The United Kingdom court ruling smacking down Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” as shameless political fantasy unfit for schoolchildren elicited an interesting reaction from the former vice president.

Did he challenge the court’s findings?


Did he provide new evidence to bolster his case for any of the specific findings of falsehood and exaggeration by the court?


Did he argue that the court itself was corrupt or incapable of understanding the “science” behind his film?


He didn’t do any of those things.

Instead, what Al Gore did was to make scurrilous and unsubstantiated accusations about the concerned parent who brought the case to court, at some personal sacrifice, to protect his child from the mental abuse of being forced to watch “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider questioned in a Washington Post online blog whether Dimmock paid for his legal expenses himself or got help from others. Since she could not determine the answer to this question puzzling her, she determined that Dimmock’s “motives are quite suspect.”

If this is not a case of the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one.

The people who created and distributed this propaganda film throughout the world are among the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world. And here they are questioning the motives of one obscure parent who battled, like David vs. Goliath, the national education establishment in the United Kingdom and won!

This is the definition of “chutzpah” – Tennessee-style.

Interestingly, Gore himself has publicly said nothing about the court case – nothing! Apparently, he hopes you won’t learn about it. He hopes that by not commenting on it, the amazing story of one parent’s battle for truth and justice in the United Kingdom will not be heard here in the United States. And, he may have something there.

This story had no legs whatsoever – which is why I am writing about it two days in a row in this space.

A reputable court of law has heard the facts on “An Inconvenient Truth” and found it seriously wanting. That court has determined the movie is unfit for viewing in public schools in the UK without specific and explicit disclaimers explaining that the assertions offered by Gore are not supported by science. And the reaction in the U.S. is like nothing ever happened. The movie is still being shown in classrooms from coast to coast. It is, besides evolution, the very centerpiece of what passes for science education in American schools today!

This raises some questions in my mind:

  • Why isn’t Al Gore being hounded in all his public appearances to address this court ruling and its implications?

  • Why isn’t he put on the spot in every venue to answer the specific findings of fact?

  • Since Al Gore won’t comment nor dispute the court’s findings, why aren’t his acolytes in Hollywood and elsewhere, all those involved in the film and supporting it, being asked to take up the challenge?

  • Why aren’t U.S. parents challenging the showing of this film in schools the way the UK parent-hero, Stuart Dimmock, did?

  • Is there not even one prominent school authority in America who is willing to re-examine his commitment to the educational value of this film in light of the UK court ruling?

Related special offers:

“Global Warming or Global Governance?” DVD

“The Sky’s Not Falling!”

“HYSTERIA: Exposing the secret agenda behind today’s obsession with global warming”

Previous commentary:

An Inconvenient Lie

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.