If by referring to Gore's carbon emissions you are talking about his home, fair enough. He should have seen the criticisms in advance and planned a zero (or close to zero) emissions home.

However, if you are referring to his travel, and suggesting that he avoid flying and instead travel by train, by donkey, or on foot, I beg to differ with you. One of the reasons he has been so effective is because he has reached so many people. And that made the movie possible, which had a significant impact.

As for mass protests, I question whether the US public is sufficiently aroused by this issue to engage in mass protests, especially since the Iraq war and occupation have failed to generate mass protests on the same level as the Vietnam War did. If the war can't generate that level of response, do we think that global warming will?

Yes, the alert refers to Mr. Gore's large and growing personal emissions exemplified by residential electricity use. Indeed, mass protest on the scale necessary to bring about social change will be difficult. At some point though, if you believe your own words that climate change is a global emergency that threatens civilization, you are pressed to walk the walk, and set down the microphone and take to the streets. Particularly when other means are consistently stonewalled. And frankly, someone of Mr. Gore's stature may uniquely be able to bring U.S. citizens to mass protest as is occurring in Australia and Europe, in a way that others are not. There is a great deal of frustration built up not only on global warming but also its relation to terrible energy policies, gas prices and the War, all which are related. Doing the difficult when few others are able -- this is called leadership.
Dr. Glen Barry

I do agree that it is high time somebody told all of us humans and particularly all of our world leaders the whole truth and nothing but the truth!
But - precisely what is that truth and what policies do we want Al Gore to ask our leaders to implement?
We can have as many demos and protests as we can muster calling for action; but, even if as a result our world leaders do take action, they may still act inadequately to solve the wrong problem in the wrong way! They all too often do!
There is a far, far bigger underlying problem here than climate change, and far,far more action is needed on it than just cutting our CO2 emissions!
What exactly is it that we want our world leaders to do?
We urgently need to take action to achieve long term sustainability for the human race on this planet. We must deal all of the things that we humans are doing wrong that jeopardises the future for our descendants.
Climate change is just one of our many ill effects. We must deal with causes not effects.
There is far to much focus on reducing our CO2 emissions, and far too little action even on that!
I believe that Overconsumption of ALL of the earth's natural resources AND overpopulation of the planet by us are the TWO sole causes of all of our problems and that we MUST deal with BOTH of them together, and at the same time.
I believe that Personal Carbon Allowances and Carbon Trading is the only solution, as part of a global agreement on Carbon Rationing, Contraction and Convergence.
BUT, this MUST also include producing a child as a part of our personal carbon allowance, in order to deal with the overpopulation problem that we already have!
I look at it this way - every new child that we bring into the world will add to our CO2 emissions and the overconsumption of natural resources.
As things stand, every new American born will, on average, emit CO2 and consume resources equal to what about 24 African will in their lifetime. For every new European it is around 12 times. For every new child in China it is approaching 5 times, but rising fast.
So whose population growth is of the greater concern, and what should Al Gore suggest our world leaders do to deal with this problem?
Calling for "action" is easy - what exactly do we want done?
What exactly is a "rigorous and sufficient biocentric climate plan" anyway, if it excludes the population growth question?

Hmm, well I thought actually Al Gore hit all the main points except the need for human population reduction, without which the rest of it is rather futile. And NOBODY has guts to tackle that one.

Linda Whittaker

Algore is simply a multi-millionaire liberal looney dud who is a spewing expert, unable to hear from most of the world. The most effective message to send to him is to throw out all of his multi-millionaire lliberal buddies in Congress, in addition to the loon representing the Democratic Party for President of our great country ------------ for how much longer, who knows? The Democrats of our country need to wake up be re-born to take back their Party from the Liberal loon leadership of the past 25 years.

Wouldn't one's efforts to make a positive change in the world have a greater impact by discussing "the truth" with those around them in an attempt to make a grass roots change in behavior reducing one's carbon footprint, than attack a single man, that at least "got the ball rolling" on public recognition of the problem. Let's remember, the entire world's change does not fall on the shoulders of AL GORE. Everyone should take positive steps towards change and negative ones attacking each other.

Linda Whittaker says that NOBODY has the guts to tackle the population problem.
I have. I just did!
Unfortunately I am neither Al Gore nor a world leader.
I am merely a not-so-humble Friends of the Earth, WWF, and Optimum Population Trust supporter.
Please see the website www.optimumpopulation.org if you are not familiar with this organisation.
I am not alone. We have the guts, we have had them for some considerable time but nobody who is a world leader has been listening to our warnings - so far!

Without leadership as Dr. Glen Barry says, and the right policies on both overconsumption and overpopulation as I suggest, any action is going to be not just "rather futile" as you say - but totally and utterly inadequate for us to achieve long term sustainability for the human race on this planet.
So what do we want?
Yet more jam today and hence even less dripping for our grandchildren tomorrow?

Maybe Mr Gore could start with his own carbon footprint. Hypocrisy won't advance the cause.
Frank Farrell

Thanks to Bill Dowling; he is so right!!!
In my letter to Al Gore I added this:
"And please, please, please make quite clear what is the most concealed truth: The members of our species are much too many!
Even if all people lived on minimum living standard, their number would exceed the limits of the ecological carrying capacity by far (in Germany, e.g. by a factor greater than 2). Propaganda against the necessary decline of population numbers has to be strongly opposed, and birth control must be regarded the most important action of development policy.
Only then the necessary minimized consumption of energy can yet earn success."

