Abstract
In this paper, I discuss the "inconvenient truth" strategy of Al Gore. I argue that Gore's notion of truth upholds a conception of science and policy that narrows our understanding of climate change discourse. In one notable exchange, Gore and NASA scientist, James Hansen, disagreed about whether scientific statements based on Hansen's computer simulations were truth or opinion. This exchange is featured in An Inconvenient Truth, yet the disagreement is edited from the film and presented simply as an instance of Hansen speaking "inconvenient truth". In this article, I compare the filmic representation of Hansen's testimony with the congressional record. I place their exchange in a broader historical perspective on climate change disputation in order to discuss the implications of Gore's perspective on truth.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
