RE: [DMCForum] Re: Global Warming Swindle

["timnagin" <timnagin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My intent was not to make it personal; please don't take it that way.

 

I assumed, maybe improperly, that you were on the side of the other movie
because of your recent posts and how you recently stated this movie we are
now watching is propaganda.  Did I assume wrong?

 

I never said any websites I find that debunk the other movie makes this one
more valid. I can find as many sites supporting, or denying, either one.
That is why I asked previously, which one is correct?  I do not know, which
is why I rely on facts and will make up my own mind.  I don't need someone
making a movie, from either point of view, making my mind up for me.

 

The side of humans causing this has been way more publicized than the other.
I don't see how anyone can deny that.  It is "in vogue" to be a global
warming alarmist.  You can't go anywhere, watch anything on TV, read
anything in the paper, or listen to anything on the radio without people
screaming "we need to wake up - global warming is real and it's caused by
humans!"  SUV's are the poster child of the problem and hybrids of the
answer.

 

No offense intended - I enjoy the intellectual pursuit as we discussed
previously.  :-)

Greg

 

 

  _____  

From: DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of jonheese
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 1:29 AM
To: DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [DMCForum] Re: Global Warming Swindle

 

For someone who claims to make decisions on hard facts, you sure do
seem bent on making this discussion personal.

I'm not sure why you keep talking about An Inconvenient Truth as
though it's my movie. I never said anything about it, I never said I
agreed with its viewpoints, or that it was factually-based or
infallible. I never quoted it, backed it, or even mentioned that I'd
seen it.

Furthermore, no matter how many websites you can find with proof that
Gore's "facts" were wrong, that doesn't make Durkin's film any less
bunk. That's the issue here, and I'm not sure why you're diverting
attention from that.

And by the way, call me crazy, but unlike the opposing view, I have a
feeling that the theory of anthropogenic global warming has been
published in a few peer-reviewed scientific journals. I can cite
title, issue, and page, if you'd like.

You'd better believe that both sides of this argument have been
politicized quite a lot more than this film would have you believe. 
It has become the new vogue to champion the cause of anti-global
warming, as it is insanely easy to get a ton of people snowballing
behind you. It's a huge money-maker for film-makers (duh), public
speakers, "scientists", and obviously, companies whose primary income
comes from fossil fuels, like Big Oil.

Think about it.

Regards,
Jon Heese

--- In DMCForum@yahoogroup <mailto:DMCForum%40yahoogroups.com> s.com,
"timnagin" <timnagin@...> wrote:
>
> >I'm only three-quarters of the way through it yet as well, but I've
> >already counted more glaring inaccuracies and faulty logic than I can
> >even remember without writing them down...
> 
> 
> We must be about the same place now. I am at the point where the guy is
> talking about mosquitoes thriving. I could find glaring inaccuracies in
> that other film as well.
> 
> 
> >If you read through the pages I posted links for, you'll see that the
> >logic used to denounce the viewpoints of the film is not based on the
> >mindset of the people doing the arguing. It shows that some of the
> >tactics used by the film were dirty tricks, not facts.
> 
> 
> I am sure this didn't happen in the other film, right? :-)
> 
> 
> 
> >At least a few of the "scientists" interviewed are not experts in
the field
> they are
> >discussing, or have opinions and theories that are presented as proven
> >fact, when they have not been published or peer-reviewed.
> 
> 
> I am sure this didn't happen in the other film, right? :-)
> 
> 
> >Yeah, it is more and more difficult for the layperson to get real,
> >true, unmolested data and analysis on this topic. Both sides have
> >been politicized and the waters have been muddied to the point where
> >it's easy not to know which side to trust.
> 
> 
> Yet, some people scream the earth is about to end after watching
that movie.
> The side of the world ending has been way more politicized than the
other.
> 
> 
> >I don't have an answer for you. You just have to do your due
> >diligence and research what's being published.
> 
> 
> Which is what I have already stated. So, given that, why adhere to one
> mindset over another? I prefer facts and verifiable proof. One
thing in
> this video that really stood out to me was how we now use satellites
to see
> what is going on right now. We live in a world of "I want it
yesterday" and
> very little patience. Sure, we can see the ice caps melting and
such but
> that doesn't mean it hasn't happened for millennia and there is a
crisis.
> The earth has been here for billions or years and gone through many
climate
> changes on its own and survived.
> 
> 
> >>>Think, research, think some more, then believe.
> >> 
> >> Believe what?
> >
> >Whatever you determine is right.
> >
> >Would "decide" have been a better word?
> 
> 
> I would go with "decide based on actual, real, hard facts, not
feelings or
> belief." :-)
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:DMCForum-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:DMCForum-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/