Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
The Great Global Warming Swindle
Log In to post a reply

90 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
grufty jim
grufty jim
1946 posts

Edited Mar 12, 2007, 20:17
Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle
Mar 12, 2007, 19:12
DarkMagus wrote:
No one seems to want to step forward. If and when they do don't expect me to leap to it's defence either. Don't shoot the messenger(s)! What has shocked me most is the poor standard of the responses to the film in the media, apparently often by people who haven't seen it.

I haven't seen it. Which is why I've stayed away from this thread. But when one of the scientists featured in the programme has written an open letter in which he insists he was selectively edited so that he appeared to say the opposite of what he meant (Source) the chances are I shan't bother.

Also, having read numerous pieces on the subject of anthropogenic global warming, I'm convinced that the scientists and writers on the subject are merely stating and reporting what they believe to be true. The use of the word "swindle" is a clear statement that there's a lot of deliberate falsehood going on.

Does the programme provide any real evidence that the IPCC (or anyone else) is actively misleading the public? If not, then I suggest the word "swindle" has been put in the title for reasons of sensationalism. In tandem with the fact that at least one of the participants insists they have been misrepresented through selective editing of their contribution; it would be difficult to know what parts of the programme present fact, and what parts are edited to mislead.

Were you involved in the production of the show DarkMagus? If not, I would suggest that you too have no idea which parts of the programme can be trusted. I'm not saying that nothing in the show is true. I'm just saying that at least some of it is an attempt to deliberately mislead (well, I'm not, Professor Carl Wunsch is) which casts a very dark shadow over the entire affair.

If you suggest the same is true for any programme, paper or book that states evidence in favour of anthropogenic climate change, then first you'll have to demonstrate deliberate misrepresentation (as has been done in the case of this programme).

As for addressing the actual 'science' presented, I obviously can't as I haven't seen it and wouldn't know which bits were bare-faced lies even if I did. However a Mr. Keith Farnish appears to have had a stab (Source).

That page opens with a parody, but if you scroll down to his comment made at 10:45pm you'll find the relevant points.
Topic Outline:

U-Know! Forum Index