Population growth is the root of many of our problems but not all.
The life style of the west and increasingly the rest of the world is unsustainable regardless of population. It is unhealthy for ourselves and the planet and must be changed even if our own numbers were decreased. Pollution, whether of the air, water or land has to be stopped for many reasons - climate change just being the most obvious and crucial.

In light of the massively increasing pressure of US citizens to retain our consumptive lifestyles, I urge you all to never weaken, but increase your work to protect intact ecosystems, help reduce long-distance shipping of goods, and do what you can to influence increased restoration of as much area of earth (and seas) as possible, to a state wherein they are unused for resource extraction.

I will not sign an action that is basic "shoot the messenger psychology".

Please - give Al Gore a break. His household energy consumption comes from accredited green source - and his personal energy levels must be at breaking point.

What more to you expect of this brave human being?

Hi Glen, There have been massive protests against the war in Iraq but the media mostly ignored them or downplayed their size. This, I believe, has left people indifferent to mass protests. They don't work if nobody knows about them. IMO the problem is the mainstream media. Its warped multinational friendly, consumption driven views are the number one reason people have not taken action and why politicians are afraid to take a stand. If you want to protest, get people to turn off the mainstream media. Ask them to stop subscribing to cable/satellite and make sure they tell their cable or satellite provider the reason they're dropping the service. If you want to target over consumption and environmental degradation, I cannot think of a more appropriate target.

I to believe the mass media is starting to play a negative role for climate change in Australia.

They seem to ask the politicians questions all the time like " will we have to pay more" and " will the coal industry be negativily impacted.

They are forcing the leaders into a situation where its almost impossible for them to act an survive the negatives.

Of course the coal industry is going to hurt, of course it will cost more for everyone, this is the mess we have gotten ourselves into.

The media also seem to feel the need to be balanced and so they through up whatever anti GW stuff they can find to counter the science. The problem is that debate is over and they just haven't noticed.

Glen, you've got that right! Bush does a better job of leading by example in the personal world of greening than Mr. Gore. It must be tough for someone of such means to know what it takes but not be willing to make the personal sacrifices. Thanks!

Is Al Gore a fraud? Hasn't his film been proven to have at least 53 scientific errors? Doesn't he have obvious financial conflicts to Global warming : aka chairman of an investment house................ and that's after royalties ?

Perhaps credibility needs to be questioned by all involved in this massive inconvenient truth ? No ?

Yes... we need the full truth: minus of course, 53 scientific errors that have been passed onto children around the world.

Respect has to be earned! Sadly, "green" groups have lost all respect, and I am not the only one who thinks this!

Green groups are not democratic.

Today I read about having a "green" baby. For pete sake, it just gets worse!

SWallace

I beg to differ as to your argument - re: standing in front of a bulldozer. That type of action failed to produce any form of accelerated change. Al is right in pointing out the issues - as to whether a zero emissions home is the answer, I wonder! The fact is the world at large is not interested in walking anywhere, and until it is, you can do all the bull (dozing) you want... besides, the only emissions strategy that will work is the invention of something that will reverse the effects at a greater speed.

Read THE CARBON CON in DAVID ICKE'S book THE DAVID ICKE GUIDE TO THE GLOBAL CONSPIRACY

All about AL GORE.

Also read THE CHILLING STARS by Nigel Calder.

Dear Dr Barry
The only country leading the WAY in this is Castro's CUBA ...have u seen the DVD Cuba, the Power of Community..
+ earlier, the Greening of CUBA...it's about how CUBA overcame the Peak Oil Crisis and today is leading the world in
sustainable organic agriculture
we here in S'pore ( a tiny tiny environmental group) have been showing this but alas only at Grass Roots level as
our Govt here totally in STEP with BUSH's USA

cheers
Betty L Khoo-Kingsley

Hi Dr. Glen

The word is POPULATION CONTROL. In the 50s when the World Population was 1/3rd of what it is today, there was much talk about the dangers of the "population explosion". Now it's the elephant in the room, that no-one dares to mention, or it's put down as not the real issue.

There must be a world plan to reduce the world's human population over the next 200 years to about a tenth of what it is now. Then our descendants can all live well without threatening the environment.

Yours sincerely
Peter Brown

Glen,

I wonder whether your perspective on Gore has changed today, with his call for carbon-free electricity in the US in ten years.......

I attended very well publicized rallies on global warming last year which had little or no discernible impact on policies, but they did make a few people feel like they accomplished something. The music was terrible, however, so maybe we can attribute the lack of impact to that.

See the newest blog entry above. The point of the alert was that given Mr. Gore's prestige and repeated deep expressions of concern, a grand substantive gesture like this was overdue. There was wide participation in the alert, so I guess many have similar concerns.

It blows me away when people try to discredit GW so that they can continue to consume.

They totally miss the point. The real issue is the overuse of resources and the extinction of habit and species. We have no right to consume the planet the way we are.

If global warming, whether hoax or real, gets us to stop, then great, because thats what we need to do.

Jeff

Somehow we are going to find ways to replace all this discussion with some responsible action that takes its shape in the form of necessary human behavior change.

As Jeff Greene and many others report, we are called upon to stop overconsuming, overpopulating and overwhelming the Earth as we are recklessly doing now. We are also going to establish new policies and programs of action that make it possible for us to be respond ably by doing many things differently and sustainably rather than to continue behaving in soon to become patently unsustainable ways.

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population,
established 2001