I found your interpretations, and the judge's, easy to understand and (once corrected from the original hyperbole, in this thread) plausible, and I said so. I don't think you have demonstrated that they are correct, however, and I don't think they are. By this I mean that I don't think that's what Gore was referring to in his cryptic little side comment, and the kinds of evidence you present are basically irrelevant - the judge's ruling, for example, has nothing to do with what Gore meant by what he said. But the entire argument is now beside the point, as far as my original question is concerned or the subject of this thread, OK? It is an example of this: , in that it has nothing to do with Gore's argument in the movie. It is at least two levels away from the physical issue, i.e. the "substantial" or "factual" situation that some claim Gore made many "errors" about. Apparently you are not among those people, and are complaining about another kind of "error" entirely, which I have no strong opinion about. I'm perfectly willing to agree that Gore's use of stock footage of ordinary glacial calving to illustrate anthropogenic meltback, or failure to include both sides of scientific debates about such things as the melting of the snows of Kilimanjaro, or failure to emphasize that many global warmings of the past were probably started by other factors than CO2 buildup, or side reference to all those islanders evacuating, are potentially misleading - have in fact misled many. The question of whether any such movie as Gore's could be made in such a way that it misled no one or at least very few people - how much Gore should be blamed for these flaws - is very interesting. I don't think, for example, that the film footage and movie dramatizations of the Apollo missions should be blamed for the common impression they created that there is no gravity in space or on the moon. We are just now getting a handle on how misleading even accurate documentary footage of events can be, the inherent problems with visual learning (first suggested by professional sleight of hand performers), and so forth. But it hardly belongs on this thread.