Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating Glimpse of His Psychology
Review: My first impression of this incredible book was anger and revulsion, but, after cooling my heels, I realized that, politically and philosophically speaking, this work is innocuous and impotent. I was interested nonetheless, and I continued reading it, fascinated with its author's world view.
Although Mr Gore sees himself as a political and ecological potentate (which is amusing), he's actually a puerile nonentity.
The book thunders about the paracitic nature of humanity with a misanthropy I've not encountered since Mein Kampf. And this is not a quip.
His knowledge of atmospheric phenomena is scant; he makes no allusion whatever to paleoclimatology (to do so would undermine his purpose).His economic theories are hair-brained, looking to the jungles of the third world, the underdeveloped countries, and the never-to-be-developed countries for inspiration.
That this is the work of a half baked neurotic is evident from the first chapter, but I recommend this book heartily to anyone who likes to plumb the depths of a personality.
As to the details of the book and its apocolyptic claims, I'll leave it alone. I am tempted to embark on a point-by-point refutation, but it would be a waste of time. The truth of these matters is so readily available besides. But if anyone wants clarification of any point of his dogma, you are welcome to email me.
Rating: 
Summary: Cars are the biggest threat?!
Review: Bottom line of this book is, and I quote "cumulative impact" [of cars] "is posing a mortal threat to the security of every nation more deadly than that of any military enemy...". More deadly than any enemy huh algore? Stupidity like that is what allowed al qaeda to perpetrate
The First WTC bombing,
The attack on the USS Cole,
The bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
etc.... All un-responded to by the clinton administration. They were to busy worrying about my car exhaust and shuffling interns.
Rating: 
Summary: environmental politics at its optimistic peak
Review: I am unsure what frightened me more, the ominious environmental facts presented in this book or the dangerous impermeability of several Amazon reviewers. If one enters this book with an open mind, the result will be a re-evaluation of how one relates to the natural world. Gore is not pushing for the destruction of the American economy but instead a more fair juxtaposition of today's benfits versus future consequences. For someone to curse this book without even remote heed to what it states scares the living daylights out of me. I am not saying this book should be converted into American policy verbatim. However, if we do not use the knowledge and experience of this book as part of an international effort to achieve balance between the present and the future, then we are in trouble. Or let me rephrase that, our kids are in trouble.
Rating:
Summary: Don't waste your time or money!
Review: This book is drivel and propaganda most likely written by a left-wing ghostwriter? Heavy on emotion and light on fact. Al Gore should be ashamed of himself. Anyone buying into this leftist garbage should be required to attend remedial high school science.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: Al Gore is not a scientist, and this book is not a tome of specific scientific knowledge on the environment. Gore is a politician, and he does what politicians do at their best--inspire us with the possible, and pass on a sense of optimism about the future. Most importantly, he questions (with facts at his side) the notion that humanity must choose between prosperity and environmental protection. He also defies those who think that all environmentalists are wild-eyed radicals by questioning some of the more extreme "deep ecology" ideas, as well as the notion that Christianity is responsible for the environmental crisis. This is a very important book.
Rating:
Summary: Written on emotion, not critical analysis.
Review: I hoped this would have been better written to make the case. It does not stand up to an analysis from the opposing point of view which would and could destroy or weaken the arguments for saving the environment. Better to leave this subject to those professionally involved, and let the politician write the Foreword!
Rating:
Summary: finally, a substantive political author
Review: Gore has produced a well-reserched, controversial book.
Unlike most "books" by political authors, this is not a 30 second sound bite. No one should dismiss this important work outright without
reading it.
Rating:
Summary: NO LOGIC HERE
Review: Earth in the balance presents no original research, and, though it has a chapter called " A Global Marshal Plan," it proffers no new solutions. Earth in the Balance is really just a compendium of all the ecological frets and dreads that have been accumulating in our minds since the days when James Thurber's grandmother worried about electricity leaking out of empty lightbulb sockets. What's interesting is the book's casual - almost unconscience - assumptions, made evident in hundreds of judgmental word clusters scattered throughout the text like something you didn't order on a pizza topping: The global ecological crisis A rapidly deteriorating global environment The dangerous truth about what we are doing to the earth Musty logic-choppers of the Aristotelian ilk would call these phrases petitio principii, or "begging the question." It is a famous old logical fallacy to assume as true ("the global ecological crisis") that which is to be proven by argument (an ecological crisis that is being suffered by the globe). But logic is so annoying. And what's logical thinking ever gotten us anyway except things like the atomic bomb? When Gore says things like "Our ecological system is crumpling as it suffers powerful collision with the hard surfaces of a civilization speeding out of control" (which summons up mental images of a hundred-mile per hour Guggenheim museum putting a huge dent in Mt. Rainer), he's not just being full of $hit, he's indicating that the disputation is over. The debate, if there was one, about whether the earth is a filthy wreck has been decided.
Rating:
Summary: Important Subjects; Very Poorly Written
Review: Without a doubt, the subjects of the book are important and must be addressed. However, it is almost impossible to actually read the book. In my opinion, I haven't come across a book this poorly written in a long, long time...
Rating: 
Summary: Well written, but questionable conclusions.
Review: Vice-President Gore is probably the most scientifically well-read aspirant for higher office in recent years. The boook is replete with carefully researched references on all of the major environmental issues of the day. Some of his cited data is questionable, as in his recitation of major, but undocumented eruptions from Hekla and Etna volcanoes, and some of the dates appear out of sync, but these are relatively minor quibbles. Less certain of reliance are the conclusions drawn. Simply put, the author is a latter Cassandra on the order of the celebrated Ehrlichs. Gore is of the opinion that the bulk of the problems confronting mankind are generated by human activity. As an example, the Vice President seems absolutely immobile in his beief that climatic warming is the result of excessive fossil fuel use alone. Evidence of previous warming and desertification episodes prior to the Industrial Age is given short shrift, and I believe this hampers an objective analysis of the issue. All this being said, I recommend the book to the interested reader. It presents one of the more lucid texts on the "Green" theory of politics and energy. The book contains many arguable points, but I believe all but the most closed-minded would find them thought-provoking, even if some are not ultimately accepted. I read the book before the last election, and although I didn't vote for Gore, I came away with a deep respect for his sincerity and depth of knowledge in the matters discussed. It is refreshing in these times of Enronism, Monica-gates, and so forth, to see an aspirant for higher office delve into matters not traditiionally associated with candidates, i.e., the scientific discoveries of the day and their implications.
| 
