I'm sure there are plenty of debunk Al Gore sites out there, so it can't be hard to find 'em. One example of FUD is that Lake Chad is not a victim of global warming, but of human behavior.
I don't remember him bitching about the 2000 Election in the movie; that perception was really what led to the loss of his reputation. This movie (good or bad) is actually his redemption in the eyes of many.
Having said all this, I liked the movie and believe it's no joke that the Arctic (North Pole and Greenland) is melting. This year, some guy sailed the Northwest Passage in something like a month (source: Wall Street Journal). Industries are salivating at the thought of developing energy resources near the North Pole, and having shipping lines moving goods from Asia to Europe faster and cheaper than ever before.
With the exception of powerful hurricanes pummeling the Southeast/Gulf States, it doesn't seem the U.S. will take the worst of it, even though we emit the most "greenhouse gases". It's the low-lying, dense population centers in developing countries that will face forced mass migrations inland (if the sea rises appreciably). Europe will also turn bone-chilling cold (remember France is at about the same latitude as Maine but isn't nearly as frigid). The UK becomes an icebox. They're not going to especially like "global warming".
Not surprised.
Can you protest this and get the media involved? Did you have a recorder or video tape of this? If not, bring one next time. Tape her and submit it to the media.
Crap movie, my World History teacher made us watch it. I hated it how he would go off on random spurts about his family pets, cousins, co-workers, ect...
He'd get that really deep, raspy voice "My dog died when I was 11, I've never been the same."
He'd get that really deep, raspy voice "My dog died when I was 11, I've never been the same."
where did i hear that the great lakes dumped into the ocean turning off the ocean flow sending us into an ace age. was that in gore's movie?
Babbles
Diamond Member
- Jan 4, 2001
- 8,253
- 14
- 81
Exactly it was a sham of a documentary. The fact that it one an "Oscar" just puts the nail in the coffin in my belief of how phony the Academy Awards are.
Anyhow it really seemed less to be a genuine documentary on global warming and instead a brief history on Gore's political platform issues. I really think better 'documentaries' can be watched on any random History, Science, TLC, or Discover channel science show on global warming.
And, good God, Al Gore narrating something???!!! He has the vocal personality of a peanut.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,590
- 986
- 126
I haven't seen the movie but I've seen documentaries on the subject and read through some of the research on global warming and my personal opinion is that you'd have to be a complete idiot not to believe that we are changing the climate of this planet.
Hell, even the Bush administration is beginning to acknowledge it now.
Hell, even the Bush administration is beginning to acknowledge it now.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
indeed. his choice of presentation is just flawed.
much better documentaries on the subject are aired on Discovery channel.
oh, and calling his movie a documentary is just about as asinine as calling Moore's craptastic films 'documentaries'. BS.
I very much believe in the science of global climate change, HOWEVER, a documentary has to be not so damned biased and shoving crap in your ears.
i actually did a report on how media basically sells fear, in the form of climate change, as my final for my freshman english class. Got a nice A on the paper. The film was actually one of the sources I discussed.
edit: updated JM's quote for his last moment edit.
and that's a funny thing, when the Bush administration was so persistent as to call global climate change bullshit, and here they are reversing their original mindset. I don't think it's hypocritical at all, I think it's just how much the science community has changed and come together on the theory of global climate change and you find very few climatologists and other atmospheric observers who actually disagree with the theory. It's great to watch it come together. Now the next couple of years will be interesting to see how the world handles China's and India's entrance into the 'industrial' age as they bring numerous coal plants online.
Fact: The global temperature has increased.
Full Fact: Global temperature has increased and decreased significantly before modern man.
Fact: The polar ice caps melted more this year than in recent recorded history.
Full Fact: Note your use of words "in recent recorded history"
Fact: The greenhouse effect is real. Greenhouse gases trap heat.
Full Fact: Greenhouse gases also deflect sunlight.
Fact: C02 is a greenhouse gas. THe amount of C02 in our atmosphere has increased at the same time that the global temperature has increased.
Full Fact: Correlation does not equal causation.
Fact: The global temperature has increased.
Full Fact: Global temperature has increased and decreased significantly before modern man.
Fact: Temperature fluctuation throughout hundreds of thousands of years has been documented. So has changes in the level of C02 during those years. Also temperature. The same correlation exists then as it does now: C02 rises at the same time temperature rises.
Fact: The polar ice caps melted more this year than in recent recorded history.
Full Fact: Note your use of words "in recent recorded history"
Fact: Ice ages happen. So do periods of warmth. The earth has been hotter than it is now and it has been colder. This is a proven fact.
Fact: The greenhouse effect is real. Greenhouse gases trap heat.
Full Fact: Greenhouse gases also deflect sunlight.
Fact: Increased greenhouse gases cause an increase in temperature.
Fact: C02 is a greenhouse gas. THe amount of C02 in our atmosphere has increased at the same time that the global temperature has increased.
Full Fact: Correlation does not equal causation.
---And that's why science has theories. Theories attempt to explain why the facts are the way they are. But if you want to get down to it...there are some really damn cool climate models that show some rather nifty things "caused" by increases in C02.
