AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

INTRODUCTION-
An outline of Al Gore's personal stake in the world, the circumstances that led him to
combine An Inconvenient Truth, and his perception of the planetary crisis as a generational
struggle that would enable humanity to rise above their differences. This thesis project
explores how scientific legitimacy is generated by rhetorical methods rather than the "data
deficit" framework of science communication. Through conducting a rhetorical analysis of
the science documentary An Inconvenient Truth, this project reveals how the documentary
format itself as well as the film's leading agent, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, are
trying to deceive audiences through establishing degrees of scientific credibility by the use of
various rhetorical or fictional science concepts to validate factual evidence supporting
anthropogenic climate change.

BODY-
An Inconvenient Truth, American documentary, released in 2006, featuring a multimedia
demonstration by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, which provided the basis for his
travelling lecture tour on the evolving human problem of global warming and climate change.
From the stage of a small theatre in Los Angeles, California, Gore depicts science behind
global warming with aspects of his own personal and political life, combining seriousness
with satire to express his message. His presentation uses a series of diagrams, photos and
other pictures to explain the greenhouse effect, shifts in ambient carbon dioxide emissions
throughout history, human energy consumption and population growth, and how all these
factors lead to global warming. In the second half of the film, Gore explains some of the
predicted consequences of global warming, citing some of the early signs of worsening
conditions in the Arctic and Antarctic. The film ends with Gore discussing widespread myths
about global warming and challenging audiences to bring about the improvements needed to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. . The credits provide audiences with advice for how to
tackle global warming in their own societies.

Gore's explanations of climate processes and warming extrapolations have been questioned,
especially by critics of global warming. Most climate scientists accept that some of the
comments made in the film exaggerate predictions or skip over the complexities involved
with climate change research. They maintain, however, that the research presented in the film
is largely correct. An Inconvenient Truth won the 2006 Academy Awards for Best Feature-
Long Documentary and Best Song. After its release, the film has been part of the curriculum
of many schools around the world, although several local school districts have expressed their
criticism of its use without offering alternative opinions.
RHETORICAL ANALYSIS-
In the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, the narrator Al Gore shows the viewer the
destructive effects that mankind have on Mother Earth, using statistics, visuals and a clip
from a famous TV show. The attributes that he primarily uses to support global warming and
climate change are the increase in Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the rise of water levels
from the melting ice caps, the greater risk of significant natural disasters (e.g. hurricanes,
tornadoes) and the possibility of certain animals being extinct. He spoke to a wide spectrum
of viewers by addressing facts such as "average Joe" and not a scientist.  This made possible
for him to make understand and convince more people to agree with his perspective.
However, just like in any documentary, An Inconvenient cannot escape the logical
contradictions found throughout the movie.

Al Gore initiates in a state of innocence, sharing his stories about his youth as a farmer, and
filming shots taken from his family and farm in the past. He said he was able to see the
impact that humans had on Earth by living in an urban region. The bleak music and the
transition to shots of what it's like for him at the moment appeals to empathy as he speaks
about how global warming has changed his life, while providing a clear description about
how it will affect many people. His quotation, "What we take for granted will not be here for
our children," gave the crowd a glimpse at the future and helped them think how it would
affect them directly. This quotation appeals to pathos because it lets the listener feel
sympathy for him and those who are equally afflicted by Al Gore.

Al Gore even claimed he was attempting to be designated President of the United States to
aim to minimize the triggers of climate change and global warming. The documentary
showed his interviews with many scientists who agree with existing global warming, giving
him the legitimacy to talk about the issue of global warming. This relates to the ethos that he
tries to convince people to pay attention and trust what he has to say, because he has the
experience of a farmer, a former presidential candidate, and talking to experts who have facts
to back up their theories. If he didn't, a lot of people wouldn't think he was the right one to
speak about this topic, and this film wouldn't have hit as wide an audience as it did. However,
the conceptual error of "Texas Sharpshooter" is established when he just talked to scientists
who advocate global warming. If he had demonstrated that he consulted scientists from the
other side, discussed their claims, and used the evidence that he had gathered to counter such
arguments, his overall analysis would be clearer and more persuasive.

