Mr. Dicaprio makes a speech on climate change.

And he was scared of one of our terrifying "Chinooks"

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
The REAL conspiracy is who Leonardo ticked off way, way back to prevent him from ever winning an Oscar. He must have gotten blacklisted by someone powerful in Hollywood, he's deserved one many times and never won.

Its very political.

I think many thought he had too much too soon. That he's young, he'll get more chances.

A Celebrity said it, so much more worthy than everybody else whose been screaming it for years.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

Ronald Regan was an actor. I wonder why anyone cared what he thought?

If he thought something about physics, I certainly wouldn't care.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

He's a high school dropout who made it in dramatic arts.

I'd bet you real money he doesn't know more about science than I do, no matter how active he is in environmentalism. Enthusiasm != knowledge.

originally posted by: Annee
He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.
He's also been an environmental activist for many years.
He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

And I bet he can spell "than"

regardless, DiCaprio like so many others were seduced into believing lies. It's too bad because there are real, legitimate problems with this planet that we CAN fix. TB in Africa for one. A 5 dollar shot followed by antibiotics, yet TB is rampant there and literally kills millions. Starvation? Yup, easily fixed.... but we better use them crops to make a fancy new biofuel to compete with evil oil.

The whole planet is back asswards.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

He's a high school dropout who made it in dramatic arts.

I'd bet you real money he doesn't know more about science than I do, no matter how active he is in environmentalism. Enthusiasm != knowledge.

Some of the dumbest people I know have degrees.

Some of the smartest people I know find a passionate focus and educate themselves on the issue.

originally posted by: bronco73

originally posted by: Annee
He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.
He's also been an environmental activist for many years.
He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

And I bet he can spell "than"

regardless, DiCaprio like so many others were seduced into believing lies.

You mean the lie of Climate change?

You can go with that without me.

Leo doesn't know squat he's to busy being buried up to his elbows in naked hot women from every corner of the earth to take time out of his day to study climate.

originally posted by: Annee
You mean the lie of Climate change?

You can go with that without me.

Who said climate changing is a lie? (why would you capitalize the word climate by the way?) The lies are that if we stop driving it will magically stop changing... or if we stopped everything and put ourselves back to the stone age (sans fires of course) that our climate will stabilize. Or if we charge a tax we can throw more money at scientists so they can keep telling us to stop driving. Or that carbon dioxide is going to destroy our planet.... What is more dangerous to our planets survival, too much carbon dioxide, or not enough?

What you and so many more "Glow Ball Warming" alarmists fail to realize is that carbon dioxide is miniscule. It is irrelevant. The culprit is water vapor. Of course that gets no attention, because it's impossible to find a way to blame ourselves.

originally posted by: onequestion
Leo doesn't know squat he's to busy being buried up to his elbows in naked hot women from every corner of the earth to take time out of his day to study climate.

Says a poster in a net forum, who's never met him, and only knows what he reads about him in tabloid news.

originally posted by: bronco73
The lies are that if we stop driving it will magically stop changing... or if we stopped everything and put ourselves back to the stone age (sans fires of course) that our climate will stabilize. Or if we charge a tax we can throw more money at scientists so they can keep telling us to stop driving.

Only an idiot would think that way.

I wish he would have taken his drowning scene in Titanic seriously and exited from the public domain

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

He's a high school dropout who made it in dramatic arts.

I'd bet you real money he doesn't know more about science than I do, no matter how active he is in environmentalism. Enthusiasm != knowledge.

you dont need to be super smart to speak out on what's probably the most important issue humanity has ever faced.

if he spoke out against say cancer or child abuse, would you dismiss the things he has to say?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

He's a high school dropout who made it in dramatic arts.

I'd bet you real money he doesn't know more about science than I do, no matter how active he is in environmentalism. Enthusiasm != knowledge.

Some of the dumbest people I know have degrees.

Some of the smartest people I know find a passionate focus and educate themselves on the issue.

No doubt he taught himself calculus and differential equations after getting that GED.

originally posted by: vjr1113

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: strongfp

I thought he was an actor not a scientist? Who cares what he thinks.

He is a person, who has a job. His job just happens to be acting and producing.

He's also been an environmental activist for many years.

He probably knows a hell of a lot more then you do.

He's a high school dropout who made it in dramatic arts.

I'd bet you real money he doesn't know more about science than I do, no matter how active he is in environmentalism. Enthusiasm != knowledge.

you dont need to be super smart to speak out on what's probably the most important issue humanity has ever faced.

if he spoke out against say cancer or child abuse, would you dismiss the things he has to say?

If he started trying to discuss DNA topology and its relationship to expression of gene sequences, yes, I would.

Very complex topics that require very complex mental tools to understand them in depth are not easy for scientifically illiterate people to deal with in depth.

He might also have strong opinions on the use of ambitwistors but I wouldn't be interested in his opinion there either.

a reply to: Bedlam

There's a ripe irony when internet chatterboxes dismiss the views of actors because they aren't qualified scientists. Aside from yourself, very few are scientists themselves. The irony is sharper when so many dismiss the views of scientists just as easily. If their arguments are contrary to their own, they [scientists] are quacks, liars and political tools.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Bedlam

There's a ripe irony when internet chatterboxes dismiss the views of actors because they aren't qualified scientists. Aside from yourself, very few are scientists themselves. The irony is sharper when so many dismiss the views of scientists just as easily. If their arguments are contrary to their own, they [scientists] are quacks, liars and political tools.

I don't know if you were speaking generally to those posting in this thread or to one specific person or even directly to me, but in the DiCaprio example he PROVED himself to be uneducated in this matter with his Calgary comments and his talk of the oil sands project. Furthermore, there are many scientists on both sides of this coin that differ in opinions, and each side is calling the other liars and political tools.

a reply to: bronco73

No, not targeting you.

By and large we're all hypocrites who pick and choose who we use as authoritative voices. We agree with science when it suits us and dismiss scientists when they conflict with our beliefs.

We'll accept any popular figure if they concur with our world-view.