I really don’t see how any of those interviewees could have been taken out of context though. That one guy was miffed because he was led to believe that it was a balanced documentary rather than an anti-GW piece. Big deal.

Maybe I’m confused, but to what degree does that discount what he said?

Also, the CO2 feedback argument to defend the independent variability of CO2 versus dependant variability with respect to its relationship to temperature… it just plain stinks from a pure logic standpoint. It really does.

It’s like saying that increases in body temperature are caused by perspiration. We know this isn’t true because we understand how our bodies work. We don’t need to interpret a time chart mapping skin temperature versus rate of perspiration; we have the knowledge.

With climate science, our sole frame of reference is a body of theories. Thus the only way to interpret data is within the context of these theories.

Unfortunately, the data is really more appropriate for the realm of archeology than science, where “best guesses” rule the day. A true scientific discovery requires statistical inference by comparing test experiment results with control experiment results.

We don’t have another earth to use as a control group, therefore we can’t conclude anything global-climate related with scientific certainty.

The problem is that scientists have done just that. And it’s largely due to these ice core records. I’m not mad because I think the scientists have made the wrong conclusion. I’m mad because they have made a conclusion at all. With 100% certainty. Yes, that’s right. Anthropogenic climate change is real. 100 PERCENT FUCKING CERTAIN.

Here is MY conclusion: as soon as data can reasonably be interpreted in contradictory fashions you have a failed experiment.

All you are left with is a theory striving for acceptance just like cosmic ether, string theory, donut shaped universes, the sun revolving around the earth, flat earth, living shadows dancing on a cave wall, etc. etc.

These are all just theories. And theories are just guesses after all.

(By the way…we do need to talk sustainability one day.)

Honestly, I’m not that impressed, largely because I feel it bases itself on too many anecdotal interviews which can easily take the speaker out of context (which is what apparently happened). A tad Michael Moorish.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled

One can argue that a single speaker format (ala Al Gore) isn’t any better, but context is preserved somewhat.

It’s significant though. I find it interesting that both Gore and this movie make the same accusation that their scientific supporters are muffled and intimidated by those with opposing viewpoints. Who’s correct?

I haven’t read state of fear but, oddly enough, I remember a quote from Patrick Moore (who appeared in this film) regarding the best thing he had heard about climate change had come from Michael Crichton

“I am certain there is too much certainty in the world’. And I am certain that he is right.”

I agree that the human induced climate change is something will probably never be 100 percent proved, however, I’m putting myself in the camp that believes that we, as humans, are changing our planet via our current carbon lifestyles

The debate aside, in many ways, I feel living sustainably is just a better, more enlightened way of doing things.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=the+great+global+warming+swindle

Now that you’ve watched this documentary. Check out this one that the BBC put out earlier this month.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU

Called, The Great Global Warming Swindle

I think you’ll find it interesting.

By the way, as a result of these documentaries, Michael Chriton’s State of Fear, Chrichton’s Essays blog, the blog: A Few Things Illconsidered, and my dad’s work with Desmogblog.com, I have decided to have absolutely no opion on climate science what so ever.

My pentax is quite hardy though, at the top of Huashan, the wind caught it on my tripod when I was checking something in my bag. Didn’t catch it in time :-(

A little denting on the lens, and the automatic focus no longer works, but can still take shots with manual! Not too bad for a meter fall onto granite.

Yeah, I bought it last month. It’s not too bad, although the stock lens isn’t very good for low-light photos.

I see you’ve been busy with your camera! Awesome photos!

Happy Chinese new year!