An Inconvenient Truth

[Gayle]

I've put this in general chat rather than nights out because it is supposed to provoke debate.

Tonight I have been to see the film An Inconvenient Truth showing Al Gore. Omg, omg, omg - I hate to say this but I could well be going over to the dark side (well Jambutty's side anyway)! The facts and figures are ones that have been going around for a long time but when you see it all laid out for you in one place it makes for a very compelling argument.


This is the blurb from Prospects Foundation

There is still time to see it on Wednesday 31st January the film will be shown in Willow Hall at the New Era Complex, Paradise Street, Accrington, from 7:00pm

Tickets for the event are available on the night for only £4.50 per person, with a concessionary rate of £3.50 available to students,OAP's, under 16's and members of The PROSPECTS Foundation.

The film, which stars former US Vice-President Al Gore as himself, follows him around the World as he presents his ideas on climate change, with the sole intention of saving the planet! The topic of climate change is often one which causes confusion, however the film manages to entertain whilst also informing and educating in a simple yet non-patronising way.

Although environmental films may not appeal to you, this one is more authentic than any reality tv show, more compelling than fictional blockbuster movies and really is essential viewing. The film is certificate U, so is open to all ages, why not bring along the family for what will no doubt be an eye opener!

For more information about the screenings, please Prospects Foundation on 01254 380675.

Before you argue with me and quote facts that you've read from a tabloid newspaper please go and see the film.

[WillowTheWhisp]

If it's gloomy it will depress me. I'm already depressed that people don't take environmental problems seriously.

[Gayle]

It's not gloomy but it will make you sit up and take notice.

Only problem is that people who go to see it are already the people who are a little concerned and already doing something - the people who really should see it probably won't!

[WillowTheWhisp]

That's usually the case with anything.

I remember when I was thought of as a complete crank for going on about recycling etc.

[steeljack]

Is the movie not available from Blockbuster or some other video/dvd rental store ?
Why is a Govt. supported/sponsored center using taxpayers money, pushing propaganda (unproven science) made by a loser of a politician , could it be because of his left wing politics ?

[Gayle]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Is the movie not available from Blockbuster or some other video/dvd rental store ?
Why is a Govt. supported/sponsored center using taxpayers money, pushing propaganda (unproven science) made by a loser of a politician , could it be because of his left wing politics ?

Eh?

No not available from Blockbuster.
Not a government sponsored centre
Not using taxpayers money - we all paid for a ticket
Not propaganda - facts
Not loser of politician - cheated!
Not relevanat about his left wing politics - not a political film!!!!

[Billcat]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

If it's gloomy it will depress me. I'm already depressed that people don't take environmental problems seriously.

Willow - while it does bring a lot of points home, it is not gloomy. Instead, after showing the science, it presents some ideas for things folks can do to personally lessen their own impact on the environment.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Here's a trailer.

This is a scary prospect.

[tadah]

Originally Posted by Gayle

I hate to say this but I could well be going over to the dark side (well Jambutty's side anyway)!

Dont encourage him lol

[jambutty]

Unproven science steeljack? The greater majority of the boffins of the world all agree that global warming is happening. Where the dispute is, is the reason for it although more and more of these boffins are coming round to the view that humanity is increasing the speed of natural cyclical global warming that the non-believers are so fond of pointing out.

Interesting snippet of film WillowTheWhisp and I totally agree with what I saw. Sadly there still some ostriches with their heads stuck firmly in the sand. Well, when the water is lapping around their rear end they might just wake up to reality but by then it will be too late.

[WillowTheWhisp]

A bit like Sam Oglethwaite.

[Lampman]

I haven't seen the film as yet,sounds a bit ominious,but I have come across this counter theory.It is a bit long winded but it makes a point:
Junk science is BIG business.

Remember Avian Bird Flu? Birds were getting sick and dying from a new strain of bird flu. The fear is that the flu would jump from birds to mankind, which it did in a few isolated cases, maybe. Hundreds of thousands of birds were being slaughtered, as a precaution. Scientists were telling us were were all going to die if we didn't work on a vaccine, and that funding would be needed to prevent millions of human deaths. I wonder how many grants were made to stop this "epidemic."

Think back to Y2K profiteering. A few programmer's and scientists said that some old, antiquated, rarely used computers might need to be updated for the year 2000. Likewise, old software may need to have a few minor updates and patches to be fully operational. The next thing you know, talking heads were warning that on January 1st 2000 that planes could literally fall out of the sky when their computers failed because they weren't Y2K compliant. We were told there would be anarchy in the streets when all public works systems failed because the computer systems helping them to function all shut down. Businesses were told that their computers would shut off, never to work again, and that all of their hard drive material and digital business documents would be lost forever. Businesses and government groups spent billions ensuring they would be safe when the ball dropped. And when the ball dropped, and nothing bad happened, anywhere, and all computers continued to function pretty much as before, whether they were certified Y2K compliant or not, the con artists Y2K compliance companies claimed that all their hard work had paid off. Disaster and the fall of all mankind had been averted thanks to their tireless bilking of companies and the government out of millions hard work. When all was said and done, the government and big business sighed a sigh of relief. Sure, maybe it was all a scam, but better to be out a few bucks and be assured that if the sky fell, it wouldn't fall on them.

How about AIDS? What happened to that? No offense to anyone who actually does have AIDS or whose friends, family members, etc actually do have AIDS, but I do not know a single person who has AIDS. This amazes me, because I remember being told as a child that by the year 2000, one in every 10 Americans would have aids. In middle school and high school health classes we were given flash cards and had to exchange signatures with five different classmates. A Student (A) was chosen at random, and was told that for the sake of the lesson they were HIV positive, and asked to stand up.One (A) HIV student. We were told that each signature represented sexual intercourse with the fellow student, so the first person on A's list, (B) was asked to stand up as well. 2 HIV Students (A,B). The second person on A&B's lists (B,C) were asked to stand up. 4 HIV Students (A,B,C,D). The third person on ABC&D's lists were asked to stand up. You see now how this works. Sure there was some overlapping, but by the time all 5 rounds were done, half or more of the class was standing. We were told that this is how AIDS spreads: through straight and homosexual unprotected sex, through drug use via needles, though accidental contact with blood, spit, etc of infected people. After years of this sort of instruction, it is amazing my generation ever got up the nerve to have sex at all. We were given estimates, that one in 10 of us will have HIV. In College, as freshmen, we were told that estimates were that between 5% and 10% of Americans could be HIV positive, and that the reasons that actual numbers were so far below reported cases was that most HIV positive people had no idea they were HIV positive. We were told that since as many as one in 10 Americans were HIV positive, and didn't know it, that in our small college community there were hundreds of future AIDS cases, and that unprotected sex was Russian roulette. It's now 2007. I don't know a single person with HIV. I've not known a single person, in the thousands of people I have met, that has ever admitted to being HIV positive. Billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of dollars have been spent on AIDS research. I still don't know a single person who has AIDS. I'm not saying they don't exist, AIDS exists, it is horrible, it is tragic. I do know a lot of people, but I don't know anyone with AIDS.

Why so much talk about AIDS? AIDS is a muli-billion dollar industry. In the early to mid 90's, you couldn't get grant money unless you were doing AIDS research. Bonafide research in other areas couldn't get a grant unless they found a way to connect their research to the AIDS discussion. Big hearted people have donated countless billions to AIDS research, AIDS support groups, AIDS awareness, International AIDS campaigns.

It is now 2007. You no longer need to be researching AIDS in order to get grant money, but the new HOT topic is Global Warming. Just like AIDS, just like Y2K, just like bird flu, this is big business. People's income depend on there being enough hype. Scholar's credentials depend on their research being "right." What starts off founded in science turns quickly into junk science. If it scares people, it makes headlines. If there are headlines there is grant money. It doesn't mean that there is no science behind AIDS/Bird Flu/Y2K/Global Warming, especially with AIDS, BUT we need to look at how much truth there is to all the hype, and we need to look at who has the most to gain by keeping the up the facade.

[Gayle]

Is it hype or simply education? He is spreading the word that global warming is happening so that everyone can alter their behaviour accordingly - no good just telling a couple of people - so he has to make an impact. The problem comes when people start to argue against it but take a look at who is arguing against it and question what their motives are.

The doubt is being brought in by the government (think he was getting at the American government there, not ours) and by tabloid newspapers, probably from reports by the government.

They did a survery of 936 articles in scientific journals about global warming and every single one of them agreed that it was happening and that we should be doing something about it. They then did a survery of 600+ tabloid newspapers and in 53% of them there was a story about doubt - where did this doubt come from when all of the experts are saying categorically that it is happening. This is why the film is called The Inconvenient Truth - it is inconvenient because it affects industry, business and the dollar, all of which have a huge influence on the government!

I would suggest Lampman that you go and see the film which can answer this far better than I can. You might want to have a look at the website

http://www.climatecrisis.net/

[WillowTheWhisp]

Maybe some things haven't happened because money has been spent on preventing them - just a thought.

[Billcat]

Originally Posted by Gayle

Is it hype or simply education? He is spreading the word that global warming is happening so that everyone can alter their behaviour accordingly - no good just telling a couple of people - so he has to make an impact.

Education. Good thought, gayle!

Education is probably the main reason why we don't have 1 in 10 Americans infected with AIDS. In places in the world where AIDS education has not happened, such as certain areas in Africa, the outcome was much worse.

Education is part of the reason why the bird flu is now known to be somewhat less of a threat than originally thought. Given the way the virus works, scientists have now learned that the receptors in the human body do no mesh well with this particular virus. However, let's not forget that flu viruses are extremely mutable and can be, in some instances, quite deadly.

Y2K? Most businesses, including the one I work for, spent considerable time and money making sure that their computer systems were appropriately modified to handle a 4-digit year, rather than the 2-digit years originally utilized, for the sake of efficiency, in computer programs. Had we not done so, there would have been some severe problems. It was not, despite lampman's claims, a wasted effort. For all the media over-hype of Y2K, it also served to educate smaller businesses to be aware of the potential risks and to evaluate their own situation.

Does the media dwell too much on certain stories? Of course! In this day of 24-hour news, they have to fill up the time somehow. Also, the news outlets are going to air those stories which appeal to the greatest number of viewers, as this is how they make money. Sad to day, but we are pretty much stuck with the tabloid sensationalism in telejournalism today, because most of the audience does not care to watch in-depth analysis of major stories. So, instead of news on the AM broadcast, we get to waste time with the "news" of the outcome of last evening's "reality" TV. Heck, we even get more than our fair share of that on AccyWeb!