Global Warming...the Movie
POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 19:58
VIEWED: 9891
PAGE 3 of 12
Considering he never even watched the thing, Auraptor sure seems to know a lot about it.
I've not watched it either, and I'm disinterested enough in "an Inconvenient Truth" to not want to either. The difference is I'm interested in the science, not what either Gore or Bush tell me to believe. Which is why I don't feel the need to make big sweeping statements about something I've not experienced. I've not watched it, but I heard on Rush Limbaugh that... LOL!
This whole American need to be told what to believe by some talking head, and judging entire subjects based on whose celebrity said what just cracks me up. You guys are all right, in a really amusing to watch kinda way...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I found 'An Inconvenient Truth' to be a bit like the movies we used to watch in high school earth science, with the exception that Al Gore was the presenter, not some faceless voice-over.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
i read a few of Al Gores books when i was a teenager in high school, i guess you could say i was one of these early green people. i probably reached an extreme while living in southern CA, probably based on the poor air quality and predominance of liberalism. but i have since come to a change of heart about the whole subject, mainly because the 'science' is misleading
its almost ridiculous how many scientific facts and theories have been reversed or changed or discredited over the years. science is not necessarily synonymous with fact. MMGW is only a theory, period. just as evolution is only a theory
CO2 is not a pollutant, its an essential building block of life on earth. i personally dont believe humans alone can change the earths climate, without an overlap of a coming cycle of some sort(but thats just my opinion). scientists claim that the earth had its highest Carbon concentrations during the cambrian and early eras, when the earth had an mysterious explosion of life, accommodated by a (graciously) tropical climate.
but were talking many of (alleged) millions of years of separation.. so i think we've got time. last i heard, unless im mistaken, we've only seen less then a degrees difference over the last 100yrs, the peak of the industrial revolution. thats not a very dramatic increase. so where is all this hysteria coming from?
what scares me is the building political (re)action to prevent this 'end of the world' scenario that the GW alarmists propagate. to execute that kind of oversight of the world populace, to minimize their "carbon footprint", it requires a scale of government and authoritarian control beyond what we've seen before. its collectivism out of control, its communism
and we dont even know what will actually happen in the future. the reaction to GW will probably be worse then the warming itself..
and thats why ive come to believe that the green movement is being run by NWO globalists. save an alien invasion, its the perfect excuse to control the behavior of everyone on the planet. why stop at limiting carbon footprints? we need to consider population control and eugenics
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That’s kind of the impression I get too. The Day After Tomorrow was, for all intents and purposes, a fantasy film. The fact the Gore used footage from this film to express a point suggests that he was going for the sensationalism not fact or science. It’s something like using footage from the Lord of the Rings to express a point about jewelry. This is propaganda, not science. It’s not like footage that was designed as a visual aid to express a point, such as what you might see in a serious documentary. It doesn’t say much too rosy about Gore’s credibility in these matters, but then fair-minded people don’t have any reason to believe he has any credibility on the topic. I don’t think Gore is trying to make fair-minded people believe that - I think he’s preaching to the choir and he’s preaching to the naïve, both of which he's done very effectively with this film. But he certainly hasn't convinced many people willing to question his assertions, I don't think.
Originally posted by Hero:
I guess I find it odd that 'people see glaciers calving every day' but those people either have no access to video equipment or the footage would not be compelling enough to support their case.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn,
Let's say I was showing a movie about safe driving. And the screen shows a red 1991 mustang going to fast for a curve, skidding off the road, and slamming passenger-side into a tree, at 10:21 in the morning, March 23, 1992, headed east at 87.2 mph on a specific portion of Route 20, in Idaho, after a steady 1/4" rainfall over 2 hours, being driven by a stunt car driver named Mark Todd and filmed for the movie, with a specific Idaho license plate 'capital restoration' 18299. Meanwhile a narrator is saying "All too unfortunately, this happens hundreds of times a day in the United States".
Are you going to say - they're LIARS ! because red mustangs with that license plate at that specific time and place and speed and driver don't go off the road hundreds of times ! Only ONCE ! SO THERE !
Or are you going to take the more rational, normal, sane approach and understand that the film was using the footage to illustrate a valid and truthful point, as an alternative to having a blank screen.
HHhhmmm ?
"And dude, if this stock footage non-issue is a big deal to you, you really, really need to get a life."
