Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

CBC - Global Warming: Doomsday Called Off


 

In this eye-opening documentary viewers will discover how the most respected researchers from all over the world explode the doom and gloom of global warming.

Humans stand accused of having set off a global climate catastrophe by increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The prophecy of doom is clear and media pass on the message uncritically.

Now serious criticism has arisen from a number of heavyweight independent scientists. They argue that most of the climatic change we have seen is due to natural variations. Scientists interviewed in the film include:

  • Dr. David Legates, Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware
  • Jorgen Peder Steffensen, Curator, Niels Bohr Institute Department of Geophysics
  • Dr. Sallie Baliunas, Astrophysicist, Harvard University
  • Dr. John Christy, University of Alabama in Huntsville
  • Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, Stockholm University
     
Video Sharing Sites  
 
Direct Download  
 
More Information  
 

ABC 20/20 - Give me a Break with John Stossel - Global Warming


 
In just 8 minutes, ABC 20/20's John Stossel demolishes the idea that all evidence points to humans being responsible for global warming and says "Give Me A Break" to the idea that the global warming debate is over.

Stossel points out that the media is constantly sending the message that the global warming of the last few decades is our fault and almost certainly bound to turn into a crisis. He finds school children that are terrified that they could die from global warming.

However many of the claims in Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" are grossly exaggeratedparticularly the claims that there is an immediate crisis. For example, in the movie the effect of the ocean rising 20 feet was used as an example of the impending danger the world faces. However, the IPCC reports that sea levels are forecast to rise just 7 to 24 inches in the next 100 years. Furthermore a closer look at the claim that CO2's rise and fall is correlated to temperature reveals that the evidence indicates that CO2 actually lags temperature rise instead of causing it. There is little observable evidence that CO2 has been the cause of global warming in the past. Mr. Gore refused to talk to ABC regarding the inconsistencies in his film.

Finally, Stossel interviews a group of scientists that dispute the claim that there's proof that global warming is caused by humans releasing CO2 and that the warming is likely to turn into a crisis. The same scientists are often labeled as 'deniers' and threatened for expressing their research.
   
Video Sharing Sites  
 

Sunday, October 7, 2007

Penn & Teller: Bullshit!


Citing Thomas Jefferson from "Profanity and Free Speech"


Environmental Hysteria



Sweatshops from "Wal-Mart Hatred"


Norman Borlaug on Genetically Modified Food from "Eat This!"
 

Penn & Teller: Bullshit! is an Emmy-nominated American documentary television series that has been on the air since 2003 on the premium cable channel Showtime. It is hosted by professional magicians/comedians Penn & Teller. Many episodes aim to debunk what the hosts see as pseudoscientific ideas, supernatural beliefs, popular fads and misconceptions, and often from a libertarian point of view, the political philosophy espoused by both Penn and Teller. The show criticizes proponents of what they perceive as nonsense and dishonesty—bullshit—often citing ulterior political or financial motives. The stated aim of the show is to apply critical thinking to misconceptions, and as is indicated by the show's title, the program adheres to Penn & Teller's characteristically blunt, aggressive presentation.

Supernatural subjects of episodes include alien abduction, alternative medicine, and ESP; other episodes cover social issues such as the War on Drugs, animal rights, gun control, education, and environmentalism.

Showtime has not permitted full episodes of Bullshit to remain on Google Video and YouTube, however some excellent short clips such as the ones above are available and of course all episodes are downloadable through Bit Torrent.
 

Episode List

Season 1

101 Talking to the Dead (John Edwards)
102 Alternative Medicine
103 Alien Abductions
104 End of the World (Doomsday Prediction)
105 Second Hand Smoke / Baby Raising
106 Non-Surgical Sexual Enhancements
107 Feng Shui / Bottled Water
108 Creationism vs Evolution
109 Self-Helpless (Self-help Seminars)
110 ESP
111 Eat This! (Dieting, Genetically Modified Food)
112 Ouija Boards / Near Death Experiences
113 Environmental Hysteria

Season 2

201 P.E.T.A.
202 Safety Hysteria
203 The Business of Love
204 War on Drugs
206 Profanity and Free Speech
205 Recycling
207 Yoga / Tantric Sex
208 Fountain of Youth (Plastic Surgery)
209 Death, Inc. (Funerals)
210 12-Stepping
211 The Bible: Fact or Fiction?
212 Exercise vs. Genetics
213 Hypnosis

