Linux.com

I find it odd that the only counter comments I've encounter to "An Inconvient Truth" is stupid mocking like this.

Does that lack of real comments mean it is absolutely true?

#

It's apparently some sick <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06215/710851-115.stm" title="post-gazette.com">energy lobbying group's</a post-gazette.com> attempt to discredit the film.
Since, you know... they can't use... facts...

#

Since, you know... they can't use... facts...

Actually, they CAN use facts, because the facts are on their side. But guess what? PEOPLE AREN'T INTERESTED IN THE FACTS. What people respond to is a good show, and the global warming alarmists were kicking the skeptics' asses all over the place when the latter were trying to argue with facts.

The world is in imminent danger of total economic collapse thanks to the radical agenda of Gore & Co., and the people on the rational side of the argument HAVE to do SOMETHING to get people's attention.

So this is what it has come to, because this is about the only thing the sheeple will pay attention to. Sad but true.

#

I find it odd that the only counter comments I've encounter to "An Inconvient Truth" is stupid mocking like this.

Then you haven't looked. There is plenty of rational criticism of Gore's propaganda film. <a href="http://www.reason.com/rb/rb061606.shtml" title="reason.com">Here</a reason.com>, for instance.

#

No. It's bad science all around. There is global warming, but the famous hockeystick graph is highly questionable. That does not mean that anthrogenic (mankind-caused) global warming is or isn't real, but the questionable data, plus "throw everything in the pot" arguments like using the 2005 hurricane season as a data point (many scientific groups, including NOAA, don't think the recent hurricanes and global warming are tied together), makes the statement "global warming is proven" utterly wrong.

Of course, to then say that because it isn't proven implies it doesn't exist is equally stupid. Bad science, bad logic. The problem is complex and likely due to many many factors. People are seeing any correlation and jumping to causation. The extremes -- that there is no warming or that humans are responsible for all global warming -- are both pretty much unsupportable given current data.

JunkScience.com and JerryPournelle.com both have fairly good skeptic information. Neither disputes global warming and both raise serious unanswered questions with the current models (in Junk Science's case it's with the mathematics, in JP's case, it's with historical records).

There is also the slightly more activisty <a href="http://www.realclimate.org/" title="realclimate.org">http://www.realclimate.org/</a realclimate.org> They are less objective in my opinion, but still bring up good points.

#

No, the lack of rational opposition is not the proof of truth. If that was the case we may still be running around believing the world was flat. The global warming theory is a popular one, but popularity does not make it the truth. Please don't abuse the innocent penguins, and give credit where credit is due. I don't belive you can brainwash penguins that easy.

#

The creator of tux's website says you are free to use and modify the image as you please. So, it may be in poor taste, but they can use the image.

#

The fact of the matter is that Global Warming DOESN'T exist. Although it's a fictional book, read State of Fear, which cites many facts that can looked up to show that Global Warming is a theroy at best.

#

"The fact of the matter is that Global Warming DOESN'T exist. Although it's a fictional book, read State of Fear, which cites many facts that can looked up to show that Global Warming is a theroy at best. "
Why do you think the gletsjers have melted so incredily fast the last ten years? why do you think thousands of scientists around the world think global warning is a serious matter? Why do you think stuffing the atmosphere with CO2 and other gasses on such a extremely great scale as we do now cant have any negative effects. Why do you think the polar caps are melting. Why you think its not true while people predicted all these things tens of years ago? I dont get you people saying global warming is just some political nonsense?

#

"I dont get you people saying global warming is just some political nonsense?"

I get it perfectly. Two words (not necessarily related). Money and responsability*.

*There's actually a third, word implicit in the two, change.

#

Why do you think the polar caps are melting.

Perhaps for the same reasons that the polar caps on <a href="http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_snow_011206-1.html" title="space.com">Mars</a space.com> are melting?

#

I'm not going to convince you that Global Warming exists as you are already so sure that it does not, that you have to write it in uppercase.

Let us forget the consequences and just make clear that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

The temperature on earth has changed dramaticly several times in its history which is a good argument for oil companies who would like to prove global warming to be fake.

Fact is: The global temperature is getting warmer.

You are boiling inside a room with hot air and cold air, which would you want less of if you could?

We are dependent on oil. Oil is not going to be there forever.

Oil has caused political issues. No talk about the actual reasons why USA invaded Iraq, but it COULD have been because of oil, and when oil is getting more and more rare it WILL cause political disputes and maby even cost lives.

What is the risk in moving to renewable energy sources?

#

Rob, I'm someone you know and I like you. That said, I need to offer a criticism. Since you call yourself a journalist, you should already know this. Obviously, you didn't.

NOT ALL GLOBAL WARMING SKEPTICS ARE SHILLS OF THE OIL COMPANIES!! Hel-l-o-o-o-o... Some of us -- myself included -- are able to follow the actual science and see that there are huge problems with the alarmists' statements.

Please try to be a little more objective. As a journalist, you should have known better.

I agree with your main point. Politicizing Tux is shameful and dirty.

Ken

#

Right, we need much more data before its clear that this is a manmade trend, not just a natural cycle that would've occurred with or without human industrial activity. If we start now and collect 400 more years of data, we'll probably have enough to make some effective policy decisions around year 2400.

#

Well, SOME data does exist that indicates that PART of the Current Warming Period (CWP) is due to anthropogenic forcing -- but the maximum amount that can be attributed to human activity amounts to less than two-tenths of one degree.

Of course, this doesn't fit well with either side, both of whom want to engage in all-or-nothing reasoning.

As I said earlier, it doesn't take an oil company shill to criticize the ridiculous claims of Gore et. al. -- just someone who is paying attention to the actual science instead of what's being reported in the popular Press.

#

That's funny, I thought this "debate" was over years ago, and it no longer has any political discussion either way, since every party is agreed over it. Unless of course you try to deny that it is man made, in which case nobody is going to listen and you may get a couple of lines somewhere in the back of a scientific publication.

Unless of course you live in the USA.

#

It moved from "Is man to blame?", to "how should we dole out the blame?". Of course no one wants their portion.

#

>NOT ALL GLOBAL WARMING SKEPTICS ARE SHILLS OF THE OIL COMPANIES!!

Of course not. Some are just knee-jerk conservative reactionaries who oppose global warming facts because it threatens their interests.

I'm old enough to remember plenty of people testifying that there is no evidence tobacco causes cancer. They weren't all Philip-Morris shills -- but they WERE heavily allied with the same side as the tobacco companies.

It's the old Arab adage, 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. The enemy of oil company shills are environmentalists, doo-gooders and liberals. It's not an unsound strategy to oppose liberals on this issue (even if you don't believe what you really spout).

#

THIS VIDEO ROB IS TALKING ABOUT WAS MADE BY AN OIL COMPANY SHILL!!!! <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06215/710851-115.stm" title="post-gazette.com">http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06215/710851-115.s<nobr>t<wbr></nobr> m</a post-gazette.com>
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/print?id=2273111" title="go.com">http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/print?id=2273111</a go.com>

#

ZOMGS, WTF?

That said, This guy is a rather lame-ass with very little to do. I wonder if his "things to do" include shaving once a... decade. It probably does include, though, bashing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. for using Bill Gates' likeness in their "BillGatus of Borg" icon.

#

I looked at both movie, the one posted here first, then the "Al gore penguin army".

So, my first impression of the movie done by 'Roblimo' is that it seems mostly true. Credit should be given to authors.

Then I watched the Al Gore penguin army youtube movie, and I was bored, it sucked, and I can't see what the hype is all about. There is tons of new lame movies made everyday on the internet. Some become phenomenons, other become archived lame movies. That's a lame movie.

Is it notable? I don't think so. It sucked. Should the credit for the use of Tux be given? Yes, it should always. Is it worth to fuss about a lame movie that doesn't credit Tux? No. It's too lame to fuss about it.

#

...how is it we are affecting Mars? Or is it the probes we've sent and their radioactive batteries?

"Mars would make a lousy host for the Winter Olympics. Yes, there's the lack of air to consider. But more important, Martian snow turns out to be rock hard. Worse, it is melting away at an alarming rate.

In fact, Mars may be in the midst of a period of profound climate change, according to a new study that shows dramatic year-to-year losses of snow at the south pole."

<a href="http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_snow_011206-1.html" title="space.com">http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem<nobr>/<wbr></nobr> mars_snow_011206-1.html</a space.com>

#

You're the second person to bring up an apple to potato comparison. The only thing they both have in common is being planets.

#

The point would be that TWO planets warming suggests a common cause (solar forcing).

#

Venus is hotter than Mercury. Mercury is closer to the Sun than Venus. Wow, that there "greenhouse effect" is all nonsense.

#

The Mars polar ice caps are made of Carbon Dioxide, not water, so any comparisions to the earth are apples to oranges. Still, I read TFA.

It admits that we don't know what caused the Mars polar ice caps to recede, but they speculate that dust storms could have had an impact by trapping some of the heat. It admits that we don't even know whether they are receding - becasue they only have ONE YEAR of data! The article states that we don't know how the sublimation of the Mars ice, which they are guesstimating could increase the Mars atmospheric density several percent, will affect the climate except that it'll probably be insignificant because the atmosphere is so thin to begin with. So this is a terrible analogy to use for debating the earth's climate.

There is no doubt that manmade carbon dioxide, methane, refrigerants, etc. are trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere. There is no doubt that on average this will increase the Earth's temperature. There are reasonable debates about how and how much the global climate will be affected and how particular local climates will change.

Pointing out that the climate has undergone large scale changes in the past ignores the serious impacts those changes have had on survival and extinction and ignores the novelty of man's expanding influence.

#

It is true that the theory of Global Warming is a crock of crap. But even if you've bought into the silly theory, you gotta admit, this is a pretty funny video!!

#

You're pretty stupid.
That about sums it up.

#

What a stimulating and insightful reply!! Truly, you must be an intellectual yourself!!

#

"What a stimulating and insightful reply!! Truly, you must be an intellectual yourself!!"
Not to mention the original message, that WAS intellectual

#

.... TUXing liberties!!

#