For the guys who haven't yet seen it

[Icemelt]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170

[ecoli]

ahhh... so much conflicting information. It's hard to know what to believe anymore.

[Genecks]

I'm getting annoyed by it all. So, who would stop me if I decided to melt the icecaps myself?

[Gilded]

I'm getting annoyed by it all. So, who would stop me if I decided to melt the icecaps myself?

 

As Finland has a separate paragraph for punishments against people who detonate nuclear weapons in polar regions for the environmental damage it causes (believe it or not) I have a reason to believe other countries might too! But I suppose if you used another method such as a blowdryer there would be no legal base for stopping you.

[ecoli]

I just finished watching the movie... the end bit about the economic impact on the poor in developing countries, due to restrictions on development is particularly interesting.

[bascule]

Oh come now, we had 3 threads on this when it came out. Here's one of them:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25328

 

Let's see, this special was denounced by the network it aired on, and several of the interviewed climate scientists came out against it after it was aired, because their opinions were selectively edited or distorted.

 

This is little more than a What the Bleep of climate science documentaries, or failing that, a Loose Change. The opinions presented were edited to fit a particular agenda. Misinformation was presented (discredited/falsified graphs) and the opinions of several different groups with varying opinions selectively edited into a single, coherent voice.

[Icemelt]

Well, although one or two of the Profs interviewed got cold feet when their research funds came under threat, and subsequently selected reverse gear, 95% of the contributors still stand by their comments, and many more have joined their ranks since.

For what it's worth, I give far more credence to these eminently qualified guys than to any unqualified wannabe president waving his baton about on stage !

Let’s face it, there is some significant irrefutable evidence included in the movie.

And on my favourite subject, the tropospheric anomalies are still unresolved by the IPCC, despite the rejection of earlier erroneous measuring techniques. Their latest report confirms subsequent results remain inconclusive, with no clear evidence of tropospheric warming significantly greater than at the surface, and many tropical results showing the opposite effect. This of course throws into doubt the very suggestion that CO2 is the driving force behind global warming.

It also seems, now more scientists pluck up their courage to question and scrutinize their reports, the IPCC comment that their climate models are intended to indicate what COULD happen under circumstances that do NOT currently exist, and should NOT be used for climate forecast purposes.

[JTM³]

Oh come now, we had 3 threads on this when it came out. Here's one of them:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25328

 

Let's see, this special was denounced by the network it aired on, and several of the interviewed climate scientists came out against it after it was aired, because their opinions were selectively edited or distorted.

 

This is little more than a What the Bleep of climate science documentaries, or failing that, a Loose Change. The opinions presented were edited to fit a particular agenda. Misinformation was presented (discredited/falsified graphs) and the opinions of several different groups with varying opinions selectively edited into a single, coherent voice.

 

And what about the bit on the FOUNDER of Greenpeace?

 

Well, although one or two of the Profs interviewed got cold feet when their research funds came under threat, and subsequently selected reverse gear, 95% of the contributors still stand by their comments, and many more have joined their ranks since.

For what it's worth, I give far more credence to these eminently qualified guys than to any unqualified wannabe president waving his baton about on stage !

Let’s face it, there is some significant irrefutable evidence included in the movie.

And on my favourite subject, the tropospheric anomalies are still unresolved by the IPCC, despite the rejection of earlier erroneous measuring techniques. Their latest report confirms subsequent results remain inconclusive, with no clear evidence of tropospheric warming significantly greater than at the surface, and many tropical results showing the opposite effect. This of course throws into doubt the very suggestion that CO2 is the driving force behind global warming.

It also seems, now more scientists pluck up their courage to question and scrutinize their reports, the IPCC comment that their climate s are intended to indicate what COULD happen under circumstances that do NOT currently exist, and should NOT be used for climate forecast purposes.

 

Quoted for truth

[1veedo]

For the guys who haven't yet seen it...

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656640542976216573

 

I'm about to post this in each individual thread that brings the swindle up. This video is like a power point by a university professor outlining some of the errors in the video.

[bascule]

And what about the bit on the FOUNDER of Greenpeace?

 

I sure hope you're not talking about Bjorn Lomborg