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I’m going to assume they are using sensationalism to make a point, which is what they would be doing. It doesn’t make any difference whether their point is true or not - its still sensationalism. Now the problem with sensationalism is that it tends to preach to the choir or to the naive. But when it comes to people who aren't convinced already and not willing to just accept your word for it, you might have shot yourself in the foot, because a fair-minded person will at least consider the possibility that you’re using sensationalism because you can’t make the point without it.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"sensationalism" Sensationalism ? You mean illustrating a very common event is sensationalism ?
Sigh. I can see we're going to have one of those discussions where you pretend to not know english.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This from the person who doesn’t know what sensationalism is.
Originally posted by rue:
"sensationalism"
Sensationalism ? You mean showing a very common event is sensationalism ?
Sigh. I can see we're going to have one of those discussions where you pretend to not know english.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Name one. One. That's all. Name one time where 'science' has done a complete U turn.
Originally posted by antimason:
its almost ridiculous how many scientific facts and theories have been reversed or changed or discredited over the years.
Quote:No, it's the search for truth.
science is not necessarily synonymous with fact.
Quote:So's gravity. Do tell us when you start floating off into space old boy. Beyond that, I'm sorry but that's a pretty ignorant thing to say. In science a theory is somewhat different to 'theory' in common usage. What most people mean when they say theory, a scientist would call a hypothesis. A theory requires supporting data, saying something is 'only' a theory indicates you don't have a clue what you're talking about, in science there's no 'only' about a theory.
MMGW is only a theory, period. just as evolution is only a theory
Quote:Yeah, lead is natural, want some in your water? Hey, it's believed that radioactivity keeps the Earth's core hot, which is essential to life on Earth.
CO2 is not a pollutant, its an essential building block of life on earth.
So, you want a Uranium sandwich? It can't be a pollutant, it's natural
.Pollutants aren't something 'unnatural' added into the environment. Oxygen is poisonous, but I'd say it's also pretty key to life on Earth. Pollutants are anything at an abnormally high concentration that upset the natural balance. So yeah, abnormal amounts of CO2 upsetting the natural balance would be pollution.
Quote:You're point is (beyond an appeal to ridicule I mean)?
scientists claim that the earth had its highest Carbon concentrations during the cambrian and early eras, when the earth had an mysterious explosion of life, accommodated by a (graciously) tropical climate.
Quote:Yeah, that's half the point. We don't. The warming is happening at a much faster and unprecedented rate.
but were talking many of (alleged) millions of years of separation.. so i think we've got time.
Quote:The 'peak' of the industrial revolution was actually further back than that. Not that I see the point in talking about it, the we're more polluting now (as a species) than at any other time in our history.
last i heard, unless im mistaken, we've only seen less then a degrees difference over the last 100yrs, the peak of the industrial revolution.
Quote:Err, actually it is. And it's accelerating, especially in the last few years.
thats not a very dramatic increase.
Quote:From the fact that a world wide rise of nearly a degree in only a hundred years (a blip in geological time) is actually alarmingly high and fast, and not something to be brushed off as insignificant.
so where is all this hysteria coming from?
Quote:Yeah, damn them! Trying to stop pollution! Those bastards! I love lead in my lungs and arsenic in my water! Unleaded petrol was one of the most evil crimes forced on the world...
what scares me is the building political (re)action to prevent this 'end of the world' scenario that the GW alarmists propagate.
Quote:Erm, yeah. Communism, for when you're not sure what it really is, but its bad, yeah. Actually I think the stateism your trying to put up as a false dichotomy would be more akin to Fascism than Communism
to execute that kind of oversight of the world populace, to minimize their "carbon footprint", it requires a scale of government and authoritarian control beyond what we've seen before. its collectivism out of control, its communism
.Quote:Is there anything that isn't part of some NWO conspiracy as far as you're concerned? Seriously.
and thats why ive come to believe that the green movement is being run by NWO globalists. save an alien invasion, its the perfect excuse to control the behavior of everyone on the planet. why stop at limiting carbon footprints?
Quote:Didn't they already try eu
we need to consider population control and eugenics
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn
No apparently you don't know what sensationalism is. But claiming words mean something other than their actual definition is your game.
BTW, if you want to watch home videos of glaciers calving, you can go to you tube:
As for professional footage of glaciers calving, I'll leave that search up to you.
And BTW, if stock footage is your biggest issue, you really, really need to get a life.
***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME