If you have seen it, what do you think?
If you haven't seen it, why not?
2007-01-04
02:16:49
·
17 answers
·
asked by
vertical732
4
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Hey Thorgirls, you are so far off on your version of history. Greenland has been an icepack since the last Ice Age, it is a scientificly proven fact, indisputable. The accounts of Leif Ericson do not include the description you claim. The ting is that the Vikings who traveled to Nova Scotia from Scandanavia had a twisted sense of humor, calling Volcanic Iceland, and frozen Greenland the opposite of what they were.
2007-01-04
02:34:12 ·
update #1
If you think you can disprove any of the statistics presented in the film, prove it. The simple fact is that you can't. Is it so hard to change the way we live that peopel have to attack facts with all they have?
The most critical review of this film I read, from a scientist familiar with the data did say Al was off..... that he was too optimistic.
2007-01-04
02:43:47 ·
update #2
Sombrero wearer, love the list of your "sources" and your "liberal media" references. After all the media has widely ignored the issue until recently. The 18% you cite is also way off, and the main CO2 study cited by Al Gore began in the 1950's and shows your 18% claim to be quite wrong.
2007-01-04
03:17:41 ·
update #3
Global warming is a fraud?????? What planet do you people live on? Check out http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/listorganizations.php for a list of all Exxon's front groups that deny global warming. I don't need a scientist to tell me, I can see it with my own eyes and tell it's real.
2007-01-04 02:28:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by . 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Is there a printed list of these "statistics" ? I will disprove them..
Global warming IS happening, a given, but not for the reasons our leftist liberal science sources, politicians and press are reporting. Only 18 percent of the "new" Co2 in the atmosphere is contributed by ALL contemporary sources including the overall world consumption of fossil fuel, livestock (and human) flatulation and crop fertilization. The majority of scientific studies are now discounting Carbon Dioxide emitted by motor vehicles (burning of fossil fuels) as any MAJOR cause. Geological history indicates natural solar cycles are the culprit, something politicians have no power over so they ignore. The real short-term danger is in fact a buildup of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, but not Co2. The real culprit is Methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas, being released into the atmosphere by the decay of Methane Hydrate occurring naturally frozen on the ocean floors, due to the gradual (natural) warming of ocean water by the (natural) solar cycle. Another item our politicians have no control over and the liberal media will never mention. Follow the money trail... They promote revenue and power by promoting fear. "We just have to do SOMETHING...You know"? So they continue to promote cars as the culprit. If we reduce world fossil fuel consumption by 10% it would have absolutely no effect on climate change, and the world would be plunged into economic chaos....
2007-01-04 11:11:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Gunny T 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
My roommates have it, and I haven't seen it. I hated all of thoser Carl Sagan movies in college because I couldn't stand his voice, and he narrated all of them...or Leonard Nimoy for the same reason. I just thought it would get on my nerves listening to him for a whole movie. And he doesn't need to convince me, I am aware of the reality of global warming, and the impact that we as humans have on it...and that we are the only piece of the puzzle that we can control...so I live my life accordingly.
2007-01-04 10:25:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by hichefheidi 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
OK so you got chainsaw to admit he both hasn't seen it and doesn't believe it! How's that for ignorance?
I personally haven't seen the movie but I bought the book. Lots of compelling evidence for unprecedented climate change in the last 50 years. The pictures of receding glaciers was amazing.
I'd like to hear Q-burt's rebuttals though...
And I like soup thanks for the Exxon link.
2007-01-04 10:42:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dastardly 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
People like Chainsaw refuse to see the movie because they fear the truth. In another 50 or 60 years when the only living creatures on Earth are cockroaches, he'll get it.
2007-01-04 10:26:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Hemingway 4
·
5⤊
1⤋
chainsaw---"Have not and will not see this. Global Warming is a fraud. It is a theory that cannot be proven or disproven. There is natural climate changes on Earth all the time. Humans are not that relevant to the Earth.
I think that this is another example of liberal indoctrination. It is disgusting. "
-------------------------------------------------
wow. you are an absolute idiot and should be sterilized immediately.
"an inconvenient truth" is a terrific movie that both states the huge global warming problem that is prevalent but then offers easy to implement solutions everyday people can put to use to help combat global warming.
every human should see this film. except chainsaw obviously since he knows things we don't.
2007-01-04 10:28:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Go to a movie theater and find a human hair on the carpet..... find the owner. You would have more scientific evidence in your hand then the global warming people do.
When the Vikings first landed in Greenland it was a well forested land filled with trees and the ability to sustain life. in a few decades the glacier moved in and all the trees were gone and the Vikings had to leave as the land would no longer support them History is filled with these ebbs and flows.
2007-01-04 10:28:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋
I watched it and fell alseep during the last of it, Al is boring, but he has some very good points, he should be running the epa
2007-01-04 10:28:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by paulisfree2004 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
Havent seen it.
Al Gore is kinda boring looking.
I already know global warming is real. I dont need a movie to tell me it is real.
2007-01-04 10:18:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Perplexed 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
read the book. it was right on, a little extreme, and predictions a bit off in regards to time, but the rest of it was hitting the nail on the head!
2007-01-04 10:35:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by qncyguy21 6
·
1⤊
1⤋