The Global Warming Swindle

[Qdrop]

Aired on BBC 4 (cause you'd NEVER see this on US TV at this point).

Fantastic documentary that answers back to Inconvenient Truth.
Featuring many of the top climatologists and scientists from around the world...and no, Exxon doesn't pay their electric bill.

If you really consider yourself well-informed and fair...

you have to watch it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...mi ng+swindle

[Schmeltz]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

Aired on BBC 4 (cause you'd NEVER see this on US TV at this point).

Ha ha, why not? Because the hardline ecoterrorists are using their hypno-ray to take over the Bush administration? Wow!

I'll try to watch this after work tonight, it looks interesting.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by Schmeltz

Ha ha, why not? Because the hardline ecoterrorists are using their hypno-ray to take over the Bush administration? Wow!

because the american media has just recently swallowed the green kool-aid and forsaken all even-handed reporting on climate change.
global warming is scary.
fear sells.

and their sponsors think global activism seems socially conscience....so they want programming to appear the same.
follow the $$

I'll try to watch this after work tonight, it looks interesting.

awesome.

[yeahwho]

Martin Durkin is now going to enlighten me on the con artists trying to cash in on a catastrophe and hoax all perpetuated by hanger ons with some sort of human consumption blame game.

"Well, isn't that ... extra special."

[D_Raay]

Professor Carl Wunsch who appeared on the programme has since repudiated the film and compared it to propaganda.

However the Commission also concluded that Durkin had misled his interviewees about the nature and purpose of the documentary, and that he had misrepresented and distorted their views by editing the interview footage in a misleading way [7]. For these reasons, Channel 4 later issued a public apology on prime time TV.[8]According to The Independent, Durkin "accepts the charge of misleading contributors, but describes the verdict of distortion as 'complete tosh'." [9]

Uh oops...

[DroppinScience]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

because the american media has just recently swallowed the green kool-aid and forsaken all even-handed reporting on climate change.
global warming is scary.
fear sells.

Yeah, because I'm sure Bill O'Reilly and co. have seen the light and are eating granola with Al Gore on roadtrips in their electric cars while on their way to windmill powered farms.

[DroppinScience]

Oh and it aired on Channel 4, NOT BBC 4. Completely separate from the Beeb.

[sercomdj01]

Baring in mind it was in the same shockumentary series as "hairy women" and "men with breasts" coupled it was on channel 4 kinda looses wait to the argument. Also the fact many contributors complained it was miss edited.

[Carlos]

yeah this caused a slight stir when it was aired last month over here..

I thought someone else had mentioned it in another of the global warming posts, otherwise i would have pointed peeps in the direction of it.

It is in no way a balanced peice, but seeing as though for the last few years we have only ever seen documentaries on how man is warming the planet, I think it was about time we had the 'other side' as well.

I must say that the scientific exvidence this program does put forward is very convincing: when totally indepedent studies' graphs match up over a long periods of time, then that is good data.

But as I have stated in other global warming threads, the issue is being clouded - and certain aspects of the debate are being jumped on by those that can use it for power.
We should not be concentrating on CO2 levels- plants use CO2!! and the planet produces far more CO2 than we do...
What we should be concentrating on is the deforestation of our planet, how we are reducing important habitats, and the amount of toxins we produce as a race.. those are the important environmental issues, and NOT Carbon Dioxide..

Bottom line (as usual) is oil - there is less and less oil each years in the world, and so oild companies want to make us use less, and charge us more. Energy companies are charging more and more amounts, and the way it is heading, they will be able to justify increasing the price if oild becomes more expensive, due to it being less available.

So how we gonna solve it: by discovering a new form of energy, completely new that is - not hydrogen cells, or wind, as these are eneficient, and also finite.

please everyone truly interested and worried about our environment/energy situtation please watch race to zero point: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...+to+zero+point

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by Carlos

It is in no way a balanced peice, but seeing as though for the last few years we have only ever seen documentaries on how man is warming the planet, I think it was about time we had the 'other side' as well.

I must say that the scientific exvidence this program does put forward is very

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by D_Raay

Uh oops...

uh huh.
what were the elements that were edited in a nefarious fashion?

http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papers...o_channel4.htm

the said what he said....it wasn't completely out of context, he just didn't get chance to blab on and on in the film and cover his ass on both side, like many scientists try to do when a camera is on them.

if you think this is heinous...look up the "editing" that Gore enanged in with AIT.

I'd like you to show some real balls by debating the science they present.

drop drinking the kool-aid and answer.


environmentalism has become a fuckin religion.
complete with dogmatic thinking and faith.

