An Inconvenient Response
In his documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore makes the argument that
drought caused by global warming set the stage for the Darfur genocide. The
conflict in the Darfur region began in 2003 and has claimed more than 200,000
lives and displaced more than two million people. Although it is possible to
argue that the climate change described by Gore may have played a partial role
in the Sudanese droughts, there is insufficient scientific evidence that links
the effects of global warming to the violent events occurring in Africa. Al
Gore’s emotionally appealing and religiously-tinged delivery fail to acknowledge
other factors that contributed to the outbreak of genocide in Darfur.
Although Gore's opinion on how religion plays a part in nature is not significantly portrayed in An Inconvient Truth. Despite this, he does thoroughly explain his opinion in his essay "Environmentalism of the Spirit." Gore is Baptist, therefore he believes that God made nature and then made man to care for it. Gore leaves his Baptist beliefs out of An Inconvient Truth in order to appeal to a larger audience. In his essay, Gore makes it clear that he believes what man is doing to nature is wrong. If he would have made this point in the film, it is possible that he would have lost viewers that did not share his Baptist sentiments. Gore sought all of the support that he could so the film was targeted at the general audience and not the Baptist minority. On the other hand, the essay is more of an academic piece. Through the academic genre he is able to explain his beliefs because the reader views it from an academic point of view instead of looking at it with bias. Religion has been a large part of Gore's life; therefore it has a large affect on how he views nature.
Al Gore claims that the race-fueled conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan is primarily driven by a lack of rain fall which he attributes to climate change. While Gore is correct in his assertion that there have been both short-term and long-term declines in annual rainfall in the region, he fails to sufficiently account for the population boom that also occurred in the war-torn region. In fact, the decrease in annual rainfall is relatively
slight in comparison to the drastic increases in demand for all natural resources (not just rain water) brought on by the spike in population. His
assessment concerning the resource-driven nature of the conflict is correct, but the close-mindedness of his argument does not take into consideration the myriad of other factors that have and continue to contribute to the situation. In fact, the groundwork for the race-fueled conflict as we know it today was laid in 1978 when chevron discovered oil in the southern portion of the country. In an attempt to exploit their relatively rural neighbors to the south, the Arab north redrew borders to steal access to the valuable resource. Since then oil rigs and pipelines have served as chief targets of attack for southern rebels who seek to share in the newly acquired wealth. Thus the
conflict is over the resource of oil, not water.
Not only does Gore ignore the influence of resource demand brought on by population increases, but he also ignores many other outside factors with his claims. He makes no mention of any outside factors with government structure or ethical conflicts occurring in the region then jumps straight to the conclusion that climate change is the root of problems without including any scientific evidence to support his lofty claim. He proposes that global warming is the cause of the drought that is drying up Lake Chad, and the diminishing water sources in Africa are the reason this violence broke out. According to the article titled “Lake Chad is Dying” by Valerie Noury, the amount of irrigation projects stemming from Lake Chad have increased four times in only 11 years (23). His hypothesis of climate change does not acknowledge the natural weather patterns that are occurring in Africa and the fragility of Africa’s ecosystem. In the past 1000 years Lake Chad has dried up twelve times. Gore provides no evidence about the effects of climate change on the drought in Africa or any information of about why the lake drying up this time is any different from the other occurrences. Without this information there is no causation given that connects global warming and the drying up of Lake Chad, thus making Gore’s idea nothing more than a story designed to play with emotions and gain support for his theory.
Continuing on, Gore fails to discuss the normal temperature fluctuations in his impactful documentary. Gore directly links global warming to the drought in Darfur which then impacts the eruption of violence among the citizens. However, he does not look closely enough to see that the temperature fluctuations are considered to be normal; therefore, showing no connection to global warming, the drought or the Darfur genocide. In the article “Temperature Trends,” Johnson explains that throughout the warmer portions in the past years, Africa has only ever gotten about three to four degrees warmer than other years (Johnson, 2012). The importance of these facts, of course, resides in the demonstration that the warming of the earth is not at all unusual or different from other climate changes of the past millennium. The facts show that even though the temperature does fluctuate normally, it cannot be connected to the violent acts in Darfur.
