Another Environmentalist Movie

[SeeingRed]

It's called the "11th Hour" and will be narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio...

"Passionate environmentalist Leonardo DiCaprio produces and narrates the documentary 11th Hour. The film takes a look at the state of the earth's environment and examines solutions to major issues such as global warming and reversing the damage to the planet's ecosystems. DiCaprio appears along with former Soviet President Mikael Gorbachev and James Woolsey."

[1of3]

Sorry lost interest in this movie the minute you mentioned who is narrating it

[SeeingRed]

Sorry lost interest in this movie the minute you mentioned who is narrating it

I was never interested in it...just found it to be a little reduntant after the whole Inconvenient Truth deal...

[az602]

The amazing part is that the media presents this as a fact instead of a (still) unproven theory. The Global Warming Prophecy (TGWP) is self-fulfilling whether it's heeded or ignored.

If we halt all targeted emissions and TGWP still happens, then we were too late...if it doesn't happen then TGWP must be true!!

Conversely, if we ignore it and TGWP still hasn't happened, yet, then we can doomsay until the end of time that it WILL happen...if TGWP actually happens, and all the worst of the Prophecies come true (ha!) then we really are doomed, our race will diminish, but survive...revert to hunting and gathering, forget about TGWP and repeat the cycle all over again...

Let the sheep watch this movie and cry that the sky is falling!

Instead of trying to destroy our infrastructure by outlawing motor vehicles and industry, devote some of this scientific funding and energy to inventing something to cleanup the reportedly fragile environment so that I don't have to live in a cave in the prophesied New Stone Age...it could be worth billions.

Besides I'm bored with horror/conspiracy movies anyway...

[Mibrilane #56]

Here's a good speech on Global Warming Hysteria entitled "HOT & COLD MEDIA SPIN CYCLE: A CHALLENGE TO JOURNALISTS WHO COVER GLOBAL WARMING (http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759)" delivered on Monday (09-25-06) on the Senate floor by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Chairman of the Environment & Public Works Committee.

He talked at length about the many fallacies of Global Warming Hysteria. It's a good read. :thumbsup:

I'd re-post it here, but it is just too long.

[SeeingRed]

Here's a good speech on Global Warming Hysteria entitled "HOT & COLD MEDIA SPIN CYCLE: A CHALLENGE TO JOURNALISTS WHO COVER GLOBAL WARMING (http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759)" delivered on Monday (09-25-06) on the Senate floor by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Chairman of the Environment & Public Works Committee.

He talked at length about the many fallacies of Global Warming Hysteria. It's a good read. :thumbsup:

I'd re-post it here, but it is just too long.

It's a GREAT read. Yesterday it was posted in the GWOT/Political forum on a Mustang message board I'm on. I took the time to read the whole thing through and he makes a lot of very valid, very practical points.

[az602]

It's a GREAT read. Yesterday it was posted in the GWOT/Political forum on a Mustang message board I'm on. I took the time to read the whole thing through and he makes a lot of very valid, very practical points.

I just finished reading it, kinda says it all. Too bad no newspaper or news agency will report it. Might ruin their credibility with the sheep...

[Cardsfan2000]

Myth: Humans are not causing global warming.

Fact: The scientific consensus on global warming is overwhelming.



Summary

There is no dispute about the basic facts of this issue: carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas; the world's automobiles and power plants pour nearly 6 billion tons of it into the air every year; and there are countless indications that the planet is warming. Perhaps the most revealing is the fact that average temperatures have been gradually rising, and the ten hottest years on record since the 1860s have occurred since 1973.

The scientific consensus that human greenhouse gases are contributing to global warming is quickly growing unanimous. Even the top critics in science have been won over. Thomas Karl -- who has been described as "the darling of global warming skeptics," and whose doubts about global warming have been quoted by conservatives the world over -- has even been swayed by the evidence. One could hardly imagine a clearer warning than the one he gave recently:

"The warming now has pretty much returned [after a brief cooling off period caused by Mount Pinatubo, whose volcanic soot temporarily dimmed the sun around the world]. If you were to come back in, say, the year 2000, and if we have taken another jump in temperature [like since 1980], then you are going to see some very strong statements from me and my colleagues." (3)
The strong statements of scientists on this issue derive from the catastrophic potential of even a small amount of global warming. The reason why the planet Venus bakes under 900-degree heat is not because it is so close to the sun, but it is trapped under greenhouse gases. Global warming is a serious threat here on earth because it would cause more severe weather, increase the range of deserts, melt the polar ice caps, cause a rise in sea level (which, according to the fossil record, is a major cause of mass extinctions), as well as expand the habitat of deadly tropical diseases.

