For Earth Day, Michael Moore released released the fundamentally misleading Planet of the Humans. Highlighting this at Daily Kos generated attention with 356 comments (as of the moment), many defending Moore as insightful and too many dismissing Moore’s rampant truthiness. For the same reasons that Moore got lots of soft-peddled media attention for the release, his notoriety led knowledgeable reviewers to (regrettably) take the time to watch the film (such as here) and, well, the detailing of errors, falsehoods, truthiness piled up. And, a letter from scientists made this clear. With the evidence in hand, [one of] the film’s distributor didn’t hesistate.
At Films for Action, (the extremely good and worth reading) Skepticism Is Healthy, but Planet of the Humans Is Toxic - A Critical Review ends
A movie that purports to care about the environment and the future of humanity and yet seeks to undermine support for the very things we must do to save this planet, and ourselves, is worse than a disappointment. It’s reckless.
UPDATE/NOTE: Note that Films for Action is not the full distributor but a sustainable film clearinghouse. Regrettably, the film is still up on Youtube and certainly will be moved around by climate science deniers and fossil fools around the world.
Providing a context for Moore’s truthiness
Yes, there are elements of truth in Planet of the Humans. Yes, neither solar nor wind is without environmental impact. Yes, human population is a real challenge that is too little discussed. Yes (YES), biofuels are overhyped and are (mainly?) damaging. Yes … HOWEVER, Moore falsifies much, maligns (too) many people and institutions with partial truth or falsehoods, presents things in fundamentally misleading ways, and — writ large — does not provide a useful contribution to the discussion of our global (climate) challenges and solution options/paths to address them.
Like Robert Bryce’s work (not that in anyway are producer Jeff Gibbs’ and Moore’s knowledge of energy issues as encyclopedic as libertarian, climate-dismissing Bryce’s), this film has the same fundamental flaws:
- it is too error-filled for non-educated/knowledgeable people to watch due to misdirection & embedded deceit that might not be evident as the viewer has to be knowledgeable to see the truthiness and deceit.
- For those already knowledgeable, the core thematics/points aren’t news and it just takes so much effort to wade through the falsehoods and truthiness for having thoughts/perspective that are already out there in discussion.
Additionally, Gibbs’ and Moore’s truthiness and falsehood-filled product isn’t helpful because they created something that is being leveraged by climate deniers/delayers to attack (not complete, need to improve, are improving) solution paths. (For examples, see Emily Atkin’s thought-provoking The wheel of first-time climate dudes.)
Comments are closed on this story.