A very interesting documentary shown in the UK recently, with the above title. It gives a different side to the status quo opinion in the press and western governments saying that the heating that we are experiencing is due to natural phenomena rather than man made.
i.e. CO2 is not the prime cause.
A lot of credible interviews in this and certainly has got me thinking/ looking for more info. I had heard the view before but this gives a nice lot of information to start with.
I think the coastlines of Sri Lanka and Indonesia would disagree.
I think the hundreds of sensitive species like frogs that have become extinct would disagree.
I think corporations would agree.
I think our war hungry world leaders would agree.
I think our vast subordinate middle class would breathe a quiet sigh of relief from not facing their planetary responsibility collectively, and nod and agree.
I don`t know if you watched the documentary Foo but it is not saying anything about global polluting that is a very real issue. The point is that this whole environmental issue it seems needs better definition.
i.e. dumping pollutants in the oceans and highly toxic wastes in landfill and rivers is not anything to do with global warming yet important. Again destruction of habitats of animals is a separate but very real issue also.
The scientists in this documentary do not claim that Global Warming is not occurring but you will see that this warming and cooling has occurred over millenia on the earth.
There was also an ice-age cooling scare in the 70`s amazingly!
I found it interesting to to see that in medievil times the average temperatures were actually higher than they are now.
There are correlations with sun activity that fit better than the CO2 corelation in recent times.
Also relating when over long periods CO2 is looked at closer it seems the CO2 follows the temperature by up to 800 years and not the other way around anyway…
As for the war hungry leaders and corporations (the two are very close in recent times), this issue becomes more intriguing when you consider entities such as the Rockefeller Foundation, funding environmentalist groups. Why do the very interests who you would assume would love to propagandize anti-environmentalism have their fingers in the pie of the environmental movement?
Separating to our governments now you can see the use of the environmental movement to encourage such things as a carbon tax, micromanagement of individuals lives etc. A great way for governments to keep greater control of people is to promote scarcity. Again however important to distinguish between CO2 and other issues as the CO2 tax may be completely unnecessary but other environmental considerations more reasonable.
Addressing the Indonesia issue, I would be interested to see what the evidence that:
This was due to global warming. If so were there more tsunamis in hotter times in the past and less in cooler? Am going to have a look into this now myself as it is not an area I have looked into but if you have any leads it would be appreciated. (EDIT: also applying to Katrina.)
Also is the frog issue you are talking about due to direct warming, habitat destruction, or combination?
If it is habitat destruction then yes we would undoubtedly be responsible if human destruction is shown. If due to warming the evidence does not seem to be conclusive that we are, this of course then applies to tsunami creation, if global warming is said to be the sole cause.
I am very open to further views and research on all these things.
Will have a look at this, parts of it are covered in the documentary I linked but would like to see it first hand also.
From what I can tell, this shouldn`t be a fake. It was aired by a mainstream terrestrial station in the UK, though I admit that is certainly no gaurantee of anything . It seems to be an airing of the alternative view on global warming and yes it certainly has given me food for thought also!
Short of the nukes it certainly seems debatable yet
hmm, while i was down in Florida last year. after a hurricane devastated Billions an possibly Trillions of dollars. i had a thought that maybe it wasn’t the wisest place to be!!
i kept thinking while i as down there a tidal wave was going to wash us all away. funny how the only place i really wanted to go was the bermuda triangle. so i got to talking to my friend that owned the house i was staying at in boca raton about all this. he told me something very simple an this pretty much put it into perspective for me.
When it floats however the extra volume is held above the surface in the case of icebergs etc.
i.e. the icebergs of the North Pole melting will not make any difference to sea levels as I understand it. The melting of glaciers and land based ice on the other hand may well increase sea levels significantly. There seem to be many conflicting arguments about the conditions that would cause this mass melting in the range of the global warming we are hearing about though…
@ledger. About the Ice on the north pole, thats right. Because the north pole bassically is a big chunck of ice, it wont affect sea levels by a centimeter. What the melting of the north pole will do however, (and is doing right now) is affect the warm currents in the atlantic ocean and make northern europe a very cold place to live.
Melting of the south pole will of course mean destruction of the homes and lives of immense amounts of people, as most of the ice on the south pole is on solid ground.
Thanks for confirming that sharku. With the point you make about the warm currents, I am interested at looking into more (not got time this sec but will). Did this happen in the previous times of global warming say in the medieval era or was this a contributing factor to “The Little Ice Age” that followed?
so the currents are being greatly affected & altered because of more fluid movement happening? an from this happening this will destroy the doldrums, eventually, then completely changing weather patterns everywhere?
Ledger, I agree with you totally man… I think was just trying to come at the issue more broadly and general. I certainly know all about things like El Nino or fragile biodiversities. The point I had in mind was more to do with the human condition:
The details are academic. Our presence is not in keeping with our ‘responsibility’. This is not a policy issue. Or a scientific issue. It’s a soul-biology issue. If we don’t nail that problem first we’re stuffed.
Bush has in a PM forbidden scientist to speak out about the enviroment when they travel outside USA. They are even supposed to get research permition when traveling to “arctic” countries such as Sweden.
In that video you linked to they say that thousands of jobs rely on the global warming, it may be true but considering a lot of the workers for organisations such as green peace etc are voluantered and considering that workers and the money in the oil industry, the travel industry, the food industry, the car industry etc is much much larger, the oposite is even more true…
So is that video a fraud? Could the persons in that video even have recieved money for figuring in that video? Who knows…
And suppose the climate threat is exaggerated, well then everything is okay even though we take meassures. But suppose it isnt and we don’t take meassures…
Which scenario would you rather have?
I would prefere humans to take the safe way instead of the “perhaps its not our fault way”…
Exactly. What’s so bad about efficient energy use and aiming for little (or even zero) footprint?
Ohhh, the jobs. Everybody who lives now will be dust in not even a century wether they had a job or not. I don’t mean to sound harsh, but there is a limit to the extend that the holes people fell into (or got shoved into) can hold our whole future hostage. Put differently: medicine put a lot of charlatans out of jobs, that doesn’t mean we should smash our microscopes.
More than 10,000 reputable, peer-reviewed scientists believe the evidence that shows rapid shifts in global temperature are caused by human activity. At last check 24 – that’s 24 – doubt it.
The only major scientific organization that rejects the finding of human influence on recent climate is the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.
Maybe some of us agree with 24 reputable scientists and 10,000 fat asses in front of their computer posting crap in forums, but most of us will probably opt towards the 10,000 scientists point of view.
Read an interesting book lately about the whole energy crisis, the author pointed out that the world-reservoir of oil and gas will last for about another 40 years max and that the industry of nuclear power is basically a horrible thing (and has the problem that the known reservoir of “easy to use”-uranium does also last only for some another 30 years, a fact I didn’t know before). Also he had some quotes from scientists that pointed out that obviously the biggest critics of the “cold fusion”-approach are the scientists that are working on exactly that project … Seems they all are trying to tell the people to “not count on it” but nobody listens. Especially the leader of the whole project in the european government expressed that he is very uncomfortable with the fact that some politicians somehow see this as the holy grail while everyone being involved has no idea when or even if this will ever become reality.
Point is we need to change alot of things very soon. (and he proposed the excessive use of solar energy which is avaiable everywhere in the world and can produce enough energy even in far-north/far-south regions if used on an industrial scale).
When I think about it, I really want to become atleast 70, that’s another 40 years for me to go, my daughter is nine and has atleast another 60 years to go, maybe she will have children in the future and so on, I really don’t want them to grow up in what’s likely going to beome the world of the future as it seems now.
I feel that all I can do at this moment is saving energy by putting energy-saving lightbulbs everywhere, having big switches for all electrical stuff so I can really disconnect if from the power-circuit when I don’t need it, use public transportation or my bike, teach my daughter to switch off lights when she is going from somehwere and so on and so forth.
And I won’t go into this, but if you really start looking closely on things like “the war on terror” a whole new political level of this starts coming up.
The other thing that WILL affect sea levels are the ice shelfs which are being suspended over the ocean at the moment. If those melt, and drop into the water, they will raise sea levels, even if only slightly. I was convinced that global warming was somewhat of a ruse until I watched inconvenient truth. It may be a melodramatic movie, but rightfully so. He wants people to pay attention to the issue.
… and here’s my thoughts on it: even IF we aren’t going to all suffer death by boiling planet, should we not start attacking the evil oil companies anyway? They overcharge everyone because there is a “shortage” of oil, yet, they KILL every opportunity to create alternatives. I, for one, am planning on buying a gas hybrid car instead of a regular gas guzzler. These are the kinds of changes that, Global Warming or not, need to come to save the rest of the planet
. It seems to be an airing of the alternative view on global warming and yes it certainly has given me food for thought also! 
so i got to talking to my friend that owned the house i was staying at in boca raton about all this. he told me something very simple an this pretty much put it into perspective for me.