Season 3

301 Circumcision
302 Family Values (Traditional Family Structure & Marriage)
303 Conspiracy Theories
304 Life Coaching
305 Holier Than Thou (Mother Theresa, Mahatma Gandhi, Dali Lama)
306 College
307 Big Brother
308 Hair
309 Gun Control
310 Ghost Busters
311 Endangered Species
312 Signs From Heaven (Miracles and Religious Icons)
313 The Best

Season 4

401 Boy Scouts
402 Prostitution
403 The Death Penalty
404 Cryptozoology
405 Ground Zero (911 Rebuilding)
406 Pet Love
407 Reparations
408 Manners
409 Numbers
410 Abstinence

Season 5

501 Obesity Epidemic
502 Wal-Mart Hatred
503 Breast Hysteria
504 Detoxing
505 Exorcism
506 Immigration
507 Handicap Parking
508 Mount Rushmore
509 Nukes, Hybrids, & Lesbians
510 Anger Management

   
Video Sharing Sites  
 
DVD  
 
Direct Download  
 
More Information  
 

Sunday, August 26, 2007

FreedomFest 2007 - The BIG Debate: Libertarians Ron Paul & Doug Casey vs. Conservatives Dinesh D'Souza & Larry Abraham



Part 1 - Ron Paul

 
Part 2 - Dinesh D'Souza

 
Part 3 - Larry Abraham

 
Part 4 - Doug Casey

 
Part 5 - Rebuttal; Abraham and Casey

 
Part 6 - Rebuttal; D'Souza and Paul


Part 7 - Q&A
 

 

On July 7, 2007 FreedomFest concluded with a debate on U.S. foreign policy and the war in Iraq between:

Libertarian Ron Paul & Anarchist Doug Casey
vs.
Neo-conservatives Dinesh D'Souza & Larry Abraham
 

Each speaker was given 10 minutes for opening remarks, followed by a 4-5 minute rebuttal from each participant, and finally questions and answers were taken from the audience. A summary of the main points made by each debater are as follows:

Ron Paul, Obstetrician and Congressman from Texas, Libertarian

  • In general, in the past those who advocated non-intervention won elections.
  • The constitution did not give permission to the US government to initiate wars of aggression and that was for good reason.
  • The constitution notes that war should only be waged after a declaration of war from congress.
  • The founders' advice was to talk to people, trade with them, but not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations.
  • There are many unintended consequences of intervention. As more intervention has taken place over the 20th century, people around the world have become resentful of U.S. foreign policy. This resentment has created blowback as extremist organizations have become motivated to attack the U.S. based on its interventionist foreign policy.
  • If a non-intervention policy is hard to accept, consider what intervention looks like from the other side. What would we think if the Chinese had troops within our borders and they were teaching us to live like the Chinese and teaching us their religion and their laws? We would be outraged and we would fight to remove their presence.
  • When Ronald Reagan sent troops to Lebanon and reversed his pledge to never turn tail and run. He explained the reversal due to his realizing the irrationality of the policies of that nation and the hatreds of the region. It was a lesson he had to learn, but we still haven't learned it.
  • In 1953 we used the CIA to overthrow democratically elected Prime Minister Mohamed Mosedec because we didn't like him defending the interests of the Iranians against the interests of the British and American oil companies. And we wonder why they get angry.
  • We remember nothing, they forget nothing.
  • In the 1980's we subsidized the radical madrassa schools and Osama bin Laden to create "freedom fighters" against the communists
  • We were partners with Saddam Hussein because he was attacking Iran. When he used gas, we looked the other way and actually sold him the gas.
  • These policies have to stop, and a better managed war in Iraq will not solve America's fundamentally broken foreign policy

