Why is only Al Gores film shown in schools and not the films refuting his claims?

Question

Its not an education if you dont show both views

Answer 1

Because the film addresses the realities of global warming. All serious intelligent scientists know this and have been writing and researching this for years. The evidence is out there. btw...I would disagree with your statement "it's not an education if you don't show both views." There is only so much time in a classroom, no respected teacher will spend valuable time, and waste taxpayer money (since schools are supported by taxes) teaching what is not true. For example, there are still people who believe that the earth is flat...do you think a teacher should be teaching that in a science class?  

Answer 2

Can you even name the film that refutes his view?  BTW, they are not just the views of Al Gore, but most of the scientists of the world.  Gore just narrated the film, Inconvenient Truth.

He got a Nobel Prize for this film.  Did whomever made a "contrary film" win a Nobel Prize?

Global Warming is a fact, the ice-caps and mountain glaciers are melting all over the world.   Perhaps you have heard the news that it may soon be possible for ships to sail across the once frozen solid Arctic Ocean?  The Soviet Union now is laying claim to this newly exposed land too.

What is in dispute is what the "human" contribution has been to this problem.

YES, We've had big global temperature changes long ago, even before humans arrived on the scene.

But, what the pseudo scientists forget to tell you, is these big temperature changes took perhaps hundreds of years to develop, or were caused by meteor collisions.

Big changes in temperatures now, are taking decades, not centuries.

The quickening of change in world average temperatures, evidently can only be explained in terms of human fossil fuel usage.

BTW, there is also a "Sun Dimming" effect taking place that is cancelling out part of the temperature rise.  Sun Dimming is caused by the same green house gases, trapping the earth's heat.  But "dimming"  reduces the amount of sunlight, energy reaching the earth.

Without Sun Dimming, also caused by fossil fuels we'd really be in trouble. But, sun dimming will bring on a whole new set of global disasters, including less crop production, and more acid rain, and eventually more lung cancers from the pollutants.(even as temperatures continue to soar)

Human progress has brought us a more dirty planet, especially in the air we breath.  Anyone watch the Olympics and see the heavy smog in Beijing China, where they have less controls on industrial pollution than the Western World?

China is a Communist nation, they don't believe in Global Warming, so to blame "Inconvenient Truth" on a "communist plot" is laughable.

An educator cannot in good conscience show two sides to a question, when the world's scientist are almost in 100 percent agreement that humans are sending too much fossil fuel pollution into our atmosphere, too fast.

BTW, U-tube and British TV with all it's freedom, is more often a place for entertainment, not a place to find out about the truths of Global Warming.

Edit: Pertaining to your "educational", title you provided late, please re-educate yourselves by reading the reference below.  I will quote just a few lines from this resource.

>>Following criticism from scientists the film has been changed since it was first broadcast on Channel 4. One graph had its time axis relabelled, the claim that volcanoes produce more CO2 than humans was removed, and following objections about how his interview had been used, the interview with Carl Wunsch was removed for the international and DVD releases of the programme.<<

>>Other scientific arguments used in the film have been described as refuted or misleading by scientists working in the relevant fields.   Critics have also argued that the programme is one-sided and that the mainstream position on global warming, as supported by the scientific academies of the major industrialised nations and other scientific organisations, is incorrectly represented.<<

AND I provide a second reference that refutes the scam of your so-called British "documentary".

I'm glad you asked this question, I'm always happy to help those who need  more information. Thanks for the opportunity.

Answer 3

Al Gore is, IMHO, deeply disturbed. If indeed, he had any concern for this cause, issue, threat (call it what you will), he would have embraced and, with respectful humility heard out several Republicans, Greens, Business owners, etc.

"An Inconvenient Truth" clearly expressed no concern for climate change, if he even thinks it exists. His energy-voracious mansions, private jets, limousines (which he prominently showed himself regularly taxied about in throughout the film).

Though I'm no huge fan of GW Bush, at least he practices what others preach. The man has one of the most creatively efficient little bungalows in the state of Texas. Did he do a film about how great he is and show himself on a hydraulic lift to demonstrate the kind of destruction Al Gore causes with his irreverent, lavish, self-serving wast of fossil fuels?

Did Al Gore make any mention of how efficient the Crawford Ranch house is? Show any praise or respect? Did he show his mansion's electric meter spinning like the TAZ? Show the fuel truck pull up to his private jet and dump God knows HOW much fuel into the wing tanks?

And leave it to the same tainted organization who sheepishly recoiled rather than publicly admit their mistake when Rigoberta Menchu was exposed as a fraud...AFTER having received the Nobel Prize.

I don't have the science training to argue the issues surrounding climate change, although I've seen developing nations literally tear the tops off of mountains, clog rivers, turn deep-green palm fans brown with soot. [Did Al Gore mention that?]