Al Gore attempts to rest the responsibility for the violent conflicts in the Darfur region of Sudan on the climate change that he depicts in his documentary. Despite his strong emotional appeal and a persuasive tactics gained at pursuing a maximum audience, there is not sufficient scientific evidence to support his claim. This bold and unfounded claim calls to question the credibility of other assertions delivered in An Inconvenient Truth and weakens the strength of its message.
drought caused by global warming set the stage for the Darfur genocide. The
conflict in the Darfur region began in 2003 and has claimed more than 200,000
lives and displaced more than two million people. Although it is possible to
argue that the climate change described by Gore may have played a partial role
in the Sudanese droughts, there is insufficient scientific evidence that links
the effects of global warming to the violent events occurring in Africa. Al
Gore’s emotionally appealing and religiously-tinged delivery fail to acknowledge
other factors that contributed to the outbreak of genocide in Darfur.
Although Gore's opinion on how religion plays a part in nature is not significantly portrayed in An Inconvient Truth. Despite this, he does thoroughly explain his opinion in his essay "Environmentalism of the Spirit." Gore is Baptist, therefore he believes that God made nature and then made man to care for it. Gore leaves his Baptist beliefs out of An Inconvient Truth in order to appeal to a larger audience. In his essay, Gore makes it clear that he believes what man is doing to nature is wrong. If he would have made this point in the film, it is possible that he would have lost viewers that did not share his Baptist sentiments. Gore sought all of the support that he could so the film was targeted at the general audience and not the Baptist minority. On the other hand, the essay is more of an academic piece. Through the academic genre he is able to explain his beliefs because the reader views it from an academic point of view instead of looking at it with bias. Religion has been a large part of Gore's life; therefore it has a large affect on how he views nature.
Al Gore claims that the race-fueled conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan is primarily driven by a lack of rain fall which he attributes to climate change. While Gore is correct in his assertion that there have been both short-term and long-term declines in annual rainfall in the region, he fails to sufficiently account for the population boom that also occurred in the war-torn region. In fact, the decrease in annual rainfall is relatively
slight in comparison to the drastic increases in demand for all natural resources (not just rain water) brought on by the spike in population. His
assessment concerning the resource-driven nature of the conflict is correct, but the close-mindedness of his argument does not take into consideration the myriad of other factors that have and continue to contribute to the situation. In fact, the groundwork for the race-fueled conflict as we know it today was laid in 1978 when chevron discovered oil in the southern portion of the country. In an attempt to exploit their relatively rural neighbors to the south, the Arab north redrew borders to steal access to the valuable resource. Since then oil rigs and pipelines have served as chief targets of attack for southern rebels who seek to share in the newly acquired wealth. Thus the
conflict is over the resource of oil, not water.
Not only does Gore ignore the influence of resource demand brought on by population increases, but he also ignores many other outside factors with his claims. He makes no mention of any outside factors with government structure or ethical conflicts occurring in the region then jumps straight to the conclusion that climate change is the root of problems without including any scientific evidence to support his lofty claim. He proposes that global warming is the cause of the drought that is drying up Lake Chad, and the diminishing water sources in Africa are the reason this violence broke out. According to the article titled “Lake Chad is Dying” by Valerie Noury, the amount of irrigation projects stemming from Lake Chad have increased four times in only 11 years (23). His hypothesis of climate change does not acknowledge the natural weather patterns that are occurring in Africa and the fragility of Africa’s ecosystem. In the past 1000 years Lake Chad has dried up twelve times. Gore provides no evidence about the effects of climate change on the drought in Africa or any information of about why the lake drying up this time is any different from the other occurrences. Without this information there is no causation given that connects global warming and the drying up of Lake Chad, thus making Gore’s idea nothing more than a story designed to play with emotions and gain support for his theory.
Continuing on, Gore fails to discuss the normal temperature fluctuations in his impactful documentary. Gore directly links global warming to the drought in Darfur which then impacts the eruption of violence among the citizens. However, he does not look closely enough to see that the temperature fluctuations are considered to be normal; therefore, showing no connection to global warming, the drought or the Darfur genocide. In the article “Temperature Trends,” Johnson explains that throughout the warmer portions in the past years, Africa has only ever gotten about three to four degrees warmer than other years (Johnson, 2012). The importance of these facts, of course, resides in the demonstration that the warming of the earth is not at all unusual or different from other climate changes of the past millennium. The facts show that even though the temperature does fluctuate normally, it cannot be connected to the violent acts in Darfur.
Al Gore attempts to rest the responsibility for the violent conflicts in the Darfur region of Sudan on the climate change that he depicts in his documentary. Despite his strong emotional appeal and a persuasive tactics gained at pursuing a maximum audience, there is not sufficient scientific evidence to support his claim. This bold and unfounded claim calls to question the credibility of other assertions delivered in An Inconvenient Truth and weakens the strength of its message.