[flash]

i had a day to sit and relax, albeit in the sweltering heat again - it gave me a chance to do something i had wanted to do for about a year



i finally got a chance to see "Inconvenient Truth" - the data they referenced was amazing - the footage is just as stunning - the conclusions are obvious



i've always known about global warming (lol - well, as long as i've known that WWF was fake - i think i was 8) i've seen the effects, known the causes, and been aware of some things to reduce it - never though had it been distilled into such a powerful version that is undeniable



if you are one of those people with your head in the sand who says "it's always been like that" or " this has happened before" or "it's just a big hoax" you need to see this film - beware though, you're probably going to feel pretty stupid afterward



lol - although i like the idea of new york city being underwater within my lifetime - just think of it - a new venice - can you imagine the cab drivers in gondolas?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[xrad]

Santa better have a pontoon boat. Late this summer, the north polar ice cap is supposed to break up.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

can't be good news for areas subject to hurricanes

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[saxman]

This bothers me



http://newsbusters.org/node/20680?q=blogs/...onvenient-truth





doesn't mean the message isn't correct... that's another debate... but it's certainly a bit disturbing that fake images were used in a documentary and passed off as real.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rhudeboye]

perhaps I need to check this out. My head however is not in the sand. This is but one of many areas were we screwed up this earth.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

the link didn't work - i'll try again later - i don't know what images were "faked"



in concept though, i don't have any issue with "fake" images - they are frequently created to illustrate a point - it's the same as CGI and animation - we buy into that regularly - i am not a CGI fan, i but i get the reasoning behind it



the data is the key - that you can't fake - the film is a distillation and presentation of the data for the layman - i've seen volumes of the data - it's for real - we're in trouble

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

I have no particular issue with the notion of global warming, but we all know that statistics can be used to "prove" just about any argument.



Are we experiencing global warming?



Does man cause this?



How do we know that the temperature we have now is the "right" temperature?



Is the Earth capable of righting itself (i.e. one massive volcanic explosion and we'll be discussing global cooling and the coming Ice Age)?



What are the costs/benefits of trying to "undo" human impact on the global condition? Can we afford to effect this change or do we wait for pandemic or disaster to do this for us? One of the best ways to eliminate Global warming would be to eliminate enough of the human population to maintain sustainability (Maybe Jonathan Swift was right).



Over 99% of all creatures that have ever existed are extinct, we should face the fact that Intelligent Monkeys are no exception, and that cockroaches will probably find the Earth to their liking when they take over.



Don't think for a moment that I am a naysayer, or that I haven't given this issue due consideration. I work for one of the country’s largest Architecture and Engineering firms and we are leaders in LEED certification (United States Green Building Council Certification). We spend incredible amounts of our design time making buildings efficient and sustainable. In 10 years, LEED design won’t be a special consideration; it will be a normal part of the design process.



Just because I question the data doesn't mean that I believe that we should use the earth as a toilet. Every good design should take into account the intelligent use of energy and sustainability. We could make this a better planet by taking advantage of renewable and sustainable resources, and we should act locally while thinking globally. With the exception of my 968 (this is still a 968 site isn’t it?) I try to be a steward for the environment.. I drive carefully and keep my car in good tune. I turn off lights and turn down the Heat and A/C, I recycle.



Just don't believe everything that the "Greens" are trying to foist upon us. As I said in my opening remark, statistics can be used to prove just about anything (how about 50% Power gains in a 968?).



Regards,



Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

take a look at the timelines and CO2 changes over the last 650,000 years - then look at the last 50 - pretty obvious correlation - yes, we are the cause - no question - it has never happened before anywhere near this degree - not even close



that's why i said everyone should see this film



for whatever reasons, we are a nation that refuses to accept reality - call it politics, greed, or laziness, we refuse to give up on our old habits, and adopt new policy - we are one of only two advanced countries in the world who have not done so - everyone else has, and has adopted corrective standards in an effort to make things right again - we can fix it, but we must give up fossil fuels - we are responsible for 1/3 of the industrial CO2 generation on the planet, yet a minute portion of the population - it's irresponsible and shortsighted - we need to correct ourselves - but the only way we are ever going to make real change is to make it law



ok - after i finish running my errands in my big SUV, i'm going out to work on my toy (which reminds me i need to fill up on 100 octane again) - i have to get it all done early though, so i can go back inside to the air-conditioned house

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[968Syncro]

Three root causes:



1. We the people were in denial, since most people knew these issues were looming.



2. Global overpopulation. Our leaders continue to ignore this subject, but we will see radical changes in our lifetime to address this incredibly serious problem



3. Corporate thinking adopted in governance. The short term thinking of quarterly profits for corporations were transformed into the political goals of "get elected" vs. "serve the people and improve the community".



Roland

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

I find it interesting how those that may have a different opinion are immediately discounted "if you are one of those people with your head in the sand". As if to say this is a highly creditable movie with rock-solid evidence to back-up their claims. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

Soon after the movie came out scientist and professionals in climatology that listed inaccuracies in Gore's claims. When asked to debate these inaccuracies Gore refused. Why do you suppose that is..? Why don't we put all the facts on the table and let proven science and historical data define the truth rather than some has-been celebrity[?].



re: CO2; What Gore fails to address is the historical levels of CO2. The concentration runs in a cyclical pattern. Now whether we have altered the natural pattern is debatable.



What I've heard and read is that if it came out that global warming is not as critical as originally thought many would be out of work. Yes, there's a very real economic side to GW.

This movie is a good example of the power of the media. Ironically the media has done a good job of squelching those that have an opposing view. Hmm, why do you suppose that is..?



This is another controversial topic were it's important that the reader does some homework and seeks out un-bias sources of information. Many of the news sources in the US are slanted and highly influenced by corporate backers. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/dry.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

From what I've read, yes there is a warming trend in some areas, [typically cool], however there are other areas that are typically warm that are cooling, [more annual rainfall]. This is natures way of balance. How extreme the weather gets is yet to be seen... <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/blink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[968rz]

Not to start any fires here but it is interesting S Cal that you mention the "facts" like that. I was reading on one of the science sites that while on Earth they have stated the temp rise (something like 2 or 3 deg in 10 years or so) is a direct affect of GW, at the same time they have monitored the temps on Mars and other planets and what did they see? the same temp rise. hmmm?



I'm just saying.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[josephsc]

My wife and I finally saw it two weeks ago and were thinking we must have been the last people to see the movie -- glad to hear we weren't the last. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/biggrin.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />



Regardless of the cause (man-made or natural) global warming would add to the all the extreme weather of biblical proportions we've been experiencing of late. I'd rather error on the side of being able to do something about it, rather than not addressing the problem at all.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Anchorman]

I don't think we know - or that we'll ever know - if man is the cause of what we've come to call global warming or not. However, there is so much business, political, environmental, economic, and social momentum in pursuit of reversing the wrath of our ignorance that the truth has stopped mattering. Being in the solar energy business, I also no longer debate the issue - rather, I accept it and determine how to do the best I can without selling any snake oil.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

lol - this is fun - it's also why i started the thread



of course i discounted them - that was sort of the point



as i said, i hear the argument all the time about "cycles" - this is the "cover your eyes" defense - while there are cycles, the extent of those cycles has NEVER been to the level it is now - there have never been this many people generating this much CO2 - there has NEVER been anywhere near this much CO2 in 650,000 years (why do i have to keep repeating myself?) - it is a direct correlation to the population - this is a no brainer



by the way, gore (who is merely the chosen spokesperson for this cause) did take into account the CO2 history - it was specifically cited



yes there is more rainfall - that's because of the increase of water in the atmosphere due to the caps melting - more melting means more warm rain, which in turn means more more melting - this is bad - this is not "the planet correcting itself" - this is exactly the problem



this reminds me of the non-believers about the ozone layer too - that one was finally put to rest - we caused it - we discovered it - we took steps to fix - at least now it is on the mend, though it will take many years to get there



it also reminds me of the tobacco companies who kept saying they weren't to blame for the problems they caused - the public believed it for a very long time - they continue to smoke, even though they know it will quite possibly kill them



there is no logic to this pattern of behavior, yet it persists - we want what we want, regardless of the consequences, and people telling us it is bad for us will not deter that drive



the evidence of human caused global warming is in fact rock solid - the problem is that there are people with obvious agendas that don't want you to hear it, and definitely don't want you to believe it - the pollyanaas would rather let you hide in the dark and be told fairy tales - that keeps them in business - more and more of it comes out though - it's pretty hard to ignore - the problem is how it is distributed - news and media is not the best dissemination of that information - it gets filtered and edited, based on what you are allowed to learn - nowadays you can pretty much turn the tv to predictable filtered versions - you want a left wing version, go here - you want a right wing, go there - that's not news - that's tv - we spend more time nowadays focused on idle newsroom banter and puff pieces on the newcasters than on the news itself - it makes better tv - if they really wanted to broadcast the news, and remove the impression of bias, then they should start by deleting the commercials - but i digress.......



the bottom line is that people that think that the global warming we are experiencing now is "natural" or "normal" are in for a very big shock in a very short time - at the current rate, it will be well within in our lifetime



people can try to poke holes in the data and conclusions, and hide behind plausible smokescreen conjecture, but the evidence keeps building - in my lifetime i have seen the climate changes - they are there - they are undeniable - sometimes 2 plus 2 is just 4



eventually, i'm confident that everyone will come to agree that it is real - i'm pretty sure it will only take a few more years of huge hurricanes, record heat, ice shelves falling, and the ocean currents changing, before everyone wakes up and realizes there is something to all of this



the question is, what are we going to do about it? will it be too little too late?



if you aren't a part of the solution, you're a part of the problem - write to congress - get real studies done - make it a focus - get the truth - demand it - take it out of the hands of big business

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[saxman]

[quote name='flash' post='55856' date='Jul 6 2008, 07:01 AM']the link didn't work - i'll try again later - i don't know what images were "faked"



in concept though, i don't have any issue with "fake" images - they are frequently created to illustrate a point - it's the same as CGI and animation - we buy into that regularly - i am not a CGI fan, i but i get the reasoning behind it



the data is the key - that you can't fake - the film is a distillation and presentation of the data for the layman - i've seen volumes of the data - it's for real - we're in trouble[/quote]





long story short, many of the video clips in the movie were directly taken from hollywood films like "the day after tomorrow", without citing accordingly. There's no mention that this dramatic footage being shown is entirely cgi and was done for a movie meant only to be entertaining. That doesn't discount the message, but to me it leads me to question the validity of some of the statements made. You discredit yourself in some aspects of your argument and everything else becomes suspect.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

just to be clear, i have no party affiliation - i have views that come from both sides of the political fence



but what you say above is the problem i see with the way the public "thinks" - the public has become so jaded, and the process has become so black and white in what people choose to believe or not believe, that they tend far too easily to discount everything somebody says, just because of an error or a single part, especially if it means they think they can go back to their lives uninterrupted - it's convenient, and we like convenient



by the way, i finally got a chance to see the link - more hole poking - more "see that, he used a clip from a movie to illustrate a point - so all the scientific data is false" - this kind of thinking is nothing but trouble - it's also the foot in the mouth kind of thing that infuriates me about democrats - one of those knotheads is always putting his foot in his mouth, or gets caught doing something stupid, so all the good work they have done or are doing is lost - as the "more educated and enlightened party" that they portray themselves to be, you would think they would know better



we see this in the "news" all the time too - there is a very nice business in selling stock footage to the news stations - they also use their own stock footage time and again - how many times did we see the same oj simpson or michael jackson footage, regardless of the day's story, location, or details? - we also see reporters standing in front of something, just to lend context to a story - it may have nothing directly connected to the story - that's television - the public doesn't want news - it wants entertainment



instead of focusing on the entertainment aspect of the film, the cute cartoons, the pretty footage, and the quaint little promotional clips of al's youth, i chose to focus on the data presented - i have actually seen some of it, presented by the scientists at hearings i attended, and it's pretty alarming stuff, but very difficult for most people to comprehend - this was the first time that i ever saw any of it distilled into a format that the average american could understand



always question the source, especially in today's mudslinging political arena - a liberal spokesman is going to present it one way - a conservative will always try to poke holes in it - and visa versa - the data is all that matters - not the spin somebody with a clear agenda puts on it



by the way, gore's team did respond:



http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checke...team_gor_1.html

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

Perhaps we should post more controversial topics to spice up the forums, perhaps illegal immigration or national healthcare next. Yep, not surprized by the responses.. Sure both camps can discount each other, but what does it accomplish[?].



If mans influence on CO2 levels is that obvious, why wasn't a bump up in CO2 seen early on at the start of the industrial revolution? We were also told [by so-called scientist/experts] the earth was cooling in the 60's and 70's, [a transition into a another ice age], we're still waiting for that to happen. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/wink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />



I think what we can agree on is there are 2 mindsets on this topic. Since I'm on the fence all I'd like to see is both camps sit down at the same table in a public forum and hash out the details. For some reason I doubt this will ever happen. Just for a moment imagine if GW theory was found to be flawed; many universities could potentially lose their funding and many professionals and scientist would be out of work. GW is good for the economy. Are we in a hurry to contest this establishment - probably not.



Here's a few links to ponder:

GW Links



I found "the 10 questions Al G. won't answer interesting...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

Here's another thought provoking report:

GW Myth?



This report details how temperature rise precedes CO2 rise by several hundred years.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

comparing the impact of the industrial revolution to what is going on now is like comparing a firecracker to a nuclear bomb



this is fun though - i love to see people thinking



try this one on for size:



http://mindprod.com/environment/kyoto.html

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[saxman]

[quote name='flash' post='55881' date='Jul 6 2008, 04:23 PM']just to be clear, i have no party affiliation - i have views that come from both sides of the political fence



but what you say above is the problem i see with the way the public "thinks" - the public has become so jaded, and the process has become so black and white in what people choose to believe or not believe, that they tend far too easily to discount everything somebody says, just because of an error or a single part, especially if it means they think they can go back to their lives uninterrupted - it's convenient, and we like convenient



by the way, i finally got a chance to see the link - more hole poking - more "see that, he used a clip from a movie to illustrate a point - so all the scientific data is false" - this kind of thinking is nothing but trouble - it's also the foot in the mouth kind of thing that infuriates me about democrats - one of those knotheads is always putting his foot in his mouth, or gets caught doing something stupid, so all the good work they have done or are doing is lost - as the "more educated and enlightened party" that they portray themselves to be, you would think they would know better



we see this in the "news" all the time too - there is a very nice business in selling stock footage to the news stations - they also use their own stock footage time and again - how many times did we see the same oj simpson or michael jackson footage, regardless of the day's story, location, or details? - we also see reporters standing in front of something, just to lend context to a story - it may have nothing directly connected to the story - that's television - the public doesn't want news - it wants entertainment



instead of focusing on the entertainment aspect of the film, the cute cartoons, the pretty footage, and the quaint little promotional clips of al's youth, i chose to focus on the data presented - i have actually seen some of it, presented by the scientists at hearings i attended, and it's pretty alarming stuff, but very difficult for most people to comprehend - this was the first time that i ever saw any of it distilled into a format that the average american could understand



always question the source, especially in today's mudslinging political arena - a liberal spokesman is going to present it one way - a conservative will always try to poke holes in it - and visa versa - the data is all that matters - not the spin somebody with a clear agenda puts on it



by the way, gore's team did respond:



http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checke...team_gor_1.html[/quote]



I understand what you're saying, and it may be the case that the statements made in the film are 100% factual. To me, however, I have trouble trusting a source that uses what I would consider less than honest methods to get their point across. It'd be one thing if they said "hey look, this is what could happen if we stay on this course" and another for them to show footage saying "this is what's happening right now", when the footage is taken from a piece of hollywood fiction. When you bring fictional events into a piece pushing a position, without acknowledging that it's fictional, you're walking a very thin line. Next thing you know, you have Al Gore saying "this is what we're doing about the problem RIGHT NOW" and start rolling clips of Wall-E.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.