It could be by companies who are negatively impacted by global warming theories, companies who love making profit by not caring about pollution, companies that build unsafe factories in third world countries.
It can be cyclical, but it should be slower than this, this is too fast for the normal evolution.
Last edited by aryanto; 23rd April 2009 at 10:14 PM.
pls chill leh, I started this thread basically just to share with others about this film which i find it anything to lose if one is interested to watch. Of cos we will never know which ever who and who is 100% right with their "researches" or "facts" they have. What's right and wrong? It just individual's perspectives after watching it, believe it or not is up to oneself.
As for this film, personally i find it logical with some of the "facts" that it shown and how its been explained.
Of cos it will be super duper funny that if i say "let SAVE the world and CHANGE the world now" then i will be the funniest joker in CS.
This thread is just to share and not meant to "fight" or "wont want to lose argument" thing.
Sometime i think, why we willing to use up so many quality time to do these "unnecessary" rather than do something which is more helpful or constructive?
Or do we really need a super huge campaign then we are able to do that bit part that we can? You see, CS is one of a huge platform of photography forum and where people "meet" to share, right?
Do you believe with this "little" strength if you comparing to the world, can do great thing if everyone can jsut help each other for good cause and it's happened. Why not now?
A simple "Movement" do can change the world, even it just a fair bit also good. Still remember the movie, "Pay it Forward"?
Watched the movie a long time back. A few comments here.
Al gore showed the melting ice on Kilimanjaro. He implies it is due to global warming. Experts believe the reason is instead man-made deforestation at the base of the mountain, so moist air can no longer be carried up the mountain. They believe the situation is easily repairable of the forrest is allowed to grow back.
The cartoon about polar bears dying. "A new scientific study shows that for the first time there are more bears that have actually drowned, swimming long distances of up to 60 miles to find the ice." Al gore seems to imply global warming is destroying the ice, causing the bears to drown. But this statement seems based on a sighting of 4 dead bears after a particularly heavy storm. Incidentally, the 4 bears belonged to a population that was actually increasing in numbers.
Incidentally, i don't approve of Earth Hour or Earth Day. Because these are large, showy celebrations that actually do little to help environmental issues.
Just want to remind people that there is only one earth and not backup.
Who want to bet using their only one? Lost and then say oops?
by the way remember elevation of singapore is not that high, I think if sea level go up 1.5m still should be OK can mobilise people to sandbag entire island but if sea level go up 2m the first thing is suddenly there is a scarcity of fresh water because the reservoirs are flooded with sea water.
make it 3 meters and many should change passport and move to other country already.
Last edited by aryanto; 24th April 2009 at 08:57 AM.
For the other side of the arguement, please read up / google "the skeptical environmentalist".
Personally, I feel that Al Gore has vested interest in promoting his green movement. Many scientist has been demonized for questioning his green movement because of the public perception that he is trying to save the earth.
Try to view this with an open mind.
At certain points, i might not totally agree with how they spent and "marketing" this campaign but we can deny that at least some one willing to put in the effort and actually it's succeed for that particular day but will it last long with the huge concurrent campaign?
Need not for me to dwell on what's appreciation about if one have explored more and feel with the heart.
Last edited by Tupi Guy; 24th April 2009 at 09:12 AM.
Like Zack said, keep an open mind about this issue. Know all the facts before jumping into conclusions.
Last edited by ArchRival; 24th April 2009 at 02:04 PM.
2nd of all, you are talking about molecule for molecule, the absorbtion of IR for methane is 20 times, but consider also how much MORE CO2 there is compared to CH4.
Lastly, you are saying if we can't solve all contributing factors to the problem, means we can ignore the other contributing factors?
Last edited by ahbian; 24th April 2009 at 07:57 PM.
I agree with your points. I myself find that the movie does contain factual inaccuracies which skeptics tend to jump on and discredit the main message of conservation.
We might not 100% prove or disprove the theory of global warming, ever. But this theory causes more distress to more because people find that they need to give up certain comforts and wealth and current ways of life.
It is hard to prove this theory of global warming, but sometimes, we need to take at look at the reversibility principle and the precautionary principle.
You've seen the links on Bangladesh being flooded. Those poor people becoming environmental refugees. What are your thoughts on the matter? How do we help these people? What should governments/scientists/students do?