dainthomas
Lifer
- Dec 7, 2004
- 14,952
- 3,941
- 136
I was actually going to watch the video with an open mind, as I've been looking for a reasonable, well put together argument about global warming.
After reading what they did to this guy, it's clear that this video isn't what i've been looking for. They tried to get credibility by bringing in respected scientists, but since this scientist didn't support their position they used creative editing to make it appear that he did. The filmmaker also made another film in the past where:
The fact that this guy has to be deceptive to make his points says something about the point he's trying to make. If I want to be lied to for an hour, i'll go to the bar and have a cute girl tell me about how she's single because all the guys are intimidated by her independence.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9082151
Intelligence Squared U.S.
Global Warming Is Not a Crisis
' by David Malakoff
* Listen to the Edited Broadcast of the Debate (50 minutes)
MP3 Download
To download, PC users right-click and select "save target as." Mac users control-click and "save (or download) link as."
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://download.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/specials/20070321_specials_iq2radio.mp3">MP3 Download
To download, PC users right-click and select "save target as." Mac users control-click and "save (or download) link as."</a>
Intelligence Squared U.S.
Global Warming Is Not a Crisis
' by David Malakoff
* Listen to the Edited Broadcast of the Debate (50 minutes)
MP3 Download
To download, PC users right-click and select "save target as." Mac users control-click and "save (or download) link as."
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://download.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/specials/20070321_specials_iq2radio.mp3">MP3 Download
To download, PC users right-click and select "save target as." Mac users control-click and "save (or download) link as."</a>
Originally posted by: Jeff7
<Stephen Colbert>Originally posted by: Excelsior
No matter how one feels about global warming, I think we all agree that less pollution is good.
Oh please! Smog and soot are good for your lungs. I mean, come on, the Eco-Nazi's are trying to tell us that it's bad that car exhaust contains ozone! Oh right, I'm supposed to believe that the stuff that protects us from UV is bad when it's inhaled? What else are the lefty crazies going to tell us next? That water can in be harmful under the right circumstances? I tell you what that's called: Insanity. And that's The Word, we'll be right back.
</Stephen Colbert>
I swear some people think that way too...
GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
My GF swore allegiance to Al Gore after seeing "An Inconvenient Truth" ...until she and I sat down yesterday to watch "Swindle". It even made her change her mind about a few things and see things in a new light.
I swear this documentary should be broadcast 24/7 from every station in the world.
The truth is that the "Green" movement of today is more less the "Red" movement of the Cold War: it's largely about the have-nots wanting to bring down those who have worked hard, achieved a lot, and made money along the way. It's the same thing as those Seattle teachers telling their students about the evils of private ownership and joys of collective ownership and sharing. It is all the same movement. It is all Liberalism. And those scientists who want to speak the truth, who want to buck the hype and the UN politics, are sent death threats.
Wonderful video indeed!
Edit: And yes, I am all for recycling and renewable energy sources, especially when you consider the nutjobs in Iran and such, but those are the minute details of the GW issue for me. The larger, overriding political issues are of greater concern. Once again, man is the center of the universe with power over all. Mother nature is our biatch. Right.
I swear this documentary should be broadcast 24/7 from every station in the world.
The truth is that the "Green" movement of today is more less the "Red" movement of the Cold War: it's largely about the have-nots wanting to bring down those who have worked hard, achieved a lot, and made money along the way. It's the same thing as those Seattle teachers telling their students about the evils of private ownership and joys of collective ownership and sharing. It is all the same movement. It is all Liberalism. And those scientists who want to speak the truth, who want to buck the hype and the UN politics, are sent death threats.
Wonderful video indeed!
Edit: And yes, I am all for recycling and renewable energy sources, especially when you consider the nutjobs in Iran and such, but those are the minute details of the GW issue for me. The larger, overriding political issues are of greater concern. Once again, man is the center of the universe with power over all. Mother nature is our biatch. Right.
Heh...
The theory of man-made global warming is false. Anyone who believes otherwise has not investigated the evidence or is purposely remaining ignorant to the legitimate opposition to global warming. I have given up an one and a half hours to watch ?An Inconvenient Truth? so I ask you to do the same and watch the movie detailing the opposition.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...
Another general resource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/global_warm...
CO2 is not causing the globe to warm the opposite is true, the warming is increasing the atmospheric CO2. When the world heats it gradually increases the temperature of the oceans which serve as the largest CO2 sink. As the oceans heat up they release CO2 which is stored in them. The information comes from the same data Al Gore uses, the temperature always goes up before the concentration of CO2 goes up.
