YouTube - The Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See »
Posted by: Fedquip 1 year, 2 months ago225 Comments Report this Story
... In regards to Global Climate Change
Read Full Story at youtube.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 225
-
0%
2sidestoeverything1 year, 2 months ago
Vary insightful video thanks for submitting it fedquip. It will be interesting to see what others think about the video.
Reply-
0%
Fedquip1 year, 2 months ago
My Pleasure, The guy in the video really sums up the pros and cons of climate change action and inaction in under ten minutes.
Reply-
0%
Aidenag1 year, 2 months ago
I really enjoyed this, great find Jeff.
He did forget to include one thing though. he needed to mention that choosing to take action, but being wrong, still isnt wasted money. Most of the same things believed to be causing global warming, also cause disease and sickness to living creatures, including us....
So really, the worse case scenario is, we spend a lot of money improving our's and future generations health and longevity.
Reply -
100%
DeadHead131 year, 2 months ago
This is Pascal's Wager applied to climate change. Though I certainly advocate environmental action, Pascal's Wager is not a valid argument. It draws a false dichotomy for one, and even if the Wager is legitimate, it is not necessarily reasonable to act according to a bet like this. We could say, "either A, or B; if A, and we act as if A, then good results; if A, and we act as if B, then bad results; if B, regardless of how we act, then nothing results." But if A is sufficiently improbably, than the cost of acting as if A is greater than the expected outcome. Now of course climate change is not sufficiently improbable, but to make the claim that the man in the video does, that 'we don't need to know if A or B, or even the likelihood of A or B' is inherently fallacious.
Reply
-
-
0%
chiefss1 year, 2 months ago
Just another piece of propaganda like that crap Algore put out. The most terrifying thing I saw to date was the day that Blue Dress Bill Clinton was elected, then the last election and finally the most terrifying thing that could ever happen would be if the screech owl Hillary was elected.
Reply-
0%
inaroundabout1 year, 2 months ago
Remind me again how climate change has anything to do with Bill Clinton?
Reply
-
-
100%
KeyserSooze1 year, 2 months ago
Not insightful, just dishonest, over simplified BS aimed at poorly educated, excitable mush-heads.
Drastically understates the consequences of global depression, drastically overstates the consequences of inaction, and ignores the possibility that there may be nothing at all we can do.
One of many cases of sleight of hand is parroting Gore's claims of refugees and citing Katrina as a minor example.
Katrina happened over a couple of days, the rise in sea level will happen over a couple of decades. You will see gradual migrations, not sudden displacement.
Reply-
100%
inaroundabout1 year, 2 months ago
True, but the gradual migration of hundreds of millions of people will ****** have a huge impact on the world. You think the evacuation on New York city over a 20 year period wouldn't have a large effect on the US?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
ameliog1 year, 2 months ago
I hope you're right - I really want to be wrong about the extent of the deniers' intractability. Stubborn pride is difficult thing for people to get past, so even if it turns out to be the worst case, they may still say it's all part of the natural cycle and refuse to accept that man plays any role in the environment. My hope is that they are actually much smaller in number than they appear to be in these discussions.
Reply
-
-
0%
issues231 year, 2 months ago
even though i do not believe that global warming is true i do believe this man makes a very good "middle man" arrgument. Another good story was posted on this forum about a month ago, but i could not find it again, untill this morning. so here it is below:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/print/4064691a6571.html
Reply
-
-
-
-
94%
Searchbeam1 year, 2 months ago
Fedequip,
Thank you for posting this insightful video.
This is perhaps the most logical and persuasive argument I have ever seen on the issue of global warming!
It has brought the issue into a "True-False" matrix that is very easy to understand and relate to for a normal person.
Then again, the opponents of Global Warming are not normal persons! They still argue about the natural cycles, solar flares and other EXXON-MOBIL promoted BS. They have enough $10,000 scientists to help them shape up their misinformation.
These are the guys who are trying to hide the rooster to stop the Sun from rising!
They may also be the same people to buy and promote the intelligent design theory, and deny the evolution and science in general.
We seem to have an endless pool of fools!
Peace and Blessings!
Reply-
0%
jdhatl1 year, 2 months ago
the actual lobbyists behind this ideology honed their craft in the 60's working for the cigarette companies trying to deny the serious health risks of smoking. They don't win any arguments, they just stall for time. That's all this is. They actually want the oceans to rise and mass pandemonium and civil strife to engulf the world, they're good at that kind of thing. Iraq is just a training exercise for the future.
Reply -
0%
slate1 year, 2 months ago
Awwwwww shucks now I'm not normal on top of all the other names I'm called, even when I believe in both inteligent design and evolution have a place in the process,,,,, kicks the sand and sulks out grumbling about dang new religions and born again fundamentalist thinkers,,,,,, wondering why they don't just turn off their lights,,,, sell their cars and walk,,, and live the wonderful lifestyle of 300 years ago,,,,, also worries about the threat of being burnt at the stake for heresy in the future,,,,,, You science fundamentalists apear to be as hard headed as you claim the fundamentalist in religion are
Reply-
0%
inaroundabout1 year, 2 months ago
science fundamentalists??? Isn't that redundant? Science if fundamental.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
MikeFromCanada1 year, 2 months ago
He has and interesting idea. The question that still remains though is "are we causing it, or is the change climate just a naturally occurring cycle"? We could just be nearing the opposite peak of an "ice-age" cycle and industrialization is an insignificant contributor or even a coincidence. We would need accurate records of the planets climate for hundreds or thousands of years to get an accurate picture. Given the age of the planet, we are basing a lot theories on a "snap-shot" of the climate.
Reply-
0%
nccneon1 year, 2 months ago
Mike,
First off, the record goes back more than 300,000 years ... a little more than a snapshot.
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/...
But, mainly I'm responding because you seemed to miss the point of the video. Please watch it again.
Reply -
-
50%
MikeFromCanada1 year, 2 months ago
I stand corrected, thank you for the article. Don't get me wrong though, i do agree that man made pollution has to be reduced. China is a prime example of that. A lot of factories are getting on board, but the whole world needs to be in on it. And yes I did get the point of the video, it's better to prepare and not need it, then to say "doh!"
Reply
-
-
0%
lfergie8121 year, 2 months ago
Mike
The point of the video is that to do nothing and be wrong is a disaster but to be wrong and do something is only a cost factor. Someone mentioned once before the argument of what's wrong with developing forms of energy that would remove us from dependency on fossil fuels from the middle east? It's would be a win/win situation in which we would reduce our import/export deficit and have plenty of energy in the future.
Reply-
50%
Sandokan1 year, 2 months ago
Iferg...you're precisely on the mark. The consequence far outweighs the action. The laziness of man will be its doom. From the begining, whether it was the Jew screwing things up to present where Americansk are to blame... Its time for a change on this planet. Perhaps the next ones can go further ...
Reply -
0%
KeyserSooze1 year, 2 months ago
It's basically the same argument religious fanatics use ... "what if it's true".
Well, what if the the Christians are right, are you going to go along just in case?
The arguments made by the global warming hysterics are not convincing, and using this skewed logic to encourage following them, is stupid.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
KeyserSooze1 year, 2 months ago
That assumes that their ESTIMATES of average global temperature are accurate to withing a fraction of a degree.
They can do a pretty good job of measuring the CO2 in ice cores, but the vast majority of data on average global temperature is estimated.
Reply
-
-
50%
protoham1 year, 2 months ago
??? Storms, Droughts, Floods? These have been happening since recorded time? So is this "Global Warming" anything new?
Just like the Exxon Valdez incident, more birds are killed by cats in one day in the UK than died from that incident. They are just trying to scare you out of your money.
Reply-
100%
Candida1 year, 2 months ago
It doesn't have to cost you money. Driving a small car costs less than driving a big one. Walking to the store or to visit your friends nearby is cheaper than driving. Not using your air conditioner when the temperature outside is not sweltering hot saves you money. The list is endless.
Even if the government spends money on action to slow global warming and clean up the environment, it doesn't have to be additional money from you; taxes could be reallocated to different purposes. For example, instead of buying weapons and fighting wars, governments could spend money on research to develop renewable energy sources (and many other useful things).
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
91%
willottica1 year, 2 months ago
Except that in this case you're doing the walking. A better analogy would be that it's like starting to walk because you don't know when the bus will get there.
You may miss the bus because you're between stops, but is that necessarily a bad thing? You've gotten exercise along the way.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Searchbeam1 year, 2 months ago
If we look at the evidence carefully, and the methodology used to analyze the data, we will realize that the natural cycles and the solar activity has been factored in by the scientists into their analysis and after compensating for these factors, there is still overwhelming evidence that global warming is occurring on a massive and accelerated scale. We are fast approaching the point of no return. Once we cross that threshold, there is nothing that we humans can do to reverse the effects. If we care about our planet and the future of our children and grandchildren- and even the future of mankind- we must act now!
Peace and Blessings!
Reply -
0%
agentX1 year, 2 months ago
Boo! This video wasn't scary at all! I'm disappointed.
His chart was pretty accurate, but because there have already been moves toward mitigating global warming, we won't get the absolute worst-case scenario. We'll get a mediocre scenario, in which people are still around, but the economy will suck. We'll also lose a few islands and probably a few cities, but we won't lose the entire Antarctic ice sheet.
Reply-
0%
nccneon1 year, 2 months ago
May I borrow your crystal ball before this week's lotto drawing? LOL
Reply -
0%
jdhatl1 year, 2 months ago
The VAST majority of humanity lives at sea level. We are already losing islands in the pacific, where evacuation plans are being drawn up already for some islands. And the pollution resulting from flooding the most heavily populated parts of the world would make current ocean pollution problems look like child's play, possibly seriously affecting our food supply. The moves to mitigate climate change are in their infancy, massive investment in research is needed. Which we would have easily if these clowns hadn't gotten the notion they had to re-stage Vietnam. They got it wrong though, they forgot to pick a jungle country.
Reply-
0%
chiefss1 year, 2 months ago
Gee. I wonder how the Dutch managed to survive all the rising seas all these years. After all a great portion of their country is BELOW sea level. They managed to adapt just fine. I guess the rest of the world can't. You act like the sea level is going jump 38 feet in the next week and a half.
Reply
-
-
lovermanComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
texangelwings1 year, 2 months ago
Thanks Neo & Fedquip, excellent posting.
Reminds me of my favorite TV show: 'Numbers'.
Common sense and practical. I will be sharing this with others. I want my grown kids & my grand kids to have a better world.
Reply -
0%
nccneon1 year, 2 months ago
Thought provoking video. I would only take issue with the A-False column (No warming but we act on the premise it is real). In his analysis, this could lead to massive spending and a global economic catastrophy. I think that the effort would (already is) lead to new technologies being developed and economic growth rather than devastation. And then, when the cards are all on the table and it turns out the warming wasn't a good theory after all, we wake up and find we are free of our fossil fuel addiction.
What I'm saying is I see no downside in the A Column, even if the fears of global climate change turn out, in the end, to be unfounded.
Reply-
-
0%
Candida1 year, 2 months ago
I agree. Although you are right nccneon, if he had used your argument, those disagreeing with him would have dismissed him outright, saying that he didn't deal with the risks of acting unnecessarily. He wanted to demonstrate that no matter how severe the consequences of unnecessary action are, they can never be as severe as the consequences of inaction.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
Excellent argument. The only way we could logically choose column B is if we absolutely KNOW that global warming isn't happening.
Reply-
-
0%
CatholicRedneck1 year, 2 months ago
That's not the only way to choose column B logically. Another way to choose it is to understand the world is full of chicken littles screaming, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
This video works IF you accept the science fiction of horrible catastrophes caused by CO2...and I don't work for Exxon-Mobil : )
Reply-
0%
Amazing11 year, 2 months ago
The only way to choose column B logically is if you did not get what the video is saying. Open yourself up to the possibility that the global warming premise is true. Just the POSSIBILITY that you might be incorrect in your thinking.
Hey, if I'm wrong and there's no global warming, I'll make you a loaf of bread and a jar of jam in 30 years. I'll even throw in a dozen eggs and let you laugh at me for being wrong. I will still rejoice in cleaner air and water.
Reply
-
-