The graphs and their descriptions are the best aspects of Al Gore's presentation. They were
his weakest, too. Despite providing clear data to support global warming and his clarification
of the graphs and their patterns well performed, the absence of proper information, such as
tags, axes, and source, is hard to pass. . With the graph indicating the concentration of Carbon
dioxide rather than the correct pattern of the predicted concentration in fifty years, it is shown
that graph is traced straight up from the last point, which is graphically incorrect. Al Gore had
the reputation of knowing peers who were certified scientists who had made several tests to
test their hypotheses. In doing so, it made it impossible for the audience to challenge all the
"science" he provided during his presentation.
Al Gore made a good case on his side of the debate that human activities are driving climate
change and global warming. Gore’s deep description of the narrative elements of the film
leading to the use of Aristotle’s rhetorical elements of logos, ethos and pathos is what made it
more convincing as well as its use made it impossible for anyone to challenge the data,
analysis and information that Gore used in this depiction. Although there were shortcomings,
he promoted his case to convince listeners and viewers that human actions are detrimental to
Mother Earth, and that they are the predominant source of global warming.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS-
An Inconvenient Truth is premised on the phenomena known as global warming and the
critical situation in which we find ourselves. Al Gore speaks about the various effects of
mankind on the earth, especially global warming, and the duty that we have to put an end to
it. In Al Gore's address, he combines together various bits of information and tries to use
different facts to his benefit. In general, however, he had excellent factual arguments going
on his side; others argue that this documentary is relevant for a variety of reasons, such as
political bias and greed. A variety of political leaders usually disregard science claims that
global warming is due to human activity and that there may be any major possible
consequences as a result. The consensus sentiment of scientists is that global warming is
caused by humanity all over the globe, although there is still controversy as to whether or not
this claim is valid. In fact, this film targets the sceptical audiences and shows us that global
warming is an increasing threat and that we are the primary culprit.

If it's to point out various contradictions of his speech, or the errors he's made, or the
hypocritical remarks he's made in the past, most of the accusations that the film is inaccurate
seem to originate from people with a political motive. Despite presenting scientific proof of a
global catastrophe, people still fail to believe him and continue to demean and ridicule him.
This inability to consider even factual information begs the question; do people hesitate to
agree that global warming is harmful for their own sake, or do they simply have proof that
global warming is non-threatening, non-artificial, and even non-existent? When he first
proposed global warming, he was essentially talking about the science of greenhouse change.
Errors such as these also impose the impression that this film is not important to note. 

Those on this side of the debate argue that climate change is neither recent nor greenhouse
gas pollution. Humans have actually been around for quite a minuscule portion of Earth's life,
and the truth that we are now starting to produce more carbon does not assert that we are the
primary cause of global warming. In reality, 500 million years ago, CO2 levels reached up to
10 times higher than those released in today's period, and, in the midst of this pollution
release, life has expanded immensely. This statistics is counter to the fact that mankind is the
primary factor of climate change. According to them, there may be a link between the
emission of human gas and climate change, but there is no reason for it. Decreasing the
emission of artificial gas on Earth will be ultimately useless, for the universe does not revolve
entirely around our will. Others claim that these so-called extraordinary occurrences are
entirely natural, and as long as people remain unaware of fundamental science, there will still
be people like Al Gore who drive policymakers toward ever more devastating oil and
environmental practises.

At the start of the film, Al Gore pointed out that the bush's involvement in the repression of
government scientists and their research on global warming has created a crisis in which we
have prolonged our ignorance and waited longer to do something about climate change. He
also mentions about his experience at Harvard University, attending classes from two
prominent innovators in global warming science, which reveals that he has already
introduced some of the most experienced scientific minds to this particular topic, and he fully
understands what he’s communicating about, In his in-depth presentation, Al Gore states that
the frequency of these extreme anomalies is rising and occurring even more often than in the
past, and then excuses global warming. There are many other aspects of the Earth that we are
causing damage, such as agriculture needs, deforestation, and declining biodiversity; so why
is it so difficult to believe that we are one of the central causes of global warming? We're not
visibly seeing huge undoubted evidence of global warming due to the immense time scale it
takes to bring about climate change, but Al Gore says that the fact that we're actually starting
to see slight changes is frightening because of this huge time scale, and as we strive to neglect
these facts, we can see these effects sooner, which is not something we should want.

CONCLUSION-

People often neglect the implication that global warming is artificial because they are so self-
centred and focus on the present rather than the future. As companies are growing in numbers
and profiting further from fossil fuels, it is clear that the opposing side can be a bias towards
monetary gain. Some people believe there are many ways to invalidate global warming, but
the science displayed in this documentary, despite being somewhat flawed, presents a very
lengthy and insightful list of why climate change should be stopped. Many key elements of
life on Earth have been affected, including biodiversity, energy source depletion, and weather
patterns. Upon watching this documentary, you feel that we should actively participate in
solving this problem. The various errors that are presented throughout the film do not take
away from all the facts that have been told, and the film is, in fact, very important in further
spreading awareness about global warming and its dangers.

Overall, we need to come up with a solution to our differences of thoughts on the subject, but
it all generally refers to stopping global warming from negatively affecting the Earth any
further. We're in an age where nobody does anything until it's too late. We need to change
this ancient pattern of neglect and come up with solutions to avoid further strife.