably few. Al Gore has made news all over the world.

What Al Gore has done is he made us all thinking. And some of us acting.

And for the judges: why don't you concentrate on those who really brainwash us. Schools including.

Al Gore has probably included some of tricks politicians us. Is it so bad? We listen to politician every day telling us impossible stories.

I'd just like to recognize Mr. Gore and the IPCC for their Nobel Peace Prize.  Apparently many on the IPCC were surprised.  Congratulations!

Interesting blog over on Weather Underground today where Jeff Masters says that the Summer of 2007 might be the "tipping point" for Artic sea ice, due to the Albedo-ice feedback loop.  I guess what happened was this summer's heat melted through several generations of sea ice.  

Onward through the fog