I understand your point: For every fact, there is another one you can pull out that seemingly contradicts it.
If things were simple, global warming wouldn't be an issue.
The greenhouse effect is real. The things we do on this planet releases greenhouse gases. No one knows what the exact consequences will be. But with at least 600,000,000 cars out there on the road, you have to wonder. If you parked them all right next to eachother, how many square miles would they fill?
Wow.
Why are you so certain that it's not as temperatures rise, CO2 rises? Why always CO2 rises, hence temperatures rise? In fact, the charts show CO2 is a trailing indicator to increases in temperatures.
Who gives a fuck how many square miles 600 million cars fill up? You think puny humans actually can alter the earth to any significant degree? Please, get over yourself.
The reason why "global warming" is such a hot topic right now is that it's so damn easy to make money off it because of zombie sheep like you. And how so fitting it's the socialist left that's leading the cause, surprise they're trying to control other people's lives, and look the mindless liberals are blindly following.
Ahh...at last, what you really think about global warming comes out. It's not about the truth, its about an irrational political agenda.
No...not an irrational political agenda, just some anger issues.
Well, I don't know.
Lets look at what you said:
1. "Global warming is a hot topic because its so damn easy to make money off of zombie sheep."
---And that's why thousands of scientists are dedicating their careers (and taking low paying jobs) to study this issue? Yes...because of zombie sheep.
2. "The socialist left promote global warming because they want to control you."
--Definitely not because anyone cares about the environment. Especially not the "socialist left." And damn, if you're a socialist you must be evil. Also, I was talking to a socialist the other day, and he told me I need to begin obeying him immediately. He told me that from now on I have to let him tap my phones. I have to submit to full body searches if I want to get in an airplane. Oh, and if I fit a certain category of individual, he's allowed to "disappear me" without any contact to the outside world whatsoever. Oh wait...Who am I talking about now?
3. "And look, the mindless liberals are blindly following."
--Yes, and those are the same 'mindless liberals' that publish peer reviewed science journals. Those same science journals for some reason seem to keep publishing studies that support the idea that global warming is caused by us. Yes, this is a VERY MINDLESS group of people, isn't it?
Have YOU ever read a peer reviewed science journal?
Thousands of scientists that have nothing to do with climatology sign their names on a useless piece of paper and it's considered "scientific consensus"?
LOL would you rather have computer algorithms tapping your phones and go through a metal detector at an airport or be put in political prisons and be executed without trial? Why don't you swim to your utopia Cuba? You must have just watched that Reese Witherspoon movie.
No, you, "the people" are mindless. These "scientists" are very shrewd. They exploit your emotions to garner your support. The ultimate goal? To control your life.
You don't know very many scientists do you?
I'm imagining the scientists I know trying to take over the world
It's the funniest thing I've imagined all day.
My question still stands...
Have you ever read a peer reviewed science journal?
JS80 --
Let me clarify what you just said. Just to make sure I read it correctly.
You think that global warming isn't caused by humans because scientists are trying to take over the world????
Let me clarify what you just said. Just to make sure I read it correctly.
You think that global warming isn't caused by humans because scientists are trying to take over the world????
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
You know what I hate about all of this global warming nonsense? People's beliefs follow party lines almost invariably. That's not a coincidence. I have reserved judgment, because this entire issue is tainted by politics. I do find it amusing that so many people are willing to decide in favor of one group of scientists over another. Some people think very highly of themselves. :laugh:
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
just let him be. trying to make a believer out of someone who so assuredly believes the mounting evidence is all falsified for some who knows reason, is an uphill battle that probably cannot be won. forget it and let him be on his way.
i do think the theory is correct, but I don't care if people change their ways of living. I won't be any time soon, that's for damn sure. I fully acknowledge that I am hypocritical for this issue, but then again I don't really care. If it means wiping out most of humanity and starting over, I think that might just be what is needed to snap mankind out of their little dreamworld that we can do whatever we want. I think the point of where mankind is now, a LOT of things need to change to make life a helluva lot better for everyone, and I can guarantee the effects of global climate change will be on full force before most of mankind even realizes what needs to start changing, let alone actually making changes. My logic is something that will be impossible to understand so I shall stop making attempts to communicate it. They are rather 'out there', eh?
Most scientists I know care much more about securing funding than they would about taking over the world. If you want an ulterior motive for scientists, that is much more likely.
DanTMWTMP
Lifer
- Oct 7, 2001
- 15,908
- 19
- 81
i'll tell you this...as a grunt in the academic field working on data from these so-called good-willed scientists, I've seen them take insignificant data and turn them into "powerful" arguments to take in further grant money. That's their living. They live off of grant money, and more talks about global warming gives them the money to smudge statistically insignificant data. Bottom line: $$ talks, and if politics is what it takes to get it, then so be it.
They give me newer "Data" about 2-3 years after the experiments took place to write over the existing data in the database.
bleh. Who am I to argue though? I'm just a lowly coder who gets shit from phd's.
They give me newer "Data" about 2-3 years after the experiments took place to write over the existing data in the database.
bleh. Who am I to argue though? I'm just a lowly coder who gets shit from phd's.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter