Hey Brent, Lance,
The last thing I want to do is argue about the topic of Global Climate Change. I simply wish that you, not having seen the film nor had a chance to fairly vet it, would give your friend Bart the benefit of the doubt that he'd only associate himself with a project of integrity. Though it's a film you suspect you'll not fully agree with I sincerely hope you'd lend it consideration, or at least not sabotage Bart's ernest efforts out of blind faith or prejudice.
To me, the most apparent, immediate and baffling effect of the Global "Climate Change" topic is how it causes intelligent well educated people to react to any whiff of skepticism with religious zeal. I've learned it's safer to talk about God or politics "in mixed company" than Global Warming.
You two say you're not "in the same ballpark on this issue" but I suspect this is not entirely the case. You misconstrue the full spate of issues examined by this film. Would either of you claim you are against the health or happiness of the world's poor?
I have seen a pre-release version of the film. It's not precisely about the topic Global Warming. By my account, the filmmakers, whom I know very well, are generally agnostic about whether and to what degree humans are causing climate change. What they wish to illuminate is what they see as the costs and consequences to the world's poor of an emergent hysterical crusade fueled by the politics, economics, and ideology of rich white people. They seek to frame Global Warming as the latest (and possibly the greatest) in a series of (not un-founded nor-unimportant but nonetheless hyped and manipulated to the detriment of many) emerging end-of-world-esqe crises (DDT, ozone hole, global famine, Nuclear disasters, new ice age,...). I'm confident you will not agree with every frame, but I'm equally confident this film is worthy of your consideration.
I value your perspective and intelligence. Most self-serving, I hope you watch the film, or better we watch it together, so we can share what will certainly be a wide and lively post screening discussion.
Sincerely,
Joe
P.S.
-Come on...is it fair to knock a documentary because it's trailer doesn't provide citations to its facts or display the credentials of every person flashing by. Cheap shot, no? The movie's website gives the bios of al the folks appearing (http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/ed-begley-jr). For example, the first "talking head" sitting "in front of a bookcase is: Patrick Moore...a founding member of Greenpeace...Ph.D. in Ecology.
-The 31,000 scientist reference is to this: http://www.aim.org/briefing/31000-signatures-prove-no-consensus-about-global-warming/
Science isn't done by consensus or by committee. I would never gather or promote such a petition, but I fully appreciate being tired of hearing folks pound about some universal scientific consensus that lofts Al Gore... Global Warming shall not be questioned! I put as much stock in a scientist petition, OR a scientific proclamation by a political committee, as I do in the toothpaste endorsement of "9 out of ten dentists." What does the IOCC have to say about plaque? I say you can take away my skepticism when you pry it from my cold dead brain.
No comments:
Post a Comment