Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: An Inconvenient Truth comes in paper case

This is topic An Inconvenient Truth comes in paper case in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000554

Posted by Edwin Sheldon (Member # 4001) on 11-19-2006, 12:08 AM:

The case is made of recycled paper. Too bad they didn't use eco-friendly cyan soundtracks on the 35mm prints. [sleep]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-22-2006, 08:51 AM:

Or they could have done the environment a real favor and not made the movie at all.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 11-22-2006, 10:22 AM:

Walmart has packaged this with a florescent bulb.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-22-2006, 12:54 PM:

From our warehouse, we recieved a promotional item for this film. It's postcard-sized "seed paper." It looks like very pulpy recycled paper, but instead of pulp it has seeds pressed into it - you soak the paper for a couple of hours in water, then bury it, and keep it moist. And soon you have a festive garden.

Posted by Dan Lyons (Member # 1454) on 11-22-2006, 01:27 PM:

I'm surprised they haven't included a pack of rolling papers for the hippies who will buy this dvd. [evil]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-22-2006, 02:33 PM:

Mike...

That sounds fun. Did you try it?

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-22-2006, 03:39 PM:

I wonder what it grows? [evil]

(See Danny's post above.)

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-23-2006, 10:53 AM:

I dunno, they may be a lot less tense people in the world. Geez, maybe that's a good idea for the remainder of my 2 weeks at the theatre. Naw, I'll stick to the bottle, less trouble with that. [Big Grin]

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 11-25-2006, 12:11 AM:

Personally I"m thankful this film was made, 18 years ago I spent a day with a canadian scientest called David Suzuki, who pretty much covered the topic simalarly to Al Gore in 2006,

The major difference was mine was one on one situation.

quote "Yes the climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years. this is not the issue, Its the rate of change thats the problem, Traditionally forrests do move, seeds grow where the conditions are right and die where conditions are no longer favorable. Unfortunatly now trees are going to pull up there roots and learn how to walk to keep up with climate change!!!!!"

The frog dies ie is boiled to death (no one saves him).

Now I am afraid that my 3 1/2 year old son will be boiled to death some time in his future

[ 11-25-2006, 12:50 AM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 11-25-2006, 12:58 AM:

The perfect solution for global warming. Build huge CO2 scubbers to take it out of our atmosphere and then transport it to Mars and dump it so it can start warming the planet to make it suitable for future generations. I dont know how to do it but surely someone will figure it out.

I just watched it on DVD today, from netflix. Better than I was expecting. One thing though, I am so tired of them blaming what happened to New Orleans on global warming. The devestation of N.O. was a MAN MADE disaster. If Katrina would have hit anywhere else it would have been just another hurricane. What do you expect when you have a city below sea level?

My other question is this. IF the damage is done and in 60 years we enter another ice age due to the desalinization of the oceans, wouldn't we want all the extra greenhouse gasses in the air to help prevent a runaway freeze? For those who don't know a runaway freeze is where so much of the earth's surface gets covered in ice that it reflects too much heat back into space and results in the planet getting colder and becoming completely covered in ice. It happened about 600mya and the only way out of it is through "global warming." Of course the last time it took about 10million years for enough co2 to build up in the atmosphere to begin the thaw.

Im no scientist of course so don't take anything I say seriously, ever.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 11-25-2006, 07:59 PM:

Ok, sorry if my earlier comments crossed the line It wasn't ment to offend, as for American Politics well I have no idea, Technically my ruler or leader is the Queen of another country (who never visits!).

I hope that my 3 1/2 year old son will live a full life and that his children will live a quality of life similar to ours, unfortunatly after witnessing 18 years of inaction, time is running out, current estimates indicate that to fix the problem will now cost 1% of GDP worldwide, this huge figure will continue to go up as inaction continues.

I find this frustrating, I believe that mankind can do anything it sets its mind to.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-26-2006, 12:23 AM:

quote: Cameron Glendinning
Technically my ruler or leader is the Queen of another country

You do have a Prime Minister or something, right? That'd be your leader, since the "queen" doesn't even truely run her own country, more like the Parliment does, and the Prime Minister.

I'd point out that scientists seem split on the whole global warming issue. Some say we're causeing it, some say it's simply the earth coming out of the last ice age. Not the BIG ice age, but a smaller one. Also, from what I've read, just one volcanic erupiton produces more greenhouse and ozone depleting gases than everything man has so far.

Anyhow, all of this global warming talk is bound to spring up political talk, so we either need to ask the mods to allow it, or evlolve the topic away from it.

Personally, on a side note, I'd like to see us colonize Mars during my life, but I doubt it'll happen.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 11-26-2006, 01:28 AM:

*sigh*

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 11-26-2006, 10:17 AM:

quote: Charles Greenlee
all of this global warming talk is bound to spring up political talk

Gee, ya think? I thought this was supposed to be a discussion about the DVD, not amateur hour at the I Took Tenth Grade Earth Science Club.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 11-26-2006, 12:05 PM:

I happened to take 10th grade science twice. I got a C the second time.

Sure, this is a discussion about the DVD. But guess what? The movie is on the DVD and the movie is about global warming.

Are you suggesting that the discussion of science be banned on here? I am not going to refrain from asking a scientific question out of the fear that some idiot will turn it into a political discussion. You see Chad, intelligent people ask questions. Intelligent people are not always smart, but they look at something and ask questions about what they don't understand.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-26-2006, 03:30 PM:

The bottom line is that no one knows for sure why the climate changes. And to think that we have anything to do with it, or that we can do anything to steer the change in one direction or the other is the epitome of human arrogance. Hell we can't even predict what the weather will be more than a couple of days out.

I think any global climate change is a sign that something else much larger is coming. Whether that's a pole shift or whatever it is. The Mayans seemed to think that something big would happen in 2012 when our solar system supposedly crosses the Milky Way's galactic equator. I guess we'll see in about six years.

Until then, if there really is global warming, I say we all eat, drink and be merry, and enjoy the warmer weather. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 11-26-2006, 05:45 PM:

The cause of global warming? You guessed it, Frank Stallone.

(see if anyone gets that, lol)

Posted by Ron Curran (Member # 3631) on 11-27-2006, 01:28 AM:

quote:
Charles Greenlee: You do have a Prime Minister or something, right? That'd be your leader, since the "queen" doesn't even truely run her own country, more like the Parliment does, and the Prime Minister.

The queen's representative sacked the pm in 1975, so Cameron might have a point.

Australia's war of independence at Eureka did not have the same outcome as the same show in the US.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-27-2006, 11:04 PM:

Being that you are from Aus. and I'm not, I will trust you on that. We learn of it in geography, and all that jazz, but unless you take some special course in college we aren't taught hardly any history of Austrailia's. It would be interesting to look at a history book from over there.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 11-28-2006, 01:51 AM:

[QUOTE Hell we can't even predict what the weather will be more than a couple of days out. [/QUOTE]

Ok guys, let me say that 18 years ago, thats what I thought.

I had no knowledge at all who David Suzuki was when I met him, (I thought he might have something to do with motorcycles). All I can say is that all of what he predicted did come true to date!!!! And The Inconvenient Truth actually showed footage of the events that he (or the papers that he was quoting) predicted. So thats what rammed it home to me.

Now I respect all your cycism, after all it took me ten years for to think that he really had a point. But now 8 more years have passed it is hard for me to ignore. Recently becoming a father has also introduced a new level of care or moral responsibility.

I certainly don't expect others to react differently to myself, so perhaps over the next 10 years your opinion will change. From my point of view I hope so. Australia is the driest continent in the world.

[Smile]

Charles,
Ron has mentioned the 1975 Dismissal, as you can see it isn't as clear cut as one would think. Even in England the Queen's almost secret powers are still used. The PM can use her signature to bypass Parliament (usually in issues of National Security.) [uhoh]

PS good luck with the future, Why not become a sound tech, I can see your professionalism and dedication to your work, find a way to follow your dream I suggest [thumbsup]

Pss The Prime Minister is my local member ( he only has a lead of 3%, no longer a safe one, so perhaps he wont even have a seat next election)

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-28-2006, 10:05 AM:

I just have to step in ....after reading the comments on this post.. GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING and its going to really fuck things up! I've lived in the far north of Canada for a number of years and I have to say its having a huge effect on the environment up there...things are changing fast and its our fault. We need more films like An Inconvenient Truth to wake people up.. I only wish Al Core had been that persuasive during the 2000 election. Denying that Global Warming in happening is like sticking your head in the sand...your going to get kicked in the ass!

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-28-2006, 12:26 PM:

quote: Paul Gordon
things are changing fast and its our fault.

Not that I disagree with you, but playing devil's advocate for a moment. How do you know it's changing fast? What do you have to compare it to? Have you lived to experience more than one full thermal cycle (by that I mean going into and back out from an ice age, or the other way around)? Recorded history has not been around long enough to tell us how warm/cold it should get and how fast and when. We do have palentologist that can give a rough guess, but that can vary to a great deal. Like what killed off the Dinosaurs, etc. And in attempting to fix something that may be an integral part of what the earth normally goes through, we may mess things up worse. We may do that even if it is our problem. It's a leap of fatih no matter how you look at it, and all guesses and assumptions. Either we assume that we're causing it, and try to fix it, and possibly screw up worse. Or we sit and watch, assuming it's natural, and hope we're right, because if we're not, the results there would be disaterous.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-28-2006, 01:19 PM:

I think you need to watch the movie....

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 11-28-2006, 04:01 PM:

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and relax. Sometimes it's cold. Sometimes it's hot. In Calgary right now, it seems like it's getting pretty cold.

Link

quote:

Environment Canada says such low temperatures unusual for this time of year

By TARINA WHITE, CALGARY SUN

Dave Koiter bundles up to take on the task of wiping off his windshield yesterday as more snow fell on Calgary. Strong winds combined with blowing snow and frigid temperatures to create treacherous driving conditions throughout the city.

The arctic deep freeze trapping Calgary is on track to break a 110-year-old weather record today, but the bitter cold is expected to ease in the coming days.

With a forecast low of -31C today, Calgary could break the -27C record set on this day in 1896.

But factoring in the wind chill, it will feel even colder to people who have to brave the elements, said Environment Canada meteorologist Ross Macdonald.

"I wouldn't break out the shorts and go sunbathing right now," he joked.

"Bundle up."

The recent frigid weather is a far cry from the city's average late-November temperatures.

Macdonald said the normal daytime high at this time of year is 0C, with a low of -11C.

"The last time it was really this cold in November was about 10 years ago," he said.

"We've hit rock bottom."

It's even been too frosty to ski, with Canada Olympic Park shutting the hill yesterday in the name of safety.

Spokesman Chris Dornan said, to his knowledge, it's the first year the weather has forced a November closure.

"It's normally in January or February," he said.

Meanwhile, blowing snow likely contributed to a crash near Sylvan Lake yesterday that claimed the life of a 42-year-old motorist.

And the icy snap has the Calgary Humane Society scrambling to respond to an avalanche of calls from residents concerned about distressed animals, said spokeswoman Cheryl Wallach.

"The Calgary Humane Society is calling on all Calgary pet owners to use common sense and not leave animals outside without adequate shelter," she said.

The frigid weather is expected to improve by Thursday, with a predicted high of -7C.

Earth is billions of years old. To expect to understand its normal climate cycle with only about a hundred years or so of data is ridiculous. To expect that the measurements taken in countries like Poland, China, Korea, or where ever 100 years ago were just as accurate as they are today is even more ridiculous. And to claim that somehow human beings are RESPONSIBLE for any changes in the climate is really ridiculous.

I'll listen to anyone who says that the climate is changing. I might even agree with you. But you lose me on the whole guilt trip thing.

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 11-28-2006, 04:23 PM:

Mark, I strongly urge you to see the movie. I was not an Al Gore fan myself but believe it or not he isn't boring in the film. The film is also very non-political, the only political thing in there I can remember is his joke at the beginning of his lecture, "Hi, I'm Al Gore. I was the next President of the United States."

BTW, the data for global climate change does not come entirely from the meteorological record of the past 100+ years but from core samples taken from glaciers and arctic ice. Those core samples can tell us about the climate for quite a far way back.

Anyhow, I urge you to see the movie. If you are still a skeptic afterwards then that's fine, just give it a chance.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-28-2006, 10:28 PM:

quote: Paul Gordon
I think you need to watch the movie...

Yeah, that's kind of like watching political ads, or listening to door to door religious people, or commercials. Doesn't that hamburger look so nice in those commercials. The trick is to persuade someone to buy into what you want them to, and you can dress up just about any information to appeal to your target. "Joe Blow voted against the taxt cut 5 times" what they don't tell you is he did so because Joe Shmoe and his buddies added a rider that'd cost the public in another way, and increase Joe Shmoe's paycheck to boot.

I'm not saying this movie is designed to be misleading, or the information in it is incorrect, but it does have a purpose, and that purpose is to recruit you to it's cause.

Besides, if I buy into everything I see in the movies, I'd beleive that there's a theme park/zoo filled with living dinosaurs, that klingons are around Uranus, and that there's a whole race of men who live forever and go around cutting off eachother's heads to gain more power.

However, for sake of trying to see where you're coming from, and out of curiousity, I think I will rent, or otherwise attain a copy of the movie, and see.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-29-2006, 07:34 AM:

believe what you wish...your a free thinking person..
for example I don't believe anyone walked on the moon..
anyway yets just cross our fingers that Savannah is not underwater in the coming decades..

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 11-29-2006, 08:52 AM:

Climate (and weather) systems are highly complex and involve a large number of interrelated processes.

It is an oversimplification to state that global warming will result in a rise in temperature of x degrees everywhere in the planet.

Whilst the GMST (Global Mean Surface Temperature) is thought to rise, it is also thought that there will be greater differences between the warm and cold regions.

[We should probably have a debate on the science of climate change in another forum]

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 11-29-2006, 11:19 AM:

quote: Paul Gordon
I think you need to watch the movie....

quote: Dustin Mitchell
Mark, I strongly urge you to see the movie.

Why? This movie presents no new information, but only takes information we already know and packages it with a famous politician. Then they throw in a couple heart-breaking graphics, like the polar bear that didn't have any ice to stand on and the little piece keeps breaking and he's stuck in the middle of this huge ocean. Why does this movie validate a topic that has been debated for decades? The answer is that it doesn't. It is just an attempt by an exiled politician to make a living. I don't blame him for the effort; After all, guilt can be extremely profitable.

Posted by Paul Gordon (Member # 3320) on 11-29-2006, 12:13 PM:

The movie is for the "layman" who really doesn't know much about Global Warming..I'm not saying that the movie is anything amazing, its basically a power point presentation but for many the environment is an important issue. Its really strange that so many people are so negative toward it. I believe that most of the money from the sales of the DVD's will be donated to environmental causes. Al gore is not trying to profit by this...he's trying to get the word out to the masses....

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 11-29-2006, 12:53 PM:

quote: Paul Gordon
anyway yets just cross our fingers that Savannah is not underwater in the coming decades.

Naw, that's ok, what I really hope is I'm not here if/when it does. Even if it doesn't, I want out of this miserable place. It's a beautiful town, wonder place to visit, but it's a black hole, where you'll disappear in pverty and hardship, to be forgotten about, forever. I don't like living here and want to leave as soon as I have the resources. I'll come back to visit, but I'll hopefully have a nice home, in a nice city, with plenty to do, making decent money rather than the 6.50/hr as a mgr/operator I'm getting now.

But anyhow, global warming, life gives you melted icecaps, take the water and make koolaid. [Big Grin]

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 11-29-2006, 02:30 PM:

quote: Paul Gordon
Al gore is not trying to profit by this...he's trying to get the word out to the masses....

Right, because after he was disowned by his party and got fired from Columbia University because he got the school sued, I'm sure he's not interested in money at all. Don't think that just because a project seems like a "good cause" means someone isn't making money off it.

quote: Dustin Mitchell
believe it or not he isn't boring in the film.

Yes, he is. He is always boring. He was doing a speech on watching paint dry once and the paint actually dried faster just so he would finish.

Here is the best summary I have ever seen on An Inconvenient Truth

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 11-30-2006, 03:41 PM:

Since this is about INconvenient Truth, how about lay off the politics and tell us the specific portions of the documentary that are incorrect or are exagerrations. That would make your point for you better than some rant about Gore.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 11-30-2006, 09:34 PM:

Hi chad, funny video, though I tend to agree with the quotes in the comments section

quote:

propaganda crap probably paid for by exxon mobil

Idiotic video. As the most of United States people, who arrogantly things they are the owners of the world and can destroy it, no matter who would suffer.

Idiots like exxon will be the death of us. A person loses his humanity as soon as he becomes selfish for money.

This is Exxon propaganda. They want you to think global warming isnt happening. See:
abcnews(dot)go(dot)com/GMA/story?id=2273111&page=1

Now the Kyoto protocol, has been signed by almost 200 countries, only 2 first world countries have refused to sign Australia and United states (several american states however have!) so we are in the minority, most of the world believe it is a very big issue , one that requires urgent action.

The British government recently released a report from a respected economist, that says that to prevent the problem is going to cost 1% of world wide gdp, they say that huge figure is cheap compared to the cost and consequences of doing nothing.

Personally I thought Al Gores film was tame compared to what David Suzuki ( world famous scientest and GW spokesperson ) explained to me in 1988.

GLOBLE WARMING IS EASY TO EXPLAIN

Humans and animals need oxygen to live, we exhale carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is required by plant life to grow, their byproduct is oxygen. The largest oxygen producers are trees and placton (in the ocean). rapid temprature shifts of only a few degress celcius unfortunatly kills plancton.

Over the last few hundred years the quantity of forests has been massivly reduced through farming and vastly increased population. so oxygen production is less.

Man uses Fossil fuels such as coal and oil, which is basically crushed trees from hundreds of millions of years ago, when the world was a vastly different place. So carbon levels are up.

It's known that man has used up much of the worlds fossil fuels.

Now globle warming equals an average increase in temprature with wider fluctuations, increased extreme weather and storms. This is were the plancton is at risk as well as food crops. hot one day, frost the next.

Sea levels are rising and the polar ice melting due to increased temprature.

Now I'm not a scientist but thats ballpark what a scientest said to me,

Some of my neighbouring pacific islands have started to be evacuated due to raising sea levels. Many more are expected.

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 751) on 12-01-2006, 02:53 PM:

Now the Kyoto protocol, has been signed by almost 200 countries, only 2 first world countries have refused to sign Australia and United states (several american states however have!)

No American states have signed the treaty. They can't even if they want to, only the federal governement can sign treaties. Several states have implemented local programs similar to Kyoto, but only involve industries in their states, and they have limite ability to enforce it, as air polution is regulated at the Federal level.

One of the objections the USA has with Kyoto is that it does not apply equally to all signers. Within the next few years, China will be a larger polluter than the USA, but under Kyoto will be held to much lower targets. That type of reasoning will not fly here. Most of the countries in Europe (except Britain) set their Kyoto standards so low that their industries met their goals without doing anything. What a Joke. Most of the 200 countries that sign the treaty are not going to have their economy's disrupted by it, so it was an easy treaty to sign.

If the nations of the world were really serious about green house gasses, they would scrap Kyoto and come up with a real and fair workable agreement.

Now globle warming equals an average increase in temprature with wider fluctuations, increased extreme weather and storms.

Last year, many "enviornmental" scientists were blaming last years severe hurricane season (Sept thru Nov) to the effects of global warming. As late August these scientists were predicting another severe season. Not one major hurricane hit the USA this season, and world wide it was a mild year. While the increase in green house gasses is real, these dire predictions of disaster caused by this is speculation at best. They can not predict what is going next year, let alone in 10 to 50 years.

Posted by Chad Souder (Member # 343) on 12-01-2006, 08:44 PM:

quote: Pravin Ratnam
Since this is about INconvenient Truth, how about lay off the politics and tell us the specific portions of the documentary that are incorrect or are exagerrations.

I wasn't being political. There was an idea proposed that Gore was doing this movie not for the money, but rather to "get the word out". I may have drifted off topice briefly, but I was referring to factual circumstances in Gore's life that might help to present my idea that he did indeed do this movie to make money, although I do believe his heart is in the effort. Actually, now that you mention it, I am one of the few people in this thread that has not written one word that can be construed as political. Also, all my comments have been directly related to the movie. You must not have read anything else posted here, otherwise there is no way you would pick out my little sentence to attack while leaving the pages of who-met-who stories and amateur opinions that have absolutely nothing to do with the movie in question, but rather discuss the topic the movie covers. Actually, I'm beginning to wonder if some of them watched it at all.

I have tried to redirect the discussion back to the actual movie, but to no avail. I will now go start a discussion on the potential drawbacks of fish harvesting for human use in the Happy Feet thread. Then, if I have time, I will present heresay evidence on inmate relations in the Lets Go To Prison thread.

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 12-01-2006, 11:17 PM:

Well I better correct my earlier simplifications/ mistakes

166 countries have ratified koyoto, Australia has signed but will not ratify, yet plan to actually deliver the results asked of them?, United states will not ratify either.

Al Gore said in the Inconvenient Truth that several American states have decided to implement Koyoto, if enough states join in it will or could force the federal government to ratify. (please see movie for more detail)

I would like to say that I too do find most if not all politicans boring and tend to think they cannot be trusted.

Did you know that in Australia, Voting in elections is compolsery or a $50 fine. So when I say I do not understand American Politics I really mean it.

I also find the China excuse a little pale, in Australia this is the argument our government uses, although we are the main exporter of coal to them. In 1990 when Koyoto was proposed, did anyone think China was going to have the growth that it has? China is also aware that the pollution is an issue, too much of the population is being effected health wise by it.

Posted by Charles Greenlee (Member # 3856) on 12-02-2006, 01:40 AM:

I think Gore is boring. I find more excitement in Ben Stein. He may not understand that speech should have inflections, but he can be pretty funny. Nothing political, though both are/were in politics, I just think he's boring. I vote that politics should be interesting. I say we reform our Congress to similar of GB Parliament, where people actually fight over issues right inn the middle of the session. Now that's good old American TV, just with British people, in Britain, oh never mind.

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 12-02-2006, 03:40 AM:

I can't decide where this thread went wrong. Maybe it was all of the veiled political rhetoric. Maybe it was my failure to close it after Cameron's first off-topic post way back on page 1.