with Peter Sinclair
A new movie about the folks who’ve brought you climate disinformation for the last 30 years.
The title warms the cockles of my heart – but will sound pretty mild to our grandchildren.
Greedy Lying Bastards website:
The Boston Globe’s reviewer isn’t entirely convinced this movie makes its case:
Rotten Tomatoes gives this film a fresh rating of 79%. And it has a raft of recent reviews. This is a hot ticket this weekend.
I follow them (Greedy, Lying Bastards) on Facebook. Love those guys❤
Can't wait to give them my theater donation!
The tone of the trailer gives me the impression that this movie is aimed at people who already accept that AGW is real and already know that the AGW ‘skeptic’ are being funded by fossil fuel interests and egged on by right wing astro-turf groups. So how is that going to help?
What we need is a film that can make the case for climate science that will convince the fence sitters and luke warmers. My guess is that this one may actually be perceived as a propaganda film,which will make it much easier to dismiss.
Re: “What we need is a film that can make the case for climate science that will convince the fence sitters and luke warmers.”
I completely non-concur. What is needed at this point is outrage and anger and a return to the guillotine.
The time to coddle the weak-minded is over. It’s time for decent people to realize we are being mis-lead by a criminal conspiracy in the U.S. today.
Here’s an important case in point. Senator Elizabeth Warren deftly and politely exposes the Obama Treasury Department as a nest of criminal conspirators out to give free rein to the reign of financial terror being imposed on we the people by the criminal banker class. Watch the video. And stop thinking that education of the unwashed is going to solve anything.
We need a Revolution. And we do not need a re-education campaign.
You can’t have a revolution unless you bring the masses along . You can’t just yell “FU you ignorant jerks,we’re taking over this joint!” to the majority that doesn’t ‘get it’ ,and expect to go anywhere except to jail or a padded cell somewhere.
Revolutions are never led by the masses. The masses invariably acquiesce to whatever leadership happens to come along.
The American Revolution is a case in point in that the richest people in the American colonies formed the core. George Washington was married to the richest woman in the colonies, Martha Dandridge Custis.
The Continental Congress and the Continental Army never had the active support of more than 3% of the population of the colonies and yet it prevailed.
You need to learn more history.
Another example? in January 1917 the Bolshevik Party in Russia had the support of less than 1/8th of 1% of the general population. Nine months later they ruled the nation.
And a strong case can be made that “You can’t just yell “FU you ignorant jerks,we’re taking over this joint!” is precisely what happened in the U.S. in November, 1963 when the Military-Industrial Complex perpetrated a coup d’etat and took over the government, immediately resulting in its great profit in the Viet Nam slaughter, a war that Jack Kennedy had begun to wind down before he was shot down. See: http://tinyurl.com/avd6kpu
I can’t see any point in debating this point with you since you also subscribe to conspiracy theories. My past experiences have taught me that nothing I say will be of any use to you. But good luck with your revolution.
What was there to debate? I was presenting you with irrefutable facts.
As to conspiracies, they do exist. They are not theoretical.
You seem a bit wet behind the ears when it comes to how the world really works.
Let me make a weekend reading suggestion to you:
And one more:
This one by William Arkin contains a listing of about 2,000 military operations all of which are classified and therefore not describable in the open literature.
This is not theory. This is real. And, of course, it is conspiratorial by nature.
It’s time for one of us to be a bit less naive, eh? And a bit less *cough* dismissive by use of psyop memes that one of us seems to have naively adapted into a fairly simplistic worldview.
Let me add ‘patronizing’ to the list of why I don’t care to have a dialog with you Ray.
That’s all you got? Weak.
I guess every film, how solidly based on evidence it is, will be dismissed by those who don’t want to be persuaded by the evidence. The reactions to Al Gore’s movie proved that clearly.
Otoh, providing tools to recognise misinformation and campaigns of doubt as such to those who are willing to accept the evidence for AGW might prevent the disinformation campaigners to get a grip on this large group. So, yes, I do think that a film that puts the methods of this movement in the open for everyone to see and recognise is a good thing.
Since I haven’t seen the film yet it’s really premature to judge it’s impact.I was put off by the tone of the trailer despite the fact that I probably will agree with the content,but that remains to be seen. But I am already convinced that AGW is real,that we are responsible,that underhanded petroleum interests are behind the denial movement and political machinations,and I accept this because I have already seen the evidence for it,so this movie is wasted on me,because I’m already there.
There has been a massive attempt to get that information out there,along with the tools for recognizing the tactics of the deniers,by scientists and the real skeptical community whom already use and understand critical thinking and the use/misuse of data and the scientific method. But we are the choir,and we need to be after the undecided and uneducated. I can tell you,that anytime I see the type of emotive, manipulative techniques like those used in this trailer,my ‘spidey’ senses start to tingle with a ‘hold on a minute’ vibe. Even when I hear information that I agree with,I do not like to be manipulated. Just give me the straight facts,logical presentation,and compelling narrative,and I’m in.
I do wish you’d make up your mind – but you seem incapable of realizing that you are proposing the very same misbehaviours you lament in others. And this without citations to their calumny. Not that anyone should doubt there is pushback against assertions that ‘the globe is heating up and we all are going to fry !’ But the reasons for that doubt are not simple ‘denial’ either. That is a pejorative limiting consideration to prechosen bipolar possibilities. It’s a complex world. And to represent this as a ‘scientific’ argument when lacing it with acknowledged political manipulation is classic doublethink.
I reserve the term ‘denialist’ for those who pretend to follow the scientific literature on climate,but refuse to acknowledge the data that contradict their main arguments. I will accept that some people are truly skeptical of AGW,due to the fact that they haven’t really followed the science.They are merely ignorant of the data.Big difference.
As to the ‘the globe is heating up and we all are going to fry !’ argument,that is a total strawman argument used against sober climate scientists who talk about real climate change risks in terms of statistical probabilities,some of which may be troubling but not that bad,some of which may be serious, and some of which could ultimately lead to what could only be termed catastrophic. Hardly anyone who really understands what is happening with the climate thinks that the alarms raised by climate scientists are overblown.If anything,it is beginning to look like they have downplayed the risks by too much.
[…] A new movie about the folks who've brought you climate disinformation for the last 30 years. The title warms the cockles of my heart – but will sound pretty mild to our grandchildren. […]
I put it to both Ray and mac that there are plenty of different toys in the toybox. I imagine the film itself won’t be as visually and aurally full-on as the trailer which is a little OTT. I hope the content of the film really digs into the greedy lying bastards with plenty of documentary evidence to demonstrate the shady deals and tactics used, otherwise it does run the risk of being labelled a propaganda film full of the very thing we accuse deniers of. That said, in the war against misinformation, we need to have propaganda style films that show the truth of the politics because the masses are apathetic. They always have been. We need films and other media to make them think and spur them into action. On the flipside we also need the educational films, like Chasing Ice that show the impacts of climate change that are happening now. There is no one way that is right or wrong. Just as the people who need to be convinced that the science is sound are all different, there needs to be different angles to the information presented. What works for one may not work for another. I just hope I get to see it in Australia, something that hasn’t happened with Chasing Ice yet.
Point taken. A similar argument has been buzzing around the real skeptic (hate to have to keep qualifying that) community about the best ways to promote the secular/agnostic/atheist position to the greater community.
Most people seem to agree that a wide range of strategies is the way to go,while some are adamant that an ‘in your face’ aggressive stance is the only way,while others prefer a more congenial,subtle approach,and of course there is a continuum of everything in between as well.
I only speak for myself here,but I feel that my reaction may not be all that unique either.
Enbridge Pipeline CEO says Trans-Canada’s Keystone XL is a “done deal”:
“Hardly anyone who really understands what is happening with the climate thinks that the alarms raised by climate scientists are overblown.”
That really is where the rubber meets the road. It hardly helps that pundits claim climate is not weather ( read any dictionary : the two are interrelated concepts ) when things are so dicey the IPCC calls its computer gaming results projections rather than predictions…which if correct means exactly what ? Null data is still an argument bereft of results. Meteorologists / weathermen met with resistance to their public scoffing around climate change dominated by AGW being a useful concept – but that means open mindedness ( a prerequisite of real scientific inquiry) is long gone. Meanwhile the Brits suffered for their folly in basing infrastructure servicing requirements on predictions indicating moderating winters – without noting changes in global effects would hardly indicate local conditions regardless.
So we have allegations people understand climate – but those claims are not backed up by intelligible resources. Meanwhile we have a political football claimed as the reason for ‘denierism’…which is still an incorrect polarized response to open possibilities.
Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
"The sharpest climate denier debunker on YouTube."
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 2,552 other followers