An Inconvenient Truth

What would they gain from instilling fear in the masses?

Sure I could write up a huge essay like answer, but I can sum it up in a few words.

Suggestive minds.

(okay, I decided to make an essay like answer)

They give us fear, we look to them for answers. With the power in their hands, they feel more and more like a dictatorship. Once a certain gov't style progresses, it always finds a way to corruption. Democracy is no exception.

The problem doesn't stand in finding a way to beat global warming, as I've stated many times before, the fact that humans have developed intelligence that makes it possible to do what we're doing is evidence enough, that what is happening, is probably a natural step in evolution.

Come on, do you really think we can kill the earth? If anything, it will shuffle it's feet and kill us all. Or make an attempt at it (a test) to see if we can change our inner-most nature for the better. At which point, human's will have huge differences amongst intelligence levels etc. and it will be a fresh new world.

Intelligence is natural. Intelligence is natural.

Stop being a doomsayer, and feeding on fear, you apathetic excuse for a race.

Isn't it amazing, we've been blessed with all of these beautiful emotions, yet as a whole, the human race is still able to stand for complete apathy. (We really must not be as intelligent as we think)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRyt

Democracy is no exception.
[/b]

---

Democracy is mob rule.

Fear is used to manipulate mobs.

'nuff said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pj

Democracy is mob rule.

Fear is used to manipulate mobs.

'nuff said.
[/b]

---

qft.

Oh, how it's true.

goddamn the world needs me right now... they just failed to setup any kind of system that allows people with idea's to make things better.

What a failure of a system.

You must learn our way for 20 years (our way sucks ass btw) before you can have a respected opinion!

Quote:

---

Are things changing? Sure. Will they continue to? Guaranteed. Is MAN making it happen? We MIGHT be having the SLIGHTEST influence regarding climate, but the more I study it, the less likely it appears to be happening or even possible.[/b]

---

The grossest understatement I have ever heard. This is like saying a murderer was not really responsible for killing someone because it was actually the gun/bullett/knife that did the killing - not the person.

For all those who said global warming has happened before - never like the climate crisis we are experiencing now! Consider the experiments purported within the slide show that depict the CO2 readings from antarctica - over the past 650 000 years, the Earth has never nearly had such high temperature or CO2 readings as it has in the past 40 years. Six hundred and fifty thousand years!

But I am sure the skeptics and media will reassure you and tell you, "Oh well, that is just El Nino. Do not worry. We do not really need to do anything." Typical excuses just like people make when they pile on garbage to an overflowing can, "Oh, someone else will take care of it. It's natural, it will just go on the ground anyway."

"But O'nus! What about the medieval warming?!" That medieval "warming" was nothing at all comapred to the warming now. Consider the slides within the show.

"Nooo, it is just a natural causation. We do not have to worry." I find this response funny as it is only found in public media and never found in any scholarly or environment journals. It would almost be an insult and sophomoric to say it to an environmental specialist. In the past 650 000 years the entire planet has never seen such activity and in the history of human-kind we have never seen such a population increase. Furthermore, consider that nearly every country in the world has signed the Kyoto agreement except Australia and the United States of America. Why?! Why have they not? Especially America?! Frankly, it pisses me off. Especially to see the crap spewed over the media to make lousy excuses and the gross amount of pathetic procrastination.

Furthermore, why argue the postualted facts? What is gained from arguing this evidence? The facilitations proposed in fact offer a national profit for countries - there will be no deficit! Why argue movements to make environmental issues no longer an issue? Money is certainly not too gain for it - consider the loss of sales in Ford and GM for their lack of fuel-efficient cars. So why argue these propositions? To comfort and neglect the evidence that there could be some serious global threats?

"Oh, I do not think I will go to the doctors this year..or brush..or eat well" Two years down the road, you no longer have a tooth and you die of a heart attack!

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Howetzer

What advantages might those be?
I certainly agree that scare tactics go on all the time. Most derived from the government that have any impact.
But as far as I can tell most governments would much rather not try to combat global warming with all the complications it would bring economically.
[/b]

---

I really think this focus is digressive and out of paranoia. I agree that the American media has been rather hostile and susceptible to many theorists... it seems that America is chock full of theorists but I see little activists...

