Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

the great global warming swindler - MUST SEE TV

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
greenman3610 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:54 AM
Original message
the great global warming swindler - MUST SEE TV




http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/010659.php

Earlier this year a British TV channel broadcast a fraudulent "documentary" called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" - by Martin Durkin - which propagated the notion that man-made global warming is a lie and a scam. Numerous scientists have written about how this documentary blatantly misrepresented the scientific data. The latest development on this swindle by Durkin is an interview that Tony Jones of the Australian TV channel ABC conducted with Durkin. This is must-see TV. Here are the two sections that were posted by DeSmogBlog. Make sure you see both and you'll get a very good picture of the charlatans that constitute the core of the global warming denial movement and their modus operandi. Also makes you wish you had real TV journalists in the U.S. who would give the global warming denial movement the treatment it deserves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TechBear_Seattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. Was this broadcast on a BBC channel or on a Rupert Murdoch channel?
I very strongly suspect the latter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Neither - it was on Channel 4
Which is run by a non-shareholder corporation - if it makes a profit (it's funded by advertising), it has to plough the money back into programme making, or film making (look at a lot of British films over the past 20 years or so, and you'll see 'Film Four' or similar in the list of financing companies).

Channel 4's charter tells it to be 'alternative', and it sometimes puts out deliberately controversial things like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Cleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. I actually watched that video for amusement...
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:08 AM by The Cleaner
their main contention was that "there is no evidence CO2 in the atmosphere is related to climate change." :eyes:

Another stupid thesis is that the warm period in the 1500s or so actually fomented a complex culture in the arts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krautrocketK12S Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
3. global warming
You conflate the issue of pollution with man-made global warming. They are separate issues. No one denies that we have caused pollution. However, it is highly questionable that we have caused global warming. Global warming preceded CO2 increases by 800 years. The increased CO2 is coming out of sea water, and even so, it is an insignificant contributor to "greenhouse gasses", especially compared to the contribution made by water vapor. Furthermore, there is NO evidence that rises in CO2 levels would actually be harmful.
No one denies that temperatures are above "normal" in many locations. Cities, airports, and parking lots are heat islands, and are constantly growing. CO2 levels are not a factor in this. It is a FACT that solar energy emission levels are not constant. It is also a fact that temperatures are rising on other planets and moons in our solar system. Only an idiot could claim that this is because of burning fossil fuels on earth. The global warming hysteria serves only to destroy the middle class and enrich the "feudal lords".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Just drop another ice cube in the Koolaid and all is well, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Cleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. It is obvious you are getting your info from the wrong sources.
You are simply parroting ALL the anti-global warming nonsensical arguments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. bear in mind, he wants Ron Paul for President. That should hint at where he gets his "info". nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim__ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Global Warming was predicted based on the increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:20 AM by Jim__
Global Warming is now happening, largely following the predicted patterns.

In 1988, James Hansen testified before Congress that Global Warming was not a future phenomenon, but was actually occurring. The same people who are now making the claims that you are citing, at that time, denied that Global Warming was taking place. Those people can no longer deny it's taking place, so now they deny it is man-made.

Of course there have been instances of Global Warming in the past that have not been caused by increases in atmospheric CO2. That, however is not an argument against atmospheric CO2 being a potential cause for globle warming. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. What do you think is the effect of increasing the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere? Why would we suppose that predicted changes that occur are not occurring due the reasons coted in the predictions?

Sorry, but Global Warming skeptics have been proven incorrect over and over again over the last 20 years. They've lost all credibility on the topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Cleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. A second reading of your post warrants another response:
So...you think global warming is caused by:

Ocean evaporation (explain then the sudden rise in temps the last decade and a half.)
Other planets are getting hotter suddenly (proof?)
Cement heat islands in cities (as if it's not getting warmer in the countryside?)
Solar energy is fluctuating (and has caused our earth to warm?)

And then this gem: only an idiot could believe in global warming? Insulting board members with your first post, BAD FORM DUDE. And as far as destroying the middle class, you have only your worshipped leader to thank for that, yes, Bush.

Good day to you, and enjoy your short stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Commonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Yawn...
You lost me at "only an idiot."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoonerPride Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. "it is highly questionable that we have caused global warming"
No, it is not.

An overwhelming majority of climate scientists from every country on the planet have each, independently, come to the conclusion that anthropomorphic global warming is real and increasing. WE ARE THE CAUSE. Plain and simple.

You are wrong.

