The Great Global Warming Swindle (new documentary)

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html ^

[Muentzer2005]

The film brings together the arguments of leading scientists who disagree with the prevailing consensus that a 'greenhouse effect' of carbon dioxide released by human activity is the cause of rising global temperatures.

Instead the documentary highlights recent research that the effect of the sun's radiation on the atmosphere may be a better explanation for the regular swings of climate from ice ages to warm interglacial periods and back again.

The film argues that the earth's climate is always changing, and that rapid warmings and coolings took place long before the burning of fossil fuels. It argues that the present single-minded focus on reducing carbon emissions not only may have little impact on climate change, it may also have the unintended consequence of stifling development in the third world, prolonging endemic poverty and disease ...

In fact, the experts in the film argue that increased CO2 levels are actually a result of temperature rises, not their cause, and that this alternate view is rarely heard. 'So the fundamental assumption, the most fundamental assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans, is shown to be wrong.'

'I've often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue, that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system,' says John Christy, Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center, NSSTC University of Alabama. 'Well I am one scientist, and there are many, that simply think that is not true.'

[AlexW]

"Follow the money..."

Sadly, that seems to be the driving force for everything today.
I use that phrase almost every day when talking about global warming and politics.
Even with Gore, it is all about money, nothing else.

[Calvin Locke]

Bell doesn't know his elbow from a hole in the wall when it comes to global warming. He sort of flip-flops the way the real wind blows.

I've been selectively listening to him since he upped and married a girl 100 years his junior, (okay something like 40), but the "Superstorm" book sucked, but did bring in money from a bad movie. And he flipped & flopped while promoting movie...

Last night, he backed off from "man causing is causing it to a maybe" (via exchanges with a caller or two).

But I heard a guest last year shoot down every one of Bell's parroting of examples of "proof" of GW.

Bell and/or his producers were so taken aback, that for the next three weekends, a least one of the main guests was a GW supporter.

[AlexW]

"I've been selectively listening to him since he upped and married a girl 100 years his junior"

I have no problem with that, as I also have many young Filipino girls that I chat with online.
They are sweet, and do not care about age, but most all are very poor and will do anything to find a better life.

As for Kook to Kook, I get it here via internet and my home station back in Memphis (WREC). For me it is when I am just getting up in the morning, so I amuse myself listening to it.
I prefer the other host, as Bell has become so condescending and pompous. I cut Bell some slack only because I am his age and also a ham radio operator.

[Calvin Locke]

sNoory is too anti-American and anti-common sense for me.

Bell goes through his phases of kookiness and condescension, but is more at ease interviewing, and has a better radio voice (imo).

I can put up with Bell's belief in "chemtrails" leaving a yellow substance on his windshield (it was Spring, Art. That's pollen...), but I can't with sNorry saying that bringing a ouija board into the studio caused all the pcs to crash.

I use a pc to record the show out of habit, checking the recap in the morning to see if it's worth putting on my PDA for listening during the day.

[Grampa Dave]

"People like Al Gore jet about the earth, living from mansion to mansion and say that they want to drastically lower the living standards for most people on the earth. Then, the so called peoples's people, who talk about "eqality" the most, think this is just fine."

[lstanle]

A little more truth and progress.

Another Convert to Sanity

[Lintilla]

Readers might be interested to know that the people behind this documentary are ex members of the UK Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), who used to publish the magazine LM, once "Living Marxism", the official newsletter of the RCP. They continue to push the agenda they promoted within the RCP through the Institute of Ideas and the online magazine spiked. If anyone wants to check them out, try a Google search of "Martin Durkin Against Nature" (the title of another anti-environment documentary by this programme's director from the 1980s), or "LM group revolutionary communist party".

But don't take my word for it - dig around on the web and see what the Revolutionary Communists behind this stuff are up to, and make you own mind up about their legitimacy.

[ChessExpert]

I finally got around to watching this. I think it is excellent and recommend it to anyone. I’ve been following this topic and was surprised that the documentary addressed so many facets of this topic - those that I had become acquainted with, and several others.

I don’t think it has “the answer,” or even all the answers. I don’t think we fully understood the Earth’s climate in the 1970s, when Global Cooling was predicted, or today, when so many are in the grip of Global Warming hysteria. Clearly, the liberal politically correct global warming story is too simple. This simplicity makes for great propaganda, but poor science. This documentary does not make things simple. Things are not simple. I am impressed by all the content in this show. I don’t see how they could cram any more in the time alloted. If they do a sequel, they could address the Earth’s molten core. I doubt the core is a constant that can be safely ignored. I would have liked coverage of various long astronomical cycles. It’s just a lot more complicated than the global warming industry admits.

Should we change our lives because of half-baked climatology? Should we have changed our lives based upon Malthus, Marx, Keynes, Freud, and others? No.

[longtermmemmory]

so this documentary is bad?

[ChessExpert]

I saw the subject documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and think it is very good. I saw it twice. Many of the posts do not address this video. They talk about the theory of Global Warming, about other videos, about a channel, etc.

I think you should watch it. You can also type “global warming swindle” in the FreeRepublic search box and see how many articles come up. Most Freepers liked it. Some die hard global warming believers do not like it. You could also go to the link and watch the first five to ten minutes, then decide.