#Climate Year in Review: Michael Moore’s Dumpster Fire of a Movie

December 29, 2020

Planet of the Humans, is of course, Michael Moore’s dumpster fire of a movie that’s been taken to the bosom of the fossil fueled, climate denial, and white supremacist internet.

As I posted a few weeks ago, I received a message from Joanne Doroshow, former fact checker for Michael Moore’s TV show, books, (see above) and several movies (Fahrenheit 451, Sicko) who was so appalled by the “excruciating” lack of honesty (and I would say, even sentience) in the film, she messaged me on facebook to express disappointment.
In a follow up phone call, she mentioned her previous associations with the Moore organization, and that she had been named in the acknowledgments in one of the books, of which she said she helped write several chapters.
“I think it was Downsize This..” she told me.

A couple clicks on Amazon, – actually more than a few because it was deep in the remainder bin zone, -= wait a few weeks, and the book showed up today.

Sure enough, as Joanne mentioned, Mike called her “one of the most honest people I know”. So I guess she has some cred.


She writes, “The director of this new film was someone we never let near the fact checking process. he seemed attracted to conspiracy theories and information that was not factual,”

Doroshow is Founder and currently Executive Director of the Center for Justice and Democracy at New York Law School.

Joanne Doroshow on Facebook:

I was not going to step into this mess, which many people have contacted me about over the last couple weeks. But because of my anti-nuclear background and my familiarity with all that went down in Midland, this one particularly pained me. So I am breaking my silence. I was involved in the research and fact checking process for various of Michael’s film, TV and book projects from the 1990s through 2007. During that period, Michael cared enough about the accuracy of his films that he complied when others told him he had to make changes to reflect facts and reality. I personally factually annotated some of these films and put entire “fact check bibles” on film websites. I dealt with studio lawyers doing fact and libel checks until they were satisfied. Believe me, by the time these projects saw the light of day, they were airtight. The director of this new film was someone we never let near the fact checking process. In my experience, he seemed attracted to conspiracy theories and information that was not factual, and I believed his influence on Michael could be damaging to his films. I cannot speak to what happened to Michael’s films after I stopped helping to ensure their accuracy but it is excruciating to see what has happened now – although it is not surprising. People disturbed by inaccuracies in this film are not “haters.” They, like I, are pained by them. The factual errors should never have happened.

Below, clip from Best of the Left podcast, which basically reads Doroshow’s post and concurs.

14 Responses to “#Climate Year in Review: Michael Moore’s Dumpster Fire of a Movie”


  1. Planet of the Humans is not a dumpster fire! The giant elephants in the room of climate policy are the huge environmental impacts of wind and solar, the bureaucratic expedient of burning wood for dispatchable electricity and that it makes for an easy path for connected billionaires to fleece the system.

    Despite all the whining about solar and battery technology from ten years ago, there are no Moore’s Law improvements and there can’t be, because of inherently well understood limits of chemistry and physics. Solar panels are still made of high quality quartz and coal, just like Ozzie says, … in China where we don’t know what happens to the toxic byproducts.

    The real solution is hidden from view like Diablo Canyon where it’s hard to find among the pristine wetlands with all the humpback whales splashing about and such. Since they couldn’t find it, they sunk into Malthusianism.


    • There are so many elephants, I forgot one of them. There’s the gas power plants that are popping up every where and make up almost half of California’s electricity generation, hence the leak at Aliso Canyon. BTW they still store gas there.

    • Brent Jensen-Schmidt Says:

      Meh! The environmental impacts of wind and solar are so trivial compared to CAGW>


      • I don’t think the environmental impacts of wind and solar are so trivial. We may lose raptor species. The mining requirements are immense! The environmental impacts of nuclear really trivial in comparison.

        • Brent Jensen-Schmidt Says:

          We WILL lose raptor species when SHTF, and a shed load other species.
          We do need nukes.

          • leslie graham Says:

            Utter garbage from the pair of you.
            Every study has shown that any deaths from collisions are so negligible that they have no effect on the numbers over time.
            As you know.

          • J4Zonian Says:

            On the contrary, leslie, collisions are a major way of death for many species of birds—collision with buildings, cell towers, power lines, cars… because those kill immense numbers of birds. Collisions with oil slicks kill fewer but often more endangered species. And of course, burning fossil fuels and chemical industrial agriculture kill many times more, as does loss of habitat for developments of sprawled strip malls, suburban tracts, golf courses, and all those other things that are little more than indulgences of the rich. Of course those are only metaphorical collisions.

    • Gingerbaker Says:

      “The giant elephants in the room of climate policy are the huge environmental impacts of wind and solar”

      LOL.

      You are such a liar.

    • BL Brown Says:

      Tell us more about the terrible impacts of wind and solar– that is, make some concrete, factual claims that can be checked. My sources indicate the opposite (including my father, who was a PhD engineer working in thermodynamics and energy efficiency for decades, including serving on the managerial board for PEI’s wind power test field). When the climate and energy scientists I know from AGU meetings present views that are 180 degrees opposed to what you’re saying, I’m inclined to reject your vague, general claims out of hand.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      Moore’s reputation has been flagging for years. This was a career ender, in terms of being taken seriously, if he does not disavow.
      Micheal Mann deals with it in his new book, and not sympathetically.
      It has made a hero of Moore among the anti-science, anti-mask, white-supremacist set – which tells you all you need to know.

      • J4Zonian Says:

        If they can disregard all of Moore’s career before this, I guess I can too. I will never see another Moore film unless it’s a retraction and debunking of this one.

      • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

        Michael Moore’s only 66, so I don’t know whether to attribute his newfound crackpottery to changes in brain physiology.

        I’m 60, and I find it distressing how many fun, functional clever people I have known in my life degrade mentally and emotionally in some way (whether becoming surly or insipid or fixated cranks). I fear it happening to me.


Leave a Reply to Mike Dombroski Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: