About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 - 2:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I don't know how sound its science is, but the documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle" aired by Channel 4 in the UK (same channel that aired "The God Delusion" documentaries) delivers a resounding refutation of the science behind the media-driven global warming scare.

Follow the link to view (1 hr 16 min):

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4340135300469846467

All the best,

Tyson

(Edited by Tyson Russell on 4/11, 2:35pm)


Post 1

Friday, April 13, 2007 - 1:24pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
For those who haven't seen this movie, I can't recommend it highly enough. It quite simply explodes the myth that global warming is man made and that it is the next apocalypse.

The URL that Tyson provided is now defunct (I hope that it hasn't been sabotaged), but here is another link that still works:

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170

This movie needs the widest possible circulation.

- Bill

P.S. Thank you, Tyson for alerting us to this superb documentary.
(Edited by William Dwyer
on 4/13, 1:28pm)


Post 2

Friday, April 13, 2007 - 2:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I second Tyson's and Bill's recommendation. This is a great film. Apparently the owners have been asserting copyright infringement and demanding that the video be removed from these video web sites. It looks like there might be an underground campaign to keep putting it up, although the speculation that it is being sabotaged is also a possibility. If the link Bill gives stops working, try searching for "The Great Global Warming Swindle" and see if you can locate a copy.
(Edited by C. Jeffery Small
on 4/13, 2:33pm)


Post 3

Friday, April 13, 2007 - 6:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I was so impressed with that movie that I sent the link out to friends and family.  It is certainly worth the time.  Make sure you are on a computer with a broadband connection and speakers and that you have an hour and 16 minutes.  Then start it up and if you don't agree, just stop it.

Post 4

Friday, April 13, 2007 - 8:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have a couple of Unitarian, liberal friends in Ottawa with whom I exchange Xmas greetings every year. I usually evade philosophical and political issues but this time they asked me flat out what I thought of Gore and "The Inconvenient Truth." I replied that I had no respect whatsoever for him and that he was engendering hysteria and that he was a political opportunist. This of course upset them but a short while later they told me that they had met a scientist at a cocktail party at a friend's chalet in the Laurentians. This turned out to be Dr. Ian Clark, the scientist at the University of Ottawa who did the ice core analysis to show that an increase in CO2 historically follows global warming.

They have now moderated their opinions after meeting Dr. Clark and seeing the movie but they still have that residual "we must do something about it" feeling rather than having outrage of being manipulated.

The movie is very authoritative.

Sam


Post 5

Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 6:27amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
One of the commentators on the posted article said:

"Posted By: Michael Kingston (4/10/2007 at 3:46:08 AM)
Comment: Um, facts ARE determined by consensus. We agree that water is colorless. It's not enough for one person to say it. Competent observers must agree. This is consensus. Yes, there is some circular logic within, but people have to start somewhere. It's not philosophy where you argue about whether the blue I see is the same as the blue you see. You just agree that it's blue and you move on. Consensus is also built into the peer review process, only now the consensus is built around whether methodology and logic are sound, as opposed to physical observations."

Sounds like the reductio ad absurdum of Popperism.


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 6

Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 12:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
One of my professors, an excellent mathematician and a free-market economist, also holds this view -- that consensus determines truth. "Some circular logic within" -- ya think?! The illogic of this view is staggering. How do you determine what is true? What others think is true. How do they determine what is true? What others think is true. etc. How this process ever gets started, or how people's view of truth ever changes is never addressed. If truth is the correspondence of an idea to reality -- which it is -- then it must be determined by observing REALITY! Hello!

- Bill

Post 7

Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 1:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Hence their appeal to the dictionary as the ultimate arbiter of meaning.

Post 8

Sunday, April 15, 2007 - 6:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This is what is meant, literally, by "social metaphysics."

Post 9

Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 8:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It's like taking the pragmatist C.S. Pierce's quote about truth being that which we'd eventually agree on -- and then running with it as a floating abstraction. If no one man can know the truth -- because it's identification required an agreement among "men" -- then how can a mob of men know it?

Ed


Post 10

Friday, April 20, 2007 - 4:09pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The movie on global warming continues to be made "unavailable." The revised URL that I posted no longer works. But I found a new one that does. Viz.,

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170

And if this doesn't work, google "The Great Global Warming Swindle," and you should be able to find a link.

