Why do I feel the AGW film supports my contention? Because it says the climate is beyond our control. Guess I'm contending that we should remedy that situation. They say we should adapt, and I think, "y'mean like wearing sunscreen and using a thermostat to keep our homes comfortable?"
I know, I'm getting into the "second level" here.
So, here's Sam's Movie Review of the link provided (somewhat magically) again by snowbird.
One of the items that hit me on that canadian film(AGW), was the big graph going back 500 million years, showing many divergent relationships (no relation) between CO2 and Temperature.
That record goes back to before Oxygen levels stabilized in our atmosphere, the continents were in vastly different positions, biological influences on the atmosphere were vastly different (just off the top of my head). But what about the past 10-20-40 million years? Guess I shoulda looked first; but how is that correlation? That would strike me as more meaningful period to examine, because the living order was fairly well established, grasses evolved, India hit Asia to give us monsoons, and the Alps and Andes developed.
As for CO2 following Temperature increases:
As the positive feedback mechanisms kick in.....
Heck, there's probably big jumps in methane following temperature rises also.
Don't you think that as the planet warms (and warmer oceans hold less CO2, btw) and the large geological/ biological deposits get released, there will be jumps in CO2 (following temp. rise)?
Oh yea, I also remember that Indian guy who talked about cyclones and (I think) the Canadian Ice Storm.
All he was saying was that nobody can directly link a specific weather event to GW, and he added that another Ice Storm could happen again if the conditions were right. Now that's profound.
About the cyclones, he says, for “reasons we don't quite understand,” there are more cyclones in years with cooler air (so it couldn't be GW making cyclones). What about the delta T (temperature differential between ocean and air). Warmer oceans mean more storms, but only if the delta T is still there (cooler air).
I think the film talked about adapting also. Take a look at how other animals have adapted to rapid climate change. It's those precipitous cliffs and jumps over the past several million years (and 35 thousand years) related to glaciations that scare me.
And talking about scary stuff, I've seen a correlation between the LENGTH of a sunspot cycle and temperature that is closer than the CO2 correlation over the past 120 years.
I certainly agree that the sun is a very big player. I did not appreciate the woman who chirpily told us what “exciting news” it was that even our galaxy influences our climate (ala Mike Kremer's post on the Physics forum).
Well, those where some thought's on the film. Overall the soothing gentle tones of the AGW's and the strident shoutings of the PGW's (anti/proGW) gave it the look of a slick propoganda film, similar in style to Incovenient Truth (IT).
Certainly a good conversation starter, but lots of disjointed points and not very conclusive (much like IT). I'd watch it again, because there's lots of points I can't recall now.
~~SA
