Going over the line: 10:10

The ad was hilarious (fully desensitised) and worked perfectly, you are all discussing it.

And it did actually make me turn off my 60" TV, and two power amps i just had running with some rubbish on i wasn't watching while surfing pchat on my netbook, so it kind of worked.

 

I don't want to start an argument at all so please don't take it as such, am i just genuinely curious, why do you believe that? is there some specific evidence or is it more along the lines of the world being so large that anything we do seems irrelevant? (which seems a perfectly sensible assumption!)

 

How about not pushing it at people? Lead by example. Show people that they can go 'green' or reduce their carbon footprint or whatever you want to call it without having to make compromises or change your way of life.

As you know I don't believe global warming to be man made, but I DO believe in reducing energy consumption and energy conservation if for no other reason that to save money. I took a lot of stick in another post for my non belief but I have my own house in order so to speak - I have a very well insulated house cutting my heating bill by nearly two thirds, drive a Prius for work (cutting my petrol bill by half £3000 a year!), my gf has now downsized her car to a Toyota IQ and I'd love to fit PV panels to my house if I could afford it.

So what am I trying to say? Just practise what you preach and show people they can do exactly what they do now, but with intelligent choices they can do it using much less energy and save money in the process. Push people with mad tv commercials and they'll just resist and rebel.

 

Solve the problem rather than the symptom? Maybe that's something worth importing from across the Atlantic

 

With all due respect, and I do respect what you are doing, changes are necessary. That's exactly the point. Maintaining the status quo simply won't cut it. Even 10% is only a small step in the right direction.

 

See we're all discussing the ad now! lol. A 10% cut. But most of us on here are already energy conscious for whatever reason (global warming or saving money).

I still think coming down hard on people with stories of doom and gloom won't work, though saying that, there was an article I read yesterday (and now can't find) that shows great apathy out there. As a test a power company over here offered to install free insulation to a whole street - no strings attached. Not one household took them up on their offer! Presumably so they didn't have the hassle of workmen in their house!

I find this crazy. I saved the cost of insulating my house in the first year alone.

 

I wish I had that power company...

 

no doubt. I'd have snapped their hand off. I'd love to bump up the R values of walls and ceiling. It also makes the house quieter. What a bunch of tossers. Probably all Blades supporters.

 

I commend you for having your own beliefs, and finding values in going green...Cabbie. I'm in an area of the US that's very conservative. There are some areas for recycling, but I notice most people just throw out a lot of garbage. There's a lot of SUVs around. Then again, I see quite a few priuses on the road here. I suspect prius drivers do have their reasons for getting one: whether you believe in global warming or not, the savings in gas is a good angle.

As for this short, I don't think it would do well in the states. I would have thought it would do better in the UK: it seems like a bad Monty Python skit. It probably would have done better if they cut it down to two episodes...and more tongue and cheek. I thought the Gillian Anderson bit was the best....but by the time that was rolling, it was already redundant and going nowhere.

It's going to be hard to raise awareness about global warming unless media outlets actually acknowledge it. I think Cabbie has the right idea about promoting the energy savings vs carbon footprint. Even if his beliefs about global warming are just plain wrong (just a friendly jab of course).

 

Or national security... You'd think that the neocons would be all over that. Unfortunately, they're only answer seems to be more drilling which doesn't even come close to solving the problem.

 

That is because they have no interest in solving the problem.

 

First, I didn't see the video as I don't have the bandwidth to waste on it, but I think I got a pretty good sense of it. Perhaps some people should develop a sense of humor.

More importantly however, perhaps the issue is not so subtle. There are many who feel, and I count myself as one, that if we don't begin to make significant changes to the way we use energy, and control CO2 emissions, the net result might be just as dramatic for the rest of the world as the video is.

With some due respect for the people who don't "believe", I am sorry that you fee ridiculed and scorned and teased about being "flat earthers", but the reality is that you haven't accepted the basic tenants of science and for what ever reason you are ignorant of basic scientific fact. To some extent you can be justified in your ignorance because of the organized, well funded misinformation campaign that has been waged against the science over the last decade or so. I suggest that you read some thing(s) out of your comfort zone(s), and at least allow for the possibility that the vast majority of climate scientists are right, and that if they are right, there is going to be dramatic changes in our lifetimes,, changes we are already seeing.

If you don't do that, I think that you are sentencing someone's children and grandchildren to a fate that is equivalent to those in the video. And indeed you will be the functional equivalent of flat earthers.

 

I take it that was meant to be an insult. In any case,,, I don't care, I am not going to spend time trying to argue the merits of science with one who (admittedly) doesn't believe in the basic tenants of science.

 

Is it not this sort of 'holier than thou' attitude that turns off the vast majority of the public from this important debate?

You want to encourage Joe Public (or whatever you call them in the US) to join the debate and save energy where they can, not dictate and talk down to them, or blow them up as per the video (a video you haven't even watched!)

 

It is an insult, but I have to admit it was a good one.

Tom

 

I'm going with the "humor" to entertain true believers theory. If pictures of empty reservoirs in the Southwest, or of refugees from Bangladesh trying to get into India with waves lapping at their heels, of starving polar bears, more and more wars over resources etc don't get people to worry nothing will.

As a late convert to AGW, my mind is pretty closed. But I can respect someone who has really done some research from both sides and comes up with a different conclusion. What I have a hard time with is the person who says Fox News and Rush Limbaugh say it isn't real so that's good enough for me.

And for me, if AGW isn't real, what has been lost if we recycle, use renewable energy (and save oil for other uses), and have cleaner air? You want a big SUV? I don't care if it's electric and using solar power. If it is real, what has been lost if we haven't done our best to stop it? If it isn't man-caused but it's real then how do we deal with it? Do we let Florida go? I doubt it? Do we let London go? Venice? I want to believe it's real so we can stop it without spending trillions of dollars or pounds or euros dealing with the consequences.

 

That video seems like anti global climate change propaganda to me. No pressure ...

 

AGW theory is far from fact.Nothing has been proven.AGW theory is a weak hypothesis at this point.
Until the effect of water vapor and clouds is fully understood,computer modelers are just guessing.
Syun-ichi Akasofu compares computer climate modeling to "ancient astrology" and hes referring to the IPCC.
The "well funded campaign" is actually the $50 Billion spent on climate change study.(initiated by Enron and Ken Lay LOL)
It distorts the science and turns scientists into whores(like Meg Ryan).
But a few hundred million $ spent to challenge the hype ,in your mind,is what is making skeptics ignorant.
Thats just deluded thinking.
Skepticism is a basic tenant of science.
YOU are the one who cant accept the basic tenants of science.
Look at the responses to the study I posted about albedo 3.5 billion years ago (with the exception of Tochatihu )
Ignore the conclusions without a second of thought about how the findings may relate to and help solve a very complex puzzle.
In some closed minds the science is settled,so why bother thinking?Is that how you all embrace science?
Ignoring groundbreaking studies , only shows that you are brainwashed (or worse, ignorant).