Warning: contains some Canadian politics (since it's a Canadian documentary).

man i don't mind paying tax's as long as the 5th estate is always this good

They were a bit shaky on the tobacco thing though. There's still no link between smoking and lung cancer, it's all spin. If you don't believe that, just try to find any raw data on how many lung cancer victims are smokers - you won't find it. They simply don't publish that data, they just give their interpretations. You will find a ridiculous amount of data on just about every other aspect except that one.

enzoblue, you might have to look back in time a litte to get that data for the US, probably in a library as opposed to the intronets; it is true that people frequently have an overly ambitious estimate as to how frequently smokers die of lung cancer, but the professionally accepted data is typically around 80% of lung cancer patients just happen to also be smokers . The statistic that people who smoke are more likely to develop lung cancer is then tossed about, minus the sidenote that lung cancer is fairly uncommon (maybe 2% of deaths, not like car wrecks or AIDS).

I'd cite some sorces but its not hard to find that stuff abouve ... pubmed, google, etc.

I just read this Sunday Washington Post article about free copies of 'An Inconvenient Truth' not being accepted for showing by the national science teachers organization in the states. The writer mentions how Exxon-Mobile just happens to be a sponsor of the organization... its pretty interesting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/24/AR2006112400789_pf.html

... one interesting point that may not be put out often enough is that scientists have a tendency to be skeptics themselves (hence the high proportion of agnostics/atheists).

....listen to the snotty tone of the announcer, the reliance on the temple of scientific method and process for an idyllic and concrete salvation, not unlike the whole of Bejeezuz and Alllagghh combined, the flipside camp full of its own whankeroids...what then, all that shit goes out the window when Maui dissappears the same day Japan does, and Yosemite celebrates the new millenium, with a display that makes the dinasaurs' trip off earth,look like a spring break beer bong contest.....


bleeeegehh!

Get rid of plastic and oil, by not buying it or driving, and, for crissakes, a convincing documentary, should have a baritone with a British accent....

It's an episode of a Canadian TV show. Why would we have a baritone with a British accent?

There was also a time when "everone agreed" the earth was flat.

Is the earth warming? Sure. Climate is a dynamic system with constantly changing temperatures. We're supposedly long overdue for another ice age.

Did human activity cause the current warming trend? Unlikely. Global temps were higher during the Middle Ages.

The people crying about this are the same who want government to micromanage everyone's lives. Freedom frightenes them. They lie(d) about gun control, tobacco, and the "epidemic" of obesity. If you want to take it to the next level, they're the same liars that banned DDT, causing the needless deaths of hundreds of millions to malaria.

Keep these people out power if you value your freedom. Or end up Canadian.

So, quantum, what is it you prepose we do? If we're ignoring scientists when their answers don't jive with economics, then who are we to listen to?

Not to sound like a jerk but did you even watch this clip? The only remaining climatologists, oceanographers, etc., that are broadly skeptical to the greenhouse gases/ozone depletion/caused by man postulates are scientist who both a)recieve funding from and actively assist energy companies, and b)have not been involved in open-peer reviewed, published research on related topics in over a decade.

A very successful PR campaign perpetuated by extraordinarily powerful companies has injected the idea that there is still debate on these issues among scientists, when there very much is NONE.

If you want to argue my last point please direct me to publicly sponsored sources (and I will respond in kind). There are hundreds of universities and research institutions interested in climatology, and I find it doubtful that they're all in on some anti-oil/coal company conspiracy.

Bamdrew don't even bother, Quantumushroom is really a political polemist from the Republican right wing, ever since he joined his prerogative has been to muddle the arguments taking place across contentious issues such as the war in Iraq, torture, global warming and others.

He doesn't represent anything but the right wing need to mess up the argument so much that easy, clear, decisions suddenly become clouded via the addition of question extraneous to this debate. Like you know that - Everyone kept saying Iraq is on the brink of a civil war, and Right Wing polemists would instantly say "Well what is a civil war?", suddenly the whole goddamn country spends 3 weeks deciding if the escalating violence is really a civil war or not.

Let's look at his arguments:

1 . "Is the earth warming? Sure. Climate is a dynamic system with constantly changing temperatures. We're supposedly long overdue for another ice age."

This is has been proven wrong by ice cores records from the poles, which contain a temperature record going back some 650,000 years. Climate is dynamic system but the temperatures remain within definable scientific bars, various data across the world show that the rising temperature is causing problems. It just proves that his arguments come from right wing talking points.

2. "Did human activity cause the current warming trend? Unlikely. Global temps were higher during the Middle Ages."

Again. This is has been proven wrong by ice cores records from the poles, which contain a temperature record going back some 650,000 years.

3. "The people crying about this are the same who want government to micromanage everyone's lives. Freedom frightenes them. They lie(d) about gun control, tobacco, and the "epidemic" of obesity. If you want to take it to the next level, they're the same liars that banned DDT, causing the needless deaths of hundreds of millions to malaria."

Remember what I said? He brings in arguments that have nothing to do with the discussion.

Seriously I won't even bother answering your paranoid idea that somehow global warming policy institutes an infringement on personal autonomy when the only people affected via global warming policy change are actually large corporations willing to overcharge their consumers for profit, but unwilling to increase their costs to save the enviroment (see oil companies).

They lied about tobacco and epidemic obesity? Really? Then why did Cigarette companies settle with the American people to the tune of 246 billion over 25 years in November 1998? Why is heart disease the number one cause of death in america? Obesity my friend.

Quantum clearly you don't know facts about studies done on DDT, while proven to be beneficial against malaria, the dosage required for it to fight effectively would cause preterm birth and early weaning, abrogating the benefit of reducing infant mortality from malaria. Toxicological evidence shows endocrine-disrupting properties; human data also indicate possible disruption in semen quality, menstruation, gestational length, and duration of lactation. The research focus on human reproduction and development seems to be appropriate. DDT could be an effective public-health intervention that is cheap, long lasting, and effective. So you are telling me when presented with all this evidence from Lancet you are still willing to spray your populace with DDT?

If it's so beneficial maybe we should start using radioactive medicines for our ailments like they did in the 30s and 40s?

Now of course next you're going to say that change in environmental policy will be deterimental to Economic prosperity and growth. That's just bullshit from people who know nothing about current market forces and policies. American big businesses unwillingness to institute environmental policies is only costing them market share in the world.

Currently Detroit's car manufacturing industry is suffering behind Toyota and Honda, because both these companies still aim to produce high range SUVs with MPG rates that are so dismal that American cars can't be sold in China because they don't meet environmental standards. Hell it's most parts of the world that American can't export it's cars to anymore, because it does not meet MPG requirements. Remember when GM was the number one? It's not anymore it's Toyota. Which is ironic because GM almost cornered the market on electrical cars with the EV1. Notice how I talk about MPG, MILES PER GALLON not even CO2 emissions or such. MPG.

This is human hubris, what kind of world do you want to leave to your kids? grandkids?

-------------

"A very successful PR campaign perpetuated by extraordinarily powerful companies has injected the idea that there is still debate on these issues among scientists, when there very much is NONE."

The same has been applied to the ideas of evolution. Creationists and ID supporters keep saying there is a debate among scientists about where or not evolution occurred, when again there is no such debate and there is consensus.

and too all this bees needin said again, the arguments for global warming are mute...the fact is the planet is changing is eveident, the likelihood that the tolerable atmospheric conditions are being altered by humans in wholly unsubstantiated, save the pep-rally organizers, and their willing putties....

The real issue is, what do we do to prepare, beyond arguing and wasting time with in- consequential datum, before we really get on a program.....Fart gasses, cause not the planet's ills, ill humans are the problem, hence the apparent dichotomy of opinions.....rhetoric, drama, more diversion and bullshit, how much can we take????

Tags for this video have been changed from 'canadian, oil, tobacco, pr, fifth estate, cbc' to 'canadian, oil, tobacco, pr, fifth estate, cbc, spin, bias, frank luntz' - edited by fissionchips

*eco

Adding video to channels (Eco) - requested by fissionchips.

It appears that the PR tactics have subsided, however the language they created was disseminated and picked up by pseudo-conferences and public debate.

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Monday, November 27th, 2006 6:25pm PST - promote requested by fissionchips.

Ahem...
*long

This video has been flagged as being at least 10 minutes in length - declared long by doogle.