Documentary: The Great Global Warming Swindle

APM

Hi all,

I've had a read of the charter and it appears that I can bring this topic up.

I'm wondering if anybody has watched the doc. called The Great Global Warming Swindle? and if so what the general opinion is on it ?

I watched it myself today and I have to say it has slightly changed my opinions about how little effect humans have on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But on the other hand this is just another angle at looking at the whole matter.

Anyone else agree or disagree with me that this film is an eye opener?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle

Ive heard that some things presented as fact in that film were not

bonkey

APM wrote: »

Anyone else agree or disagree with me that this film is an eye opener?

I'd agree that its an eye-opener, except that my eyes have already been opened to just how ridiculously misrepresentative documentaries can be.

I see it more as giving me a reinforcement of that truth, then as it opening my eyes to it.

baldieman

Hi,

That was last year, by now you might find a few more sceptics after the atrocious and very wet summer this year, not to mention last year.
The question is, is the alternative theory of solar effect going to get an opportunity to be proven or not? As solar activity does appear to be in decline. Solar cycle 24 is having trouble getting started. Although it will be another 6 to 12 months before that will become clear. The solar wind has been in decline for the last ten years.


http://airamerica.com/blog/2008/apr/05/global-warming-deniers-favorite-sunspot-theory-refuted-again







http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/07/truly-inconvenient-truths-about-climate-change-being-ignored-ipccs-pachauri-says-warmi

gerky

This program was very widely shown to be full of false facts and some of the people involved in it said they were misrepresented.

Here's just some of the links relating to it.

link1
link2
link3

old boy

the history channel ran a program about that some timeago claimed to prove that them things come in cycles

bonkey

baldieman wrote: »

Hi,

That was last year, by now you might find a few more sceptics after the atrocious and very wet summer this year, not to mention last year.

If you find such skeptics,though, you should consider the two following points when talking to them:

1) Weather in Ireland <> global climate
2) Wet <> cold.

Húrin

As gerky pointed out, that programme was a complete fraud, and full of lies.

baldieman

I saw the program about a year ago, I actually did'nt find it that convincing. But lately I've been looking at the apposing view on the net and there is quit a lot of it from serious scientists. we're told the vast majority of scientists accept the carbon co2 theory, but how do we know that's true, when was there ever a poll.
Having said that, I'm not convinced either way, But I do believe it's important to question these things and not follow the excepted view like a religion.

bonkey

baldieman wrote: »

But lately I've been looking at the apposing view on the net and there is quit a lot of it from serious scientists.

Is there?

we're told the vast majority of scientists accept the carbon co2 theory, but how do we know that's true, when was there ever a poll.

Generally, such comments are based on comparing the amounts of peer-reviewed subject-relevant documents and/or the authors behind same.

This ratio is also considered to be representative of the scientific community at large.

So...lets get back to your "serious scientists". How many of them are there producing material (peer-reviewed or otherwise) on the net? Lets say there's 100. To the nearest percentage, thats 0% of all scientists. Lets say there's 1000. Still at 0%.

The rejoinder to this argument is all too often someone pointing out that science isn't a democracy. Its not about which idea is the more popular. I agree, it isn't. Then again, I don't support the popularity notion in the first place...I'm just clearing up where it comes from.

But I do believe it's important to question these things and not follow the excepted view like a religion.

Indeed. There's too many people on both sides of the argument who accept the view they hold because they believe in it...whether its because its from the establishment, or anti-establishment, or because they trust Al Gore, or whatever.

I encourage people to learn as much about the underlying scientific arguments. You won't find much of that from youTubery, and not much more from investigoogling, but hey...if science was easy, then we wouldn't need the scientists in the first place

djpbarry

APM wrote: »

I watched it myself today and I have to say it has slightly changed my opinions about how little effect humans have on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But on the other hand this is just another angle at looking at the whole matter.

Anyone else agree or disagree with me that this film is an eye opener?

There's an old thread on this documentary, in which it was torn to pieces:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055063281

baldieman wrote: »

But lately I've been looking at the apposing view on the net and there is quit a lot of it from serious scientists.

As opposed to funny scientists?

baldieman wrote: »

...we're told the vast majority of scientists accept the carbon co2 theory, but how do we know that's true, when was there ever a poll.

Bonkey's already covered this, but you can search for publications here:
http://www.scirus.com

Even Google Scholar isn't too bad:
http://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&tab=ws

baldieman wrote: »

...I do believe it's important to question these things and not follow the excepted view like a religion.

Absolutely. The fact that this documentary obtained so much credence would indicate that there are still a very large number of people who are happy enough to accept whatever the media tell them, which is rather worrying.

barnicles

old boy wrote: »

the history channel ran a program about that some timeago claimed to prove that them things come in cycles

If anyone wants the name

"A Global Warning"

DragonT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ

I think, he is right.

What do you think ?

Cheers.