The High Priest of Ecoalarmism
By Stephen Goode and Eli Lehrer, Insight 
Copyright 1998 Washington Times
October 12, 1998
 Most tabulations of Albert Gore's publications contain 80 or so works by 
the vice president - 
a long list for someone in politics. A great majority of them are reports of 
special commissions. Others are small books or longish essays, such as his The 
Best-Kept Secrets in Government. That one is full of friendly but mostly 
indifferent advice, most of which hardly seems up to the status of 
"best-kept secrets" - such as the Internal Revenue Service must 
"complete proper" paper returns within 40 days, while it has 21 days to respond to electronic 
returns that are complete and proper.
 Gore's publications also include tomes connected with 
"reinventing government," a task he assumed after becoming vice 
president and which has led to such books as Common Sense: Government Works 
Better and Costs Less, a claim that for a century or two was made by 
old-fashioned conservatives such as the late Sen. Robert Taft of Ohio, but 
which when it comes from the pen of Gore evidently is to be regarded as a major 
discovery. 
 Still, the book at the heart of the vice president's work - and the only one 
of his volumes that Gore reportedly wrote on his own - is Earth in the Balance, 
a grandly titled tome whose subtitle is the even more grand, Ecology and the 
Human Spirit. This book first appeared in 1992, became 
a best-seller and since has gone through new editions, including a best-selling 
paperback.
 What the book makes clear is that environmentalism and ecology are subjects 
the usually dispassionate vice president gets passionate about, a fact which 
Gore made clear in the first edition of Earth 
in the Balance where he declared in the introduction: 
"Writing this book is part of a personal journey that began more than 25 years 
ago, a journey in search of a true understanding of the global ecological 
crisis and how it can be resolved."
 The personal journey he records is his discovery of the enormous 
ecological disaster the world now faces: a severe, even Armageddon-like crisis 
for which Gore offers up a solution that he claims is the only answer to this 
major dilemma, a solution not surprisingly that claims draconian government 
action and vastly increased taxation are the only antidotes. 
Anything short of biting a very hard bullet indeed won't do to save us from 
what he sees as our fate.
 Gore brings up a lot of science in his book, all of which he claims supports 
his fears of an imminent ecological tragedy. He writes about global warming 
and the greenhouse effect as if they were 
"facts" 
accepted by most scientists, which in fact they aren't. He describes enormous 
carcinogenic ozone layers in the skies, massive deforestation of the planet, 
the acceleration of the extinction of various species of wildlife and a 
worldwide population explosion among human beings.
 Gore's draconian remedies to save the planet include 
taxes on all carbon fuels (that means the gas used in automobiles), a retooling 
of all major industries and the eventual abandonment of the internal combustion 
engine - all measures that would so transform the world that the way Americans 
live now would be unrecognizable.
 Gore says scientists support his demands 
for immediate and major change, but most of them don't. Every 
"scientific" argument Gore puts forth in his book and which he says should convince us of 
the direness of our ecological disaster has been disputed and challenged by 
scientists who know far more about the subject than does Gore. Their 
challenges, however, miss the point: 
Science isn't the major reason Gore wrote Earth in the Balance.
 What is at the core of his book is stated clearly in that subtitle: Ecology 
and the Human Spirit. Fundamentally, what Gore's book is about is his views on 
how to get right with the Earth and with God. It's far more a sermon that 
stems from Gore's own Southern Baptist background than it is a coming to grips 
with the scientific information about our environment available to thoughtful 
men and women. To be sure, Gore lectures about saving the environment, but he 
sermonizes about saving souls, too, and he sermonizes with an ease, and often a 
grace, that is 
beguiling.
 
"We have misunderstood who we are, how we relate to our place within creation, 
and why our very existence assigns to us a duty of moral alertness to the 
consequences of what we do," he declares. Our planet is in the midst of an 
"ungodly crisis" that calls for an 
"all-out response." The 
"rescue of the Earth" must be the 
"central organizing principle" of our 
times, the vice president claims, calling upon our commitment to a virtuous 
cause.
 
"Our civilization is addicted to the consumption of the Earth," Gore writes with condemnation. We human beings no longer enjoy
an intimate 
relationship with the soil and with nature, a divorce between ourselves and the 
rest of the world that emerged (according to 
Gore) as early as Plato and the ancient Greeks. Western civilization has been 
wrong from its inception. Our souls are separated from their physical 
environment. 
"Shopping is now recognized as a recreational activity," he sniffs, denouncing America's obsession with possessions.
 All this of course is Gore being at one with Rousseau and the noble savage and 
with the hippies of the 1960s 
who chose to leave mainstream America to cultivate their souls and private 
gardens outside the temptations of material relationship. If one can't easily 
imagine wealthy Al comfortable on a hippie commune, it's nonetheless a 
relationship he finds comfortable, for Gore says he is drawn to the 
environmental 
cause primarily because he finds it the most genuinely spiritual commitment a 
right-thinking American or citizen of the world can make in the late 20th 
century.
 Gore ranges widely in his spiritual quest for the right environmental 
attitude, noting how civilizations in the past have been 
destroyed when they failed to comprehend how they should deal with the problems 
that face them, while others, with the wisdom to bite the bullet, were saved by 
their realization of imminent ecological disaster.
 Gore argues, for example, that a reason for the decline in Mayan civilization 
was climatic change that caused the Yucatan to grow too hot. 
Specialists in Mayan culture hesitate to make this claim, but Gore, as he does 
with the scientists who challenge his views, ignores their arguments.
 The Old Testament story of Joseph and his saving of Egypt from the 
consequences of famine becomes, in Gore's hands, the story of potentially 
disastrous climatic change where Joseph (like Gore?) 
emerges as the hero because he successfully interprets Pharaoh's dream of lean 
years to mean that Egypt had to prepare for - yes - ecological disaster. That 
societies from time immemorial have had to prepare for famine as part of the 
natural cycle of events doesn't seem to occur to Gore.
 When the vice president writes about his own personal 
experiences, he is sometimes on safe ground: 
"In my own religious experience and training - I am a Baptist - the duty to care 
for the Earth is rooted in the fundamental relationship between God, creation, 
and mankind. ...Dominion does not mean that the Earth belongs to humankind; on 
the contrary, 
whatever is done to the Earth must be done with an awareness that it belongs to 
God."
 Fair enough. Christianity traditionally has taught responsible stewardship. 
But then Gore quickly goes New Age with his religious faith. What we need is 
"a renewed investigation of the wisdom distilled by all faiths. This pan-religious perspective may prove especially important where our
global 
civilization's responsibility for the Earth is concerned," he writes, and then begins to select passages from the holy writings of other 
cultures that he believes prove his point.
 American Indian prayers are included among his suggestions for environmental 
inspiration. So are Islamic and Buddhist 
teachings. Gore makes a great deal of the Hindu reverence for water. Pope 
John Paul II comes in for praise because of his growing 
"ecological awareness."
 Then Gore pulls out all the stops and shows where he's been heading all along: 
True reverence for the Earth only 
will come if we understand that true wisdom comes from earliest times, when men 
and women lived as one with the Earth and all other creatures. There was no 
aggression. There was no visiting of violence against living things or against 
the Earth itself.
 No violence? No warfare? How can this be? 
"A growing 
number of anthropologists and archeomythologists argue that the prevailing 
ideology of belief in prehistoric Europe and much of the world was based on the 
worship of a simple earth goddess, who was assumed to be the fount of all life 
and who radiated harmony among all living things."
 This is nonsense. Only a very few 
women writing at the fringes of radical feminism argue that there is evidence 
that prehistoric societies were ubiquitously involved in goddess worship. The 
"proof" usually provided is that when a society can be characterized as gentle it must 
have been ruled by women and its deities must have been goddesses (contrarily, 
radical feminist scholarship 
concludes that aggressive societies are male-dominated and worship male 
deities).
 Nonetheless Gore endorses the whole radical-feminist argument. He laments 
that the last village in Europe where the goddess was worshiped was wiped out 
in the 15th century. After that, the aggressive, acquisitive, cruel masculine 
civilizations dominated the world, and 
most particularly the West.
 To overcome our addiction to the masculinized destruction of the Earth, what 
does Gore suggest we must do? 
"The advanced economies must undergo a profound transformation" - which means a global Marshall Plan to guide worldwide
economic and social 
reconstruction, which of course would cost untold trillions.
 By the time he makes this 
demand of us, it's clear that for Gore only 
"wrenching transformation" can be spiritually satisfying. He's demanding that we purge our souls as well 
as our pocketbooks.