And I know, from working with centrifuges that ships use cleaner-burning diesel fuel ONLY when in sight of land or under jurisdiction of some nation who requires it. On the open ocean, however, they switch to "Bunker Oil" which is just about like burning roof tar. It's so grimy it must be cleaned with a centrifuge to prevent damaging the engines.  [Did Al Gore mention that?]

Its smoke is sulfuric and acidic which - true, I admit - will not hurt most of the hardier sea life. But consider that over 90% of the world's conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen is done by phytoplankton  [Did Al Gore mention that?] ... and phytoplankton is very sensitive to acidity and sulfur.

Now, why didn't Al Gore mention that this power-house of oxygen has been disappearing rapidly?

Somebody get that boy a doctor.

...

Answer 4

Because the liberal unions are infecting our schools almost without control. These liberals do not tolerate ANY opposing viewpoints, and they therefore see no reason to air them.

Answer 5

Global warming is a scam. the world has had volcanoes, earthquakes, ice ages, meteors, and floods for millions of years. No problem. Now some simple carbon dioxide that is essentially just plant food is going to destroy everything? LoL. This has to be one of the biggest communist hoaxes of all time.

I understand that most of the history of the world has seen warmer temperatures and that we are emerging from the mini-ice age following the Krakatoa volcanic eruption 800 years ago. I think that the earth would be warming right now if humans weren't here. I also know that there has been increased solar flare activity in recent years that may be contributing to temperature increases. The last 25 years has seen very slight temperature increases for ALL the other planets in the solar system as well.

Evaportion is good for living things because 2/3 of the earth's surface is water and what goes up must come down. I don't necessarily believe increases in CO2% will increase plant growth directly as some do because this increase is only a very minor amount and of course CO2 is not generally thought of as the limiting factor in plant growth but more often sunlight and to a less consistent degree water which as I've mentioned should increase with higher planetary temperature. Increased rainfall will balance the water factor enough to increase land mass coverage by foliage. When the volcanic dust blocked out sunlight 800 years ago oxygen levels plummeted as photosynthetic organisms collapsed.leading to a new ice age round of large animal extinctions.

Arctic and antarctic circle animal, plant and human tribe extinctions also occored. The mass migrations out of northern Asia and Scandanavia sparked huge unrest and the northern Asian population has barely begun to recover. As the world recovers from yet another ice age humans have become self aware enough to recognize the dynamic nature of the earth's climate but maybe not enough to percieve all factors.

Al Gore says the oceans will rise up to 25 feet! From just the frozen north and south poles? Are you kidding me? He can't really think think the world is dumb enough to believe that obvious lie. If the caps melt the ocean will rise very little. You see I took GEOMETRY in school. The earth is a sphere. A vast majority of the sphere is not covered by ice. Each half has to be far less than 10% ice covered even in the winter, probably less than 5% in the summer. LOL. It switches year round because of alterante seaons in the north south pole. How tall would those ice sheets need to be to raise the sea level noticably of the rest of the earth which is mostly covered in water have to be? Don't forget that ice expands to a much larger size over the same quantity of water, including the portion that is below sea level which will of course itself contract subsatantially as the arctic is all sea with little land. The answer: It would have to be miles high. It is a proven fact that 1000 years ago there were huge vineyards growning in northern Britian. It is far too cold to grow grapes there today. Guess what the sea level was then? You guessed it (whoever has at least and average IQ) the same as it is today according to coastline sediment formations.

Answer 6

IDK they should show both, but he almost has to be right. Even though, they have been proven wrong a few times recently.  

Answer 7

Its as other said about the education system.

Theres no where near 100% of scientific agreement on this subject.

And if people would actually look around they would see that.

And as for dan, picking apart your answer

Ice caps are not melting all over the world and in fact only in a small part of greenland and a small part of west antarctica ( but ice is growing in other areas ).

No temperature changes were not slower to develop when we had a warming trend during middle ages for instance it was a more rapid change than we are seeing now.

And as for your mentioning china and pollution.  yes its bad there.. so why have the global warming crowd given china and other developing countries a pass on doing something about it.

This whole movement is mostly about redistribution of wealth thats why.  

Answer 8

I go to the school in the UK and all the science classes are shown the inconvenient truth and a documentary refuting his claims, im 15 and i've already decided global warming is a natural phenomenon  

Answer 9

I am showing the rebuttal film right after I show the one from the Flat Earth Society.

Answer 10

Schools have not been about education since the late 1970's now they are about brainwashing. If you show real science then it is hard to brainwash the children.

Answer 11

I am going to separate my answer from the science.

It is being shown because it has been *given* to most schools for free.

Find out who funded the distribution and you have your answer.

Answer 12

A good reason that An Inconvenient Truth is shown rather than nay sayers is that 99% of scientists in the field agree with the Global Warming theories as portrayed in Al's film while the other 1% were mostly getting money from the oil companies.  The media in its conservative bias overplayed the oil companies' point of view making it seem that there was a great falling out between honest scientists.