[sercomdj01]

Global warming is a theory. There is no right or wrong answer. The whole thing rests upon the individual scientists opinion. Its like gods existance. No one can be sure either way. Its just the whole point of global warmin is that if we are to blame, then we need to do something about it. They're can't be 100% conclusive proof either way. Then it would be a law or fundermental and not a theory.
The arguement is do we rest on the side of causion or do we go with the cheeper option. Where do you stand on that Q?
I personaly beleive we are likly to be causing a speeding up of the global warming process. I read 2 scientific weeklies and many journals on the subject, and though evidence points in both directions - the main body of evidence suggests we are effecting the process.
I choose to read directly from scientific sources than how the media deals with a subject. Though everything in that documentary has factual basis, the cleaver editing and use of emotive phrasing can mislead and misappropriate many of the sources. But isn't that what the media does? Its politics now and is treated as such by the media.

Sorry to go all physicy on you all. But a good parable type idea to compair global warming is the big bang theory.
The history of the universe is based on infinate mathmatical differences that account for the entire makeup of the universe. Each one is different in a tiny way, just a number or constant. Of these only a finite small amouth actually have a big bang. So statistically and in veiw of probability there is less likly to have been a big bang.

BUT! Why do we go with the big bang theory so much? Well without the big bang the universe never started. And if the universe is infinate and has been around for ever, there is no creator. No god.

So despite the fact that the big bang theory isn't the best. People side with it as its not "ungodly". In other words there are politics and person beleif behind every scientific theory.

[fucktopgirl]

Global warming is due to human activities as well as the warming of the sun.

Both factors are playing a very important role.... And human should change his destructive production habits and switch to less damaging energy production and think more about his actions instead of blaming the ocean and the freaking rabbit that fart in the field.

Also, i am amaze that some people see human who care about environment like a scam....the fuck is your problem?

Anyway, that documentary is bullshit....total crap!! The ocean is responsable for the co2..hahahahaha, alright then.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by sercomdj01

The arguement is do we rest on the side of causion or do we go with the cheeper option. Where do you stand on that Q?

i believe we do NOT err on the side of caution when that entails dumping trillions in an unsubtatiated theory that will economicially cripple much of the world and keep the 3rd world countries stuck in the 3rd world...dying from poor drinking water and disease.
we have finite resources to put forth fixing global problems.
so we must prioritize the problems by levels likely hood and proof.
Man-made global warming is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY down the list.

I personaly beleive we are likely to be causing a speeding up of the global warming process. I read 2 scientific weeklies and many journals on the subject, and though evidence points in both directions - the main body of evidence suggests we are effecting the process.

I'm not seeing that, what that am seeing is coming from people more suspect and desparate for money and grants than the "Shell Answer Man."

I choose to read directly from scientific sources than how the media deals with a subject.

smart lad.

Though everything in that documentary has factual basis, the cleaver editing and use of emotive phrasing can mislead and misappropriate many of the sources. But isn't that what the media does? Its politics now and is treated as such by the media.

an COMPLETELY unbiased report or documentary just probably isn't possible anymore.
you just have to look at the science.

The science is that Co2 does not appear to causing the warming...it lags behind by about 800 years during temperature changes.
so C02 isn't the cause, but a byproduct. That was proven by the very deep ice core samples Gore showed in his AIT movie. He just didn't mention that part.

It's the sun, people....the sun.
Global Temp change relies on cloud cover.
cloud cover depends on cosmic radiation from the universe hitting our oceans and forming water vapor.
The cosmic rays hitting the earth depend on the activity of the sun and the solar winds it emits from time to time.

The problem that the Green Left have with that...is that they can't do anything about the sun. It's difficult for them to force us to change our lifestyles and industry if the changes are coming from the sun, not us.
I'm sure they'll find a way.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by fucktopgirl

Global warming is due to human activities as well as the warming of the sun.

prove it.

Both factors are playing a very important role....

prove it.
which scientists are you referring to.
what work did they do, what process. are they credible?
if you can''t answer that, then environimentalism is just a religion to you.

And human should change his destructive production habits and switch to less damaging energy production and think more about his actions instead of blaming the ocean and the freaking rabbit that fart in the field.

to some degree, yes.
whenever possible, humans should be given the choice between better, cleaner environmental conditions or more industry or cheaper prices.
who are we to tell Ethopia how they should run thier industry.
free market ecomics....not Big Brother.

Also, i am amaze that some people see human who care about environment like a scam....the fuck is your problem?

to those in the "know" it is a scam. Many scientists know thier data is flawed and thier predictions are unsubstatiated....but they need the grant dollars, they want the lime light...and/or they feel the means justify the ends.
and the pressure from thier peers is enourmous.

Anyway, that documentary is bullshit....total crap!! The ocean is responsable for the co2..hahahahaha, alright then.

yeah. read some more books.

[sercomdj01]

Physically (sorry to talk about physics again) processes are mainly unreversable. It depends on a measurable quantity known as entropy. Studying the chemical reactions happening within the ozone layer it is possible to study there entropy (its pretty simple stuff actually that we new allready) and what reactions lead to global warming.
The process isn't reversable. IE there is no way we can go back once the damage is done. Part of the problem is chemical reactions are happening and truning chemicals into other chemicals. Once these are turned into the other chemicals (which means they no longer protect us from the suns power) they're is no going back. These chemicals cannot be maufactured on earth, and the process cannot be reversed. There is no way anyone can do anything about it, its against the laws of nature. Impossible.
All we can do is slow the effects down. Do you really want to see people been flooded? Cause its happening allready in some places. The whole of holland for example could disapear. Whats gonna happen then?

[QueenAdrock]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

prove it.

To you? That's impossible. It doesn't matter how much proof the other side is willing to offer, you're set in your ways and you're not open to hearing the other side; you're only open to debating it because you're already convinced anything the other side has to offer is crap. Quite a few people on this board are like that, and I admit I'm like that for a few issues too. It's like debating evolution, 9/11 conspiracy, all of that. These debates aren't cut-and-dry, there are no concrete infallible answers for either side. You just choose the answer that best fits your beliefs and sounds best to you based on the evidence you yourself have seen, and debate from there.

However, most of the time these debates turn into an "I'm right, you're wrong" thing and it's like two brick walls screaming at each other, and chest-beating commences as each side claims victory. It's tiring.

[DroppinScience]

I dunno, this "60 Minutes" piece (talking with scientists no doubt funded by Al Gore's pocket and nefarious scheming Earth Sciences departments from colleges worldwide fearmongering for funding... I sure hope the English department catches on to this trend!) is convincing enough that we ought to do something.

http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/5...age_of_warming

[Qdrop]

sigh...
it's "Y2K" all over again.

"we're all gonna DIE!!!!"

than it never happened.


remember those "killer bees" migrating up from Texas at an astounding rate....they were projected to hitting the west coast within a year or 2...
what ever happened to the "killer Bee" epidemic?

what ever happened to the Bird Flu epidemic?

i guess Global Warming is the next "we're all gonna die!" thing, huh?

can't any of you see trees for the forest?

can't any of you see the pattern?

[sercomdj01]

That was all media hype. I ignoured it all. Why did u ignour my argument. Nothing to say?

[DroppinScience]

The "global warming" talk isn't so much "we're all gonna die" as in "let's conserve our energy to reverse damage on the planet." Afterall, the picture we're given is, "This isn't impossible to fix. If we all do our part we can make a better world for our children and our children's children" not "we're all DOOMED!"

Look, a sensationalistic documentary made by a guy with a dubious agenda and done with dubious tricks isn't enough to convince any of us lemmings, sheeple -- or whatever condescending word you give to anybody who doesn't side with your views 100% -- to stop drinking the Kool-Aid. And rebutting the deceits and manipulation of Al Gore's documentary (if there are any) with more deceits and manipulation doesn't help matters either.

P.S. - The doomsday predictions of Y2K may very well have happened, but we spent years changing the codes to ensure a seamless transition that... guess what? The world didn't collapse. If we did nothing about Y2K, I'm not sure the world would have turned upside down (or at least to the extent we were being told), but you know what? We worked to prevent anything catastrophic from happening and nothing bad happened. Same thing here. Erring on the side of caution doesn't hurt. Oh, and global warming initiatives won't kill economies (even 3rd world economies). If anything, Africa is feeling the effects of global warming a lot worse than the rest of the world, and Africa has contributed the LEAST to the problem, so there's irony for you.

[ASsman]

Qdrop, you dumb.

As a species I think it is our best interest to think in the future and try to survive. If there was even the smallest possibility we are all going to kill the planet ,I, as one who wishes the longevity of the human species, would atleast start to do a little something.

Simple as that, hey there ain't much shit in space or the fucking moon, we got there though, hoping we might find something. Slim chance but one worth taking. Global warming isn't one I'm willing to gamble with, we are a wasteful and inefficient animal, makes sense that we need to curb ourselfs.

[yeahwho]

Well I sure hope that wisdom of taking the middle road on "Global Warming" also engages many to think on a level of higher thought than a couple of documentaries and theatrical releases. I have not seen Al Gore's film nor will I watch this "Swindle" documentary.

This planet is changing rapidly. The sun has not had the activity to cause this change.

Thus many critics of greenhouse effect have had a startling revelation, man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup.

I can layout charts, facts, timelines, people who are way too smart and wise to bullshit you....yet if your not convinced, fuck it....not everybody is going to get it. Charlatans and opportunists are at every turn of life so I'm not surprised by people exploiting this tragedy, don't let that fog your train of logical thought, seriously look into the industrial revolution and the rise of CO2 emissions, particularly in just the past 3 decades and take the information you gleam from this objectively. Think about the overall history of the planet earth, this is the most rapid rise of CO2 emissions in recorded history.

If your still not convinced that something odd is going on around you and your environment due to CO2 concentrations I'm not sure what to tell you.

Propaganda? Hype? Political? Sensational? All of those terms do not mean shit when the atmosphere reaches CO2 concentrations beyond 400 PPMV, it'll be all she wrote then.

[QueenAdrock]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

what ever happened to the Bird Flu epidemic?

It's still a worry to many, just not in America. Just because the media has moved on to things they deem more important doesn't mean the problem disappears, it just means that the media has found something else to focus on. Everytime I leave the country, I'm briefed on the risks of Avian Flu abroad, and deaths have actually risen in countries overseas. Indonesia especially.

From today: "Bird flu has killed at least 172 people worldwide since it began its spread through Asian poultry in 2003, according to WHO. Most human deaths come from contact with infected birds, but experts fear it could mutate into a form that spreads easily among people."

It's not like it was "Whoops, we were wrong, don't worry about it because it's not a problem." It's still a problem, it's still a worry to many, people have died because of the flu. It's still a worry that it can warp and jump to humans, that threat has never disappeared, it's just gone under the radar. I work with a few of the top Avian Flu experts in the world, and I can assure you they are still very much worried about it. I do believe that the media does hype it up, but it's still a valid concern.

[Ali]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

sigh...
it's "Y2K" all over again.

"we're all gonna DIE!!!!"

than it never happened.

because people like me spent over a year hunting through pages and pages of code correcting the date or writing patches to prevent systems from using the two digit date.

Believe me, Y2K was real and we did something about it.

Originally Posted by Qdrop

remember those "killer bees" migrating up from Texas at an astounding rate....they were projected to hitting the west coast within a year or 2...
what ever happened to the "killer Bee" epidemic?

Dunno, but we were prepared for it, weren't we?

Originally Posted by Qdrop

what ever happened to the Bird Flu epidemic?

Ask the peeps in SE Asia who lost family and friends. We did something about that, too. Any infected bird found caused mass culling of all free range poultry in the area (ironic, eh?)

Originally Posted by Qdrop

i guess Global Warming is the next "we're all gonna die!" thing, huh?

NOt necessarily, but the earth is warming up and it might be speeded up by human activity and it might not. What harm is there in trying to slow it down (other than asking people to drive smaller cars and not waste so much electricity and heating oil).

Originally Posted by Qdrop

can't any of you see trees for the forest?

can't any of you see the pattern?

Sure. The forests of trees being planted by people who think they can travel as much as they like and donate some money to some people who say they are going to plant a tree in Africa, or some such bullshit. THAT is the swindle, my friend. That and Green Taxes and reducing trash collection to force people to recycle more. All it is is fucking greedy politicians jumping on the Green bandwagon and making money by taxing more and collecting less trash while at the same time approving more road building, more airport runways, more air corridors and spending sweet fukall of the taxes they collect on subsidising public transport, hybrid cars, micro-generation and all the other things which REALLY make a difference.

Every time I hear a politician utter the word 'green', posing on a bicycle or a glacier or whatever, I want to strangle the fukker. Bush's push towards biofuel is another part of the swindle... no doubt his family has bought up all the farmland on which the biofuel crops (GM no doubt) will be grown with all manner of horrible fertilizer and pesticides and whatnot. In the mean time poor people in neighbouring countries can't afford to eat because the price of corn has shot up due to demand from the US.

I read a great article about how the real greens are getting fed up with all the mainstream journalists and politicians jumping on the bandwagon and shouting doom without concrete proof as Q so rightly says they are, because it causes people to say 'hey it's just journos exaggerating and politikos lying as usual' and so they don't believe them when really there could be something that they can do (other than this stupid fukn practice of paying Tree Tithes for their CO2 sins.)

[yeahwho]

Man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup. (More than just exhaling and populating the planet)

Can anyone prove otherwise? No.