The only scientific opposition to the global warming theory comes from the expected places: scientific commissions funded largely by the fossil fuel industry, which is responsible for creating the greenhouse gases in the first place. This is highly reminiscent of the all the "scientific" studies produced by the tobacco companies proving that cigarettes do not cause cancer. In a like manner, the industry-backed Global Climate Coalition has mounted a huge public relations campaign to prevent policies that limit fossil fuel use. It issued a report called "Changing Weather? Facts and Fallacies about Climate Change." It completely distorted an important survey issued by Harvard climatologist David Keith, who demanded an immediate retraction of the report. After receiving a blistering response from the world's top climatologists, the Global Climate Coalition issued a watered-down edition of the report, which made no mention of Keith's study. Obviously, even industry-backed scientists are admitting to the evidence.

[Mibrilane #56]

There is no dispute about the basic facts of this issue: carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas; the world's automobiles and power plants pour nearly 6 billion tons of it into the air every year; and there are countless indications that the planet is warming. Perhaps the most revealing is the fact that average temperatures have been gradually rising, and the ten hottest years on record since the 1860s have occurred since 1973.
From the above linked speech:
END OF LITTLE ICE AGE MEANS WARMING

The media have missed the big pieces of the puzzle when it comes to the Earth’s temperatures and mankind’s carbon dioxide (C02) emissions. It is very simplistic to feign horror and say the one degree Fahrenheit temperature increase during the 20th century means we are all doomed. First of all, the one degree Fahrenheit rise coincided with the greatest advancement of living standards, life expectancy, food production and human health in the history of our planet. So it is hard to argue that the global warming we experienced in the 20th century was somehow negative or part of a catastrophic trend.

Second, what the climate alarmists and their advocates in the media have continued to ignore is the fact that the Little Ice Age, which resulted in harsh winters which froze New York Harbor and caused untold deaths, ended about 1850. So trying to prove man-made global warming by comparing the well-known fact that today's temperatures are warmer than during the Little Ice Age is akin to comparing summer to winter to show a catastrophic temperature trend.

In addition, something that the media almost never addresses are the holes in the theory that C02 has been the driving force in global warming. Alarmists fail to adequately explain why temperatures began warming at the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, long before man-made CO2 emissions could have impacted the climate. Then about 1940, just as man-made CO2 emissions rose sharply, the temperatures began a decline that lasted until the 1970’s, prompting the media and many scientists to fear a coming ice age. Let me repeat, temperatures got colder after C02 emissions exploded. If C02 is the driving force of global climate change, why do so many in the media ignore the many skeptical scientists who cite these rather obvious inconvenient truths?

[Mibrilane #56]

More:

SIXTY SCIENTISTS

My skeptical views on man-made catastrophic global warming have only strengthened as new science comes in. There have been recent findings in peer-reviewed literature over the last few years showing that the Antarctic is getting colder and the ice is growing and a new study in Geophysical Research Letters found that the sun was responsible for 50% of 20th century warming. Recently, many scientists, including a leading member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, predicted long-term global cooling may be on the horizon due to a projected decrease in the sun’s output.

A letter sent to the Canadian Prime Minister on April 6 of this year by 60 prominent scientists who question the basis for climate alarmism, clearly explains the current state of scientific knowledge on global warming.

The 60 scientists wrote (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605):

“If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.”

The letter also noted:

“‘Climate change is real’ is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes occur all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural ‘noise.’”

[Mibrilane #56]

And to show how people in the media present only one side:

MEDIA COVERAGE IN 2006

Which raises the question: Has this embarrassing 100-year documented legacy of coverage on what turned out to be trendy climate science theories made the media more skeptical of today’s sensational promoters of global warming?

You be the judge.

On February 19th of this year, CBS News’s “60 Minutes” produced a segment on the North Pole. The segment was a completely one-sided report, alleging rapid and unprecedented melting at the polar cap.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/16/60minutes/main1323169.shtml

It even featured correspondent Scott Pelley claiming that the ice in Greenland was melting so fast, that he barely got off an ice-berg before it collapsed into the water.

“60 Minutes” failed to inform its viewers that a 2005 study by a scientist named Ola Johannessen and his colleagues showing that the interior of Greenland is gaining ice and mass and that according to scientists, the Arctic was warmer in the 1930’s than today.