However, I must repeat this analogy:

Let me ask you this. Let us say you are living in a neighborhood that has incredibly high crime rates. So you and all your neighbours get together and agree to do X task in order to bring down the crime (does not matter what the task is, just something that deters the crime, ie. stand in front lawn, set up motion lights, etc.). Now let us say that all your neighbors, except two, agree to this. Then one of these neighbors has the audacity to start selling weapons, throwing parties, having too much sex, and robbing your other neighbours! What would you do..?

I use this as an analogy for the Kyoto agreement. I would have held off on the exaggeration, but America is far too responsible for contributing to the current climate crisis.

~

The debate isn't whether it's happening or not, it's if man or nature is the source. I think man has affected it, but not on a significant level. The Earth's climate changes over time, even when humans weren't on the Earth, why should we now believe that the Earth is changing because of us? I see Al Gore's movie as more of a publicity stunt/money maker more than a source of information, Al Gore isn't an expert on the subject. The Earth is changing, but humans aren't making it change, and there's nothing we can do to stop it, we have to learn to adjust.

zOMG it hasn't happened like it is now! It must be terrifying.

relax, and enjoy the show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zxc

The debate isn't whether it's happening or not, it's if man or nature is the source. I think man has affected it, but not on a significant level. The Earth's climate changes over time, even when humans weren't on the Earth, why should we now believe that the Earth is changing because of us? I see Al Gore's movie as more of a publicity stunt/money maker more than a source of information, Al Gore isn't an expert on the subject. The Earth is changing, but humans aren't making it change, and there's nothing we can do to stop it, we have to learn to adjust.
[/b]

---

We are aware of the problem. What do you suggest we do then? Let our dogs take care of it?

I knew someone was going to say the it was some publicity stunt on Al Gore's part. I knew that while watching the movie. However, after seeing his exhaustive efforts to reference all of the research to other people - not himself! - it was easier to believe. Not too mention, Al Gore is not the cause of the climate crisis.

Quote:

---

zOMG it hasn't happened like it is now! It must be terrifying.

relax, and enjoy the show[/b]

---

The sarcastic responses I hear are typically from people who will refuse to take action or even vote. Yes, enjoy the show, and make sure to do nothing in life to bring about a change for things.

It is time to take responsibility for things in the world instead of making up excuses of why not to. Why is it that global issues are alwasy brushed off and seen as a selfish act? I have seen many scientific journals, even in my school library, publishing about climate problems which have not been seen before with such magnitude. Yet the public procrastinate and debate it. Why? Are these the same people who "will take care of their taxes tomorrow" or "take out the garbage later!' or "call my mom on Monday"??

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRyt

Come on, do you really think we can kill the earth?
[/b]

---

We can and have killed thousands of species. I admit the rocks and cockroaches will probably endure.

So either we can assume human activity is causing global warming, and start trying to reduce pollution, use less gas, come up with more reliable forms of energy. The worst thing that happens is the world is cleaner, and we have less dependence on psychotic fundamentalist middle-eastern countries and immoral greedy oil companies.

Or we can carry on as we have, assuming this is a natural phenomenon. The worst thing that happens is that we are wrong, and the world as we know it is possibly destroyed.

It's kind of like why you buy insurance.

(whoops double post)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O

We are aware of the problem. What do you suggest we do then? Let our dogs take care of it?

Al Gore is not the cause of the climate crisis.
[/b]

---

If it's the Earth's natural changes, then there is nothing we can do to stop it. And if you believe that people are causing the change, how can you say he's not the cause of the crisis? He drives, rides planes, goes on long trips to win votes, he's just as guilty as any other person.

The real inconvenient truth is that there are thousands of things that are going wrong.
To try and address something is to say you are a doomsayer. :shakehead2:

Quote:

---

Stop being a doomsayer, and feeding on fear, you apathetic excuse for a race.[/b]

---

Now that is pathetic.
Why not try to address a problem rather than shrug it off for another generation?
That is what makes us intelligent. The ability to think and plan in the future. Planning ahead. :shock: What a concept.
Ignoring issues is another human trait =greed.

