Seen 'An Inconvenient Truth'? Watch this....
 

Full 90 minute Channel 4 documentary now on Google Video. Shit, it's hard to know who to believe: Professor Al Gore and all these expert politicians who want to tax me in the name of the enviroment or these 'non government funded' Scientists who think it's all of a load of bullshit:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...mi ng+swindle

Even the co-founder of Green Piece thinks it's BS. They need to openly debate this stuff instead of simply assuming everyone will just believe whatever they are told.

I always like to keep an open mind but it's pretty hard to believe ANYTHING that is used to frighten people into submission. I love how everyone's suddenly a fucking expert!

thanks for the link. i'll watch this later.

thanks for the info

It's beyond a joke now. I wish they would all kindly go and take a fuck to themselves... :disgust

if its real or not cleaning up the air is a bad thing.I dont understand

If it's true or not, what does it matter? We are still fucking this planet with pollution and so on.. So why not go out of our way to change things?

Do you like to breath smog and shit air? Do you like mercury in your water? So reguarless of who is right or wrong they all have their own agenda. So why not breath fresh air and drink fresh water?

Why does it matter whether it is true or not??

truth is all that matters, you WILL be asked to pay your hard earned money in the name of climate change, so you bet your life it matters.

Nice we agree on something hehe.

Well I'm asked to pay my hard earned money for a lot of things I don't like. In fact I just paid the IRS a little over a thousand dollars today. So I'd much rather pay that money for something positive even if it's for the wrong reason.

BTW a side note, nine times out of 10 you will find these "documentaries" as they call them are actually produced by organizations like big money oil.

No one argues the Earth doesn't have climate cycles and that it's been hot and cold over the past millions of years. It's true it part of the Earth's history so these "anti-global warming" guys try to focus on that point as if the "global warming" people think this is all new.

The fact the anti's ignore is that man made global warming isn't changing anything the Earth does naturally over time, but man made global warming is speeding up the process.

WATCH THE VIDEO! That is addressed in full. OR you can just argue about it without watching it. I watched the Al Gore debacle twice just so I can argue about it.

i guess you don't mind mercury in the fish you eat.

Now fish are causing global warming? :disgust

I don't need to watch a video to know that things are changing very fast on this planet. I can see with my own eyes, that the ice caps are melting that rivers and oceans are polluted and that the water levels are rising..

I can see with my own eyes we are fucking up this planet with pollution. Global warming or not things need to change and nothing is going to force a change and get the world support like global warming is.

I don't need a scientist or some documentary to tell me all the shit we pump into the air and into the water everyday is fucking things up.

That'd be a true statement. I like the flavor it gives the fish, personally. :2 cents:

Simple question for you.

Aside from whether or not GM is real or fake. Do you think, as humans, we have a responsibility to properly care for the environment? Do you think humans have the right to pollute the air, water, and soil without care?

Just don't eat fish... :winkwink:

I am shocked and appalled sir!

it seems people like stickyfingers will disagree with anything that might make them seem like they are 'on the other side of the fence' even if it makes them look like total fools. yes, fish are causing global warming...they raped my mother and killed my father too. as much as people want to remove themselves from nature and feel they are above it, without it we'd all be dead.

One is bullshit, one is common sense. Figure it out. lol Im not out dumping acid into rivers and shit lol.

Whats laughable is Im pretty much a conservationist. But since my views oppose the global warming contingency I must me a rabid planet polluting co2 expunging asshole right? lol :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I like your search term ;)

Pffft, you know you have five 6,000 watt space heaters on right now just to waste energy.

watched this few hours ago. Pretty interesting.

I'm struggling to see what polluted fish have to do with global warming?

If it really were a crisis they'd stop everyone doing these climate changing activities by banning them. Instead they'll still let you destroy the climate as long as you pay for it in extra taxes. Gotta love that policy!

If you cant find the relation between mercury in fish, and our global warming problem you obviously hate the planet.... :1orglaugh

It's fairly obvious from the complete idiocy in this thread that some of the boys and girls didn't watch the video. Really nice to see someone touting the truth for once.. In fact, some people in this thread remind me of the people they refer to in the video. I think everyone would be very surprised at what they see.

Interesting doco for sure, just watched it and it raises some interesting points. Might need to watch Al Gore's doco again.

Regardless of your views on global warming and the likes, I think this sums it up pretty well.

http://www.transfixing.com/

why the dumbass comment that fish are causing global warming instead of actually trying to respond with something? obviously i wasn't trying to relate mercury in fish to global warming but the huge pollution problem we have. like crockett said, global warming or not we are abusing the planet but the thread starter comes back as if his only concern is the money he is going to have to pay out for it which just goes to show the total selfish thinking we are stuck in. we're only concerned how it effects ourselves.

for some reason its ok for american companies to set up camp in countries without even mild pollution laws and then sell their wares to us. for some reason we allow companies to dump toxic chemicals into the water then just give them a slap on the wrist with a small fine. for some reason people seem to think this is ok for the most part, as long as it saves us a few bucks on some new shoes or toilet cleaner.

BECAUSE WE DONT HAVE A HUGE FUCKING POLLUTION PROBLEM! Pollution has decreased leaps and fucking bounds over the last 100 years. We DID have a huge pollution problem. Its ridiculously better than it was even 25 years ago. Its STUPIDLY silly for people to tout global warming is being caused by pollution now. If such was the case we all would of melted years ago. But of course that was back when pollution was going to cause an ice age then.

So you felt compelled when you DID NOT have a good argument against the movie to bring up fucking fish. Its annoying when someone tries to divert a topic when they have no good arugment.

we don't? so why do we have increased levels of mercury in fish? why does toronto have smog even in the winter now? why are there more people than ever with asthma and other breathing problems? we are creating more garbage than ever, including more things that will never biodegrade or be able to be recycled because they contain both metals and plastics for example cds and computers.

sure we've made some changes from 25 years ago but you can still get away with it if you have big enough pockets. i used to live near the st. clair river and it was almost a monthly occurance that these chemical companies in sarnia would have 'accidential discharges' that they wouldn't let the public know about until days after those who get their water from the river have been drinking it. and what do they, get maybe a 50k fine.

also im not saying pollution is causing global warming. all i was trying to say is no matter if global warming exists or not, there are many things we could at least be attempting to do in order ot preserve what we have left for the future.

pollution has decreased? How is that possible, if hte human race has INCREASED in population?

that alone doesn't make sense at all.

Look fingers, it seems that this is a really deep set thing with you, and i'm sorry for that.

If you're so convinced that something doesn't exist, then fine. You can sit there, banging your sheeple drum, disputing everything that fosters awareness of humanity changing the enviroment for the worst. That's good! If you don't think there is a problem, why are you here disputing it?

Why are you in every thread getting more and more upset about something that "is just hype" that will blow over in the next few years?

I'm sorry to say this, but you're not offering anything towards the argument but ego, arrogance, fear, and ignorance.

we suggest taking a big look at what IS going on in the world, and ask for something more than "the earth melts polar ice caps naturally!" "pollution is going DOWN"

R

Again no one wants to see the earth get dirty.

Pittsburgh 1906

http://www.history.uncc.edu/images/image002.jpg

http://www.gasp-pgh.org/pgh-img/pgh1906.jpg

1947

http://www.gasp-pgh.org/pgh-img/nov1...ibertytunn.jpg

1954
http://www.gasp-pgh.org/pgh-img/smokypittsburgh1.jpg

1972

http://www.gasp-pgh.org/pgh-img/1972...ckdowntown.jpg


Today

http://www.whatstaboo.com/400px-Pitt...ne_daytime.jpg

I ask did you watch the video linked in this thread?

i tried to actually.. it was disabled. I'll find it later and get back to you.

The funny thing about that picture set is you tried to stuff this down my throat last time.. last time i just posted pictures that aren't "sunny tourist" shots of industrial centres.

Propaganda is a bitch dude.

Also, i'm not arguing with your claim that the ability to pollute has gone down. I'm arguing with you about the AMOUNT of pollution.

Just because the factories and stuff today have better technology, there is still MORE of them.

R

No there are not more of them in the U.S. not sure where you get your info from. The early 1900s was the industrial revolution. We have pushed strongly away from manufacturing. Those pictures I went and found. They were in history archives not on any anti global warming page. Why did I go looking for them? Because I remember what the air used to be like. Maybe part of my problem is I remember too much? I should just have a short term memory like most of the country. lol

Stickyfingerz, are you blind? Show me a graph in which it is shown that annual CO2 emissions are now lower than they were 50 years ago.

Oh and I find it rather funny that you call my pictures of different times in the history of Pittsburgh propaganda, but Al Gores little movie is a carefully crafted documentary laying out detailed facts... lol :1orglaugh

Did you watch the video that shows why co2 emissions are rising? Did you see that the facts show that co2 FOLLOWS temperature increases? Did you see that the largest majority of c02 is created by the planet itself? Coming from sources such as Volcanoes, decaying matter, and even the ocean itself? Do you know the planet NEEDS c02?

The video is disabled so I didn't see anything.

Blindfingerz, look at this: http://www.hydrogencommerce.com/imag...Worldwatch.png

You can easily calculate how many tonnes of carbon dioxide emitted that equals to.

You say "how about coal consumption"?

http://www.netl.doe.gov/KeyIssues/im...hart-4b_sm.jpg

Why is it that you are so blind?

I know you dont listen well so... As the video shows c02 INCREASES AFTER temperature increases. Do you understand? In other words its not causing the increase, but is a result thereof. Getting it yet?

The most worrying thing about the documentary is that George Bush may have been right all along. It's like in the Simpsons when Homer correctly predicts the asteroid heading to earth will break up in the earths atmosphere.

The fact is, climate change happens over long periods of time, just because you see ice breaking off glaciers doesn't indicate anything, I bet my ass if you went back in time to the last ice age, ice was breaking off the edge of glaciers then. Seas may well be rising, but I would be suprised if there is any point in the earths history where temperature, sea level and glaciers were ever at a static point.

Pollution is bad it affects the environment in a negative way, it should be reduced as much as humanly possible, I don't think anyone disputes that fact.

It's up to the scientists to do what science is all about, and discuss the different evidence and theories without any outside bias and come to a logical conclusion, pretty hard when most of them receive their pay checks from someone with an agenda.

who they need to tax is the companies polluting the environment, but you know they won't, they are tooooo powerful!

Blind guy, you know how carbon dioxide is formed right? You can easily calculate how many tonnes are emitted when you drive 100 miles. Similarly, the graphs show a clear steep line. Every tonne of oil consumed will cause more tonnes of CO2 to be emitted.

Apart from the possibility that forests and such emit more co2 when it's warmer, do you think your oversized car will emit more co2 because it's 120 instead of 119 degrees?

Here for all of those smart enough to accurately interpret graphs and statistics that even scientists dont agree on, but not smart enough to find a video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arming+swindle

They will be taxed. Eventually, kerosine should be taxed too.

I give up. I guess you can tell me "I told you so" once we are all engulfed in the flames caused by a 83 Ford F150... :Oh crap

Kerosene isnt taxed? :uhoh

the guy that made this film is full of shit, he's made some documentaries that are more biased than the shit Michael Moore's made...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_...on_director%29

I watch this pice of rubbish and I don't belive a single word of it.
How can you explain the levels of Co2 in the air today compared to at any one point in history before. There is only one explanation, we're putting it there!

Don't give me that shit about volcanoes, we haven't had a proper erruption on this planet for hundreds of years (and even when there were some, that did cause global warming, followed by global cooling, the levels of Co2 were lower than they are today...)