Wednesday, May 02, 2007 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

CNN: Exposed: The Climate of Fear: full video

The full AVI video (344 MB; 41:15 when played) is available at mirror 1, mirror 2. Please create your own mirrors if you offer to many others. Thanks to Frédéric...

Six parts of the program may also be found on YouTube or Google Video.


Tonight, on May 2nd, at 7 pm, 9 pm, and midnight Eastern time, Glenn Beck will try to deflate the media hype about the global warming on CNN. He will look at the physical basis, proposed policies, as well as the somewhat Adolfian methods to impose the so-called "scientific consensus".
Press release
See video excerpt by clicking here (WM)
Full transcript of the program
Beck's 3-minute promo
A 7-minute segment from the show
Other Glenn Beck climate videos
Some extra frequently visited climate articles on this weblog


Add to del.icio.us Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (14) :


reader jbg said...

just for fun:
news.google.com

j


reader Barlycorn, John said...

Here is another question to ask yourself, "just for fun".

Why is it that whenever the climate models are wrong, instead of wondering, "maybe something else is at work here?", you just say roughly "The models were even more right than we thought!"


reader Lumo said...

Dear jbg, Arctic ice is oscillating, and it has been always oscillating, as dynamically as stock market or anything else. There's nothing unusual about it and there's really nothing dangerous about it, and the articles you mentioned just demonstrate inadequacy of the climate models that fail to account for short-term dynamics.

For example, the ice that melts keeps the sea level untouched because of the so-called Archimedes' law. ;-)


reader jbg said...

dear lubos,

perhaps three short comments are appropriate...

i.) "When Arctic ice melts, it doesn't raise the level of the ocean, and doesn't threaten coastal communities with flooding. [...] But there is still reason to pay attention. Water from the Arctic Ocean plays an important role in Northern Hemisphere weather. The powerful Gulf Stream current moves warm water from the tropics past the east coast of the United States and Canada and northwestern Europe. If the Arctic continues to melt, some scientists fear the Gulf Stream will be diverted."
from this cnn report from 2000

ii.) people have criticized climate models of exaggerating certain aspects. it's perhaps interesting to note that some developments are at the upper boundary of the forecasts.

iii.) indeed, one would hardly expect complex systems as the global climate to only depend on few effects, so obviously the challenge is to incorporate as many relevant forces as possible. which again makes the modeling subtler, as offsetting phenomena, e.g., global dimming and global warming, are competing mechanisms influencing the path-dependent evolution of the systems state.

regards,

j


reader Lumo said...

Dear jbg,

not at all. The primary driver of the Gulf Stream is not thermohaline circulation but winds. See, for example, the third sentence of Wikipedia definition of the circulation. These winds are subsequently determined by the rotation of Earth. So if you want to mess up with the motion of the Gulf Stream, melting Arctic ice won't do it.

You must actually stop Earth's rotation. Not sure whether Al Gore already says that the human activities are stopping the rotation of Earth. ;-)

When you quote the 2000 media reports, it looks like you have no idea what's happening. It's been observed very clearly recently that the Gulf Stream is not changing its strength or path, see e.g. this blog with a link to Die Zeit. It's been everywhere in the newspapers but I can't find the articles too quickly now.

Best
Lubos


reader jbg said...

dear lubos,

perhaps, as ever, the situation is rather more involved than one might be inclined to think:

-wikipedia.org: Shutdown of thermohaline circulation i.)
-wikipedia.org: Shutdown of thermohaline circulation ii.)

regards,

j


reader Lumo said...

Dear jbg, the fact that the situation may look/be very complicated is a major reason why I tried to explain basic facts.

I don't know what you want to say by citing random sentences in an article about the thermohaline circulation. If you read my explanation above - or the first sentences of the article whose portions you linked - you would know that thermohaline circulation is not the Gulf Stream, and there is evidence, on the contrary, that the Gulf Stream's impact is getting stronger - warming Western Europe relatively to America.

Things are complicated, of course, but they can be understood - and maybe even you could start to understand them if you carefully read my texts and the texts I link, instead of spamming my blog with random links that must inevitably be confusing for you before you understand the basics that I am trying to explain you.

Good luck
Lubos


reader Lumo said...

Dear jbg, the reason why I erased that last comment of yours, and why I will do it again, is that the comment contained exactly zero of meaningful technical information. Instead, it was based on ideologically driven ad hominem attacks. I won't tolerate it here and I can't afford to tolerate it here. Go to one of those environmentalist trash websites, they will appreciate your contributions there.


reader jbg said...

dear lubos,

i am honestly sorry that you feel that way, as it was not my intention to cause animosity.

to be fair, my comment didn't contain "exactly zero of meaningful technical information", as there were three issues briefly addressed:

i.) the fact that the authors and studies you choose to quote and discuss are not the whole story,
ii.) a remark concerning the difference between analytical models (of mostly fundamental aspects) of reality and algorithmic models thereof (simulating mostly real-world complex systems), and the notion of intricacy within the two contexts,
iii.) a motivation/explanation regarding the links i posted in my comment of May 2, 2007 3:00:00 PM.

regarding your assessment that my remarks are "ideologically driven ad hominem attacks", i do think you are exaggerating a little bit. ok, i jokingly compared you to a creationist, which maybe wasn't funny and perhaps uncalled for. in addition, the last paragraph may have been a bit too general and somewhat patronizing. i apologize for that.

as for my opinion that "you sometimes appear very arrogant and smug", i do think that you have built up somewhat of a reputation for that (starting with your newsgroup posts in 2003 as far as i can judge). however, given an astute self perception, i take it that you are aware of this, and employ such measures for stylistic or rhetoric means.

for what it's worth,

j


reader Frédéric said...

Hi,
For the complete documentary, there are two links (other mirrors welcomed)
http://www.projectalberta.com/TV/Exposed_TCOF.avi
http://fichierforum.iservio.ca/Exposed-The_Climate_of_Fear.avi


reader Bruce Hall said...

just out of curiosity... is the file a video or just the audio portion of the video. I can only get the latter on two different players.


reader Lumo said...

It plays both video and audio to me although there are pretty exciting video effects in it - moving holes in faces etc. :-) Maybe you're missing the right video codec? Good luck, Lubos


reader berki said...

beatiful site thanks super and very goood very very http://muzikdinlee.blogspot.com/


reader Frédéric said...

Hi Lubos,
Here is a link to "the climate of fear" on Google Video (viewable online, no audio sync problem, embeddable on your blog).
http://skyfall.free.fr/?p=126