Maybe I won't worry about saving for retirement. Social security will be here.
Ahhh fuck health insurance, what are the chances of my family getting hurt.
Maybe I am just a doomsayer.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Onus")</div>

Quote:

---

It is time to take responsibility for things in the world instead of making up excuses of why not to. Why is it that global issues are alwasy brushed off and seen as a selfish act? I have seen many scientific journals, even in my school library, publishing about climate problems which have not been seen before with such magnitude. Yet the public procrastinate and debate it. Why? Are these the same people who "will take care of their taxes tomorrow" or "take out the garbage later&#33;&#39; or "call my mom on Monday"??[/b]

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O

-There were major issues with overpopulation, global warming, etc.

-Why do most people overlook this..? Because, frankly, humans are freaking lazy-ass human beings and we can not take responsibility for things&#33; Stop procrastinating&#33;
[/b]

---

I personally do not have sympathy on our race, and I fully agree about the procrastination part. (and im not satanic or anthing) I believe that anyone who throws their life away early in school (ie, start doing drugs and never gets back on his feet) they should die, and thats almost 1/3 of my population at my school. Those people don&#39;t even accept what their given. At least if they tried in school they could accomplish something, but instead they waste resources, which in-tern kills our planet.
Now my next issue might be touchy, but i am describing my full opinon (and everyone has the right to do that). I have nothing against special needs people, but if there isn&#39;t a chance in a special needs person&#39;s life to be normal, and act functionally, I think they shouldn&#39;t be kept alive, its a waste of resources, which kill the plant.
It&#39;s not hard to help the enviornment, in fact its really easy, to fix up the hole down in Antarctica, you just take three oxygen molecules from the air and make ozone. Yet, who is going to "waste" money on that? Obvisously not Politicians, and they have the money to help. Alas politicians, I found out, don&#39;t think logically and instead of helping the enviornment, they use the money for greed, and power, and we as a society watch helplessly. Most of us just go along with it, which is worse&#33;

It&#39;s funny that you can write a large response as you have, yet still are unable to understand my stance on the issue.

Perhaps if you read my posts before you posted, I wouldn&#39;t have to reply with a sarcastic comment. (sarcasm given, where I didn&#39;t feel like repeating myself)

(Over-population won&#39;t be a problem for long)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zxc

The debate isn&#39;t whether it&#39;s happening or not, it&#39;s if man or nature is the source. I think man has affected it, but not on a significant level. The Earth&#39;s climate changes over time, even when humans weren&#39;t on the Earth, why should we now believe that the Earth is changing because of us? I see Al Gore&#39;s movie as more of a publicity stunt/money maker more than a source of information, Al Gore isn&#39;t an expert on the subject. The Earth is changing, but humans aren&#39;t making it change, and there&#39;s nothing we can do to stop it, we have to learn to adjust.
[/b]

---

Have any of you nay-sayers of the facts even seen the movie? Al Gore couldn&#39;t care less about being president again and it&#39;s definitely not about him trying to get back into office. One of the main reasons for him wanting to be president initially was to better tackle this very subject. This is a subject he has been studying since his time in college almost 30 years ago and has fought to pass a multitude of regulations on the subject while other congressmen continually try to doubt the facts and skirt responsibility. Hell, Gore even spawned the kyoto agreement so I don&#39;t know what the hell you&#39;re talking about, this definitely isn&#39;t something new to him.

It&#39;s this kind of postulating and having too much time on your hands, whilst doing nothing to help, that keeps this problem raging at the forefront of everyone&#39;s lives. Give me a break. Conspiracy theories about the environment? I&#39;m surprised you would have enough free time to be able to think of possible conspiracy theories with almost no basis in reality, kudos on that. On a more serious note though, if you can&#39;t feel the earth&#39;s changes over the past few years you must not get out much or have done one too many inhalants because it&#39;s about as obvious as getting kicked in the groin. The reasons for these dramatic changes have been equally obvious, Gore&#39;s movie just spells it out again for the average joe in big bold letters. Just as any normal person would understand coffee is hot without a label, any sane person would know we are at the root of, most, if not all the drastic changes to our planet. The way you are doubting these facts, is simply another way of diverting responsibility. You aren&#39;t one of those people that would get angry if you spilled hot coffee on yourself and blame McDonalds, are you? Hey maybe McDonalds killed Kennedy while they were at it. If anyone feels insulted by my comments, you should be, because this isn&#39;t a laughing or speculating matter... it&#39;s actually pretty f*ing grave. Unfortunately this time- no if&#39;s, and&#39;s or but&#39;s

I never said it wasn&#39;t happening, I believe that it&#39;s the Earth&#39;s natural climate changes rather than the release of CO2 for the past 100 years. If we try to fight it, which I don&#39;t think is possible, cars aren&#39;t the only/biggest problem. How do you plan to stop volcanos from releasing massive amounts of CO2? Why do you think the ice age happened and stopped without people on the Earth, and why would the Earth&#39;s climate suddenly stop changing when humans start developing? It&#39;s not a conspiracy theory either, it&#39;s just a different view.

