Before The Day After Tomorrow hit the theaters on May 28, the web was abuzz. Not because moviegoers expected it to be any good the filmmaker is known for making Grade B movies with Grade A budgets, to Grade C effect but because it has a Message.

The movie purports to show that U.S. environmental policy, as guided by the Bush administration, will lead to worldwide ruin. The premise? Global warming somehow “shuts down” the Gulf Stream, turning Europe and Canada into an ice box within hours. We see New York destroyed, enough special effects to make “The Perfect Storm” seem like tiddlywinks, and probably a tragic waste of the talents of Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal.

Now, I’m less of a scientist than I am a movie critic, but I know something about history. I know that the Little Ice Age that ended in the 19th century wasn’t an overnight affair. And yes, there’s been warming on our planet. Humanity may even have caused some of it, but that’s not the whole story. Years ago, “The China Syndrone” nearly killed the nuclear power industry. But just the other day uber-environmentalist James Lovelock said that global warming had gone so far that the only possible cure is an immediate switch to the environmentalists’ old enemy, nuclear power.

Let’s be careful when walking out of the theater, and especially when making political decisions on the basis of any movie that plays fast and loose with the scientific facts. Take that advice today, tomorrow, and . . . the day after tomorrow.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.