Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.

The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 413 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Topic Options
#21781 - 05/24/07 10:56 AM "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
RicS Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/26/06
Posts: 310
Loc: Sydney, Australia
G'day all,

No, this is not my heading on the state of the global warming debate. I don't consider it a swindle or a deliberate hoax although I do believe that there are several individuals and organisations that know the information being disseminated is inaccurate and don't do anything to correct the errors. Even Mr Gore admitted that he was aware of "errors" but believed that the message was more important that "minor" inconsistencies in the science.

The Great Global Warming Swindle was a documentary shown on Channel 4 in Britain. I believe it now has its own website.

I have watched it and suggest anyone interested in the issues of global warming do so, just as I suggest that anyone interested in global warming should see "An Inconvenient Truth" and read the book.

I didn't agree with some of the science of the program when it was shown and thought that some of the "facts" presented were biased to support the supposition that global warming was a swindle. They also seemed to everemphasise the fact that climate is always changing rather than the more accurate description that climate fluctuates in this Ice Age between relatively stable periods of cold and much shorter periods of warm. Within these periods the climate does not seem to alter all that much.

The basic argument relating to CO2 never previously causing any climate change could also be argued with because of the event around 33 million years ago but basically the argument seems sound.

What I found particularly strange about the recent reporting concerning this documentary is it is being lambasted as being factually incorrect and "irresponsible" yet the same newspapers refused to print quite clear innacuracies, often quite fundamental to Mr Gore's cause in an inconvenient truth. The hockey stick curve should never have been used by Mr Gore and any criticism of him for its use is certainly deserved. His support of Lonnie Thompson's analysis of ice cores is another major issue.

So there are certainly problems with the principal documentary supporting global warming, ranging from the four polar bears that were the basis of the comment by Mr Gore that polar bears are dying in large numbers because of global warming, that tornadoes are increasing when the figures show the opposite and so on and so on. Yet this does not get any publicity.

So too there are faults in the documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle", however it seems to be taken as faith that this is a distortion of facts and riddled with "half truths". Indeed, it was reported because one of Australia's TV channels has bought the rights to the documentary that the broadcast was the result of some sort of dirty dealing done with the board and that they were "pushed" into it. The news story included comments such as:

"Scientists, including some featured in the program, said it contained fabricated data and misleading statements."

"Mr Williams [the Channels science reporter] yesterday accused the broadcaster of “verging on the irresponsible” for airing a program that was “demonstrably wrong”.

Now there may have been gross simplifications in the documentary but hey, it was trying to distill a very complicated issue into a short program. It seems that anything pro global warming can use data that has been discredited, that really has concerns as to its scientific accuracy and not need to explain why it did so yet any counter argument cannot do the same. The attacks on the programs were mostly along the lines that the information was distorted yet the arguments were along philosphic lines rather than scientific. The size of the Medieval Warm Period is something that is debatable and certainly isn't something that is settled science yet apparently the program was wrong in suggesting the Mediaval Warm Period was larger than the hockey stick data.

Seems the debate is OK as long as it does not contradict any of the pro global warming "facts".

Doesn't seem to be a particularly balanced way of supporting a scientific position.



Sane=fits in. Unreasonable=world needs to fit to him. All Progress requires unreasonableness

#22174 - 06/18/07 03:45 PM Re: "The Great Global Warming Swindle" [Re: RicS]
BrianPatrix Offline

Registered: 06/18/07
Posts: 44
I am scared that people who fight Global Warming are seen as the new establishment. Thus, just to be contrary, a lot of people will have opposite opinions. But, just because lotsa people say something doesn't mean its untrue, especially if its backed by rigorous science. And especially if the other side amounts to 'science' of the (un-)intelligent design level.
Also, pointing out errors in the science on both sides is all good and fine, but if it leads to sitting on the fence with this issue ... that would be bad. Just because Al Gore got it 10 percent wrong doesn't mean that his main assertion should be completely rejected: mankind is causing climate change, and it will kill us all if we don't change it. Instead of 'kill' you can read: harm significantly.
In the 18th or 19th century the debate whether Africans were real humans or animals also lead to this notion that they should be somewhere between monkeys and man. These middle of th road conclusions can be quite dangerous and utterly wrong.

#22176 - 06/18/07 06:23 PM Re: "The Great Global Warming Swindle" [Re: BrianPatrix]
Wolfman Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 04/17/06
Posts: 264
Loc: Pago Pago, American Samoa
This post struck a chord with me.
For years before WWI, Germany had a great interest in the Samoan Islands as a re-fueling/Naval strategy location. After an "incident", Western Samoa became a territory of New Zealand. But I recall seeing an old Poster, from Germany, that was used to promote a new exhibit in Berlin. The exhibit was a diorama of "South Seas Life", featuring four Samoan men, two women and a child. The exhibit was IN A ZOO!!!

#22179 - 06/18/07 09:27 PM Re: "The Great Global Warming Swindle" [Re: RicS]
scpg02 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 04/03/07
Posts: 217
Loc: Sacramento
I don't consider it a swindle or a deliberate hoax

I do. Scientists using government grant money to say we need more government control. Increased solar output has caused some minor changes in Earth's climate. Do we need to be more careful in the changes we make to our environment? Yes. A free market economy is what has allowed us the luxury of being environmentally conscious. Government control will only kill the economy that has produced the technology that furthers these goals.

The spotted owl was a good example of what the environmental movement does. Logging was never the cause of reduced owl numbers. Killing the economies of small northwest towns did nothing to save the owl. The numbers continue to drop. The main threat to the owl is the barred owl coming in from the east coast through Canada.

Same with the Coho salmon. I could go on. Talk about your protection rackets. The mob has nothing on environmental groups.
It's not Global Warming, it's Ice Age Abatement.

#22309 - 06/24/07 11:23 PM Re: "The Great Global Warming Swindle" [Re: scpg02]
BrianPatrix Offline

Registered: 06/18/07
Posts: 44
Originally Posted By: scpg02

Same with the Coho salmon. I could go on. Talk about your protection rackets. The mob has nothing on environmental groups.

This is really outrageous. To equate the environmental movement, which largely consists of underpaid teachers and nurses and the like, who do this in their spare time, with the maffia who actually kill people and profit in such a way that we can actually see their large villas TODAY, is disgusting, scgp!!
And to say, that bad science with regards to your spotted owl is the same as mob practices is also outrageous. Small town economies are dying all over the world, except in Northern Europe. This is caused by urbanization, which is not caused by environmentalists.

Edited by BrianPatrix (06/24/07 11:24 PM)


Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.