The Great Global Warming Swindle?
13-03-2007, 07:50 PM
#1
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bexhill, East Sussex
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Great Global Warming Swindle?
Hello all,
I think this was a Dispatches show on Channel 4 recently, but I've seen it's on YouTube as well.
It's funny, because I like to keep my options open on many things and my Dad is a pretty firm nay-sayer when it comes to CO2 and Global Warming (he always likes to point out the fact that CO2 is heavier than air anyway, but we have arguments about convection currents and warming from the Earth's surface
).
Personally, I think we should do all we can to preserve as much of fossil fuels as possible - so in that way I am 'Eco-friendly', but more and more it does seem that it's a tool for politics rather than the ACTUAL good of the Earth and the people that live in it.
As for the political aspects of 'Greenies' - don't get me started, I was already aware that once Communism 'failed' in the '90s that the far-left was looking for a new political vehicle. This program shows that the Scientists and experts involved are only too far aware of this as well!
YouTube - Great Global Warming Swindle (parts 1-8 of 8)
I personally think this program was very good - much better than any of the pap Conspiracy Theory 'Documentaries' I've seen about many other issues. I'm sure GrahamS1 will disagree though!
Enjoy!
Andy
I think this was a Dispatches show on Channel 4 recently, but I've seen it's on YouTube as well.
It's funny, because I like to keep my options open on many things and my Dad is a pretty firm nay-sayer when it comes to CO2 and Global Warming (he always likes to point out the fact that CO2 is heavier than air anyway, but we have arguments about convection currents and warming from the Earth's surface
).Personally, I think we should do all we can to preserve as much of fossil fuels as possible - so in that way I am 'Eco-friendly', but more and more it does seem that it's a tool for politics rather than the ACTUAL good of the Earth and the people that live in it.
As for the political aspects of 'Greenies' - don't get me started, I was already aware that once Communism 'failed' in the '90s that the far-left was looking for a new political vehicle. This program shows that the Scientists and experts involved are only too far aware of this as well!
YouTube - Great Global Warming Swindle (parts 1-8 of 8)
I personally think this program was very good - much better than any of the pap Conspiracy Theory 'Documentaries' I've seen about many other issues. I'm sure GrahamS1 will disagree though!
Enjoy!
Andy
13-03-2007, 08:05 PM
#3
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bexhill, East Sussex
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've yet to watch an 'Inconvenient Truth' - from the reviews I've heard it's supposed to be pretty good. Will give it a watch - although I feel biased now I've watched this one! 
13-03-2007, 08:22 PM
#4
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Saving the planet
Posts: 5,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically the CH4 program took Al Gores facts and showed them to be close but inaccurate. They showed their sun theory model to fit Al's temp curve far better than the CO2 theory and as you know then suggest that it is CO2 levels being effected by temp and not CO2 effecting temp.
Pretty good stuff I thought.
However, everyone is on the climate change bandwagon so its going to be a massive ship to turn around....
I still haven't made my mind up yet and it's a fundamental part of my job these days...
Pretty good stuff I thought.
However, everyone is on the climate change bandwagon so its going to be a massive ship to turn around....
I still haven't made my mind up yet and it's a fundamental part of my job these days...
13-03-2007, 08:56 PM
#7
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bexhill, East Sussex
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This issue is quite important to you then!
I'm aware that the ball is already set in motion - I just wish people wouldn't take everything they get told by the media as gospel and perhaps do their own research on these things!
Cheers,
Andy
Trending Topics
13-03-2007, 09:08 PM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Didnt see the programme, but from what I read the producer, Martin Durkin, has a rather dubious track record for programme making. I think this might be a case of C4 trying to boost their ratings by broadcasting controversial material rather than something to be considered seriously.
Quote From the Independent:
"Martin Durkin, for his part, achieved notoriety when his previous series on the environment for the channel, called Against Nature , was roundly condemned by the Independent Television Commission for misleading contributors on the purpose of the programmes, and for editing four interviewees in a way that "distorted or mispresented their known views".
Channel 4 was forced to issue a humiliating apology. But it seems to have forgiven Mr Durkin and sees no need to make special checks on the accuracy of the programme. For his part, the film-maker accepts the charge of misleading contributors"
Quote From the Independent:
"Martin Durkin, for his part, achieved notoriety when his previous series on the environment for the channel, called Against Nature , was roundly condemned by the Independent Television Commission for misleading contributors on the purpose of the programmes, and for editing four interviewees in a way that "distorted or mispresented their known views".
Channel 4 was forced to issue a humiliating apology. But it seems to have forgiven Mr Durkin and sees no need to make special checks on the accuracy of the programme. For his part, the film-maker accepts the charge of misleading contributors"
13-03-2007, 09:10 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just found this as well, what a joke that guy is
in October 1998, a television producer named Martin Durkin took a proposal to the BBC's science series, Horizon. Silicone breast implants, he claimed, far from harming women, were in fact beneficial, reducing the risk of breast cancer. Horizon commissioned a researcher to find out whether or not his assertion was true.
After a thorough review, the researcher reported that Mr Durkin had ignored a powerful body of evidence contradicting his claims.
