The truth about Global Warming......

[chadspad]

Did anyone see this programme the other night? I watched some of it (altho I dozed off as have been poorly lately), my hubby and parents watched it and filled me in on the rest. It was pretty much as my hubby and I suspected that it is more a nature thing.
I was surprised to not see anything about it on here being discussed.

My parents, who dont like to have to make an effort with anything, straight away see it as a reason to relax on trying to make the planet a nicer place saying that it was all codswallop and why should they bother now they know theyre not affecting anything - not a good attitude! We shouldnt give up trying to get more alternative energy used or different ways to fuel cars etc. Why not continue to plant a tree for a flight anyway - what harms it gonna do?

Whats other peoples views on the programme?

[Jack]

Gidday

Naturally I haven't seen the program and I doubt very much that it would ever be shown down here anyway. Freedom of speach and all that crap.

But have a dig around on these two sites and you will see why I don't bloody beleieve the crap they are spouting off.

http://www.iceagenow.com/

http://www.climatescience.org.nz/

When I was a boy they were saying that the World Wars changed the weather with the bombs. Then through the 50's and 60's they were blaming the nuclear testing.

But wat back I really believe they were probably blaming the use of bows and arrows. The climate has always been changing and it it will continue to keep changing till the Good Lord comes back, whether you believe that or not.

[Martin]

I read it as a diatribe from the right wing, aimed more at those dreadful "green" types who've made it all up (apparently, global warming was invented by Margaret Thatcher! )........it contained blatant untruths about the "uselessness" of pv panels, and how the West was denying the third world their god-given right to industrialise............
All the graphs that were displayed were still ending up showing "horribly hot", whatever the wobbles were in the graphs themselves. They conveniently overlooked things like gross-overpopulation, and the fact that we are galloping through the earth's resources at a rate of knots, all given to "feed the machine", and further poison the planet. No mention was made of acidification of the oceans, which of itself could cause the cessation of life on this planet as we know it!
More fiddling while the earth burns!

[Muddypause]

apparently, global warming was invented by Margaret Thatcher!

Yep, that's absolutely right - well it was she who was the first major politician to draw attention to it.

Much as I despise the woman, and all she did and stood for, we shouldn't forget that she was a proper, qualified scientist, and knew how to assess scientific data.

Here are a selection of speeches from as long ago as 1990:

http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeche ... cid=108097 (briefly, near the end of the speech)
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeche ... cid=108102
http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeche ... cid=108237

"The greenhouse effect, without which we wouldn't be here, is in danger of getting so hot that there might be fundamental changes unless we alter our way of life."

*****

"The second conclusion that can already be drawn is that more than ever we are one world. The fact is that you cannot divide the atmosphere into segments and say: "All right! We will look after our bit and you look after yours!" We shall only be able to deal with the problems by a giant international effort in which we all cooperate and that leads on to the third conclusion:

We would be taking a great risk with future generations if, having received this early warning, we did nothing about it or just took the attitude: "Well! It will see me out!" "

*****

"We have become more and more aware of the growing imbalance between our species and other species, between population and resources, between humankind and the natural order of which we are part."

*****

"The real dangers arise because climate change is combined with other problems of our age: for instance the population explosion; â€â€

[Millymollymandy]

My husband watched this programme, he is an intelligent bloke, and he believed it all. However he's not about to change his lifestyle (I wouldn't let him anyway!).

[funkypixie]

I believe that (as with most things) the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. It was interesting to see an alternate POV though. Actually 2 of the guys who made the film were being interviewed last week and they said pretty much the same thing.

Will it change how I live? No. Should we still be taking account of our actions and consumption. Yes. Do we need to remember that everyone has their own agenda regardless of which 'side' they are on? Absolutely.

[thedharmahouse]

I did not see the documentary, but was told about it by a friend. My first question was "who funded this documentary, and what was their purpose". I discovered that the documentary was produced by Martin Durkin, who has "caused consistent controversy over the alleged bias found in many of his documentaries" including his 1997 documentary, Against Nature which elicited a primetime apology from Channel 4. (Source: wikipedia and numerous other websites found by searching his name).

There's some interesting points to read on Wikipedia about the documentary if anyone is interested -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_ ... ontroversy

[catalyst]

is this the great global warming swindle?
if so, it had us in hysterics. to say that 'this poor woman (in africa) has to cook in smoke because she doesnt have electricity' was ridiculous to say the least. what she needed was a chimney! LOL.

[QuakerBear]

I didn't see the programme but I've heard many of the arguements against man made global warming. At the end of the day I don't know everything about global climate systems, no one does. So, for the foreseeable furture I'm not going to take the risk that I may be adversely effecting the climate.

At the end of the day, our beautiful Earth is too rare to risk, especially when based on the evidence of a TV show, all for the sake of human effort and money.

[mybarnconversion]

Always confuses me why something like climate change has to either exist or not in the eyes of the media and be caused by a single group of factors with no reference to history ... why can't we just view it sensibly and take a holistic approach -- the climate is changing (as it always has done), mankind is influencing that change (but we're not really sure in what way) and we have a pretty good idea what we can do to minimise that influence (most of which is just good old-fashioned common sense)...

Now can we just get on with being sensible ...

In relation to Margaret Thatcher much as most people despise her, at least she was intelligent & had a (much as we may not agree with it) moral standpoint that she acted from and that wasn't based purely on self-promotion and personal gain -- there've not been many politicians since her that that can be said about.