How many species have survived Ice Ages?

Only a handful I&#39;m sure... through their proper methods of survival. It&#39;s time to show that intelligence can lead to better survival.

edit: I&#39;ll be willing to bet after the next ice age, multiple intelligent species will emerge.

If any of you have National Geographic which im sure you do you need to watch Naked Science. It has an interesting episode premeiring today about the human race is coming to an end in about the next 80 years or so. I beleive that it discusses global warming, war and whatnot. If you are interested as I am you must see this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRyt

It&#39;s funny that you can write a large response as you have, yet still are unable to understand my stance on the issue.

Perhaps if you read my posts before you posted, I wouldn&#39;t have to reply with a sarcastic comment. (sarcasm given, where I didn&#39;t feel like repeating myself)

(Over-population won&#39;t be a problem for long)
[/b]

---

Sorry :oops:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRyt

How many species have survived Ice Ages?

Only a handful I&#39;m sure... through their proper methods of survival. It&#39;s time to show that intelligence can lead to better survival.

edit: I&#39;ll be willing to bet after the next ice age, multiple intelligent species will emerge.
[/b]

---

Being half Sami - Finnish Eskimo - I&#39;d be fine with that.

Seriously... try giving this a read:

http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/63410...old%20Media.pdf

It isn&#39;t the end-all by any stretch, but it is a nice summary of why taking such a one-sided view of this whole thing is kind of nutty - and how this really HAS been manipulated... over and over and over again, whenever things start changing one way or the other.

How many times in the past 100 years has the global warming/global cooling argument come up and been used in an effort to justify tyranny? The answer is in there, along with a whole lot of VERY good questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zxc

I never said it wasn&#39;t happening, I believe that it&#39;s the Earth&#39;s natural climate changes rather than the release of CO2 for the past 100 years. If we try to fight it, which I don&#39;t think is possible, cars aren&#39;t the only/biggest problem. How do you plan to stop volcanos from releasing massive amounts of CO2? Why do you think the ice age happened and stopped without people on the Earth, and why would the Earth&#39;s climate suddenly stop changing when humans start developing? It&#39;s not a conspiracy theory either, it&#39;s just a different view.[/b]

---

Well put. The effects of humanity are just a drop in the bucket when it comes to the factors driving climate change. A large problem we&#39;re facing is that only scientists planning on doing pro-global warming research get funding. No one wants to give money to someone saying that humans have no impact on the environment, it&#39;s too politically incorrect right now.

Oh no, volcano&#39;s cause CO2 too&#33;&#33;111111

That is why it is called a cycle. The earth has spewed out and taken back CO2 for ages. It&#39;s a balance. Volcanoes are part of that balance. We are fucking up that balance, perhaps change it to a new balance, a balance that can sustain no life but bacterial one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zxc

If it&#39;s the Earth&#39;s natural changes, then there is nothing we can do to stop it. And if you believe that people are causing the change, how can you say he&#39;s not the cause of the crisis? He drives, rides planes, goes on long trips to win votes, he&#39;s just as guilty as any other person.
[/b]

---

I am saying that Al Gore is not the one who is making hurricane&#39;s occur and the dramatic increase of CO2. Of course each human is equally responsible for contributing to global warming. However, keep in mind that the United States of America are the highest contributors of CO2 than any other country.

I do not understand why people are constantly arguing against these facts. Why? That is like arguing how common AIDS is and saying, "Oh it is natural, we are all going to die somehow." Sure, we can take an apathetic approach to it and do nothing about - let them die. Or, you can get off your hands and take responsibility for something - accept that you have contributed to globabl problems. If not, you can still do something to help rather than argue against why you should not do it.

