The Inconvenience of an Inconvenient Truth

Summary

Episode Overview

Podcast: Breakpoint
Host: John Stonestreet (Colson Center)
Episode: The Inconvenience of an Inconvenient Truth
Date: June 5, 2026

This episode marks the 20th anniversary of Al Gore’s landmark documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. John Stonestreet revisits the documentary’s lasting claims about climate change, assesses their cultural and scientific impact, and contrasts Gore’s worldview with a Christian understanding of stewardship and responsibility. The episode encourages listeners to examine how philosophical assumptions shape our response to environmental questions, concluding with a call for Christians to engage these issues thoughtfully and faithfully.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Lasting Impact of An Inconvenient Truth

• The documentary was released twenty years ago, receiving major acclaim (Sundance ovation, Oscar win, $25 million box office).
• Al Gore’s position remains unchanged: He insists the film is “even more relevant today than when it first came out,” asserting that climate change is human-caused and an existential threat ([00:10–00:40]).

2. Prophecy and Cultural Authority

• Gore claimed that unless drastic steps were taken to change global structures, humanity would face runaway warming with catastrophic results.
• At the time, questioning his claims was culturally equated to rejecting science ([00:40–01:20]).
  • “For quite a while, to even question his claims was the same as being a flat earther. Not so much anymore.” — John Stonestreet ([01:12])

3. Retrospective Critique: Predictions vs. Reality

• Recent critiques (e.g., National Review, Slate) highlight that many of Gore's dire prophecies have not materialized:
  • Floods, droughts, extreme weather, sea level rise, polar bears: data does not support catastrophic outcomes ([01:22–02:06]).
  • Quote: “The data… tell a different story. Over the past century, as the global population quadrupled, deaths from climate related disasters have plummeted.” ([01:38])
  • Even left-leaning outlets critique the film’s factual imprecision: “…it’s jarring that the movie was not scrubbed for factual precision.” — Slate, quoted by Stonestreet ([02:05])

4. The Science/Philosophy Divide

• “An Inconvenient truth was always more philosophy than it was science.” — John Stonestreet ([02:24])
• Gore’s framing didn’t allow for dissent and assumed consensus where none existed; not all scientists agreed or agree with his position.
• The core issue is not merely political but deeply philosophical and moral ([02:28–03:03]).

5. Competing Worldviews: Naturalism vs. Christian Stewardship

• Naturalistic worldview:
  • Humanity and history are accidents; the future is precarious due to our actions.
  • Stephen Jay Gould quote: “We’re here because one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin anatomy… The whole thing’s an accident, so one little slip up by us could bring the whole thing crashing down.” ([03:07])
  • Catastrophic environmentalism stems from a vision that sees humans as threats in a fragile system ([03:17])
• Christian worldview:
  • Inspired by Francis Schaeffer’s call for stewardship: “Christian based science and technology should consciously try to see nature healed while waiting for the complete healing of Christ’s return.” ([03:36])
  • Humans as divinely appointed stewards, responsible yet not alone or ultimately in charge.
  • “We’re responsible. We’re valuable creatures created to meaningfully care for the rest of creation.” ([04:14])
• Essential difference: The Bible and Gore’s film offer fundamentally opposing visions of humanity’s place and role in the world ([04:20]).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

Al Gore’s Continued Conviction

• “From my perspective, the movie is even more relevant today than when it first came out.”
  — John Stonestreet, quoting Al Gore ([00:10])

Data vs. Disaster

• “The data… tell a different story. Over the past century, as the global population quadrupled, deaths from climate related disasters have plummeted.” ([01:38])

On Worldview

• “An Inconvenient truth was always more philosophy than it was science.” ([02:24])
• “It was always a worldview issue—specifically, what we believe about the kind of world we live in and our place within it.” ([02:55])

Stephen Jay Gould on Accidentality

• “We’re here because one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin anatomy that could transform into legs for terrestrial creatures… The whole thing’s an accident, so one little slip up by us could bring the whole thing crashing down.” ([03:07])

Francis Schaeffer’s Christian Vision

• “A Christian based science and technology should consciously try to see nature healed while waiting for the complete healing of Christ’s return.” ([03:36])

Christian Stewardship Conclusion

• “Between the Bible and Gore’s film is all the difference in the world.” ([04:20])

---

Important Timestamps

• [00:01–01:20] — Introduction; An Inconvenient Truth’s legacy & Al Gore’s enduring claims
• [01:22–02:06] — Major climate claims critiqued; population/death rate statistics
• [02:24–03:03] — Science vs. philosophy; the role of worldview
• [03:07–03:36] — Stephen Jay Gould’s evolutionary view; the fragility of existence
• [03:36–04:20] — Francis Schaeffer and the Christian understanding of stewardship
• [04:20–04:47] — Summary and final contrast between Christian and secular visions

---

Tone & Style

Throughout, John Stonestreet’s tone remains thoughtful, confident, and worldview-oriented. The episode weaves together cultural analysis, philosophical reflection, and scriptural conviction, urging Christians to discern the underlying assumptions in societal debates and to approach environmental stewardship through faith rather than fear.

---

Closing Note

For the Colson Center, I’m John Stonestreet with Breakpoint.
This episode was co-authored with Dr. Timothy Padgett.

---

Ad sections, appeals, and program promotions have been omitted per instructions.

Transcript

[A]

Welcome to Breakpoint, a daily look at an ever changing culture through the lens of unchanging truth. For the Coulson Center, I'm John Stonestreet. Twenty years ago, Al Gore released the documentary An Inconvenient Truth. After premiering to a standing ovation at Sundance and earning $25 million at the box office, it earned an Oscar for best documentary. Well, today, 20 years later, Gore still stands behind the film. From my perspective, the movie is even more relevant today than when it first came out, he recently stated at an anniversary ceremony for the film, adding that global warming is not yet solved and Gore's primary claims today are the same as they were a generation ago, that climate change is happening, that it is human caused, and that it presents an existential threat to the human race. Unless the nations of the world took immediate and drastic steps to alter economic and political structures, he argued, then the runaway effects of warming would doom us all. In the documentary, Gore evoked a line from Mark Twain saying, what gets us into trouble is not what we don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so. In other words, the world was not too big for humanity to mess up, as so many believed. Maybe that was true at one time, he said, but it's not anymore. An Inconvenient Truth is the most consequential documentary of the last half century. Gore's prophecies had a profound impact on Western culture from From Hollywood to D.C. to the sciences, even the humanities in most universities. And for quite a while, to even question his claims was the same as being a flat earther. Not so much anymore. A recent article on National Review outlined Gore's failed prophecies. He promised, and I quote, a world besieged by floods, droughts, storms, wildfires, wrote author Beyond Lamborghini. The data, however, tell a different story. Over the past century, as the global population quadrupled, deaths from climate related disasters have plummeted. According to Lamborgh, Gore was wrong about the catastrophic rise of sea levels, the cause of shrinking glaciers, extreme weather events and the polar bear population. Even left wing journal Slate published critiques for Gore saying, quote, considering the multiple times Gore has given his greenhouse slideshow, he says thousands, it's jarring that the movie was not scrubbed for factual precision, end quote. Also, as Cornwall alliance founder and president E. Calvin Beisner has argued, the widely believed and repeated assertion that all scientists agree with Gore's version of climate change has never been true and is simply not so today. An Inconvenient truth was always more philosophy than it was science. Gore over catastrophized his facts and figures in terms that did not allow for dissent. He was right to claim that ultimately this is not really a political issue so much as a moral issue. But in fact, to be more precise, it was always a worldview issue, specifically what we believe about the kind of world we live in and our place within it. If, as naturalistic worldviews demand, there's no God overseeing and superintending the flow of history, we're all here by accident. As evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould said, and I quote, we're here because one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin anatomy that could transform into legs for terrestrial creatures, because the earth never froze entirely during an ice age, and because a small and tenuous species arising in Africa a quarter of a million years ago has managed to survive by hook and by crook. In other words, the whole thing's an accident, so one little slip up by us could bring the whole thing crashing down. In fact, that's the same vision behind most catastrophic visions like Gore's. And what is our place in the cosmos? Well, Francis Schaeffer wrote almost 60 years ago that a Christian based science and technology should consciously try to see nature and healed while waiting for the complete healing of Christ's return. It's an incredible difference whether or not we're divinely appointed as stewards of this world with a role to play, or simply problems that need to be solved. An Inconvenient Truth described a world that was on the precipice of a disaster that we caused and probably really couldn't fix. The Christian vision is that we aren't alone and we're not ultimately in charge. We're responsible. We're valuable creatures created to meaningfully care for the rest of creation. In other words, between the Bible and Gore's film is all the difference in the world. For the Colson Center, I'm John Stonestreet with Breakpoint. Thanks today to William of Bozeman, Montana. Thanks for being a Cornerstone monthly partner of the Colson center and for making this episode of Breakpoint possible. Today's Breakpoint was co authored with Dr. Timothy Padgett. If you're a fan of Breakpoint, leave us a review wherever you download your podcast and for more resources or to share this commentary with others, go to breakpoint.org

[B]

across the country, Christians are asking how to respond to growing confusion about identity, truth, and what it means to be human. That's why the Colson center created Truth. The study Recently, John Stonestreet sat down with detransitioner Chloe Cole to discuss why this message matters so deeply today.

[A]

What would you hope for the Truth Rising project to accomplish?

[C]

What happened to me is something that is in some way affecting almost everybody in this country. The message of not just my story, but of this project needs to go far and wide. People need to know how to engage on these issues, and that is why projects like this are so important. They make these stories so much more digestible and they enable people to be able to speak about these things that we should be convicted in more easily.

[B]

Just $200 trains and supports one Truth Rising facilitator to help reach even more people with truth and hope. Give today to help meet our June 30th fiscal year end goal of raising $1 million and be part of shaping the next decade of impact. Just go to colsoncenter.org june that's colsoncenter.org june.