|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Great BBC video on Global Warm.
I just found this video and thought that others would enjoy watching it, there is a lot of interesting things brought up in it that should make everyone think about what we are hearing.
Video Link Rich |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
It looks like I just wasted a bunch of money on CF light bulbs
Thanks for posting this, very refreshing. Get ready for the usual suspects to chime in with their humorless doom and gloom. On your mark, get set, GO!
__________________
Current Livestock: mated pair False Percs mated pair Banggai Cardinals Longnose Hawkfish Magnificent Rabbitfish Diamond Goby Blond Naso Tang Bluechin Trigger I got the poo on me. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
LOL, yeah I'm not to worried about it, its not like I made the video or anything. I guess when someone with the same qualification as the Professors, Doctors, and other professional in that video could possible argue with what they are saying, otherwise its just a bunch of made up BS.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Watched a little of it. Seems like some new faces and some old faces. But I can't watch it all at the moment. Might wait till I get home, otherwise my download limit will get a little thin.
As far as doubters of the video link go. If you want to see scientists arguing against it, do a search. There are many arguments for and against on the net. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Watch the whole video and then tell me about someone who can argue with what they have laid out. Everything that was said was based one Science not politics or some hidden agenda.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
One of the main scientists in this,complained to channel 4 because everything he had said had been used out of context and changed around. He claims he was duped. And was very angry about it. I will try and find the link about what he wrote.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Head of Production Wag TV 2D Leroy House 436 Essex Road London N1 3QP 10 March 2007 Dear Mr. Green: I am writing to record what I told you on the telephone yesterday about your Channel 4 film "The Global Warming Swindle." Fundamentally, I am the one who was swindled---please read the email below that was sent to me (and re-sent by you). Based upon this email and subsequent telephone conversations, and discussions with the Director, Martin Durkin, I thought I was being asked to appear in a film that would discuss in a balanced way the complicated elements of understanding of climate change--- in the best traditions of British television. Is there any indication in the email evident to an outsider that the product would be so tendentious, so unbalanced? I was approached, as explained to me on the telephone, because I was known to have been unhappy with some of the more excitable climate-change stories in the British media, most conspicuously the notion that the Gulf Stream could disappear, among others. When a journalist approaches me suggesting a "critical approach" to a technical subject, as the email states, my inference is that we are to discuss which elements are contentious, why they are contentious, and what the arguments are on all sides. To a scientist, "critical" does not mean a hatchet job---it means a thorough-going examination of the science. The scientific subjects described in the email, and in the previous and subsequent telephone conversations, are complicated, worthy of exploration, debate, and an educational effort with the public. Hence my willingness to participate. Had the words "polemic", or "swindle" appeared in these preliminary discussions, I would have instantly declined to be involved. I spent hours in the interview describing many of the problems of understanding the ocean in climate change, and the ways in which some of the more dramatic elements get exaggerated in the media relative to more realistic, potentially truly catastrophic issues, such as the implications of the oncoming sea level rise. As I made clear, both in the preliminary discussions, and in the interview itself, I believe that global warming is a very serious threat that needs equally serious discussion and no one seeing this film could possibly deduce that. What we now have is an out-and-out propaganda piece, in which there is not even a gesture toward balance or explanation of why many of the extended inferences drawn in the film are not widely accepted by the scientific community. There are so many examples, it's hard to know where to begin, so I will cite only one: a speaker asserts, as is true, that carbon dioxide is only a small fraction of the atmospheric mass. The viewer is left to infer that means it couldn't really matter. But even a beginning meteorology student could tell you that the relative masses of gases are irrelevant to their effects on radiative balance. A director not intending to produce pure propaganda would have tried to eliminate that piece of disinformation. An example where my own discussion was grossly distorted by context: I am shown explaining that a warming ocean could expel more carbon dioxide than it absorbs -- thus exacerbating the greenhouse gas buildup in the atmosphere and hence worrisome. It was used in the film, through its context, to imply that CO2 is all natural, coming from the ocean, and that therefore the human element is irrelevant. This use of my remarks, which are literally what I said, comes close to fraud. I have some experience in dealing with TV and print reporters and do understand something of the ways in which one can be misquoted, quoted out of context, or otherwise misinterpreted. Some of that is inevitable in the press of time or space or in discussions of complicated issues. Never before, however, have I had an experience like this one. My appearance in the "Global Warming Swindle" is deeply embarrasing, and my professional reputation has been damaged. I was duped---an uncomfortable position in which to be. At a minimum, I ask that the film should never be seen again publicly with my participation included. Channel 4 surely owes an apology to its viewers, and perhaps WAGTV owes something to Channel 4. I will be taking advice as to whether I should proceed to make some more formal protest. Sincerely, Carl Wunsch Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physical Oceanography Massachusetts Institute of Technology
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
This is a good summary of the movie's faults, and an excellent site in general. I'd like to see Savage try to pull the junk he does on his radio show with these guys (yes, I listen to Savage). http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...7/03/swindled/
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
So, one scientist out of all of them on there and the whole video is junk? Seems to me that I would be able to use the same theory for the IPCC report then, because as you see in the video there are several scientist on there that say they were duped by the IPCC.
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
How does a majority of anything, become science. Where is the repeatable outcome. How can the hypothysis be tested? IT's not science but gossip.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
The whole idea of global warming is garbage. Can you say... The sky is falling!!!
This subject is worse then DSB vs. BB.
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
And you have no way to back up global warming. It's a theory...
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Proof of global warming???
Finally there is proof of global warming!!!!!
The ice is melting in my iced tea.... If the ice all melts, it won't be iced tea any longer. What will I do?
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Exactly, you don't know anything about this. Thanks for making that clear, now I know not to listen to you.
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
What are you talking about? I agree there is global warming. I just showed sciectific proof.
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
No you didn't, that's my point, you don't know what you're talking about.
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
I'm sorry if I didn't quote Al Gore or any of the other global warming experts.
__________________
Mike Sandbeds operate like wormholes and the excess nutrients and detritus are transported to a sister galaxy - Bomber 12-7-41 & 9-11-01 Never Forget! |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
This always the problem, we will never agree one way or the other and thats fine. The big problem is that we will not know the truth one way or the other as long as there are HUGE political organizations pushing there agenda on all of us.
Thats why I liked this video so much, its great to see some real scientists with real knowledge talk about all of the fake science we are seeing from the political groups. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
The Sand People are easily startled, but they will soon be back, and in greater numbers. All statements have been peer reviewed. |
|
|