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...
CO2 makes up only .03% of our atmosphere. Water vapor, another greenhouse gas, makes up 1-4% of our atmosphere, this gas is acknowledged to be the main greenhouse gas. All human activities combined contribute only 6 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Animals, through respiration, decomposition, etc contribute 150 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere. So humans contribute only a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere which is already in very small concentrations in the atmosphere.
http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science.html... This is where my data came from, it is an interesting site, it displays the same graphics as Al Gore in his movie but it tells how low the human contribution is. So Al Gore is using the same data but coming to a different conclusion, who do you want to believe a politician with no scientific training or the NASA CO2 laboratory, a group of scientists who spend their entire careers studying CO2.
We know the greenhouse effect is real it is a necessary effect to keep our planet at a habitable temperature. However if our current warming is due to greenhouse gasses it would cause warming in the troposphere , but the troposphere is actually getting cooler.
http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature... That points to other explanations to our current warming.
So what is causing our current warming, it is the sun.
http://web.dmi.dk/solar-terrestrial/spac...
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2003/s...
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/06...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/...
The fact that only the earth?s surface is warming points to direct heating from the sun rather than heating due to greenhouse gasses. Also other planets in our solar system are warming pointing to a common cause of warming, that common cause being the sun.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/0...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...
The global warming crowd says our glaciers are melting and animals will suffer this is another false claim.
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/co2sci...
http://www.nationalcenter.org/npa235.htm...
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/...
the global warming crowd also claims a scientific consensus on the issue, this is wrong in two ways. One, there is no consensus, this is a false claim to make you believe in global warming by suppressing the opposition. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm...
Second, even if there was a consensus it would mean nothing, science is not politics, you don?t vote on theories to determine their legitimacy.
The IPCC is the main supporter of global warming, their statements are defended blindly by people who don?t want to admit that global warming is not real. People will claim that they took into account natural sources of CO2, they didn?t. Take a look for yourself:
http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index.... That is the latest IPCC report, read the entire report, do a search of the documents, there is absolutely no mention of natural sources of CO2. The natural sources have been completely ignored. Also people will claim that the IPCC took the sun into account in their report, this is not entirely correct, while the sun is mentioned the report it?s effects have not been accurately represented.
http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/moderr.... The IPCC did not take into account the Svensmark factor. This would greatly reduce the effect of solar radiation on the earth. Look back up to the solar resources to see the effect of the sun correctly represented.
Also allegations have been by IPCC scientists who disagreed with the IPCC statements. They say that their research was censored or taken out of the IPCC report. This is not the first time the IPCC has lied, they forged the famous ?hockey stick? graph, which later resulted in a reissuing of the IPCC report.
Quotes form politicians, CEO?s, and others are not proof of global warming, they issue these statements to get votes and customers. Scientists are able to get published and get time on the media by supporting global warming. The IPCC continually lies and misrepresents data so they keep their jobs.
In regards to the precautionary principle that says we can only help if we switch over to alternative energy, this idea is not correct. While this may seem legitimate it only helps the first world, third world countries can not afford to switch to the more expensive energy options. Also the US currently spends 4 billion dollars a year on global warming research which could be better spent on research for disease or to fight poverty. For an excellent example of how the precautionary principle is harmful you do not need to look further than DDT. This pesticide was cheap and incredibly effective but it was banned because of it harmful effects on egg shells. Now thousands of people die every year in third world countries because of malaria, a disease that could be easily controlled with DDT.
I hope anyone who believes in global warming they will take a look at the resources I provided. These resources should convince you that global warming is not man-made, it is caused by cycles in the earths climate. If you are not convinced I hope you at least take a new look at global warming as an unproven idea. Remember that global warming is big business for anyone who aligns themselves with it.
I could not go this entire post without mentioning global cooling. In the 1970?s it was claimed that there was a consensus on the fact that the world was headed into an ice age. We have seen once before how damaging a false claim about our climate change can be to our world. Most of the global warming crowd does not want you to know about this scare because it is so similar to the scare today. Government panels were formed and claimed the world was headed to an ice age, evidence poured in supporting the claim, a consensus was claimed, then the whole issue just faded away. That is what will happen with the false scare of global warming.
The theory of man-made global warming is false. Anyone who believes otherwise has not investigated the evidence or is purposely remaining ignorant to the legitimate opposition to global warming. I have given up an one and a half hours to watch ?An Inconvenient Truth? so I ask you to do the same and watch the movie detailing the opposition.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...
Another general resource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/global_warm...
