Well, I'm glad you at least admit you were paraphrasing.  It's an amusing word game you're playing, but it's feeble.

You use the quote: 

The entire premise of the alarmists is that PEOPLE are TERRIBLE
because we DRIVE CARS and EMIT CARBON DIOXIDE that's destroying the
planet.

So, your counter claim must be that alarmist think people are wonderful for driving cars and emitting carbon dioxide and 'destroying the planet'.  Alarmists either like the 'destruction' or they don't, you can't have it both ways.  If you think they "love the sinner, hate the sin" I suggest you show up to one of their rallys in a large SUV, and see how you're treated, since you desire first-hand evidence.  Take an active part in your own education.  I can tell you're not dumb, you just enjoy the argument, but I guarantee you it's more fun when you're also right.

You will meet many Enviro-activists who are convinced that people are
the worst thing to happen to this planet, and many of them were
convinced by the arguments Gore presented.

"Not Really."  That's your entire argument? "Yes Really." is all I have to say to a retort THAT flimsy.  I have met them and plenty of them... first person.  Hell I lived with one for 2 years.  It comes with the territory when living in Los Angeles and San Francisco.  This is what we call a "primary source" when it comes to evidence. 

Arguing what is 'fringe' and 'mainstream' within a lunatic-fringe-inspired movement is pointlessly subjective, and you know it. Your "parallel" (more like an orthoganal) is a rabidly hyperbolic simile.  How many buildings bombers are out there, and how many environmental activists are out there?  You're comparing a bunch of apples to a bushel of oranges, but you missed the point that both are defined by their ACTIONS and not their mere existence.  Observe some environmentalist rallys yourself.  Poor treatment and hateful speech for the people they blame for global warming is the "action" you're looking for.  If you think the MANY (I know that word scares you) who engage in it are "like" the percentages of bombers among conservatives, then you need to learn how to count.

Asking for ONLY a direct quote IS dissembling by implying you have the right to ignore the mountains of contextual evidence simply because there is no admission of guilt.  That's just a word game and I'm calling you on it.  If that were the case, NO criminal who pleaded not-guilty would EVER be convicted of ANYthing.  If there's no direct quote of Hitler saying "I hate jews," does that mean the evidence to the contrary must be wrong?  That's the argument you just made.

There's nothing wrong with asking for evidence.  There IS something wrong and prejudicial with claiming the ONE piece of evidence you asked for is the ONLY valid piece you'll accept.

And let's see... more of the "No it's not because I said so." argument.  The concept IS 100% true, and you've offered nothing to refute it.

You want proof that people are easily convinced? Take a good look at PETA.  They have no problem putting animal life above that of human life (when it's not their own).  You think people are easily convinced of their own inferiority by Animal Rights, but somehow are immune to the same thought process from Global Warmingists?  They think people are terrible for infringing upon animals but somehow that very same sub-culture is ok with people destroying the whole planet and thereby the animals that live on it?  Cognitive dissonance much? 

Let's be clear, no one's claiming they think themselves terrible, they think everyone ELSE is terrible, as demonstrated above which you will no doubt dismiss and ignore.  I have no control over how you move the goal posts for "sufficient" evidence by playing your word games.

If many believe what Gore says about people destroying the planet, it logically follows that many of those will blame people.  If you talk to these people yourself, you will find many to be quite judgemental in their blame.  So again, I encourage you to educate yourself.

You have provided no evidence that many people DON'T get an inferiority complex by believing what Gore has peddled.  You're the one asking for a retraction.  Prove that one is merited.

"That wasn't obvious to me at all. Given the level of pathological hate
conservatives direct at Al Gore, it's entirely reasonable to think
Sheppard was serious"

You have us all wrong, where are laughing our butts off everytime something like "Global Warming events get cancelled because of cold weather" or Gore wisks away to an AGW event aboard a private jet. We don't have a pathological hate for Gore, on the contray, we think he is hilarious!

"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...