Really only right wingers with their own agenda are asserting that An Inconvenient Truth contains lies at all.
So you can name the South Pacific island that has been abandoned, then? Can you say where the polar bears drowned for lack of an ice sheet to rest on?
BTW, now that the politicians have been given the green light by Gore, and everybody is rushing to provide biofuels, nobody on the Gore team is mentioning a report in Science
that estimates that the increasing production of biofuels will release two to nine times the amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere over the next thirty years than would be generated by using fossil fuels.
And worse, to meet the EU target of substituting 10% of transport fuel with biofuel by 2020 means turning 40% of European farmland over to biofuel. Since that is not possible, it will mean importing biofuel from poor areas of the globe, with resulting devastation of their ecosystems. This is what happens when politicians get involved in science.
Not many people are saying that the earth is not getting warmer, but a lot of people are
saying that there is still no good information on how much of this is man made and how much is natural. The politicians don't like science getting in the way of their agendas, so that is why the Gore camp has declared the debate to be over. To me it seems perfectly reasonable to conclude that since the earth's climate has been constantly in change throughout geological time and no doubt is changing now, we should first try to determine how much of the present changes are not just nature at work, a process that proceeds without human intervention.
However, politicians don't like this concept of not being in charge, so I fear that by feeding their egos, they could make disastrous decisions.