'The Great Global Warming Swindle' - Documentary Film?
May 1st 2007 05:54
People interviewed in this movie are all apparently credible, respected scientists who use cold hard facts to disprove global warming, they also want to sue the film makers sorry ass.
But why? Because their words were taken out of context to make people think that Global Climate Change is not a very real issue. The film maker got these scientists, interviewed them, twisted their words as he saw fit, put it in a documentary and said 'hey what the hey, I swindled these folks to make my movie seem credible'.
From the horses mouth,
Ironic, a movie about swindling was made by swindling people...
You see? When a man in all honesty and pureness of spirit wants to educate people on how complex global climate change his he's shunned down, his words are manipulated, and suddenly he's not saying what he wants to.
Now who do I recall here was saying how he was using this movie as a turning point in his argument about global climate change?
But why? Because their words were taken out of context to make people think that Global Climate Change is not a very real issue. The film maker got these scientists, interviewed them, twisted their words as he saw fit, put it in a documentary and said 'hey what the hey, I swindled these folks to make my movie seem credible'.
From the horses mouth,
'I thought they were trying to educate the public about the complexities of climate change,'
'This seems like a deliberate attempt to exploit someone who is on the other side of the issue.'
'This seems like a deliberate attempt to exploit someone who is on the other side of the issue.'
Ironic, a movie about swindling was made by swindling people...
You see? When a man in all honesty and pureness of spirit wants to educate people on how complex global climate change his he's shunned down, his words are manipulated, and suddenly he's not saying what he wants to.
Now who do I recall here was saying how he was using this movie as a turning point in his argument about global climate change?
| 66 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Damo
Rather than looking at science as an objective dispassionate search for the truth they try to force it to conform to their viewpoint. Such people are common and they think science is like politics and can be argued into place.
It is always better to use the respected journals when trying to read about scientific debates. Scientific American and Nature are respected sources that aim to be accurate. The next trick is to check out the sources incase the do contradict the author as seems to have happened in this film.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
It's like Jon Stewart said, 'reality has a liberal bias', and it's true, or at least thusfar it has been proven true, I still don't understand how arguing using politics (like the Kyoto protocol) disproves global warming which is purely scientific.
I realized just a few days ago, these people aren't arguing the science, they're arguing the politics and are trying to apply it to the science, so since the kyoto protocol is going to cause damage to an economy global warming isn't real (youranter made an entire series of kyoto protocol posts and concluded after all the politics that global warming wasn't real, like writing about how zebra's have a striped pattern then conclude the earth is flat - just doesn't have any relevance).
Comment by Damo
I don't think this is a Liberal verses Conservative issue.
I stopped reading certian posts because of a total lack of manners and willingness to resort to sarcasm to make a point. Hence no point talking if no is listening to what you say. I don't if someone is opposed to everything I say so long as they are willing to tell me why. If my science is wrong tell why it is wrong in scientific terms. If my politics is wrong tell me why it is wrong in logical terms.
Everything else is noise.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Of course the science is a purely scientific issue, the debate for it amongst a scientific community has long since died, there is more htan ample proof us polluting the environment is making the earth behave in ways that may adversely affect us, the question is how is it?
When scientists try to debate such matters they get into tussles with nit picking right wingers, if theres a disagreement between a theory then suddenly global warming is false. Thats how politics works of course, show a flaw, back flip, or whatever else and you lose, scientifically though it's quite common, one scientist comes up with a theory to prove something, the other challenges for proof, the proof is subject to scientific analysis.
Replace scientific with politics and you have a pointless debate of well accepted facts.
Conservatives have a tendency of ignoring points or not debating proper, theres still some republicans who think they can get elected into congress with the typical 'vote for me or die by bomb' slogan, literally.
So when a democrat pops up and tries to argue health care and whatnot it gets met with 'you're going to let the terrorists win'.
Comment by Francis
Passionate Apathy
Good thing my parents insisted that we all learn how to swim before we got into kindergarten.
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks