Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: Transcript Of A Q&A With Director Davis Guggenheim!!

Goddamned head-in-the-sand right wingers! by cutest_of_borg	Jun 8th, 2006 10:23:58 PM
Anyone who can't see that global warming is already upon us is a fucking moron.
Conservatives in 3....2....1.... by IndustryKiller	Jun 8th, 2006 10:24:11 PM
fighting the losing battle they've been fighting for 50 years.....yawn
Inconsistent Lies... by Silverblade11975	Jun 8th, 2006 10:39:09 PM
There is no such thing as scientific truth anymore, just political science which only consists of "popular truths". Right wing, left wing, tail feathers, whatever side you're on, don't buy into anything you hear without looking at facts for yourself. At one time, it was accepted scientific proof that the earth was flat, then it was proven wrong. Then it was accepted that the earth was the center of the solar system, which was later proven wrong. Bloodletting was considered a correct way to rid the body of disease or some other malady. That too was proven wrong. At one time, global cooling was supposed to be a threat, now it's global warming? Maybe someone ought to put Al Gore on a flat piece of ground and drain him of his blood while the universe revolves around him. Honoris Causa... Silverblade
cutest...get your facts straight by zacdilone	Jun 8th, 2006 10:43:38 PM
Very few people are arguing that global warming isn't taking place. The question is...how much of it is due to human causes, and how much of it is due to the natural cycles of the earth? I'm a conservative, and I think it's probably 50-50. Not as dire as Gore thinks and not as peachy as Rush thinks. But here's the rub...REGARDLESS of the level of damage we are causing by our reckless energy practices and policies, we need to stop them and find alternatives. Any conservative who thinks we should just go on as usual is, as you say, a fucking moron. For me, it boils down to the fact that ANY amount of harm we are causing, no matter how big or small, is too much. If we could turn the tone of the argument away from the "holy shit the planet's gonna explode" extremism that turns the ultra right-wingers off and instead promote the advantages to cleaner, more efficient energy we would win a lot more people over. We should take Kennedy's bold call to reach the moon as an example of the kind of vision we need to give our country. That vision can't be spread by panic-inducing films like this, IMHO.
Blastoff! by UncleEthan	Jun 8th, 2006 10:45:31 PM
Sorry, hoss, I happen to believe that Brother Gore is right on with his assesment of the comming ecological disaster, even if I don't agree with his current position on Third World domination by the American war/Corporate machine. That said perhaps this talkback could offer an opporuntiy for a different kind of political discourse. One that does not include personal attacks and name calling, but consist of well reasoned arguments. That is what this film represents. It is no partisan attack on the Bush Administration. It is a call to action for all Americans and world citizens. Inaction would be the worst responce to this film and this crisis. How many people do you know that were killed by terrorist last year? Me either. I do, however, know many people, myself included, who be homeless orworsefollowing the flooding of coastal America. Bush was able to whip the country into a war frenzy...why is it so hard to whip people into a frenzy that might result in the peaceful protection of our earth? What does that simple fact say about us as Americans? I don't believe that the average American is a war monger...I do believe they have been lied to. Many conservatives including Pat Buchannan, John Dean, and William F. Buckley agree that the Bush administration lied to get us into two wars that have done zero to aliviate the problems they were meant to address. If they would lie about the war...why would you think they wouldn't lie about the realenviromental danger. These people are implimenting the worst of Ayn Rand's Moral Egoism philosophies. Today a well meaning kid in one of my classes made the statement that human beings have risen up and out of the food chain. I fear, if we don't change our path soon, we will become more a part of the food chain than any of us ever wanted to be.
Should I take my 5-year old nephew to this? by zacdilone	Jun 8th, 2006 10:46:21 PM

It really boils down to one simple thing. by cutest_of_borg	Jun 8th, 2006 10:54:10 PM
Americans are sheep. Lazy, ignorant sheep. We're all fucked. Sit back and enjoy the show.
My little rant by thatpeterguy	Jun 8th, 2006 11:05:12 PM
How anybody can think that all the pollution modern civlization has been dumping into the environment has had no real serious effect is mind boggling. Yes there is a natural cycle in the earth but are you telling me that all the pollution that we have thrown into the equation irrelevant. Isn't it reasonable to think that there are some different factors today than there were a few hundred years ago that cause climate change. We simply are not living in the same world as back then. That whole natural cycle thing drives me crazy.
I want the world to do nothing by Doctor_Sin	Jun 8th, 2006 11:06:01 PM
That's right - nothing. Especially my country, the USA. And I hope I live to see the end of humanity, so I can personally kick every goddamn conservative's "Global Warming is a Myth" ass from here to hell. Can you imagine Bush surrounded by a million pissed-off people all chanting "You fucking killed the world, assbag!" while they do things to him I can't say because then the Secret Service would investigate me for threatening the President, which I am in no way advocating, just using such an image for illustrative purposes to drive home a satirical point regarding the tensions this debate raises. *Disclaimer* I am in no way affiliated with any terrorist organization, sleeper cell, or domestic private militia. I am not affiliated with any organized religion or political party. *End of disclaimer*
Truth by TheXeno	Jun 9th, 2006 12:10:49 AM
Good article/Q%A, I'm interested in seeing this the more I read into it.
NY Times reports... by Christopher3	Jun 9th, 2006 01:07:18 AM
New ocean floor geological samples from the Arctic Ocean indicate that there were, long before human existence, significant sources of greenhouse gases/atmospheric warming elements that scientists previously weren't aware of. I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in alternate energy and conserve fossil fuels (simply because they're nonrenewable and we depend heavily on them), but this global warming = ecological disaster/ice age/flood of ages Roland Emmerich movie stuff continues to make me skeptical. Why is it that we Americans always need the threat of a big fucking catastrophe in order to be motivated to do the right thing?
Christopher3 by Lukecash	Jun 9th, 2006 01:45:11 AM
Christopher3-To answer your question- the film points out that USA actually is one of the biggest contributors. China is more-but is less than per person. In other words- we do just a little bit less polution than china who has a HECK of a lot more people. If the US did reduce their output-it would lower greenhous effect. Also "New ocean floor geological samples from the Arctic Ocean indicate that there were, long before human existence, significant sources of greenhouse gases/atmospheric warming elements that scientists previously weren't aware of" That may be true- but thats not the point. The point is this When ever CO2 Levels rise- so does the globle temperature. We ARE contributing to the rise in temperature...it is our CO2 output that is doing it.
The media inspires panic, not the film. by Thor's Stone	Jun 9th, 2006 02:35:02 AM
I was actually impressed by the way this film avoided hyperbolic scare tactics the likes of which are employed by Time Magazine, US News and World Report and sadly the initial ad campaign for this film. This is not a disaster movie. This is not a pre-apocalyptic horror flick by any means. Just a sober wake up call. One of the most interesting moments in the film came when Gore puts up a slide that shows different countries compare with regards to fuel efficiency standards and the US ranks in the middle below China. Then he shows a slide that shows the falling profits of GM and Ford compared to the rising profits of Toyota and Honda. The Japanese are beating us because the offer better made, fuel efficient vehicles and the American public are finally waking up from their smog induced fugue to realize that SUV
Stephen Colbert:"The highest grossing Powerpoint..." by smackfu	Jun 9th, 2006 07:17:19 AM
"...presentation in box office history"
Global Warming is a Religion by kevinwillis.net	Jun 9th, 2006 07:21:24 AM
Complete with sacraments, absolute truths, tithing, commandments, salvation, and (of course) heretic and non-believers. For the folks trying to argue data and historical context with the true believers in the great Global Warming (may we find sustainability, praise Kyoto), you might as well walk into the closest fundamentalist Baptist church and argue that Jesus Christ was actually a transexual woman named Louise and that God didn't actually create the universe because He only works on alternate Tuesdays. It is a matter of faith. Some zealots find evidence of Noah's flood and the parting of the sea in the most paltry of empiric evidence; as such, the Global Warming crowd (who, not coincidentally, share an apoclyptic vision of the world with most doomsaying fundamentalists, one where the End Times is always upon us) are always going to accept data that confirms their beliefs and deny data that does not, or even find the most questionable ways to view the data, in order to confirm their pre-ordained. If you wouldn't try to talk a faithful Jew or Christian out of their belief in God, then you probably shouldn't try to argue about global warming with a true believer. This is not about the film (which I have not seen, but probably will, based on the reviews) so much as my personal experience that it is futile to try and reason with folks who are looking forward to the death of humanity by (sorry, I shouldn't snicker at other people's religious beliefs, but: snicker) "global warming"! The End is Coming! Haven't you people see "Waterworld"?! And, in many ways it's sad, because people who aren't true believers are turned off by the Global Warming Faithful's zealotry and immunity to contrary data, yet there are good reasons to raise CAFE standards, practice fuel efficiency, invest in hybrid technology, etc (while there are also reasons to abandon local/regional gasoline reformulations, to be skeptical about ethanol as an alternative fuel, to understand fuel efficient gasoline usage is more important and valuable, and will be for a while, than hydrogen cars or fuel cells, based on the expense (monetary and environmental) of producing, instead of just (or rather than) consuming said alternative fuels. Environmentalism and conservation are valuable principles that, when practiced dilligently and advocated rationally, can have tremendous social and economic benefits. Unfortunately, the Religious Environmental movement is generally so zealous in their proselytizing and so enthusiastic in their persecution of heretics (and so prolific in their predictions of doom) that they will tend to "destroy the town to save it". The banning of the useful (and not carcinogenic) pesticide DDT, an act directly responsible for the malarial deaths of millions of 3rd world children, being but on example of the road to Hell being paved with environmentally pure intentions.
The Biggest Greenhouse Gas Is . . . by kevinwillis.net	Jun 9th, 2006 07:33:20 AM
Water vapor. CO2, on the other hand, is 0.03 percent of the atmosphere, and is not as signficant a greenhouse gas as water vapor. The primary factor in global temperature is . . . the sun. And solar activity can vary in intensity, thus causing more variation in global temperature than we could cause if we all tried together. And such variations are not uncommon, as it is clear for the historic record that the planet gets globally warmer and colder over macrocycles, just as regions get warmer and colder seasonally, and temperature vary from day to day. Now: This has been a demonstration of why it's completely pointless to argue facts with apoclyptic fundamentalist true believers in any religion, including the First Church of the Environmentalist. Thank you for your time and attention.
thatpeterguy by zacdilone	Jun 9th, 2006 08:04:52 AM
As the only one who brought up "natural cycles," I'm assuming you were responding to me. Did you read my entire post? It doesn't sound like you did...sounds like you got as far as my natural cycles comment and then responded. Please read the whole thing and I hope you'll see that I in no way call our contribution "irrelevant." As far as the whole "natural cycles thing driving you crazy," that's just too bad. There is plenty of data to show that the earth itself contributes plenty to climate change without our help. In a way, I see that as STRENGTHENING the argument that humans need to change our ways, because it means that we are exacerbating a delicate situation. When I hear that the planet already creates these situations, and has for millions of years (and gasp! I believe that...and I'm a Christian, too!), then my response is, "Holy crap we need to stop making it worse."
Luscious-868 by zacdilone	Jun 9th, 2006 09:13:25 AM
Your wish may come true. http://tinyurl.com/z97ue
Yawn by Blacket-Man	Jun 9th, 2006 09:23:05 AM

Hurray! Our Republican Majority... by Saluki	Jun 9th, 2006 09:31:45 AM
... Will surely save us from global warming! And gays to boot!
Insane conservative by Peirce	Jun 9th, 2006 09:32:25 AM
I don't know if humans are affecting the climate and I don't know if altering human activity can restore the climate. I think the economy is more important than the environment because with advanced technology we can survive whatever the environment throws at us. Man has always had to adapt to the environment; It all started with clothing. It will end with space ships and other planets. If we crucify the economy for the sake of the environment we will cripple our ability to adjust our technology so that we can survive. No one knows what the next big environmental obstacle will be. If global warming can not be stopped, then a robust economy with advanced technology will be the answer. If the next environmental obstacle is something else then a robust economy with advanced technology will still be the answer.
Luscious... by UncleEthan	Jun 9th, 2006 09:35:20 AM
Dude...I know where you are coming from with the third party thing. The only problem I see in holding my nose and voting for Republicans is that the current neo-con variety (I have less of a problem with the Grand Old Party type conservatives) are war criminals, war profiteers, mass murders, and worse. If anyone has a grip on reality it is the neo-cons though. They understand who writes the checks...and they do what they are paid to do. On a totaly unrelated thing...are you the Luscious who stared in a independent film called "Outerbanks" back in the 90's?
Kevinwillis.net by Thor's Stone	Jun 9th, 2006 09:37:40 AM
lifted his entire anti-religion, anti-environmentalist screed from an essay that Michael Chriton has been giving for the last few years and which appears on his website. Humans have an instinctual religious nature. Should it be any surprise that an issue with this many social and emotional ramifications should not give rise to religious feelings. This is our planet we are talking about. The very nature world that more than likely gave rise to our earliest religions in the first place. It is only the most closed minded secularists who believe that not only all organized religion, but also all spirituality or morality or anything that attaches people to something greater than themselves must be bad. Michael Chriton appeared at last weeks Skeptic
UncleEthan... by Saluki	Jun 9th, 2006 10:30:23 AM
... If they understand who writes the checks so well, then what is WITH the national debt ballooning up to 9 TRILLION? Is this just another Republican 'Fuck you, I got mines' movement?
Oh Luscious.... by IndustryKiller	Jun 9th, 2006 11:48:43 AM
you silly bastard. Conservatives can have all the technicalities they want. The house, the senate, whatever. What progress has hte COnservative wing of this country actually prevented int he last 50 years? What will they prevent? Gays WILL marry, stem cells WILL be researched, the seperation of church and state WILL be re-enforced as will abortion, art will continue to push the envelope further and further even on television, the environment WILL become a bigger and bigger issue as time goes on and alternative fuel sources will become more prevelant. All these things will occur, conservatives can have all the leadership positions they want but all the fucking conservatives int he world cannot and have not stopped progress. It's impossible. Conservatism stand in opposition to progress and it's a losing battle. Maintaining the status quo is now impossible in a country that has always changed with the times. SO good luck peddling your non-issues, history is against you.
Saluki my friend... by UncleEthan	Jun 9th, 2006 11:58:31 AM
I mean that they have pay masters. Of course they don't care what the deficit does. Their out of control spending is basically corporate welfare for oil businesses, pharma companies, the Saudis, and anyone else who will cut them a check.
IndustryKiller by zacdilone	Jun 9th, 2006 12:01:16 PM
Be careful what you define as progress. Others in history have been just a cavalier in what they called "progress," and look what happened. Not that I disagree with your premise...I think conservatives are afraid of change, and that to the nation's detriment, but we can't just say that everything they stand against is worth pursuing. Tomorrow we may approve stem cell research...but what will then keep us from harvesting embryos for anything and everything? What you describe is a slippery slope.
You're right Zacdilone, in fact... by IndustryKiller	Jun 9th, 2006 02:06:43 PM
I think COnservatives are a good thing. "There is that famous line in Jurassic Park "You were so busy wondering if you could you didn't stop to think if you should." Conservatives slow progress very often to a level where we have time to stop and think about whether it's a good thing. They very often force introspection onthose issues. Unfortunately sometimes, as in environmental studies, they make us lose precious moments and even illegally (as in oil company cover ups of new technologies) keep progress from happening. It's good and it's bad. I just want them to acknowledge that ultimately they are ont he losing side of history, not that they have no place in it.
no matter what side is ultimately correct. by VoodooV	Jun 10th, 2006 12:04:13 AM
a hundred years from now, they'll be reading about us and point and laugh at how fucking stupid both sides were.
You said it, VoodooV by zacdilone	Jun 10th, 2006 12:29:17 AM
Just like we laugh at all those folks predicting a "second Ice Age" in the 1970's.
Hey Thor's Stone... by 2	Jun 10th, 2006 01:43:40 AM
Where did you get the "Michael Chriton appeared at last weeks Skeptic
Hypocrites by DinoZoot	Jun 10th, 2006 07:37:55 AM
I think one of the big obstacles to getting the citizenry to adopt some personal responsibility on this issue is all the hypocrisy, especially on the left. Seems to me like most politicians want everyone else to change, but dont want to change themselves. Too few members of congress have traded in their SUV's for better gas mileage vehicles. Laura David gives fake tickets to SUV owners, but refuses to fly coach so she goes back and forth across the country in private jets that consume ridiculous amounts of fuel. If more of our leaders led by example, I think more people would get on board.
Sorry 2, by Thor's Stone	Jun 10th, 2006 11:55:28 AM
I
There already is a third political party by Immortal_Fish	Jun 10th, 2006 07:09:31 PM
They're called the Republican 'moderates' that claim to be conservatives. There is no such thing as a Republican majority with folks like McCain running around.
I'd go see this, but I dislike religious films. by ExcaliburFfolkes	Jun 10th, 2006 09:35:43 PM

"...its really an emotional issue, " Thats the problem by DoctorWho?	Jun 10th, 2006 11:40:18 PM
Exactly! All emotion and fear...no cool reasoned thinking. It's not that I don't believe global warming isn't happening...it obviously is. But that mankind... in the last paltry ONE HUNDRED years or so is capable of threatening the planet?? Please. George Carlin used to have a rant in which he scoffed about our ability to either "threaten" OR "save" the planet. How the earth experienced countless epochs of MULTIPLE ice ages, cataclysms, extinctions, tectonic upheavals, repeated over and over and over and over...LONG before we ever took our thumbs out of our butts and climbed down out of the trees. THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN THROW AT THE PLANET THAT IT HASN"T ENDURED A THOUSAND TIMES OVER. When the planet is done with us, it will "...shake us off like a bad case of fleas" he said. Classic bit. And so very true. AL Gore thinks the internal combustion engine is the "single greatest threat to mankind". BAH! The arrogance. If the earth is THAT fragile, we might as well pack it all in right now.
Let's not forget the Population Explosion myth also by DoctorWho?	Jun 10th, 2006 11:58:57 PM
Back in the 1970's they predicted (among other things)that by now, the earth would be crippled with over population...mass famine, water shortage blah blah blah. I bet Al Gore still has THAT book on his shelf. In fact, population is dropping like a rock in Europe and China. The middle east and parts of Africa are booming, but thats about it. In 15 or so years, we'll all be looking back on this and saying "What the hell was THAT all about?"
The World Population by Shan	Jun 11th, 2006 01:36:09 AM
Even through the rate of increase of the world's population may be slowing, momentum will carry it forward to somewhere between 9 and 10 billion most likely. Current projections by the UN's Population Division, based on the 2004 revision of the World Population Prospects database [3], are as follows.//// Year Population (billions) 2010 6.8 / 2020 7.6 / 2030 8.2 / 2040 8.7 / 2050 8.9 Other projections of population growth predict that the world's population will eventually crest, though it is uncertain exactly when or how. In some scenarios, the population will crest as early as the mid-21st century at under 10 billion, due to gradually decreasing birth rates. //// I guess my question is, how well can the Earth cope with 10 billion people, which is where a lot of people think the global population will peak before starting to reduce itself? Well, I guess we'll see since barring accidents, most of us will probably be around to see it.
Well actually the Earth will cope OK with 10 billion .. by Shan	Jun 11th, 2006 01:57:59 AM
... as in, it'll still be there in 2050. I guess I mean "How well will the 10 billion people cope with each other?"
Where the hell are the flying cars? by Immortal_Fish	Jun 11th, 2006 09:04:51 AM
Global warming! No, global cooling! No... GLOBAL WARMING!! Lookit, going green ain't a bad idea. Sure, there's plenty of stuff we could get cleaned up. Few think this is a bad idea. But the thing is, it requires the rest of the world to cooperate. I bet we're WAY greener and cleaner than most other countries. Let's see Gore stop bashing the US during his visits overseas and let's see him talk about their contribution to a cleaner environment when he's over there. All Gore truly wants out of his little film is short-term to re-energize his political aspirations, and long-term more out of our paychecks to increase the size of government. They get half now. Why isn't that enough?
No Silverblade11975 by Vision	Jun 11th, 2006 02:48:59 PM
It was never accepted accepted scientificly that the earth was flat, or that the earth was the center of the solarsystem that's a lie (or ignorance) or your part.
Re; DinoZoot & The Hypocricy of Lear-Jet Eco-Warriors by CRanapia	Jun 11th, 2006 09:48:45 PM
Well, yes, and that's problem isn't it? It's only "them" who have to curtail their lifestyles for the common good never "us". Now, I'm waiting for the director and producers of AIT to reveal the environmental impact of their press tour. Hope they weren't riding too many private jets or gas guzzling SUVs...
How does the earth's population "crest"? by cookylamoo	Jun 12th, 2006 01:10:54 PM
Doesn't Malthus prove that it keeps growing exponen...exsponen...oh, you know what I mean?
An Inconvenient Truth: Episode II by IronSpyder	Jun 12th, 2006 04:37:52 PM
No political aspirations here: http://tinyurl.com/l4nd9 In the end, saving the environment doesn't make anybody any money. Saw both movies this past weekend. This second is a very good look at some very shady recent ongoings in Cali, not to mention the disservice done to the rest of the country as a result of some of the decisions that were made, especially when you think about how much it cost you to fill up your car's gas tank the last time you did. Some of what's broken is broken by choice, plain and simple.

Talkbacks

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: Transcript Of A Q&A With Director Davis Guggenheim!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks