by Michael dEstries
Categories: People.

snipshot_bx199d2winhm.jpgVice-President and Oscar winner? You can now add the ultimate award in the entertainment industry to Al Gore’s resume. At the 79th Annual Academy Awards Sunday night, Gore’s film — his passion — An Inconvenient Truth was the winner in the Best Documentary category.

Interviewed earlier, Gore was thankful that his Oscar nomination for his global warming documentary was shifting public opinion, but he’s not happy about being right. From the article,

“Gore said he hopes to pull the global warming argument out of a partisan context and frame it as a moral and spiritual issue that involves responsibility to future generations. Skeptical at first at the idea of turning his slideshow into a movie, Gore said now he’s grateful for all the people the movie has reached.”

Gore accepted the award, along with producers Laurie David, Scott Burns, Lawrence Bender and director, Davis Guggenheim. Everyone was quick to acknowledge Gore’s inspirational role in allowing them to create the film. Gore than then took the mic and thanked the entertainment industry for allowing his to make the film. He also then called upon all Americans — and the world — to work together to address the serious issue of climate change. Chris from LighterFootStep filled me in on some of the speech, “”We have everything in the world we need to do it [beat global warming], with the possible exception of the will to act.”

“That’s a renewable resource…let’s renew it.”

[UPDATE] ThinkProgress is rockin’ out with some quick video uploads. Click here for the video of Gore and Co. accepting the Oscar. Congrats Al!

About Michael dEstries

Michael has been blogging since 2005 on issues such as sustainability, renewable energy, philanthropy, and healthy living. He regularly contributes to a slew of publications, as well as consulting with companies looking to make an impact using the web and social media. He lives in Ithaca, NY with his family on an apple farm.

View all posts by Michael dEstries →
  • Ian

    This is not a documentary. This is a opinion piece. Regardless of your position on the whole global warming issue, it was not a reflective piece. The Oscar should have gone to one of the other documentaries.

  • df

    Congrats to 43. He really cares, while Geowar Bush is just a hired globalization cheerleader.

  • Ron Habegger

    Oh really? There are plenty of facts in Gore’s doc; Unless you are a disbeliever or self-destructionist.
    Since when can’t a doc have opinion? Since when must a doc be entirely reflective?

    And to negative commentors: You would deny Gore’s doc based on support for Bush’s do-nothing, in fact, harmful administration of the environment.

  • Dan Healy

    Anyone who has actually done any reading, AND actually seen the film, will have only positive things to say.
    Anyone still covering for the republicans is lower
    than Nazi sympathizers after WWII.
    We know the truth, the bad guys tried to keep it secret
    and it got out anyway, they are still fighting to cover it back up again to save their miserable carcasses, and
    if you don’t have a lean to the left, get off this page, duuuuh.

  • DJNoha

    There’s no “position” on observing reality. Science is based on observation, denying global warming is based on closing your eyes and yelling. BushCo and the neocons deny it for two reasons:

    1) They snicker at any cause that “liberals” champion, even if they used to believe it.

    2) Their only politics is kleptocracy and corruption, and they’re much more interested in handing taxpayer billions to their energy and oil industry pals than observing reality.

  • kmc

    brought tears to my eyes.

  • Lewis

    The conservative scum have already begun their partisan attacking.

    Conservatives are traitorous scum. period.

  • Pingback: HiiFii Celebrity Entertainment - Celebrity News » Oscar Winners and lots more pictures; it is more entertaining this year()

  • Ken Mitchell

    Gore gave the wilm what Joe Friday asked for, “Just the facts Ma’am.”. Gore should run in 2008 and get back the election that Bush stole from him in 2000.

  • Pingback: CelebritySearcher Blog » Blog Archive » Oscar Winners and lots more pictures; it is more entertaining this year()

  • Pingback: CelebFace: All the gossip, juicy rumors and scandals!()

  • Burre

    Yep, the facts…. The hockey stick… It seems it’s not good science after all.

    “The Hockey Stick graph was first published by Mann, Bradley and Hughes in 1998 in Nature (vol. 392: 779-787). It is now generally referred to as “MBH98”. Two Canadian statistical experts, McIntyre and McKitrick set out to audit the Hockey Stick. They had great trouble getting the necessary information from Michael Mann. He put many obstacles in their path and even refused to release his computer code, saying that “giving them the algorithm would be giving in to the intimidation tactics that these people are engaged in” and that “if we allowed that sort of thing to stop us from progressing in science, that would be a very frightening world”. He apparently was not willing to accept that one of the litmus tests of a scientific theory is its reproducibility. Anyhow, McIntyre and McKitrick found serious flaws and deliberate manipulation of data in the methods used by MBH98 to obtain their Hockey Stick. They even found that that the statistical methods used by MBH98 always produces a hockey stick shaped graph, even when random numbers are used.”