Welcome to DU, though I suspect you are a freeper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. And no one is arguing that there weren't periods of global
warming before humans. What we're saying - and what ALL legitimate scientists agree with - is that human-generated CO2 emissions are making it WORSE.

Did you even SEE the movie, "An Inconvenient Truth?" Or are you just mimicking right-wing talking points? In the movie, Gore explains that, yes, there were always periods of global warming, but not to this extent.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. bu$hco="feudal lords". Who's the idiot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unpossibles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
14. pretty much every argument you make has been debunked several times
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:33 AM by unpossibles
do some research.

The planet thing? Not true, and not studied on a large enough scale. For instance, on Mars, the temperature was claimed to have risen over the past 2-3 Earth years as cited by the deniers. That is about one Martian year, and also fails to account for the normal swings in Martian temperature caused by dust storms. Completely different conditions.

As to the sea water argument, even though it's true that there are natural causes of CO2 release into the atmosphere, we are not helping matters as we reduce the amount of trees and other green growth that will absorb the CO2.

And there have been many studies, and even some very recent ones, which have debunked the solar activity one as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6290228.stm

<snip>
'No Sun link' to climate change

A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change. It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

...
"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that," he told the BBC News website.

"You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," he said.
(more at link)




This should settle the debate, except it's not really a debate so much as a tantrum.

I don't honestly expect you to stick around long enough to do anything but try to disrupt, but if you are honest, read some more and varied information on what you are posting. And back to your initial point, let's suppose that man-made GCC is wrong - why spend so much energy fighting attempts to create a less-polluting industry and lifestyle? Where's the harm?

Here's a Pascal's Wager sort of thing applied to GCC that I found interesting.
http://www.break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html

I won't hold my breath that you will actually try to educate yourself on the issue however, so... enjoy your stay! :D


(edited for Monday mistakes)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #3
15.  Pathetic. Would Polly the GOP parrot like some facts instead of bullshit?
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 10:46 AM by hatrack
1. "The increased C2 is coming out of sea water . . . " Uh, no. It's being absorbed by sea water, hence the drop in pH for the Pacific Ocean - that's the entire Pacific Ocean - of 0.026 in the space of a little more than a decade. IOW, an increase of about 25% in acidity in a geological eyeblink.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006AGUFMOS21C1598B

2. "Furthermore, there is NO evidence that rises in CO2 levels would actually be harmful."

Ever hear of the Permian Extinction? You know, the one that wiped out about 90% of life then on Earth? I didn't really think so, but here, let me assist you:

"To solve the puzzle of how those conditions may have affected climate and life around the globe, the researchers turned to the Community Climate System Model (CCSM). One of the world's premier climate research tools, the model can integrate changes in atmospheric temperatures with ocean temperatures and currents. Research teams had previously studied the Permian extinction with more limited computer models that focused on a single component of Earth's climate system, such as the ocean.

The CCSM indicated that ocean waters warmed significantly at higher latitudes because of rising atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas. The warming reached a depth of about 10,000 feet (4,000 meters), interfering with the normal circulation process in which colder surface water descends, taking oxygen and nutrients deep into the ocean.

As a result, ocean waters became stratified with little oxygen, a condition that proved deadly to marine life. This in turn accelerated the warming, since marine organisms were no longer removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

"The implication of our study is that elevated CO2 is sufficient to lead to inhospitable conditions for marine life and excessively high temperatures over land would contribute to the demise of terrestrial life," the authors concluded in the article."

EDIT

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/higher_temperat...


3. "Only an idiot could claim that this is because of burning fossil fuels on earth (sic)."

Here's a little primer from the American Institute of Physics. Or are they not politically reliable enough to suit you?

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

Of course, these links and articles will only help if you, in fact, can read. If your skills are limited to horching up the little Rushie Bushie talking points like so many rhetorical hairballs, I'm afraid I can't help you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Thank you, hatrack. As for your comments troll:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
17. Well, your avatar is appropriate....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
12. I watched this very docucrap just a couple of days ago as
they crapped their shit about CO2 not being a cause of global warming and that GW is caused be natural cycles of the Sun, which is actually in a cooling phase right now.

No matter what they say, the fact is that humans are pumping all kinds of crap, especially CO2, and that is the cause of the increase in mean average global temperature. Don't believe it, just look at a green house. Same thing. Think the ice on Greenland can survive in a green house?

That little piece of propoganda was paid for and approved by Big Oil, et al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 19th 2014, 03:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC