An Inconvenient Truth

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 08:34 PM

I'm watching An Inconvenient Truth. I'm writing this as I watch the movie.

The first few minutes are a shocker; Al Gore seems to have a personality now.

At one point, Al Gore simply says The atmosphere is thin. So thin that it makes sense that humans can affect it. Then, having proven nothing, he simply moves on. No facts, no data, nothing.

He shows a graph of the CO2 levels. He draws it at a 45 degree angle while talking about temperature levels. He's trying to imply that the graph is about temperatures. This brings up an interesting question: if CO2 levels are rising so fast, where's the correlation? The average temperature has risen about 1 degree in the last hundred years. If CO2 has such a great affect on temperatures, then where is the huge spike in temperatures in the last 50 years? And don't give me that crap about the “hottest x day in the past x years”, the temperature has been rising for over 10,000 years, so the hottest days should be now. But where is the big spike in the last two or so years?

He also goes on and on about the affects of global warming. He talks about the loss of glaciers like it's a man-made problem. Never mind that they started to recede over 10,000 years ago. At this point in the file (about 16 minutes) he has yet to make a mention of the natural trend of th globes temperates. $100 says he never does; Not once in the movie.

Oh God, this stuff is good. He talks about the loss of a water source for the people living in the Himalayas and blames it on global warming. So, what's the source of this water? The melting glaciers. All righty then...

Okay, now he's showing a temperature graph that only goes back a thousand years. Even creationists go back 6 thousand years. Every time a person that endorses a man-made global warming provides a temperature graph, they only go back a thousand years or so. Why don't they go back any further? Because if they do, they'll get to the point 10,000 years ago when the last ice age ended. Which is just a tad before the CO2 emissions (and industrialization) started to rise. Which doesn't fit with their world view, so they just ignore it.

Then he talks about the “anti” crowd bringing up the cyclical nature of global temperatures. And proceeds to point to the medieval “hot spot”. Still ignoring the previous 4.5 billion years before that.

Okay, I stand corrected. He actually went back 650,000 thousand years. He even showed a seeming causality between CO2 levels and the ambient temperature. This is the best piece of science so far. The only problem is that he shows this huge C02 spike at the end, but the temperature does change. There goes any causality. He is correct though, pollution is a real problem, unlike man-made global warming. He never did make mention that the glaciers started to recede 10,000 years ago.

He just said that the 10 hottest years on record have occurred in the last 14 years. I like that “on record” qualification. It's like Penn Jillette said, “The numbers aren't bullshit, the bullshit is bullshit!” If Gore actually looked beyond “the record”, these are no where near the hottest days the Earth has ever seen. Not even in the last 10 million years.

Now he's trying to tie in Katrina's damage to global warming. Plenty of class 5 hurricanes have hit the US. The only thing that made Katrina something special was shitty planning by state and local officials. Natural global warming is real; and increased water temperature does provide strength to storms. So will we see greater storms, but no amount of anti-CO2 efforts on our part is going to stop that.

Okay, enough.

I made it about half-way though and it looks like all he's going to do is keep talking about the affects of increased global temperature. Which, for the most part, are true. But he seems to have just taken it as a given that it's all man's fault. So far, again, about half way through, he's said nothing about any sort of natural warming affect. Not a single sentence, other than to say that's the defense the “other people” use. Never mind that the same ice core science that he relies on shows that the Earth has been much hotter; and without man's intervention.

But that information would be...inconvenient...

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 08:43 PM

But I do have to give him some credit. Unlike most politicians, at least he's trying to do something constructive. Even if it is misguided.

**goandykid** · 01-20-2007, 08:44 PM

Wizards jsut won in OT, who cares.

Really though, I bet half the people that watched that movie didnt drive any less or use less styrofoam or anything.

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by goandykid

Really though, I bet half the people that watched that movie didnt drive any less or use less styrofoam or anything.

No joke. Al Gore talks about how he's been all over the globe to check out the affects of global warming and to give presentations about it. I wonder if he walked?

**goandykid** · 01-20-2007, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

No joke. Al Gore talks about how he's been all over the globe to check out the affects of global warming and to give presentations about it. I wonder if he walked?

True.

Kind of like all the supremely obese people that Supersize Me was aimed at most likely still eat fast food.

**P-funk** · 01-20-2007, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by goandykid

True.

Kind of like all the supremely obese people that Supersize Me was aimed at most likely still eat fast food.

I always wonder about that. I wonder if that movie impacted anyone's life enough to stop eating shitty food?

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by goandykid

True.

Kind of like all the supremely obese people that Supersize Me was aimed at most likely still eat fast food.

Again, I have to give credit to Gore; he was spot on about people not wanting to be inconvienced. Too bad that includes the pro-global warming theory people.

**goandykid** · 01-20-2007, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by P-funk

I always wonder about that. I wonder if that movie impacted anyone's life enough to stop eating shitty food?

I'm sure a few did, probly under 5%. People are stupid, changes wont come from some mass public opinion change, especially from a movie.

Less obesity will come from govt programs and regulations, like how DC jsut eliminated all trans fats from their rsttaurants.

Less pollution will come from EPA and other programs like that. We need to eliminate Big Oil first.

**P-funk** · 01-20-2007, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

Again, I have to give credit to Gore; he was spot on about people not wanting to be inconvienced. Too bad that includes the pro-global warming theory people.

I wonder if he drives less, or uses less styrofoam?

I wonder how much he changed his way of life and 'inconcienced' himself after making the movie.

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by P-funk

I wonder if he drives less, or uses less styrofoam?

I wonder how much he changed his way of life and 'inconcienced' himself after making the movie.

He seems pretty passionate about this cause; and he's tied it into the love of his son. So I'd like to believe that he's done something on a personal level to fight CO2 emissions.

**goandykid** · 01-20-2007, 08:59 PM

So recommended or no? At least most people say its interesting.

**BigDyl** · 01-20-2007, 09:01 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

I'm watching An Inconvenient Truth. I'm writing this as I watch the movie.

The first few minutes are a shocker; Al Gore seems to have a personality now.

At one point, Al Gore simply says The atmosphere is thin. So thin that it makes sense that humans can affect it. Then, having proven nothing, he simply moves on. No facts, no data, nothing.

He shows a graph of the CO2 levels. He draws it at a 45 degree angle while talking about temperature levels. He's trying to imply that the graph is about temperatures. This brings up an interesting question: if CO2 levels are rising so fast, where's the correlation? The average temperature has risen about 1 degree in the last hundred years. If CO2 has such a great affect on temperatures, then where is the huge spike in temperatures in the last 50 years? And don't give me that crap about the “hottest x day in the past x years”, the temperature has been rising for over 10,000 years, so the hottest days should be now. But where is the big spike in the last two or so years?

He also goes on and on about the affects of global warming. He talks about the loss of glaciers like it's a man-made problem. Never mind that they started to recede over 10,000 years ago. At this point in the file (about 16 minutes) he has yet to make a mention of the natural trend of th globes temperates. $100 says he never does; Not once in the movie.

Oh God, this stuff is good. He talks about the loss of a water source for the people living in the Himalayas and blames it on global warming. So, what's the source of this water? The melting glaciers. All righty then...

Okay, now he's showing a temperature graph that only goes back a thousand years. Even creationists go back 6 thousand years. Every time a person that endorses a man-made global warming provides a temperature graph, they only go back a thousand years or so. Why don't they go back any further? Because if they do, they'll get to the point 10,000 years ago when the last ice age ended. Which is just a tad before the CO2 emissions (and industrialization) started to rise. Which doesn't fit with their world view, so they just ignore it.

Then he talks about the “anti” crowd bringing up the cyclical nature of global temperatures. And proceeds to point to the medieval “hot spot”. Still ignoring the previous 4.5 billion years before that.

Okay, I stand corrected. He actually went back 650,000 thousand years. He even showed a seeming causality between CO2 levels and the ambient temperature. This is the best piece of science so far. The only problem is that he shows this huge C02 spike at the end, but the temperature does change. There goes any causality. He is correct though, pollution is a real problem, unlike man-made global warming. He never did make mention that the glaciers started to recede 10,000 years ago.

He just said that the 10 hottest years on record have occurred in the last 14 years. I like that “on record” qualification. It's like Penn Jillette said, “The numbers aren't bullshit, the bullshit is bullshit!” If Gore actually looked beyond “the record”, these are no where near the hottest days the Earth has ever seen. Not even in the last 10 million years.

Now he's trying to tie in Katrina's damage to global warming. Plenty of class 5 hurricanes have hit the US. The only thing that made Katrina something special was shitty planning by state and local officials. Natural global warming is real; and increased water temperature does provide strength to storms. So will we see greater storms, but no amount of anti-CO2 efforts on our part is going to stop that.

Okay, enough.

I made it about half-way though and it looks like all he's going to do is keep talking about the affects of increased global temperature. Which, for the most part, are true. But he seems to have just taken it as a given that it's all man's fault. So far, again, about half way through, he's said nothing about any sort of natural warming affect. Not a single sentence, other than to say that's the defense the “other people” use. Never mind that the same ice core science that he relies on shows that the Earth has been much hotter; and without man's intervention.

But that information would be...inconvenient...

True Story, you have single handidly disproved Al Gore, and the worlds leading scientists who have tried to say otherwise.

Well done.

**ABCs** · 01-20-2007, 09:01 PM

Hasn't this topic been beaten to a pulp in another thread?

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by goandykid

So recommended or no? At least most people say its interesting.

He's using scare tactics to push a lie for a reason that he believes.

I have a hard time buying into lies even if it promotes something good. At that point, it's called "manipulation." This is the same sort of shit that GWB is accused of doing. The goal may be nobler in the case of Gore, but that doesn't make it right.

So no, I wouldn't recommend it.

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 09:04 PM

Originally Posted by ABCs

Hasn't this topic been beaten to a pulp in another thread?

I told Decker that I'd watch it. So I did and now I'm giving my thoughts on it.

**BigDyl** · 01-20-2007, 09:10 PM

Originally Posted by ABCs

Hasn't this topic been beaten to a pulp in another thread?

Sort of like how you've worn out your presence here before even being here a month?

**ABCs** · 01-20-2007, 09:13 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

I told Decker that I'd watch it. So I did and now I'm giving my thoughts on it.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by BigDyl

Sort of like how you've worn out your presence here before even being here a month?

DUDE, seriously, stop fucking following me around you fruitloop loving ass clown.

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by ABCs

DUDE, seriously, stop fucking following me around you fruitloop loving ass clown.

The problem is that he lost Foreman; and without Foreman's cock to ride, he's decided to latch onto you.

He's like an STD, only more annoying.

**ABCs** · 01-20-2007, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

The problem is that he lost Foreman; and without Foreman's cock to ride, he's decided to latch onto you.

He's like an STD, only more annoying.

*drops to knees* WHY MEEEEE!!!

**goandykid** · 01-20-2007, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by DOMS

The problem is that he lost Foreman; and without Foreman's cock to ride, he's decided to latch onto you.

He's like an STD, only more annoying.

The Dyl will outlast ABC. ABC just brought a lot of shit upon himself in his first few posts.

**NordicNacho** · 01-20-2007, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by BigDyl

True Story, you have single handidly disproved Al Gore, and the worlds leading scientists who have tried to say otherwise.

Well done.

Most studies show that global warming is strongly influenced by Man. Dom you need to get another source for information besides fox news. There our other sources out there.

**DOMS** · 01-20-2007, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by NordicNacho

Most studies show that global warming is strongly influenced by Man. Dom you need to get another source for information besides fox news. There our other sources out there.

Hey, cockrider Jr., I don't watch the news. So where's is this 100% conclusive study? Or are you simply talking out of your ass; because that's what your post smells like.

**NordicNacho** · 01-20-2007, 11:17 PM

Heres alot of studies
not hard a bunch of them
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...dy&btnG=Search

90% of scientists believe man is causing it or rapidly speeding it up! But its a waste of timr talking to you! Your like most right wing wackos to far gone to bring back to the light. You've gone to the darkside

No need for name calling. What happened you get sand in your pussy

**Yanick** · 01-21-2007, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by NordicNacho

Heres alot of studies
not hard a bunch of them
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...dy&btnG=Search

90% of scientists believe man is causing it or rapidly speeding it up! But its a waste of timr talking to you! Your like most right wing wackos to far gone to bring back to the light. You've gone to the darkside

No need for name calling. What happened you get sand in your pussy

lol good job, the first link for that search:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...8-schulz_x.htm

this is a piece about how the original research data might have been misinterpreted and basically corresponds to everything DOMS is saying. didn't look at any of your other so called "hard research studies" b/c you probably haven't either.

**DOMS** · 01-21-2007, 08:24 AM

**Witmaster** · 01-21-2007, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by NordicNacho

Most studies show that global warming is strongly influenced by Man. Dom you need to get another source for information besides fox news. There our other sources out there.

You couldn't be more correct.

Man created this story. Man nurtures this story. Man continues to promote this story with the lack of factual evidence. Man will use any means necessary (to include lies and distortion) to portray this apocalyptic nonsense as the be-all/end-all truth of truths.

Yes, global warming is most definitely influenced by man.

**NordicNacho** · 01-21-2007, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Yanick

lol good job, the first link for that search:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...8-schulz_x.htm

this is a piece about how the original research data might have been misinterpreted and basically corresponds to everything DOMS is saying. didn't look at any of your other so called "hard research studies" b/c you probably haven't either.

In case you didn't know theres been more the one study on global warming lol I didn't try to cherry pick theres a bunch of studies and a large majority will agree with my point of view. Notice on my post I say 90 % lol

**BigDyl** · 01-21-2007, 10:00 AM

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm

**ABCs** · 01-21-2007, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by goandykid

The Dyl will outlast ABC. ABC just brought a lot of shit upon himself in his first few posts.

Outlast in what sense? This isn't a social club, this is a place to learn about health and fitness. Isn't it?

**BigDyl** · 01-21-2007, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by ABCs

Outlast in what sense? This isn't a social club, this is a place to learn about health and fitness. Isn't it?

Open Chat isn't, and since you don't have any knowledge to provide in the area of health in fitness or any other area for that matter you're pretty much worthless.

Thread: An Inconvenient Truth

Thread Tools

Display

An Inconvenient Truth

Similar Threads

The Truth Is Out There

The truth

An Inconvenient Truth

I Want The Truth Only..how Much

truth about you

Posting Permissions