 Two more points about Gore's passionate environmentalism. When the vice 
president brought up American Indians and cited them as examples of those from 
whom we could learn a healthy 
attitude toward nature, he included Chief Seattle, a 19th century American 
Indian. Gore quotes Seattle on his closeness to the Earth: 
"How can you buy or sell the sky? The land? The idea is strange to us. If we 
do not own the freshness of the air and the sparkle of the water, how can you 
buy them?'" and 
so on, until Seattle concluded: 
"One thing we know: Our God is also your God. The Earth is precious to Him and 
to harm the Earth is to heap contempt on its Creator."
 Sweet, pious statements. Gore writes that Chief Seattle was supposed to have 
uttered them in 1855 when President Franklin Pierce was so crass as to 
offer to buy land belonging to Seattle's tribe. But the real author of 
Seattle's words was Ted Perry, a screenwriter who penned them for a 1971 ABC-TV 
show and who has said he never intended them to be attributed literally to the 
chief.
 How passionate - and unreasonable - Gore can be 
about environmentalism again was revealed in February 1992 when the Airborne 
Arctic Stratospheric Expedition issued preliminary findings that suggested the 
development of an ozone hole above the Northern Hemisphere.
 Stories about cancer-causing ultraviolet rays and other disasters flooded the 
press, their chief source being 
Gore who went to the Senate floor on Feb. 6 declaring that the Northern ozone 
hole was leading to increased cases of cataracts and blindness among humans and 
"to blind rabbits in our backyards."
 The problem for Gore was that particular ozone hole did go away, or to be more 
accurate, never existed 
at all. In March scientists found that there was no ozone hole over the 
Northern Hemisphere.
 Gore likewise predicted an increase in immune-deficiency diseases such as 
lupus, herpes and AIDS. The world and the United States were facing an 
"acute emergency," a 
"long-term emergency" that was 
not going away.
 That Gore hasn't abandoned his passionate commitment to environmentalism is 
revealed in his 1994 introduction to Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, where he 
claims that Carson, whose book led to a prohibition on the use of the 
pesticide DDT, was a major influence on his life. He describes Carson as a 
major scientific thinker. 
"Her picture hangs on my office wall among those of political leaders, the 
presidents, and the prime ministers," he writes. Then he adds that Carson has had more influence on him than all of 
others put together.
 This is interesting because Carson's Silent Spring is a stark presentation of 
an imminent ecological 
disaster, not unlike Gore's Earth in the Balance. But Gore's most questionable 
and self-serving assertion in his introduction to the 1994 edition of Silent 
Spring is a glib comparison between Rachel Carson and Harriet Beecher Stowe, 
author of the antislavery manifesto, Uncle Tom's Cabin, 
a book whose passionate views on slavery helped precipitate the Civil War.
 Abraham Lincoln famously said to Stowe upon meeting her, 
"So you're the little lady who started this whole thing." More than a century later, Connecticut Sen. Abraham Ribicoff made a 
similar statement to Carson just before she testified before a congressional 
committee, claims Gore: 
"You're the lady who started all this" concern about environmental disaster.
 But Gore's Carson/Stowe parallel is nothing if not morally and intellectually 
embarrassing. The social and moral wrong of slavery, which 
made hundreds of thousands of human beings the property and chattel of others, 
couldn't be compared to the use of DDT without trivializing what slavery was. 
Above all, what Gore's comparison of Stowe and his own hero Carson amounts to 
is an attempt to make his own involvement in the environment equal to Stowe's 
role in 
bringing an end to slavery.
 In the winter 1995-96 issue of Pathways, a moderate Christian publication, 
Gore offered a definition for the word extremist, one of his most oft-used 
pejoratives for congressional Republicans. 
"Their [Republican] leadership consistently puts ideology above 
common sense, which is the definition of an extremist," he says. Extremism is putting ideology above common sense? After reading 
Earth in the Balance, there's no doubt that Gore knows whereof he speaks.
 Jennifer G. Hickey contributed to this article. 
Comments on this posting?
Click here to post a public comment on the Trash Talk
Bulletin Board.
Click here to send a private comment to the Junkman.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of Steven J. Milloy.
Copyright © 1998 Steven
J. Milloy. All rights reserved on original material. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair
use." Site developed and hosted by WestLake
Solutions, Inc.