God, it feels like arguing with a young-one about why they should help pick up garbage around the house, "Why? It&#39;s not my garbage&#33; I don&#39;t wanna&#33; I like it there&#33; So what? Garbage will just come there later&#33;" Pick it up&#33;

"Natural changes"? Is it really natural to have about ten-fold the amount of CO2 the planet has had in the past 650 000 years?

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neruo

Oh no, volcano&#39;s cause CO2 too&#33;&#33;111111

That is why it is called a cycle. The earth has spewed out and taken back CO2 for ages. It&#39;s a balance. Volcanoes are part of that balance. We are fucking up that balance, perhaps change it to a new balance, a balance that can sustain no life but bacterial one.
[/b]

---

Read about the theory of Gaia.

I have a major complaint about the Gaia theory which I would like to share:

If we are incidentally manipulating our world to meet our standards of living, what about the Earths standard for living and existing? Our population is very well on the brink of exceeding the food surplus that the Earth can supply - a farm can only produce so much food.

I think this rounds my complaint up better than a long-winded explanation.

~

Just for the record, the new Canadian government has announced that they will not ratify the Kyoto protocal. I think all countries are supposed to be like %6 below the emissions released in 1994 by 2012. Don&#39;t quote me, but i think that&#39;s it.

I&#39;ve seen the movie. Found it very interesting. If you guys like that, look for a movie called Who Killed the Electric Car. You conspiracy theorists will have a field day with that one, but i liked that one too. Humanity is almost certainly responsible for the upswell in temperature. Seriously guys, that&#39;s just how it is. Many leading scientists are saying the same thing: it&#39;s time for some action, and that action is greenhouse gas reduction.

I will agree that this movie is "propoganda" in the sense that Al Gore will probably be making another run at being president, and i feel this is evident by the tagline already quoted on the first page of this thread "vote for politicians who are environmentally concious." It&#39;s right at the end of the movie. BUT that doesn&#39;t change the facts or the evidence to back them up. Al Gore has been pursuing this issue for almost three decades. He knows what he&#39;s talking about. He learned about this stuff in college. Watch the movie.

There have been doomsday prophets since the beginning of time. Every generation has someone or some group of people saying "things have gone too far. We need a change."

The world is not going to end because of this, humanity might die off though. If all of us ignorant fucking humans die off, i personally don&#39;t care. The earth will bounce back, things will be fine.

We, or most of us just might not be here any more. Don&#39;t bitch about it if it happens. We were all warned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O

I am saying that Al Gore is not the one who is making hurricane&#39;s occur and the dramatic increase of CO2. Of course each human is equally responsible for contributing to global warming. However, keep in mind that the United States of America are the highest contributors of CO2 than any other country.

I do not understand why people are constantly arguing against these facts. Why? That is like arguing how common AIDS is and saying, "Oh it is natural, we are all going to die somehow." Sure, we can take an apathetic approach to it and do nothing about - let them die. Or, you can get off your hands and take responsibility for something - accept that you have contributed to globabl problems. If not, you can still do something to help rather than argue against why you should not do it.

God, it feels like arguing with a young-one about why they should help pick up garbage around the house, "Why? It&#39;s not my garbage&#33; I don&#39;t wanna&#33; I like it there&#33; So what? Garbage will just come there later&#33;" Pick it up&#33;

"Natural changes"? Is it really natural to have about ten-fold the amount of CO2 the planet has had in the past 650 000 years?

~
[/b]

---

There are 2 sides to everything, people aren&#39;t the cause of every change in the world, I still don&#39;t see why you expect the earth to come to a standstill once we start producing things. There are scientists who argue that the rising temperature naturally causes the amount of CO2 to rise, not the other way around. What about the large amount of CO2 that enters the atmosphere as part of the water cycle from the sea into the air? At 6 billion pounds, humans are responsible for less than 5% of CO2 in the atmosphere, 60 billion tons circulate just because of vegetation. We&#39;re just at the peak of a change that has been going on for 25,000 years ago. 15,000 years ago the earth warmed up enough to stop the glaciers, 8,000 years ago the Bering Strait was drowned, and since the end of the ice age, the earths temperature has risen 16 degrees F, and sea levels have risen 300 feet, what caused that? Because it wasn&#39;t humans.