Martin Durkin withdrew his proposal. Instead of dropping it, however, he took it to Channel 4 and, astonishingly, sold it to their science series, Equinox. To help him make the programme, Durkin hired Najma Kazi, a highly respected TV researcher and producer who was previously a research biochemist. After two weeks she walked out. "It's not a joke to walk away from four or five months' work," she told me, "but my research was being ignored. The published research had been construed to give an impression that's not the case. I don't know how that programme got passed. The only consolation for me was that I'm really glad I didn't put my name to it."
But the programme was broadcast, in May last year. Silicone implants, it insisted, appeared to reduce the incidence of breast cancer. Women claiming that their operations had caused severe health problems were dismissed as cranks, malingerers and compensation-chasers. The researchers who believed that there was a problem were accused of practising "junk science".
After a thorough review, the researcher reported that Mr Durkin had ignored a powerful body of evidence contradicting his claims.
Martin Durkin withdrew his proposal. Instead of dropping it, however, he took it to Channel 4 and, astonishingly, sold it to their science series, Equinox. To help him make the programme, Durkin hired Najma Kazi, a highly respected TV researcher and producer who was previously a research biochemist. After two weeks she walked out. "It's not a joke to walk away from four or five months' work," she told me, "but my research was being ignored. The published research had been construed to give an impression that's not the case. I don't know how that programme got passed. The only consolation for me was that I'm really glad I didn't put my name to it."
But the programme was broadcast, in May last year. Silicone implants, it insisted, appeared to reduce the incidence of breast cancer. Women claiming that their operations had caused severe health problems were dismissed as cranks, malingerers and compensation-chasers. The researchers who believed that there was a problem were accused of practising "junk science".
13-03-2007, 09:22 PM
#10
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
I saw the program and I'm sold! Seriously they are presenting facts taken from un-related studies which all show similar trends. I've yet to see any figures that truely support global warming appart from Al Gore's nicely altered graph of CO2 and Global temp. All the politics that were covered at the end of the show were not a nice way of looking at the world, however I have to admit, they made as much sense as 0.05% of our atmosphere causing the world to end......
How come everyone else is completely ignoring the recent data which supports global temp drops in the 40's ect..?
I think we should reduce our energy consumtion and reduce waste, but I want to do it to preserve resources and reduce costs.
I hope that in the next ten years the Global temp drops one year
that'll put the wind up some ppl.
JAmes.
p.s. The inconvenient truth should be renamed "A convenient lie".
How come everyone else is completely ignoring the recent data which supports global temp drops in the 40's ect..?
I think we should reduce our energy consumtion and reduce waste, but I want to do it to preserve resources and reduce costs.
I hope that in the next ten years the Global temp drops one year
that'll put the wind up some ppl.JAmes.
p.s. The inconvenient truth should be renamed "A convenient lie".
13-03-2007, 09:40 PM
#11
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bexhill, East Sussex
Posts: 1,789
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't aware of the producer's history - it's interesting reading!
However, I could point out similar arguments with Al Gore and other's productions supporting global warming. We'll never get to the truth if we continually tear apart things based on a person's reputation. Hard facts will win over people's minds.
Unfortunately, as with nearly everything important, politics and narrow-mindedness will mean that the truth will be muddied and never be attainable
Andy
However, I could point out similar arguments with Al Gore and other's productions supporting global warming. We'll never get to the truth if we continually tear apart things based on a person's reputation. Hard facts will win over people's minds.
Unfortunately, as with nearly everything important, politics and narrow-mindedness will mean that the truth will be muddied and never be attainable
Andy
14-03-2007, 07:39 AM
#12
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Saving the planet
Posts: 5,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the trouble with this stuff. Nobody has the time to do there own research so we only have the crap that gets fed to us.
Which is why i sit squarely on the fence because I don't know who to believe.
People always ask me how can I drive the csl when I'm the energy manager. All i have to say is that energy management was around long before global warming. Climate change is a recent addition conveniently tacked on to an energy managers role
At 110bhp/litre my na car is very efficient
Which is why i sit squarely on the fence because I don't know who to believe.
People always ask me how can I drive the csl when I'm the energy manager. All i have to say is that energy management was around long before global warming. Climate change is a recent addition conveniently tacked on to an energy managers role
At 110bhp/litre my na car is very efficient
14-03-2007, 06:12 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by andyhardy
I wasn't aware of the producer's history - it's interesting reading!
However, I could point out similar arguments with Al Gore and other's productions supporting global warming. We'll never get to the truth if we continually tear apart things based on a person's reputation. Hard facts will win over people's minds.
Unfortunately, as with nearly everything important, politics and narrow-mindedness will mean that the truth will be muddied and never be attainable
Andy
However, I could point out similar arguments with Al Gore and other's productions supporting global warming. We'll never get to the truth if we continually tear apart things based on a person's reputation. Hard facts will win over people's minds.
Unfortunately, as with nearly everything important, politics and narrow-mindedness will mean that the truth will be muddied and never be attainable
Andy
Doesnt help me or you make our minds up though when everyone researching and preaching about global warming has an angle on things, how can we believe either when they all have reasons to bend the truth?
My own view (which may offend some but it is only my opinion) is that I dont give a fuck, if its a slow temp increase and a slow decline to our planet I aint bothered, on the flip side if it all goes pete tong in a week a-la 'The Day After Tomorrow' then bring it on, saves me going to work
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post