Dinesh D'Souza, Conservative Commentator, Neo-Conservative

  • For libertarianism to be consistent it should defend the principle of liberty.
  • Non-intervention can be useful, but it is subordinate to the primary principle of liberty
  • If you can intervene abroad to secure liberty should you do it? Or should you abstain in the name of non-intervention which would undermine liberty?
  • It could seem paradoxical to libertarians to use force to secure freedom. However, we have imposed freedom at the point on a bayonet in the past on Japan and Germany. The results have been very positive.
  • Freedom often comes through force. For example through a revolution. Revolutions are rarely peaceful and never legal. It took a civil war to secure freedom for African Americans. Hence freedom sometimes comes through force.
  • In retrospect, should we have gone into Iraq? In retrospect, I wish we had focused a little more on Iran. They're clearly the ones seeking WMD's. Unfortunately we can't act in retrospect, we have to act based on the best information available at the time.
  • Today Muslims have only two choices, Islamic tyranny (like Iran's rule of the Mullahs) or secular tyranny (like everyone else; Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc). From a Muslim point of view there is no freedom in the middle east. The war in Iraq is trying to create a 3rd choice; call it Muslim democracy.
  • We're not the worlds policeman promoting democracy everywhere. In Iraq we're not trying to impose democracy everywhere, we're simply trying to impose it somewhere to give Muslims an alternative to the forms of tyranny that engulf their world. 
  • The Islamists already control Iran and have been trying for a generation to export the Khomeini revolution to other countries. They are desperate to get another major state, and they've said it should be Iraq. They've announced if they get Iraq they'll then target Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
  • Is the libertarian position that we should sit back and watch this happen? Realistically we have interests in the Middle East and we should defend them.
  • Why did Islamists attack the US on 9-11? Bin Laden believes that the U.S. is outwardly tough, but inwardly a bunch of cowards. When the fighting get's tough, they'll turn tail and run. They did it in Vietnam and they'll do it again. All they have to do is wait it out in Iraq until the great impatience and weariness of the American people to arise when stoked by the political left and some libertarians that say we should leave. Iraq then falls into their hands.
  • If we believe in freedom, we should stay and fight for it.

Larry Abraham, Chairman and Founder of Pan-American Capital Group, Neo-conservative

  • 93 years of idiotic, schizophrenia, and insane foreign policy is not the point.
  • Who really set the stage for Reagan's cut and run in Lebanon? The same people who are setting the stage for the cut and run from Iraq, the editorial board of the New York Times
  • I'm opposed to helter-skelter intervention, but 911 is different
  • Hypothetically, if Musharraf in Pakistan goes down, Islamists will gain possession of a nuclear weapon. If Mubarak in Egypt goes down they would they close down the Suez canal. The reality is that's the hand we've been dealt right now.
  • Very bad things could soon occur so we should act offensively now while we still can to defensively prevent them from taking place in the future.

Doug Casey, founder of Casey Research, Anarchist

  • The US attacked a backward, primitive country that did nothing to it and which used to be a bosom ally of the corrupt U.S. government.
  • If a Muslim army had attacked the US, I would hope every American would be out there every night trying to kill a Muslim soldier just like they're out there trying to kill an American soldier
  • The arguments of the neo-conservatives are complete rhetoric and sophistry.
  • The war is counter-productive. It can have no benefits. It will destroy American freedom.
  • When the next 911 occurs, the US government will lock down the country into a police state. That will destroy American freedom and bankrupt the US government.
  • Should we invade Iraq to defend America? No, continuing now by taking the war to Iran will start WW3
  • Who's the enemy? We brought freedom to Germany and Japan? Ridiculous! Those were modern industrialized nations which had a government to fight. In this case it's a guerilla war.
  • The real enemy is not backward Muslims, it's the US government. The Muslims are just misguided human beings who are attacking us because we attacked them.
  • Should we give them democracy? No. Democracy is nothing more than mob rule dressed up in a sport coat.
  • What should we have done about 9-11? Should we have attacked Beijing because the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor (which is exactly what attacking Iraq is)? No. It was a criminal act not a cause for war.
  • We can't win a guerilla war. If we go into Iran, the average Iranian who currently is very sympathetic to the U.S. and anti his government will turn anti-American. And then we'll really whack the hornets nest.
  • Three actions to take to solve this problem: Withdraw all U.S. troops from the 100+ countries they are stationed in. Stop meddling in foreign governments and stop giving foreign aid to Israel and Egypt, etc. Apologize for doing these awful things.
  • If we take these actions, the Muslim people will stand down and go back to their natural evolution and development.

Rebuttal by Larry Abraham

  • Who started this conflict? Perhaps it was at the Battle of Tours, a hangover from the Battle of La Ponto, or the British and the French screwing up the Arabs at the end of WWI. Who knows, but 911 was much more than a criminal act.
  • We didn't start it.
  • Have you ever been hated and wanted dead just for who you are? Every Jew in Israel knows that feeling. Everyday there's someone over there thinking, "how can we kill those people, they deserve to die, they're worse than pigs." That hatred is not only directed at Israel but also the American people.
  • Doug has a lot of contempt for this country, but the U.S. is not deserving of contempt. We've made mistakes, sure. But it's not conservatives who are responsible for those mistakes.
  • I have a son in the Marine Corp. Does that make me a fool? Does that make my sons just worthless battle cannon fodder? I don't think so.
  • If Doug is right and this country is as contemptuous as he says it is, then this debate is a prelude to chaos, confusion, and genocide.