- Bill

Post 11

Friday, April 20, 2007 - 4:26pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The following article is being used by defenders of man-made global warming to challenge the argument in the British documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle, that CO2 is the effect, not the cause of global warming.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

I'd say it's a pretty weak rebuttal. What's significant is that the fact that global warming initially causes an increase in CO2 (rather than the reverse) is never mentioned by defenders of GW orthodoxy, but remains buried in the climatology literature. Nor do the defenders of man-made GW deny that human beings contribute only a small amount of the total CO2, yet they continue to stress that the human contribution somehow significantly affects GW. Their main objection to the point made in the British documentary is that although it is the warming that initially causes the increase in CO2 (rather than the reverse, as we’ve all been led to believe), the CO2 then acts to increase the warming by trapping the heat that was initially generated from other sources like solar activity. What becomes obvious from all of this is that, at the very least, man-made global warming is far from a settled issue, but that’s scarcely the impression one gets from environmental populists like algore and his media lackeys.

If you have yet to view the movie itself — which is 1 hour and 15 minutes -- here is an updated link. It’s well worth watching, if you can find the time.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170

If this doesn’t work, you can always google “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and you should be able to find a link that does. Of course, as I indicated above, the movie is already being attacked by the defenders of orthodoxy, but that shouldn’t discourage you from seeing it.

Bill


Post 12

Monday, April 23, 2007 - 3:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
John Stossel will be discussing the Global Warming hoax on "Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity" on a special edition of "20/20" Friday, May 4th at 10 p.m. EDT

See the following for more info:

http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/news.php?extend.6

I would vote John Stossel for president if he would just friggen run! But he does an excellent job of refuting myths in a way that even the general public can understand.



Post 13

Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 7:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Film on Global Warming Is Challenged
Scientists Demand Changes to Global Warming Skeptic's Film LONDON (AP) -- A group of British climate scientists is demanding changes to a skeptical documentary about global warming, saying there are grave errors in the program billed as a response to Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth."


http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070425/global_warming_film.html?.v=1

This still doesn't address the skeptics' basic refutation of human-caused global warming. Gore's group just can't get evidence together to disprove that higher CO2 concentrations follow global warming. Until they can get over that hurdle I don't see how anyone can believe them.

Sam

(Edited by Sam Erica on 4/25, 9:10pm)


Post 14

Thursday, April 26, 2007 - 11:17amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Global warming debate 'irrational': scientists
Stephanie Stein  /  Standard-Freeholder
Local News - Thursday, April 26, 2007 @ 10:00

The current debate about global warming is "completely irrational," and people need to start taking a different approach, say two Ottawa scientists.

http://www.standard-freeholder.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=502332&catname=Local%20News&classif=


Post 15

Friday, April 27, 2007 - 5:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The only swindle is the "documentary" itself.

Post 16

Friday, April 27, 2007 - 7:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andrew Bowman wrote:

> The only swindle is the "documentary" itself.

Thanks Andrew. I'm convinced!
--
Jeff

Post 17

Friday, April 27, 2007 - 9:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeffrey -

No you aren't. You never will be, simply because you're too lazy to look at the absolute junk that went in to that documentary, simply because accepting global warming as caused by human activity would be too damn inconvienient for you. I advise you to take a look at the horrendous methodology that went in to it, the out-of-date information, the lying by omission and the kind of logical leaps made that reminds me of "Creation science".

Andy.


Post 18

Friday, April 27, 2007 - 9:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Andrew:

Ubi dubium ibi libertas.

That's the standpoint from which I view all scientific debates. Whether, The Inconvenient Truth view is correct or The Great Global Warming Swindle view is correct, or neither, I don't really care.

The point of GGWS is less so to show the TRUTH and more so to show that there is an alternate hypothesis.

Science should never be politicizied. And from my standpoint of doubt, all I want to know is the truth of nature.

All the best,

Tyson


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 19

Friday, April 27, 2007 - 9:38amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Tyson wrote; "The point of GGWS is less so to show the TRUTH and more so to show that there is an alternate hypothesis."

And if it was claiming to do such a thing, I'd be more than happy to accept it as a legitimate piece of scientific research, and I'd be willing to try and debunk it, but that's not what it does. It portrays warming due to emissions as a man-made phenomenon as some kind of myth, designed simply to deceive the public, says that there seems to be some kind of great divide between scientists over the issue, and that human emissions are not contributing towards warming, or that temperature increases caused CO2 increases, all of which are either lies, or half-truths, designed to deceive the public.

Any merits it has from being an intelligent piece of research are immediately negated by it's intellectual treachery. That is what I oppose, not the idea that scepticism of these sorts of theories are worthwhile, which they are.

Regards

Andy.


Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.