CO2 is not causing the globe to warm the opposite is true, the warming is increasing the atmospheric CO2. When the world heats it gradually increases the temperature of the oceans which serve as the largest CO2 sink. As the oceans heat up they release CO2 which is stored in them. The information comes from the same data Al Gore uses, the temperature always goes up before the concentration of CO2 goes up.
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...
CO2 makes up only .03% of our atmosphere. Water vapor, another greenhouse gas, makes up 1-4% of our atmosphere, this gas is acknowledged to be the main greenhouse gas. All human activities combined contribute only 6 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Animals, through respiration, decomposition, etc contribute 150 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere. So humans contribute only a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere which is already in very small concentrations in the atmosphere.
http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science.html... This is where my data came from, it is an interesting site, it displays the same graphics as Al Gore in his movie but it tells how low the human contribution is. So Al Gore is using the same data but coming to a different conclusion, who do you want to believe a politician with no scientific training or the NASA CO2 laboratory, a group of scientists who spend their entire careers studying CO2.
We know the greenhouse effect is real it is a necessary effect to keep our planet at a habitable temperature. However if our current warming is due to greenhouse gasses it would cause warming in the troposphere , but the troposphere is actually getting cooler.
http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature... That points to other explanations to our current warming.
So what is causing our current warming, it is the sun.
http://web.dmi.dk/solar-terrestrial/spac...
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2003/s...
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/06...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/...
The fact that only the earth?s surface is warming points to direct heating from the sun rather than heating due to greenhouse gasses. Also other planets in our solar system are warming pointing to a common cause of warming, that common cause being the sun.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/0...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...
The global warming crowd says our glaciers are melting and animals will suffer this is another false claim.
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/co2sci...
http://www.nationalcenter.org/npa235.htm...
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/...
the global warming crowd also claims a scientific consensus on the issue, this is wrong in two ways. One, there is no consensus, this is a false claim to make you believe in global warming by suppressing the opposition. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm...
Second, even if there was a consensus it would mean nothing, science is not politics, you don?t vote on theories to determine their legitimacy.
The IPCC is the main supporter of global warming, their statements are defended blindly by people who don?t want to admit that global warming is not real. People will claim that they took into account natural sources of CO2, they didn?t. Take a look for yourself:
http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index.... That is the latest IPCC report, read the entire report, do a search of the documents, there is absolutely no mention of natural sources of CO2. The natural sources have been completely ignored. Also people will claim that the IPCC took the sun into account in their report, this is not entirely correct, while the sun is mentioned the report it?s effects have not been accurately represented.
http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/moderr.... The IPCC did not take into account the Svensmark factor. This would greatly reduce the effect of solar radiation on the earth. Look back up to the solar resources to see the effect of the sun correctly represented.
Also allegations have been by IPCC scientists who disagreed with the IPCC statements. They say that their research was censored or taken out of the IPCC report. This is not the first time the IPCC has lied, they forged the famous ?hockey stick? graph, which later resulted in a reissuing of the IPCC report.
Quotes form politicians, CEO?s, and others are not proof of global warming, they issue these statements to get votes and customers. Scientists are able to get published and get time on the media by supporting global warming. The IPCC continually lies and misrepresents data so they keep their jobs.
In regards to the precautionary principle that says we can only help if we switch over to alternative energy, this idea is not correct. While this may seem legitimate it only helps the first world, third world countries can not afford to switch to the more expensive energy options. Also the US currently spends 4 billion dollars a year on global warming research which could be better spent on research for disease or to fight poverty. For an excellent example of how the precautionary principle is harmful you do not need to look further than DDT. This pesticide was cheap and incredibly effective but it was banned because of it harmful effects on egg shells. Now thousands of people die every year in third world countries because of malaria, a disease that could be easily controlled with DDT.
I hope anyone who believes in global warming they will take a look at the resources I provided. These resources should convince you that global warming is not man-made, it is caused by cycles in the earths climate. If you are not convinced I hope you at least take a new look at global warming as an unproven idea. Remember that global warming is big business for anyone who aligns themselves with it.
I could not go this entire post without mentioning global cooling. In the 1970?s it was claimed that there was a consensus on the fact that the world was headed into an ice age. We have seen once before how damaging a false claim about our climate change can be to our world. Most of the global warming crowd does not want you to know about this scare because it is so similar to the scare today. Government panels were formed and claimed the world was headed to an ice age, evidence poured in supporting the claim, a consensus was claimed, then the whole issue just faded away. That is what will happen with the false scare of global warming.
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