The Great Global Warming Swindle NTSC DVDr
- Type:
- Video > Movies DVDR
- Files:
- 1
- Size:
- 3.36 GiB (3607166976 Bytes)
- Info:
- IMDB
- Spoken language(s):
- English
- Uploaded:
- 2007-06-24 22:50:27 GMT
- By:
- greenfrog
- Seeders:
- 0
- Leechers:
- 1
- Comments
- 28
- Info Hash: 6EA71B1D43B9E926B730F3C9F36EB725FD7AF2EE
(Problems with magnets links are fixed by upgrading your torrent client!)
Full NTSC conversion from the BBC documentary with custom menu. A full DVD release wont be available until November, 2007. 76 minutes. A debunking of the current global warming fraternity: \"Campaigners say the time for debate is over. Any criticism, no matter how scientifically rigorous, is illegitimate. Even worse, dangerous. But in this film, it will be shown that the earth\'s climate is always changing. That there is nothing unusual about the current temperature, and the scientific evidence does not support the notion that climate is driven by carbon dioxide(c02), man-made or otherwise. Everywhere you are being told that man-made climate change is proved beyond doubt. But you are being told, lies.\" Quotes: \"There is no direct evidence which links 20th century global warming to anthroprogenic [man-made] greenhouse gasses.\" \"We can\'t say that C02 will drive climate, it certainly never did in the past.\" \"The global warming alarm is dressed up as science. But its not science, its propaganda.\" \"[we are being told that]If the C02 increases in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas, then the temperature will go up. But the ice-core records shows exactly the opposite. So the fundamental assumption, the most fundamental assumption, the assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans is shown to be wrong.\"
| File list not available. |
Thank you! At last a voice of reason
I though global warming was too much hype. Then I saw Al Gore's movie and was shocked to think that it might not be hype after all. But once I saw this, it showed Al Gore to be partially responsible for the hype and his facts to be partially erroneous as well.
Basically C02 never changed the climate. Meaning we can drive huge SUV's forever and it wont change the temperature.
Its the SUN that caused the temperature to go up, which caused forests and then animals to prospers, which in turn causes c02 to go up.
The NY Times article (3/13/2007), said, "scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore?s central points are exaggerated and erroneous"
because he fails to point out that his C02 vs Temp chart not only shows Temp coming before C02 (not the other way around that he portrays), but most importantly, that the gap is 820 years!
If any change could be made to the planet, which man-made c02 cannot, the resulting change show fruit until the year 2800.
Basically C02 never changed the climate. Meaning we can drive huge SUV's forever and it wont change the temperature.
Its the SUN that caused the temperature to go up, which caused forests and then animals to prospers, which in turn causes c02 to go up.
The NY Times article (3/13/2007), said, "scientists argue that some of Mr. Gore?s central points are exaggerated and erroneous"
because he fails to point out that his C02 vs Temp chart not only shows Temp coming before C02 (not the other way around that he portrays), but most importantly, that the gap is 820 years!
If any change could be made to the planet, which man-made c02 cannot, the resulting change show fruit until the year 2800.
You read to much of Crichton's "State Of Fear" or what?
This "Climate Swindle" debate is a selfish and highly egoistic LIE which could (and maybe WILL) harm humanity as a whole; and it will much more harm the following generations which did not participate in inducing Global Warming. WE are responsible for THEM, and I do not want my children to suffer for what I could not stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
I encourage you: Do NOT believe this crap!
This "Climate Swindle" debate is a selfish and highly egoistic LIE which could (and maybe WILL) harm humanity as a whole; and it will much more harm the following generations which did not participate in inducing Global Warming. WE are responsible for THEM, and I do not want my children to suffer for what I could not stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
I encourage you: Do NOT believe this crap!
This debate may never end. Instead can we all just agree to disagree? Watch Al Gore's movie, then watch TGGWS and then you can make your own educated decision.
And between all that watching, I maybe read some scientific reports because I just don't want to view all this polemic without knowing any facts.
Channel 4, which screened the documentary on March 8, 2007, described the film as "a polemic that drew together the well-documented views of a number of respected scientists to reach the same conclusions."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle)
Channel 4, which screened the documentary on March 8, 2007, described the film as "a polemic that drew together the well-documented views of a number of respected scientists to reach the same conclusions."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle)
well, it would be just great if people will comment on teh quality of this post, and only after that state their opinions! since this is a conversion, i assume no subs, no xtras, but at least the video/audio specs would be nice!
Thanx!
Thanx!
Zukure: Have you ever thought of that the current CO2 in athmosphere is 0.05%? Man & nature has raised it by 0.02% last 100 years. At the same time temperature has raised 0.5C. Looking back last half million year, the temp max-min differs 10C and CO2 0.02%.
Before cyanobacterias started to convert CO2 to O2, the CO2 level should have been about 20% as it is 21% O2 today. That is a raise 400 times greater! How did the oceans form in that hellish temperature? Remember that water vapor is also climate driving.
Another one; If earth were an apple, the skin represent what we know of the planet, i.e. the surface, oceans and athmospere. The sun is 333.000 times bigger and all is burning with millions C in the middle and "only" 6000C on surface. Even on our distance the heat radiation warming our planet 300C. And you think that a change of CO2 of 0.0002 in that tiny skin layer of one apple is causing 10C heat difference in past (and 0.5C now)?!?
Hey, don't cry. You are not alone to be fooled. There were a time when everybody just knew that earth were flat and the centre of universe. Saying otherwise and the church executed you.
BTW: A PAL variant with swesub can be found here: http://piratebayproxy.live/tor/3677800/Klimatf__r__ndringarna_-_En_bluff__Dokument__r_s__nd_i_TV4_070426
Before cyanobacterias started to convert CO2 to O2, the CO2 level should have been about 20% as it is 21% O2 today. That is a raise 400 times greater! How did the oceans form in that hellish temperature? Remember that water vapor is also climate driving.
Another one; If earth were an apple, the skin represent what we know of the planet, i.e. the surface, oceans and athmospere. The sun is 333.000 times bigger and all is burning with millions C in the middle and "only" 6000C on surface. Even on our distance the heat radiation warming our planet 300C. And you think that a change of CO2 of 0.0002 in that tiny skin layer of one apple is causing 10C heat difference in past (and 0.5C now)?!?
Hey, don't cry. You are not alone to be fooled. There were a time when everybody just knew that earth were flat and the centre of universe. Saying otherwise and the church executed you.
BTW: A PAL variant with swesub can be found here: http://piratebayproxy.live/tor/3677800/Klimatf__r__ndringarna_-_En_bluff__Dokument__r_s__nd_i_TV4_070426
The Romans had a principle that they applied when trying to decide what evidence could be trusted in a (admittedly, usually legal) case. They asked: "Cui bono?" --- who does it benefit?
Now it is clear to me that adopting stringent emissions controls is not to the benefit the large manufacturing corporations, however I do not see how it benefits the advocates of such controls.
The global warming debate has been around for at least 30 years. At first there were a few scientist (designated cranks) talking about it with mass rejection by the mainstream scientific community as a whole.
By today this has turned around. Now it is the few odd cranks and hacks who still insist that climate change is a myth. It is not that they don't believe in what they say, but I am sure that the fat checks they get for their pseudo-scientific nonsense in support of the "No Warming" agenda serves as good reinforcement.
Now it is clear to me that adopting stringent emissions controls is not to the benefit the large manufacturing corporations, however I do not see how it benefits the advocates of such controls.
The global warming debate has been around for at least 30 years. At first there were a few scientist (designated cranks) talking about it with mass rejection by the mainstream scientific community as a whole.
By today this has turned around. Now it is the few odd cranks and hacks who still insist that climate change is a myth. It is not that they don't believe in what they say, but I am sure that the fat checks they get for their pseudo-scientific nonsense in support of the "No Warming" agenda serves as good reinforcement.
kovesp: You forgot something, political idealism! It is an even better driving force than money. There are a bunch of environmentalists who don't want you to drive any car at all, even that they don't gain any money from it. Compare them to islamic fundamentalists and you might understand them better. Or try figure out who gained money on the fact that earth once was flat?
UN's climat experts, IPCC, was originally created by Magret Thatcher to help her motivate more nuclear power plants after Harrisburg. She had problem with sheiks (who stopped pumping oil when it pleased them) and english cole miners who were on strike all the time. IPCC only gave funding to all scientific research saying bad things about coal and oil.
A question to you kovesp. Have you looked at the evidence for and against CO2? I have! I found that there are no evidence for! Yes, you read it correct. I couldnät find any evidence for. They drilled into the ice of Greenland end 1980, beginning 1990. Conclusion: CO2 followstemperature with a delay of 800 years and not the other way around. An evidence against CO2. That was bad so they drilled in the ice in Antartica. Same results! You look at temperature last 100 years. Once again, it doesn't look the way it should have done if CO2 were the cause of temperature. The sun activity does on the other hand compare quite good to the temperature last 500 years. An evidence for sun activity theory.
UN's climat experts, IPCC, was originally created by Magret Thatcher to help her motivate more nuclear power plants after Harrisburg. She had problem with sheiks (who stopped pumping oil when it pleased them) and english cole miners who were on strike all the time. IPCC only gave funding to all scientific research saying bad things about coal and oil.
A question to you kovesp. Have you looked at the evidence for and against CO2? I have! I found that there are no evidence for! Yes, you read it correct. I couldnät find any evidence for. They drilled into the ice of Greenland end 1980, beginning 1990. Conclusion: CO2 followstemperature with a delay of 800 years and not the other way around. An evidence against CO2. That was bad so they drilled in the ice in Antartica. Same results! You look at temperature last 100 years. Once again, it doesn't look the way it should have done if CO2 were the cause of temperature. The sun activity does on the other hand compare quite good to the temperature last 500 years. An evidence for sun activity theory.
Does it really matter if global warming exists and/or is man made? The fact is the polar ice is melting at an alarming rate and youd have to be an utter retard not to realize the effects on the worlds population when the glass overfills.
furthermore: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled-carl-wunsch-responds/ that says it all.
Zombiebunner: Climate changes all the time. Where I sit right now, there were 3km of ice about 10.000 years ago.
A retard like me thinks (unlike you) that stopping manmade CO2 means that global dimming gets less, which means we probably get an even higher temperature. It´s better to put money on what to do instead of feeding those environment fundamentalists with campain money for their holy crusade against modern way of living. The danish guys working on the solar activity theory have (after the film were made) made a successful experiment were they prooved cosmic radiation is neccessary to form clouds. http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/sun-climate/other/global-warming-and-cosmic-radiation If we give such serious science money, that might end up in for example a machine that can create clouds to cool down earth.
Yeah, the link tells you how journalists work, not that he said any lies. Do you think the CO2-propaganda work indifferent?
A retard like me thinks (unlike you) that stopping manmade CO2 means that global dimming gets less, which means we probably get an even higher temperature. It´s better to put money on what to do instead of feeding those environment fundamentalists with campain money for their holy crusade against modern way of living. The danish guys working on the solar activity theory have (after the film were made) made a successful experiment were they prooved cosmic radiation is neccessary to form clouds. http://www.spacecenter.dk/research/sun-climate/other/global-warming-and-cosmic-radiation If we give such serious science money, that might end up in for example a machine that can create clouds to cool down earth.
Yeah, the link tells you how journalists work, not that he said any lies. Do you think the CO2-propaganda work indifferent?
Most of the points have been stated over and over by scientist, economist, ect. but the world of green religion disregards facts that do not support their beliefs.
As a wise old teacher told me many years ago,"take no one word without looking at the facts yourself. Do the Math, do the science.
As a wise old teacher told me many years ago,"take no one word without looking at the facts yourself. Do the Math, do the science.
I'm sorry Greenfrog, I forgot to say Thanks! So Thankyou I've been trying to find this.
Bullseye! I'll remember those wise words oldngrey.
Please....
The average temerature in Antarctica is - 37C.
What the fuck is melting?
The icecap in Arctic is a layer of floating ice in the sea. The ice on the north pole is just as thick as a sub easily can brake through it. Well, what the fuck is Archimedes principle of boyancy?
The actual rise in temperatures will eventually melt all the ice on Greenland. It will take 25.000 years to free the iceland from the ice. Correct me if I´m wrong, but it is less than 2000 years since good old Jesus left the planet earth.
The neofascist apostels of Al Gore and the IPPC tells us that sealevels will raise 64 metres in the next 50 years. Sieg heil to the new reign of fear!
Cui bono?
Haha...seriously...cui bono? The Media, the media, the media and the coward politicians who knows that the day will come when they have to explain to their voters why the chineese econemy is dominating the world and why the western world, as we know it, lay in ruins....
Nice upload, Greenfrog.
The average temerature in Antarctica is - 37C.
What the fuck is melting?
The icecap in Arctic is a layer of floating ice in the sea. The ice on the north pole is just as thick as a sub easily can brake through it. Well, what the fuck is Archimedes principle of boyancy?
The actual rise in temperatures will eventually melt all the ice on Greenland. It will take 25.000 years to free the iceland from the ice. Correct me if I´m wrong, but it is less than 2000 years since good old Jesus left the planet earth.
The neofascist apostels of Al Gore and the IPPC tells us that sealevels will raise 64 metres in the next 50 years. Sieg heil to the new reign of fear!
Cui bono?
Haha...seriously...cui bono? The Media, the media, the media and the coward politicians who knows that the day will come when they have to explain to their voters why the chineese econemy is dominating the world and why the western world, as we know it, lay in ruins....
Nice upload, Greenfrog.
Your welcome people. If you could, please post about the quality as people have been asking for a 3rd party opinion. Pal to Ntsc pulldown and sync doesnt always come out correctly.
There is an American program called The Climate of Fear by Glenn Beck from CNN also debunking GW. You can find the whole thing on youtube.com. But the best thing in it was the explanation of why the US doesnt support Kyoto. The reason is because 'developing' countries are completely excluded, including China which will be producing more co2 than the US by next friday! The funny thing is however, that the US 'stance' was developed in 1990 and Clinton and Bush just maintain this everytime it comes up. Guess who made this decision for the US in 1990...?? yup, Al Gore!
You people that do no believe in the Green House effect, ask for example the Greeks. A couple days ago the temperature in Greece was up to a record 47 Celsius. That coupled with brown-outs because more and more people install air-conditioning in homes and businesses cause shortages to electricity. I heard from friends that it was quite unbearable.
I moved to the city I now live in, 20 years ago. When I first moved here, the air was the best quality, top of the scale. Now it is almost all year around just inside the safety limits of the scale. I too like my car and all the other goodies, but how long can it go like this.
The businesses? Quartal-mentality at the moment does not encourage them to do long time research, just take the money the easiest possible and fastest way and run, as the saying goes.
In my opinion, what governments around the world at least should do, is introduce bills that demand for example that cars should in five years time run on less fuel, or that electric appliances run with half the electricity, and in ten years time consume even less energy, and so on. That would force the manufactures to do more research if they want to stay in business. Even if the future products cost at the beginning a little more money, so what, people will pay. I remember for example that I paid for my first computer, a 486 25 Mhz SX, almost 2000 euros and I didn?t grumble.
So what I?m saying is, there are things that can be done, but unfortunately they have to be imposed from above. Because no matter what the Americans are saying, that private sector will solve the problems voluntary, I personally don?t see it happening.
I moved to the city I now live in, 20 years ago. When I first moved here, the air was the best quality, top of the scale. Now it is almost all year around just inside the safety limits of the scale. I too like my car and all the other goodies, but how long can it go like this.
The businesses? Quartal-mentality at the moment does not encourage them to do long time research, just take the money the easiest possible and fastest way and run, as the saying goes.
In my opinion, what governments around the world at least should do, is introduce bills that demand for example that cars should in five years time run on less fuel, or that electric appliances run with half the electricity, and in ten years time consume even less energy, and so on. That would force the manufactures to do more research if they want to stay in business. Even if the future products cost at the beginning a little more money, so what, people will pay. I remember for example that I paid for my first computer, a 486 25 Mhz SX, almost 2000 euros and I didn?t grumble.
So what I?m saying is, there are things that can be done, but unfortunately they have to be imposed from above. Because no matter what the Americans are saying, that private sector will solve the problems voluntary, I personally don?t see it happening.
Well, in Sweden (where both pirate bay and I live) the goverment is hiding. They don't want to decide what the cars will use for energy source, but say that the industry must take that decision. You are not allowed to build more hydro plants or neclear plants in this f*cking country. So, how can we get all the energy needed to replace oil?!? We can't! Hence the industry can't solve it either.
Today there is only one single source that can give us replacement energy for oil and that is nuclear. Lucky enough we got plenty of uranium. Unlucky some leaders in the world are not technicans and can calculate themselves to that conclusion.
Today there is only one single source that can give us replacement energy for oil and that is nuclear. Lucky enough we got plenty of uranium. Unlucky some leaders in the world are not technicans and can calculate themselves to that conclusion.
I'm not convinced that the global warming is human created myself, I do find that the phenomenon is being abused, for a good cause though. We should strive to be innovative and cause minimal stress to the environment we live in, it's just sad to see how only panic can really motivate people to do so...
Common misconception to think combating 'global warming' has no dire consequences. In fact, its quite the contrary. For example, the Enviromentalists are forcing developing countries not to produce the cheap economical power plants that we in the developed world have. This leads to hundreds of thousands of deaths since no electricity means medicine is virtually non-existant ( no refrigeration), rampant respiratory disease (indoor fires to cook).
The reason why modern society lives healthier and longer lives is primarily because of electricity. But Al Gore says no to that for all the developing country's.
The reason why modern society lives healthier and longer lives is primarily because of electricity. But Al Gore says no to that for all the developing country's.
this movie is helarious. it made me laugh so hard. I love this kind of mockumentary stuff, do you have any more? Keep it coming!!! Thanks.
I love how even though this year has been the coldest year in decades and there was snow in Baghdad, the global warming cult still marches onward. The sun changes our climate, it's a gigantic nuclear reactor. Please explain how humans are melting Mars' polar ice caps?
Comments