the great global warming swindle

[m_the0ry]

I'm glad someone pointed out the editorial bias in this 'documentary'.

Still, the lead climatologist in France's government recently changed his opinion from a, "yes humans cause global warming" to "we're not 100% sure yet". As a result he said that maintaining biodiversity by ceasing overpoaching in the seas and controlling toxic substances is far more important.

No matter what the outcome with regard to global warming, the idea of a society concerned with sustainability is without a doubt important to human survival. At the very least the global warming frenzy is just an omen; a reminder that we cannot live on fossil fuels indefinitely. Without the climate scare there would be much less research in solar and wind technologies which are on the verge of breaking the cost barrier currently preventing them from powering households across the country.

The video makes some good points but it certainly changes nothing about the way I will continue to live my life. I'll still recycle, I'll still bike to work and school every day instead of drive and I'll still be an avid proponent of electric vehicles and high fuel efficiency. The only way mankind can hope to survive the tidal wave of technology that we are on the verge of is if we consider more than our consumer impulses when we live our lives.

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. The guy has a history of ignoring large bodies of contrary evidence, and manipulating and editing informations and interviews unfairly. He is no doubt getting paid handsomely by corporate interests. You should take everything he says with a grain of salt.


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL at people who attack peoples bias as proof that they are wrong. Attack the ideas please. I'm sure a lot of what he said was probably wrong, but a lot of it might be right. Its probably just the nature of trying to compress a complicated issue into an hour program that is going to cause people to be misrepresented.

Are the graphs he showed wrong? Did the current warming trend not start before the majority of our CO2 output occured in 1940? Does it even make sense that we would see an effect on the environment in a brief 65 years since CO2 production has drastically increased?

At this point I dont care where these ideas came from, I believe they may be legitimate criticisms to Global Warming. They are now my ideas, am I biased and paid by oil companies?

[ianlippert]

[ QUOTE ]
No matter what the outcome with regard to global warming, the idea of a society concerned with sustainability is without a doubt important to human survival. At the very least the global warming frenzy is just an omen; a reminder that we cannot live on fossil fuels indefinitely. Without the climate scare there would be much less research in solar and wind technologies which are on the verge of breaking the cost barrier currently preventing them from powering households across the country.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if you watched the movie but the cost barrier is no where near to being broken. For us rich north americans we can talk about funding programs to produce solar for us, but in the third world their only choice is live in poverty or use fossil fuels. I honestly think that global warming debate is completely pointless, nothing is going to curb CO2 emmisions.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL. The guy has a history of ignoring large bodies of contrary evidence, and manipulating and editing informations and interviews unfairly. He is no doubt getting paid handsomely by corporate interests. You should take everything he says with a grain of salt.


[/ QUOTE ]
LOL at people who attack peoples bias as proof that they are wrong. Attack the ideas please.

[/ QUOTE ]
I said nothing about them being wrong. Neither of us know enough to intelligently comment to that volume of information - few people do, which is why propagandists are so dangerous. I'm simply warning to take it with a grain of salt. That's different to what you claim. And when you don't know all the facts, the credibility of the documentary maker is everything. Do you see why?
This guy has previous produced a documentary arguing that silicone breast implants are beneficial to women's health. I think we know where his loyalties lie - not with the truth.

[ QUOTE ]
Are the graphs he showed wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]
The solar strength-temperature graph is missing the most recent 30 years of data. It stops at 1975. And that missing data is nothing short of damning to his theory. I doubt any of the graphs are actually wrong, but the above shows how information can be cleverly distorted by someone without scruples.

[ QUOTE ]
They are now my ideas, am I biased and paid by oil companies?

[/ QUOTE ]
There's an excellent chance that he was paid by oil companies. Many of these organizations are. Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_..._for_opponents

Big oil has paid for documentaries and shills before. And it's important to realize that many of these people aren't "trying to get the truth out" - they are directly on the payrolls of oil companies. That changes things, don't you think?

[Hopey]

[ QUOTE ]

Anyone who is influenced by this film is a sucker. Not because they dont agree with MMGW but because they can be influenced by so totally overt biased media programming.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect that most people who do not "believe" in global warming do so because they do not *want* to believe in global warming. The potential consequences of global warming are too scary -- it's much easier to just stick your head in the sand and pretend like it's not happening.

A film like the one linked in the OP gives the nay-sayers a feeling of vindication -- even if the feeling is almost certainly completely unjustified.

[mjkidd]

[ QUOTE ]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_...on_director%29

This is the director of the film. He also made a documentary claiming that silcone breast implants are GOOD for a woman's health.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there has never been any evidence that silicone breast implants are harmful to health.

[Metric]

I believe in global warming, and also global cooling, as does apparently everyone in this particular video. Why should I be on the edge of my seat prepared to crap my pants, again?

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

Two of the Scientists in the Film actually agree with Global Warming, yet the film didnt mention this, it just misrepresented their views via editing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Names and links to their stated positions please (or at the very least the names).

[wacki]

Here is a 5 page rebuttal to the program:

http://www.jri.org.uk/news/Critique_...ng_Swindle.pdf

[wacki]

lol @ this video

Climate scientist 'duped to deny global warming'
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2031455,00.html