    Just google more. The info is there. Do peolpe actually belive a gas (CO2) we are breathing out and flowing in our blood all the time is dangerous?

  • Mr. Grammar

    “…Gore’s inspirational role in allowing them to create the film. Gore than took the mic…”

    THEN took the mic…

    This is the whole reason I watched the boring Oscars. Hooray for Al Gore, Davis Guggenheim et aliter.

    The dance group was really amazing, though.

  • Karl

    “Just google more. The info is there. Do peolpe actually belive a gas (CO2) we are breathing out and flowing in our blood all the time is dangerous?”

    Exactly! That’s what I said to those Hurricane Katrina crybabies. Our bodies are 58% water! We take it in and out of our bodies all the time! How could water be dangerous?

  • Bob

    What a crock of unadulterated crap. Hollyweird has truly gone over the deep end. I can imagine being one of the other nominees only to have it stolen by Al Whore for a political schlockumentary.

    Geesh… were have all the independent thinking people gone? It’s a sad day when eco nazi’s declare the debate over… sounds somewhat familiar from a not too distant past. Some of us refuse to drink the nazi kool-aid.

  • Roger Drowne EC

    YO… Al & Millisa

    Need a song and PR 4

    Earth Ball Homes Will Cut Global Pollution

    By 87.53 % Fast… Ck it Out

    Thank U, Roger D. EC another

    Solar Powered – Earth Citizen

  • Reggie Hall

    Imagine if Al Gore had been our president for these six years. I believe in the long run no issue we face today is more challenging than Climate Change. The Inconvient Truth documentry was most deserving of the Oscar and I hope and pray Al Gore will run for president in 08. I can not Imagine a better president for these times. Gore 08!

  • Pingback: :: celebrities caught green-handed » 2007 Academy Awards Recap! How Green Was The Golden Man?()

  • Paul

    The fact that he had to put truth in the title is evidence that this is just a bunch of lies being sold to you as the truth

  • J Snow

    Bob said, “What a crock of unadulterated crap. Hollyweird has truly gone over the deep end. I can imagine being one of the other nominees only to have it stolen by Al Whore for a political schlockumentary.

    Geesh… were have all the independent thinking people gone? It’s a sad day when eco nazi’s declare the debate over… sounds somewhat familiar from a not too distant past. Some of us refuse to drink the nazi kool-aid.”

    Bob, you’re the reason that I continue to be vigil against evil. As I always said, “the only good murderous ignorant racist Nazi is a dead Nazi.” Caring about the survival of the human race isn’t “eco-nazism,” you lying evil scumbag. Just because your Mom seduced you at the age 12yo doesn’t make you a hero, you moron!

  • Gwen

    Al Gore is a great example of using something that you are passionate about and getting noticed. He’s come a long way! Read our blog on Wabi-Sabi and the Oscars at


  • Michael

    The predictions of Global Warming have not panned out under scientific scrutiny. That’s why the Doomsday nuts have now begun championing Abrupt Climate Change. There is absolutely no consensus among scientists about the validity of Global Warming or Abrupt Climate Change as a human created condition. The jury’s out on this, as of yet. Which means people who choose this position as a faith are no better than the religious right nuts (whose faith is equally stupid).

  • mary

    ANYONE who brushes aside the global warming evidence shows true ignorance for real logic. Even IF you did not believe the evidence, IF there was a remote possibility that global warming is taking place should be enough to catapult this country into action. Just think for a minute, Our current strategy is to destroy a culture for oil, spend billions of dollars on this strategy, when research and development into renewable resources would provide jobs, a new peaceful direction, utilize our real strengths in this country and propel us into this new direction. And very possibly restore integrity and health to a dying planet and a morally dying humanity.

  • mark

    “the predictions of global warming have not panned out under scientific scrutiny” ???? hmmm, exactly what do you define as scientific scrutiny? as best i can tell, the scientific community documents established fact in a network of science journals and white papers. if you were to check the last twenty years’ worth of those, you’d find that not only has global warming been heavily scrutinized, it’s been confirmed by science. period. it always amuses me how much the right and the libertarians believe that talk radio is the source of all debate.

  • Bob

    One simple question… why doesn’t Gore practice what he preaches? Defining silence. (crickets)

    “Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.” – Tennessee Center for Policy Research

  • MOhan

    I applaud Al Gore’s efforts to bring this issue to the front burner and the recognition he has received. But,
    I can’t help but wonder about the double or even multiple standards adopted by the world leaders to the question of development and how it affects living standards and global warming. The developed world has enjoyed the fruits of development and innovation and has reached a stage of richness and prosperity by exploiting the resources of the earth and the world. They are now however talking about the ill-effects of development taking place in China, India, Brazil etc which are aspiring to improve their economies and raise the living standards of their people. But these efforts are being perceived as contributing more to the gloable warming. The environmentalists and naturalists are now worried about the consequences of continued growth of these countries and the effect it may have on depletion of resources and increase in pollution and warming due to more industrialisation. Though it is true, is it justified to ask these countries to go slow on their development so that the already developed world can continue to enjoy their prosperity.

    The other question is if these countries put a brake on thier growth, what effect it will have on the economies of the developed world like USA, UK, Australia and the OECD nations which see these countries as the market for their goods and depend on them to increase thier exports.
    Not to forget the Big Oil Companies which take their raw material from much of the developing world and whose final products contribute to the pollution and global warming to a great extent. Will they or their stake-holders be ready to accept a big fall in their income/profits for the sake of improving the atmosphere and lessening the harmful emissions.

    This is a classic catch-22 situaton where the speeding train cannot be stopped without a break-up, but continuing to speed ahead may take the train to disaster.

    The only solution may be managed slowing down of the world economy, which requires consent and co-operation by all the major players. A system of compensation for the developing and undeveloped nations from the already developed nations may be required for this managed slow-down to take place. This requires sacrifice by every one. How this will be agreed to and implemented and who will supervise the same? Will the United Nations grab the leadership on this critical issue?

    Already USA is proving to be difficult to realise its role in bringing the world to the present desperate state, and is refusing to contribute in any meaningful way. Who is strong enough to bring USA to the realisation that it has a big responsibility in leading the world out of this crisis. Will it be its friends like UK, Australia or its critics like France, New Zealand and other OECD countries which are part of the developed world as of today? Or will it be the new giants like India, China and Brazil etc which themselves are dependent on continued growth in their export markets in the developed world.

    This is a very complicated situation and just more and more talk will only create more hot air and hard feelings. The time has come to think of radical solutions like massive transfer of wealth and aid to feed and clothe and maintain the undeveloped nations like those in Africa. A mechanism will have to worked out to tax the developed nations and use the funds to slow-down and manage the economic growth in other countries.

    Time is running out fast and the train is hurtling towards an unknown land and uncertain future. Who will grab the throttle to manage a safe ride and arrival for the passengers?

  • Joe V

    If people have a problem with the messenger, VP Gore…then how about Tom Brokaw and the documentary he did for NBC and The Discovery Channel?

    How about the body of int’l science put forth by the UN’s Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change?

    How about our US-based prestigous climate research institutions?

    How about the CEOs of some of the major Fortune 500 companies (eg, GE, DuPont, Duke Energy, PG&E, Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar, etc)uniting to form the US Climate Action Partnership to issue a call to action re: climate change? see

    They are all in accord on how man-made pollution has driven and is driving climate change at an alarming rate.

    What is wrong with creating a new economy based on cleaner and renewable energy? We just have to get the petroleum and transportation industries on board, which will be the fnal and ultimate challenge.

    Congrats to Mr Gore and the AIT producers for taking the risk to make this film.

  • Michael

    Man Made Global Warming Debunking News and Views
    Facts disprove warnings about global warming
    by William Robert Johnston
    in The Brownsville Herald, April 4, 2001, p. A10

    A long time ago kings and rulers might be advised by magicians, astrologers, and other charlatans. These mystics would prey on leaders–and through them, on entire societies–by using the false superstitious beliefs of all involved. These people mostly went away with the advent of science.

    But they’re back–this time using the name of science. A vocal minority of the scientific community, with the help of unqualified outsiders, has persuaded many politicians to pursue plans that would be economically devastating. The story this time is global warming.

    The “global warmers” produced the Kyoto treaty of 1997. However, the facts completely disprove what these people are saying about climate change.

    We’ve all heard the stories, reported as indisputable fact: The last century or decade is just about the hottest the world has ever been. Carbon dioxide from burning gasoline and coal is blamed. Unless their solution is enacted right now, temperatures will rise terribly in the next century. Icecaps will start to melt, coasts will flood, storms will get worse, diseases will spread, animals will die, and more. And it’s all because of us Americans.

    The best lies contain a measure of truth. Yes, carbon dioxide in the air has increased in the last century due to the use of fossil fuels. Yes, global average temperature has increased 0.8 degrees F in the same century. Unfortunately, the temperature increase came first: most of the temperature increase was before 1940, and most of the new carbon dioxide was added after 1960. Would you trust a “scientist” who said the result came before the cause?

    There are other problems, as well. Solar activity may be the cause of the world temperature changes. The global warmers can’t explain why satellites show no temperature change in the past 20 years. The computer models that predict disaster in a century have been completely wrong for the past 20 years. And no one can agree on the side effects.

    Scientific facts actually helped unravel the treaty last year. Carbon dioxide is removed from the air by various natural and manmade processes, and world leaders couldn’t agree on how to credit for this. No one wanted the U.S. to get credit for removals of carbon dioxide, so negotiations faltered.

    Most scientists use facts and logic to reach conclusions. It’s no surprise that over 17,000 scientists and engineers have signed a petition calling for rejection of the Kyoto treaty. This overshadows any collection of scientists that have endorsed the treaty.

    The global warmers have failed to prove that man has caused a problem. This hasn’t stopped them from demanding we act, and act now.

    The Kyoto Protocol called for the U.S. and other western nations to shoulder most of the limits on fossil fuel energy use. Developing countries suffer little or no restrictions.

    Those countries are obviously enthusiastic. The economic powerhouses would have their hands tied, while would-be competitors like mainland China would not.

    President Bush has sided with the scientific facts in recently declining to implement the Kyoto limits. After all, the treaty is so bad the Senate opposed it 95 to zero.

    Bush and Congress must go further. They should refuse any regulation of carbon dioxide emissions whatsoever.

    Consider the impact of the restrictions still promoted by some. The U.S. would have to put a 50 to 100 % tax on gasoline, heating fuels, and most electricity. Local farmers and landowners will face bureaucratic restrictions hindering the use of land. In south Texas, the result would just be massive inflation and unemployment. In the developing world, suffering economies would cause starvation and death. And for all this, the restrictions can’t be shown to make any difference to world climate.

    The primary advocates of global warming remain the environmentalists. They propose a drastic solution to a non-existent problem–a solution which is, amazingly, the same political policy they have unsuccessfully sought to impose for decades. Many of their leaders oppose free markets and seek to limit human development, and global warming is currently the best means to these ends. If people are hurt in the process, so be it.

    The current power supply problems in California are a perfect example. They are not a consequence of true deregulation, but of environmental and anti-free market restrictions on power production. This is the same thing proposed in Kyoto, and the same thing still promoted by some Washington leaders.

    As you watch your gas and electricity bills go up, recognize this as only a taste of what could have been under Kyoto–and what could still be, if environmental politics and big government win out over free markets and scientific facts.

  • Kevin McCollum

    The one question I do not hear asked very often is, what if Al Gore and the vast majority of the scientific community is right? What if the human species is slowly killing the planet? Unfortunately the only real absolute truth will come when it is too late. The problem here is the solution and the fact that it could have a severe economic impact. A lot of people have their life savings invested in oil companies and utilities and talk of global warming is seen as a threat to their economic security. This of course is no reason to ignore the facts or to do nothing but it is very easy to use it as a wedge to keep ordinary people divided which in the end serves the small minority of people who would lose the most.
    So what if Al Gore is right? Well obviously we face extinction as a species unless we quickly adapt to a very severe environment. And another good question is why not do all we can to limit the damage even if it is only theoretical? Would it be such a bad thing for the human species to get off oil? Yes, the big oil companies will need to adapt to a different economic environment but does anyone really think they can’t? Would it be such a bad thing to take away the money supply from the terrorists? If Osama Bin Laden came from a very poor part of the world does anyone really think he would be such a threat to the world? I really do not understand why some people are obsessed with disproving Al Gore. So again I ask, what if he is right? Do you really want to face the consequences? Exxon has a better chance surviving the changing economic environment then we have surviving the ecological disaster that is Global Warming.

  • Pingback: Who Cares The Most About The Environment?()

  • Pingback: TechCrunch Japanese アーカイブ » Google vs Yahoo。環境に最も気配りをしている企業は?()

  • Magazineblog

    The fact that he had to put truth in the title is evidence that this is just a bunch of lies being sold to you as the truth too