Republican 'Tricks' about Global Warming

[smash]

I'm not trying to make this about Republican against Democrats, but if you have seen "An Inconvenient Truth" Gore does bring up that critics of "Global Warming" have a standard bag of arsenal against it...

And here's some proof of this. This is the third time in a month that I've seen an article like thismake headlines at Drudgereport.com.

The problem is, if you try to google this 'renown' Scientist, the only articles you can find are this same article or other sources 'quoting' it. They did this with two other doctors, one of them Israeli. All are 'foreigners' making it hard to prove/disprove.

I swear, I'm POSITIVE this is bullshit viral marketing.

[Bligityblah]

There are actually only about 30 true climatologists on the entire planet and not a single one of them says global warming actually exists. Thats not to say it doesn't but there simply isn't sufficient data to support ANY conclusion do to the young age of true global climate study. To support their claims the environmental lobby use scientists but they use archaeologists, geologists, and meteorologists whose field of study has nothing to do with true longterm climate study. It's a little like commissioning Enrio Fermi to build an airplane.


Post hoc, ergo procter hoc my ass

[eamon angelface]

I wouldn't buy into anything that has to rely on using standard audience manipulation techniques in order to "convey" their message. The Inconvenient Truth was one big long infomercial. All it was missing was "act now and we'll cure AIDS at no extra cost to you!".

Plus global warming discounts cyclical climate change. These amazing "global warming" affected areas that look so different than they did 20 years ago looked like that do now 30 years before that.

The whole thing rings of a sales pitch to me.

My dad was telling me about this last time I visited and it disheartened me to hear him regurgitate the mass jargon everyone has been force fed lately. He even told me "top scientists from around the world are convening in Europe to come up with a solution". I asked him if Professor Brainiac would be attending. Maybe Dr Science of the University of Complex Scienceness has the answers?

I'm thinking this is just another arena to filter tax dollars into for the usual *awareness and research.

*Politicians beach house

[smash]

I wouldn't buy into anything that has to rely on using standard audience manipulation techniques in order to "convey" their message. The Inconvenient Truth was one big long infomercial. All it was missing was "act now and we'll cure AIDS at no extra cost to you!".

Plus global warming discounts cyclical climate change. These amazing "global warming" affected areas that look so different than they did 20 years ago looked like that do now 30 years before that.*Politicians beach house[/color]

I can only assume you didn't watch "An Inconvenient Truth" because the 'cyclical climate change' is specifically addressed in the mockumentary.

It also addresses Bligs comment about 'not any real climatologists supporting it.

Now, my original intention in this thread wasn't to debate global warming. None of us know a fucking thing about it one way or the other to speak educated. We are a product of which ever camp brainwashed us first/best. Fact.

My point was this purported 'news' article ripe with quotes from 'respected' scientist ... who is unfindable on the interwebs.

[eamon angelface]

I said the theory discounts it not the movie excluded it.

Per the phantom expert...you can use statistics to prove anything that's even remotely true, Kent. Fourteen percent of all people know that.

That just looks like another case of people taking advantage of format to deviantly feed a message to an audience who think there is some kind of journalistic code of conduct that stops people from lying in print.

[Seriously]

I liked An Inconvenient Truth.


I also liked Bowling for Columbine.

I believe both contain some factual information. I also believe both exist to primarily to persuade.

Nobody argues facts in a debate, they argue feelings and beliefs, and you pick whichever most resembles yours, regardless of the size of the laundry list of true things for the other side.


These purpose of these movies is to preach to the choir. They'll change no one's mind, but they will make bank.

Anyways, the global warming debate seems a lot like the debate on the existence of an afterlife to me. Soon enough we will all know for sure.


EDIT:

The movie wasn't bad, but I think what I like absolutely best about An Inconvenient Truth is its movie poster.


A hurrican coming out of smokestacks?

I love it.