I agree with both you and Holmes on this issue.
On the Holmes side: Gore has played the hyper-environmental game at least one too many times. His book,
Earth in the Balance (Penguin PLUME 1993, NY), for instance, was an extremely obnoxious and blatantly political screed that did nothing (IMO) to advance the science of conservation or the public's awareness of the issues. Contrasting his work with the likes of Ehrlich or Wilson, for instance, shows how shallow and ultimately self-serving he can be. I feel his book did more to lower people's interest and understanding of the issues than advance it.
From your side: I completely agree that climate change hype - whether good science or bad - is a distraction from much more insidious and potentially more disastrous anthropogenic environmental effects. Whether or not climate change has a human component (and I think this is pretty unequivocal), habitat destruction, bioinvasion, and the threat of spreading epizootic/panzootic emerging infectious diseases through human activity/globalization represent orders of magnitude greater threats not only to humans but to the rest of the ecosphere.
Edited to add: I wil probably see the movie anyway, just as I bought the book. I doubt I'll find the movie any more overwhelmingly convincing than I did the book - or most other recent "pseudodocumentaries", for that matter.
Edited by Quetzal, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
