National Geographic Releases Alarming Climate Change Movie 'Before the Flood' On YouTube (youtube.com)

dryriver writes: National Geographic's Climate Change movie "Before The Flood," featuring actor-activist Leonardo DiCaprio, can now be viewed freely on Youtube. One of the most interesting points in the movie comes at around the 23 minute mark. At 23 minutes, scientist Michael E. Mann, famous for co-discovering the "hockey stick graph" via eigenvector based climate field reconstruction (CFR), recounts how media like the Wall Street Journal demonized him for his research, how he received death threats from unknown sources, how Congress grilled him about whether his scientific methods are credible, and how he even received an envelope in the mail with strange white powder in it. The movie is worth watching because it shows very clearly that a) man-made climate change is happening and that b) the negative effects of climate change are already impacting many areas of the world.

Comments

Well I'm convinced

[Anonymous Coward]

This was the final piece of propaganda to convert me into the Cult of Climatology. Where do I send all my guilty money?

Temperature Hockey Stick

[Anonymous Coward]

The temperature "hockey stick" actually exists in one place: up Al Gore's rear end.

And I keep coming back to my same question

[MikeRT]

I keep seeing zealots on this side calling for everything incredibly invasive (in terms of liberties) public policy, to criminal prosecution of "climate change deniers."

So if you are going to intertwine science and politics like that, in ways that will invariably lead to the needless suffering of many millions of people if you are wrong, what happens if you are wrong?

You don't get to just walk away and say "sorry about the shit we did to you, science corrected itself. Don't you Fucking Love Science?" In the realm of politics when you ideologically wreck the lives of a lot of people, justice demands you pay for it. So, are you ready to say the science is settled, we trust it, let's act on it and if scientists firmly disprove it we're ready to face whatever consequences the political system demands of us?

Re:And I keep coming back to my same question

[Anonymous Coward]

AND - Stop using the phrase "Climate Change" as if it is not a Natural Occurrence.
We are mid IntraGlacial period. Of course the climate changes.

What you mean is Anthropogenic Climate Change if you are being honest, or Man Made Climate Change , if the prior to too difficult to understand.

The root of most argument, I Believe, is there, in that people keep saying we have to stop Climate Change, and almost everyone knows intuitively trying to change a control mother nature successfully globally is a wast of time and energy.

Be Specific and your argument will carry much more weight and be credible.

For example, to rephrase for you, - Man Made Climate Change is leading to negative effects. We need to control our impact on the natural cycle.

You are entering a carbon-friendly area

[allcoolnameswheretak]

You will probably get envelopes with strange white powder in them for posting this to the happy go lucky, science denying Slashdot crowd.

ridiculous lies of the Leo/Mann crowd

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course there will never be a punishment when decades from now absolutely fucking nothing the AGW religious freaks predict will happen does not happen.

We still have polar bears.

NYC is not under water.

Bangladesh is not under water.

Tuvalu is not under water.

Hurricane activity has decreased not increased.

Plants still grow. People are not starving en masse around the world.

The Arctic is covered by ice.

There is no northwest passage.

The Antarctic is covered in ice.

Greenland is covered in ice.

We still have as many glaciers as ever. They didn't melt.

But, we still have actor activists like Leo and Michael Mann running around making money telling us the sky is falling. Mean while these same people fly around the world on private jets to climate change boondoggle conferences.

Oh yeah, I'm obviously a clime change denier and a nazi and a racist and several other ists because I have been listening to their nonsense for decades now and not a single prediction has come true, so I must be stupid, uneduca6 and anti-science.

Oh! The irony!

Re:ridiculous lies of the Leo/Mann crowd

[jabuzz]

Problem is we already have fewer glaciers than 100 years ago. In fact we have fewer glaciers than 50 years ago. In addition the vast majority of glaciers have substantially less ice in them than even 20 years ago. Perhaps you might like to get of your fat lazy ass and go visit some *ACTUAL* fucking glaciers you moron.

Title of the movie is wrong

[johnlcallaway]

National Geographic Releases Alarmist Climate Change Movie 'Before the Flood' On YouTube

There ... fixed the title for you...

Wikipedia is not a credible source

[alternative_right]

After years of bias, selective editing, source-policing to ensure cherry-picked data, etc. from Wikipedia editors, why would you even post a link to it?

Remember when they removed the global IQ chart because it was ideologically inconsistent for them, and then started inventing reasons why they should have done it, after the fact?

I sure do, and over the last ten years, many other events of this nature.

Al Gore says it's so and therefore it is?

[REALMAN]

The following review (not mine) on IMDB sums it up quite nicely.

Al Gore says it's so and therefore it is?
1/10
Author: pete-801-834182 from United States
30 October 2016

Basically DeCaprio was told by Al Gore (who has made a hundred millions of dollars by preaching global warming after he retired from political life, gained a bunch of weight and had nothing to do) that anthropological global warming is real, and from that point onward DeCaprio was convinced. LOL! Then DeCaprio presents the ole "97% of scientists" lie that has traveled around the world. In reality 66% of scientists have no opinion about AGW -- Those opinions were conveniently thrown out of the messaged John Cook study. Then DeCaprio presents cherry picked anecdotal evidence, without ever questioning whether it's a case of Texas Sharpshooting. Why didn't he present the Vostok Station / Greenland ice core data to put the last 100 years IN PERSPECTIVE versus the last 5,000 years, 11,000 years and 420,000 years? And if he's such a big fan of anecdotal evidence over temperature data then why didn't he mention that Greenland used to be green? That 20,000 years ago New York was covered by a mile thick glacier? Why didn't DeCaprio interview Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, who is not part of "Big Oil" and doesn't buy into AGW? Because DeCaprio suffers from confirmation bias. The rest of this propaganda piece (I mean movie) continues under the ASSUMPTION that humans are causing the planet to warm and we all need to agree to tax ourselves more. No thanks.

Your bad thinking is showing.

[alternative_right]

Only fools are cowed by a large number of sources when it is clear those have been selected for their agreement with a thesis.

Re:Your bad thinking is showing.

[drinkypoo]

Only fools are cowed by a large number of sources when it is clear those have been selected for their agreement with a thesis.

Only assholes expect people to buy their argument when they have no credible sources.