I'll wait for the shoddy bullshit to appear and then challenge it without any agenda.

It's a fact that Man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup, even a dork like myself has figured that out.

The swindle is in someone actually getting paid to make movies and documentaries about Junior High School science.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by yeahwho

Well I sure hope that wisdom of taking the middle road on "Global Warming" also engages many to think on a level of higher thought than a couple of documentaries and theatrical releases. I have not seen Al Gore's film nor will I watch this "Swindle" documentary.

than get off this thread till you do.

This planet is changing rapidly. The sun has not had the activity to cause this change.

ummm...did you read your link:
"Changes in the solar wind and the Sun's magnetic flux

* A more active solar wind and stronger magnetic field reduces the cosmic rays striking the Earth's atmosphere.
* Variations in the solar wind affect the size and intensity of the heliosphere, the volume larger than the Solar System filled with solar wind particles.
* Levels of 14C and 10Be show changes tied to solar activity.
* Cosmic ray ionization in the upper atmosphere does change, but significant effects are not obvious.
* As the solar coronal-source magnetic flux doubled during the past century, the cosmic-ray flux has decreased by about 15%.
* The Sun's total magnetic flux rose by a factor of 1.41 from 1964-1996 and by a factor of 2.3 since 1901.

[edit] Effects on clouds

* Cosmic rays may affect formation of clouds.
* 1983-1994 data from the International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP) showed that global low cloud formation was highly correlated with cosmic ray flux; subsequent to this the correlation breaks down[15]
* The Earth's albedo decreased by about 2.5% over 5 years during the recent solar cycle, as measured by lunar "Earthshine". Similar reduction was measured by satellites during the previous cycle.
* Mediterranean core study of plankton detected a solar-related 11 year cycle, and an increase 3.7 times larger between 1760 and 1950. A considerable reduction in cloud cover is proposed.
* An experiment conducted by Henrik Svensmark at the Danish National Space Center supports this hypothesis. [16]
"

Thus many critics of greenhouse effect have had a startling revelation, man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup.

the data shows that CO2 is a BYPRODUCT of global warming..NOT the cause.

I can layout charts, facts, timelines, people who are way too smart and wise to bullshit you....yet if your not convinced, fuck it....not everybody is going to get it.

that was done for you in the swindle movie...by people much smarter than you, but you choose not to listen.

Charlatans and opportunists are at every turn of life so I'm not surprised by people exploiting this tragedy, don't let that fog your train of logical thought, seriously look into the industrial revolution and the rise of CO2 emissions, particularly in just the past 3 decades and take the information you gleam from this objectively. Think about the overall history of the planet earth, this is the most rapid rise of CO2 emissions in recorded history.

think about CO2 being the byproduct, not the cause.
you've been had.

If your still not convinced that something odd is going on around you and your environment due to CO2 concentrations I'm not sure what to tell you.

you needn't tell me anything.
I can tell you that it appears you've been had.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by yeahwho

Man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup. (More than just exhaling and populating the planet)

Can anyone prove otherwise? No.

I'll wait for the shoddy bullshit to appear and then challenge it without any agenda.

It's a fact that Man is contributing to atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup, even a dork like myself has figured that out.

The swindle is in someone actually getting paid to make movies and documentaries about Junior High School science.

watch the documentary by some top scientists who are much smarter than yourself....and not bought and paid for.
than comment.

stay off this thread till you do.

[Qdrop]

Originally Posted by Qdrop

uh huh.
what were the elements that were edited in a nefarious fashion?

http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papers...o_channel4.htm

the said what he said....it wasn't completely out of context, he just didn't get chance to blab on and on in the film and cover his ass on both side, like many scientists try to do when a camera is on them.

if you think this is heinous...look up the "editing" that Gore enanged in with AIT.

I'd like you to show some real balls by debating the science they present.

drop drinking the kool-aid and answer.


environmentalism has become a fuckin religion.
complete with dogmatic thinking and faith.

regardless of his belief that man still has a connection on some level to warming....he DID day : " am on record in a number of places as complaining about the over-dramatization and unwarranted extrapolation of scientific facts. Thus the notion that the Gulf Stream would or could "shut off" or that with global warming Britain would go into a "new ice age" are either scientifically impossible or so unlikely as to threaten our credibility as a scientific discipline if we proclaim their reality "

[D_Raay]

Hey yeahwho, how much they paying you man to perpetuate the "myth" of Global Warming on a lightly traversed board such as this one? Or any one of you for that matter...

Are we all on the payroll or what? If so where's my cut?