[BigDinGlenDale]

Global Warming is a phase the earth goes through to clease itself of the carbon in its own atmosphere. I laugh about "global warming" because many enviromentalists are also evolutionists but for some reason they don't seem to believe that the earth could "evolve" its own method of cleasing itself...idiots.

[Mibrilane #56]

By the way, you should always reference your sources (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-globalwarming.htm) if the material you post is not composed by you.

[Mibrilane #56]

If you're a fan of AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, perhaps a few more inconvenient truths (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmFiZDAyMWFhMGIxNTgwNGIyMjVkZjQ4OGFiZjFlNjc=) might be a worthwhile read.

I'm particularly interested in this one:

Carbon Dioxide’s Effect on Temperature.

The relationship between global temperature and carbon dioxide (CO2), on which the entire scare is founded, is not linear. Every molecule of CO2 added to the atmosphere contributes less to warming than the previous one. The book’s graph on p. 66-67 is seriously misleading. Moreover, even the historical levels of CO2 shown on the graph are disputed. Evidence from plant fossil-remains suggest that there was as much CO2 in the atmosphere about 11,000 years ago as there is today.
Seriously, though, click the link and read it. There's even links to studies that go against the "scientific consensus" idea that CF2K keeps talking about. I'd repost it all here, but I think a link is enough. Read it in the context in which it was originally presented.

[Saturn5]

The amazing part is that the media presents this as a fact instead of a (still) unproven theory. The Global Warming Prophecy (TGWP) is self-fulfilling whether it's heeded or ignored.

If we halt all targeted emissions and TGWP still happens, then we were too late...if it doesn't happen then TGWP must be true!!

Conversely, if we ignore it and TGWP still hasn't happened, yet, then we can doomsay until the end of time that it WILL happen...if TGWP actually happens, and all the worst of the Prophecies come true (ha!) then we really are doomed, our race will diminish, but survive...revert to hunting and gathering, forget about TGWP and repeat the cycle all over again...

Let the sheep watch this movie and cry that the sky is falling!

Instead of trying to destroy our infrastructure by outlawing motor vehicles and industry, devote some of this scientific funding and energy to inventing something to cleanup the reportedly fragile environment so that I don't have to live in a cave in the prophesied New Stone Age...it could be worth billions.



So is son-of-a-bush also wrong?

CCTP is the technology component of a comprehensive U.S. strategy introduced by President Bush in 2002 to combat climate change that include measures to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions

http://www.energy.gov/news/4178.htm

Why a green energy initiative, if what we are doing is not causing global warming?

[Mibrilane #56]

Why a green energy initiative, if what we are doing is not causing global warming?
No one knows for sure, which is why green energy initiatives are a pragmatic solution to address that uncertainty. Bush is just going with what people are recommending to him. As you are so fond of pointing out, he is not always right about everything, is he?

[SeeingRed]

Why a green energy initiative, if what we are doing is not causing global warming?

I have already pointed out the pros and cons of "going green". You read it all and asked your off-topic, skewed questions, and I answered them all. Why do you need to ask again? Dense much?

[az602]

So is son-of-a-bush also wrong?

CCTP is the technology component of a comprehensive U.S. strategy introduced by President Bush in 2002 to combat climate change that include measures to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions

http://www.energy.gov/news/4178.htm

Why a green energy initiative, if what we are doing is not causing global warming?

This activity, my friend, is called placating the sheep AKA politics...do you actually think this strategy will in any way affect TGWP?

Traditionally the largest source of "greenhouse gases" has been volcanos. Since they release tons of them. Especially CO2:
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Emissions/Publications/OFR95-85/

here's one in CA:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs172-96/

We are but a speck of dust compared to Mother Nature...

[Mibrilane #56]

Traditionally the largest source of "greenhouse gases" has been volcanos. Since they release tons of them. Especially CO2:
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Glossary/Emissions/Publications/OFR95-85/

That's it - we must completely eliminate our reliance on volcanoes. :whistle:

[SeeingRed]

That's it - we must completely eliminate our reliance on volcanoes. :whistle:

We could stuff them full of styrofoam from the 1980s that are full of CFCs, that'll really give the environmentalists something to worry about.

[arizona_cards_11]

Good read....:yourock:

[SeeingRed]

Glad ya liked it! Thanks for bringing it back from the stoneage. :whistle: