ArticleslgStudy

earth science

Not Evil Just Wrong

Not Evil Just Wrong is a earth science topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Not Evil Just Wrong rather than just read about it. In short: Not Evil Just Wrong is a 2009 climate change denial documentary film by Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer that challenges Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth by claiming that the evidence of global warming is inconclusive and that the impact global warming legislation will have on industry is much more harmful to humans than beneficial. The movie was filmed in 2008 and was screened at the International Documentary Film…

Not Evil Just Wrong — main illustration
Not Evil Just Wrong — illustration

Key takeaways

  • Not Evil Just Wrong belongs to earth science; place it in that map before memorising details.
  • Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
  • Connect Not Evil Just Wrong to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
  • Reproduce the core statement of Not Evil Just Wrong from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

Not Evil Just Wrong is a 2009 climate change denial documentary film by Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer that challenges Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth by claiming that the evidence of global warming is inconclusive and that the impact global warming legislation will have on industry is much more harmful to humans than beneficial. The movie was filmed in 2008 and was screened at the International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam and at the RightOnline conference in 2009.

Summary The film argues that the science behind climate change science is not settled. Not Evil Just Wrong focuses on the British High Court ruling which found nine errors in Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. The film also highlights assertions about the Medieval Warm Period and Stephen McIntyre's alleged debunking of the hockey stick graph. The film also focuses on the impact of climate legislation in developing counties and average families in America. The film states that one of environmentalists' first restrictions on industry was when DDT was banned, led by Rachel Carson. According to the film, the ban on DDT "...has needlessly resulted in the deaths of more than 40 million children and adults in the developing world." The film then continues to on a similar tack, arguing that climate legislation like cap and trade would negatively impact the life for middle and low-income families in America, particularly those working for energy-related jobs. The directors follow Tiffany McElhany and her family in rural Indiana, to see how fossil fuels have given them better opportunities.

Production and reception

Funding In 2008, McElhinney and McAleer raised almost $1 million (€799,000) from real estate investors, but said they needed a total of $4.5 million for a cinema release. After the film was turned down for funding by the Irish Film Board, the filmmakers then began taking donations online. The film failed to find a commercial distributor.

Production The documentary has been noted for being a very similar style to Michael Moore's documentaries by using file footage of old movies, cartoons and class-based arguments. McAleer has been quoted saying, "I would not be making documentaries if it wasn't for Michael Moore," he says. "He aroused my interest and people's interest in documentaries. He's also made it acceptable for people to go to the movie theatre and watch documentaries. I hate to say it but we're all children of Michael Moore."

Reception Mother Jones published a highly critical article on the movie. Stephanie Mencimer wrote that "The film is poorly organised and rehashes the familiar talking points of climate change sceptics —global warming as bad science; climate concerns as hysteria akin to that over killer bees, etc. Pushing those views are the usual suspects, including Patrick Moore, the Greenpeace founder turned nuclear power lobbyist, and Thatcher-era British politician Nigel Lawson." A premiere party was held at The Heritage Foundation, where it was also broadcast on Ustream and the American Family Association channel. "We may at last be getting our Michael Moore," said Fred Smith, of the AFA, "A virtuous Michael Moore!" Suzanne Fields from the Washington Times said, "Ann McElhinney's film focuses on people (not polar bears) whose paychecks and families are dependent on coal-generated energy, and whose interests are usually ignored in abstract statistics." The Online Opinion, said that the movie excelled "in pointing to the absurdities and gross contradictions in the current scare over global warming."

Subsequent events Mother Jones subsequently reported that the husband of Tiffany McElhany, the Indiana women highlighted in the film as at risk of losing her standard of living should controls on carbon be enacted, was laid off from his job at a car parts plant. "It turns out that McElhany's story, too, is more complicated than Not Evil would have you believe. She is by far the documentary's most compelling character, and seems poised to become a minor heroine to the Tea Party crowd. Yet for all her talk of the bounty that coal has brought to Vevay, when I contacted her for this story she disclosed that her husband was laid off in March and has been unemployed ever since. It appears that a lot of dirty industry jobs have disappeared with no help at all from environmentalists."

References

External links Official website Not Evil Just Wrong at IMDb

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Not Evil Just Wrong

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Not Evil Just Wrong claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In earth science, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Not Evil Just Wrong before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Not Evil Just Wrong ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Not Evil Just Wrong

In research
Not Evil Just Wrong appears in earth science research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry
Engineering practice reuses Not Evil Just Wrong in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom
Not Evil Just Wrong is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics 2009 English-language films, 2009 documentary films, 2009 films, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life
Look for Not Evil Just Wrong outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.
Ask Teacher Smith questions about this articleOpens your AI tutor with a question about “Not Evil Just Wrong” →

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Not Evil Just Wrong in 20 minutes

  1. Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
  2. Close the page and write down what Not Evil Just Wrong means in your own words.
  3. Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
  4. Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
  5. Explain Not Evil Just Wrong out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Not Evil Just Wrong in simple terms?

Not Evil Just Wrong is a 2009 climate change denial documentary film by Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer that challenges Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth by claiming that the evidence of global warming is inconclusive and that the impact global warming legislation will have on industry is much more…

Why does Not Evil Just Wrong matter?

Because it connects several earth science ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Not Evil Just Wrong?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Not Evil Just Wrong.

Tags

  • 2009 English-language films
  • 2009 documentary films
  • 2009 films
  • Climate change denial
  • Crowdfunded films
  • Documentary films about business
  • Documentary films about global warming
  • English-language documentary films
  • Environmentally skeptical films
  • Irish documentary films

Keep exploring