Rebuttal by Doug Casey

  • I've got no problem with Israel or the Jews, I just don't want a dog in that fight.
  • The state of Israel stole the land that now makes up it's borders from the residents that previously lived there. 
  • Before the creation of the state of Israel the Muslims and Christians living in the middle east didn't hate the Jews and they all got along fine.
  • It's the creation of a state that's the problem where the people who are not controlling the state are disenfranchised.
  • It's a big problem, but it's not our problem to solve, they have to work it out for themselves.
  • Larry said I have contempt for the country. No! I said I have contempt for the government.
  • If you want to kill someone badly enough, you should do it yourself, not get control of a government to do it for you and force others to pay for that action.

Rebuttal by Dinesh D'Souza

  • The issue here is not just "the government", it's also what the founders stood for. Libertarians believe the founders stood for liberty. Is liberty only good for us? The principled libertarian, like the founders, believes that liberty is a universal aspiration.
  • The idea of 911 as a police action: Memo to our opponents; the guys that did 911 are all dead. If that's the war on terror then you might as well declare it over. What about all the new terrorists coming out of the madrassas committing bombings all over the world?
  • The idea that we should pull all of our troops home everywhere and get involved nowhere; if you took this idiotic principle and applied it over the past 100 years...is it the idea that if FDR didn't like Hitler he should go choke him himself?
  • Blowback; foreign policy is sometimes about the principle of the lesser evil. Sometimes you ally with the bad guy to get rid of the worse guy. In WW2 we allied with the really bad guy--Stalin--because Hitler posed a greater threat at the time.
  • We sold those weapons to Saddam? Non-sense. The U.S. diplomatically tilted towards Iraq in the 80's because Khomeini then posed a greater threat than Saddam.
  • It is true we're seeing a blowback. Is the average Muslim in the Sudan or Somalia or Islamabad willing to go to his death because the Palestinians don't have a state? Give me a break. Is the ordinary Muslim willing to kill himself because there are troops in Mecca? There are no troops in Mecca. They're 500 miles away in the Saudi desert. The average Muslim is not saying that in the street.
  • What they're saying is: the US is the global head of the unbelievers or the pagans. The US is exporting thorough globalization and free trade values that are undermining Islam, destroying the Muslim family, and corrupting the innocence of Muslim children. Pulling home the troops will not stop that. Their argument is the fundamental values of Islam are being attacked.
  • It is American ideas and values that are at the root of this. Either we stand up and fight for them, or we go down with them.

Rebuttal by Ron Paul

  • If we had respected private property and not used regulation to take away the responsibility to protect passengers from the airlines themselves, it's likely that the pilots of the planes that were used on 911 would have had guns in the cockpit and been able to defend themselves and prevent the event from occurring.
  • Now 911 is the excuse for perpetual war. Iraq had nothing to do with 911, yet 911 is the excuse for the initiation of the Iraq invasion.
  • Our foreign policy creates conditions for terrorism
  • Christian non-intervention means you don't go to war carelessly and you do not preemptively strike a nation that has not threatened you.
  • Michael Scheuer is the world expert on Bin Laden who says Ron Paul is the enemy of Al Qaeda because if we take Paul's advice it will remove the primary source of new recruits for Al Qaeda. They like us in their backyard (Iraq) where they can pick us off one by one and wear us down.
  • Suicide terrorism's root cause is not radical Islam. Robert Pape's book, Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism notes the top suicide bombing nation is not Islamic -- it happens to be Sri lanka. I was unconvinced he was right, but he convinced me. The top motivation to get someone to commit suicide terrorism is foreign occupation.
  • It's the Arabian peninsula that is considered holy land by the terrorists, not just Mecca.
  • The fundamental principle of the constitution is non-intervention and minding our own business. If we had embraced that principle all along and apply it in the future we will be much safer.

Question and Answer Period

  • Moderator George Gilder asked what Israel's response should be to Iran's threat of using nuclear weapons. Larry Abraham noted that they do not have the capability now, but we should make it clear that if they do develop the capability that [the US] should take them out. He asked, if we're going to be a world power, shouldn't we act like a world power?
  • A questioner from the audience asked: why should we be a world power? The point of being a world power is so that we can DEFEND ourselves not so that we can go around beating up on others, he went on to ask D'Souza, why do you think the constitution is for the entire world?
  • D'Souza responded by saying the founders didn't make the constitution for the world, our civil rights are ours. But the constitution arose from universal principles, everyone is entitled to liberty. Another 911 will destroy freedom in America, if it occurs the US will have to become like Israel, a police state. Since there's been no attack since, everyone has been able to relax and rest easy.
  • Ron Paul responded to D'Souza by saying that he too fears more 911's as a threat to our freedom. But the threat is not from a foreign power, it's from more Patriot Acts, more National ID Acts, more loss of habeas corpus -- and that's coming from our government. If we want to spread our goodness it should be without force by setting a good example, having a vibrant economy, and minding our own business where people will want to emulate us. You can't do it through use of force!

FreedomFest is an annual festival where "free minds meet" to celebrate "great books, great ideas, and great thinkers" in a liberal, open-minded society. It is independent, non-partisan, and not affiliated with any organization or think tank.

Founded and produced by Mark Skousen since 2002, FreedomFest invites the "best and the brightest" from around the world to talk, strategize, socialize, and celebrate liberty. FreedomFest is open to all and is purely egalitarian, where speakers, attendees, and exhibitors are treated as equals.

Who should attend FreedomFest? It’s open to anyone who enjoys a wide interest in books, art, music, film, and drama in all topics, including science, philosophy, economics, health, sports, technology, business, religion, law, and politics. FreedomFest attracts people of all walks of life and across the political spectrum to learn, debate and honor great books, great ideas, and great thinkers.

   
Video Sharing Sites  
 
DVD  
 
More Information  
 

Thursday, July 19, 2007

An Inconvenient Truth...or Convenient Fiction


Part 1
 


Part 2
 

A film by Steve Hayward, the author the annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators, released each year on Earth Day.


Reviews

The Antidote to 'Inconvenient Truth'
- NY Times

(Steve) Hayward... has an advantage over Gore. Unlike Gore, he is calm and reasonable, avoids hyperbole, and sticks to the facts...
- Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard
   
Internet Streaming  
 
   
Video Sharing Sites  

IQ Squared Global Warming Debate


 

Climate change is big news these days, from melting mountain glaciers to warming seas. But is the buildup of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere leading to a crisis?

That was the question at the core of a recent Oxford-style debate called Intelligence Squared U.S. The series is based on the Intelligence Squared program that began in London in 2002. Three experts argue in favor of a motion (Michael Crichton, Richard Lindzen, and Philip Stott); three others argue against it (Brenda Ekwurzel, Gavin Schmidt, and Richard Somerville).

In this debate, the proposition was: "Global Warming Is Not a Crisis." In a vote before the debate, about 30 percent of the audience agreed with the motion, while 57 percent were against and 13 percent undecided. The debate seemed to affect a number of people: Afterward, about 46 percent agreed with the motion, roughly 42 percent were opposed and about 12 percent were undecided.

   
Video Sharing Sites  
 
More Information  
 

Charlie Rose - February 19, 2007 - Michael Crichton


 
Michael Crichton speaks about his latest book 'Next' and discusses global warming where he has some controversial views. (Global warming discussion begins at 22:10)
   
Video Sharing Sites  
 

The Great Global Warming Swindle

 
The Great Global Warming Swindle is a controversial documentary film by British television producer Martin Durkin, which argues against the scientific opinion that human activity is the main cause of global warming. The film showcases scientists, economists, politicians, writers, and others who are skeptical of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming. Publicity for the programme states that global warming is "a lie" and "the biggest scam of modern times."

Channel 4, which screened the documentary on March 8, 2007, described the film as "a polemic that drew together the well-documented views of a number of respected scientists to reach the same conclusions. This is a controversial film but we feel that it is important that all sides of the debate are aired."

The programme's accuracy has been disputed on multiple points and several commentators have criticized it for being one-sided, noting that the mainstream position on global warming is supported by the scientific academies of the major industrialized nations and other scientific organizations. The film disputes the positions of these scientific organizations by interviewing scientists and others, including Richard Lindzen and other contributors to reports by the IPCC, who disagree with explanations that attribute global warming to human activities.
 
Video Sharing Sites  
 
Direct Download  
 
DVD Purchase  
 
More Information  
 

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Freeman Dyson on Global Warming


Part 1


Part 2
 
A prominent scientist who's followed the science of global warming from the beginning, Dyson explains why climate models have no scientific merit, why average global ground temperature is a great fiction, and what he believes the real dangers of increased CO2 in the atmosphere are. He suggests that the relatively simple solution of land use management could potentially give us the ability to control the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere at any level we'd like with no need to stop burning coal and oil.
   
Internet Streaming  
 
Video Sharing Sites  
 
DVD Purchase