It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Al Gore used a Nuclear Bomb subliminal in his An Incovenient Truth trailer

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Talk about terrormongering. GWB would hardly have the audacity to sneak one in like this, he'd come right out and say mushroom cloud, and in context. We wont be seeing much of Bush splicing hurricane videos into his clips, however the Gore propaganda-disinfo terror campaign wasn't at all shy with the terror language ala "By far the most terrifying film you will ever see" being the films slogan; additional similar rhetoric can be found in the trailer in question. But hey, Bush, like Gore, will still say it "if it just ain't so".


The trailer:
www.climatecrisis.net...
The image is at about the 90% mark; it's one of the final images in the video.

Note the smoketrails, a classic sign of a nuclear bomb test.

Here's blasts that looks similar to Gore's:
Operation Upshot-Knothole

And:
atangledweb.typepad.com...

Relevant Threads:
An Inconvenient Truth: Al Gore engaged in direct disinformation
An Inconvenient Truth ON Al Gore: The Google AI Conspiracy
Dubya and Al Gore's unknown unholy alliance.

"By far the most terrifying film you will ever see.":


Found this by chance while analyzing the terror factor of his trailers. Now I have to keep the lookout for similar tactics in the feature film...


[edit on 28-6-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]




posted on Jun, 27 2007 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Oh noes. He's trying to scare us into taking action and saving our planet from ourselves. He is such an evil person. What has the world come to?

Sarcasm aside, I don't see anything wrong with scaring people into doing the right thing (the right thing being, you know, stop f-ing up the planet). He isn't saying if we don't blow up global warming, global warming will follow us home and kill us because it hates freedom. Kind of a big difference when you compare it to Bush/Cheney's fear mongering.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 12:03 AM
link   
But he's actually caught here using "mushroom clouds" following in GWB's footsteps, and he engages in direct disiformation in his film, like Bush selling US the Iraq Occupation.

Since he uses junk science + disinformation + misinformation in his film, along with direct terror tactics, it gets harder and harder to believe it's that serious of a threat, let alone justify something like the nuke-blast tactic here.

If you check out my links you'll learn how Gore's terror is just the other side of the coin, and what it's all really about.

[edit on 28-6-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 01:43 AM
link   
You know, I don't remember seeing Mushroom clouds or even a mention of Nuclear Weapons
in 'An Inconvenient Truth', of course I may just not remember it, but it seems like it
would be something I would indeed remember.

I suppose I'll re-watch it and check over the weekend.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
PR is as PR does. i wouldn't call the nuke pic subliminal, it's just very short in duration, still very insulting to the audience, though.

global warming is long past the stage of rational discourse, trying to stop the scare mongering with facts are mostly fruitless, so the yonly thing left in our inventory is a) reverse scare mongering (f-ex. 'the Kyoto air tax will lead to poverty, famine and war all around the planet') or ridicule.


the question is whether emotional tactics work when you're in the minority.

btw, i find it more and more disturbing how every single time i post a summary of what i gathered in the past few months, the response is either evasive or non-existant - nowadays even when a thread poster is specifically asking for data, see www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 06:32 PM
link   
What is the duration of the nuclear clip? Lori-k, if its subliminal, you wouldnt 'see' it or remember seeing it, due to the shortness of the visual, if it was short in duration, but the brain 'sees' it and our subconscience sees it as well.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Talk about terrormongering. GWB would hardly have the audacity to sneak one in like this, he'd come right out and say mushroom cloud, and in context. We wont be seeing much of Bush splicing hurricane videos into his clips, however the Gore propaganda-disinfo terror campaign wasn't at all shy with the terror language ala "By far the most terrifying film you will ever see" being the films slogan; additional similar rhetoric can be found in the trailer in question. But hey, Bush, like Gore, will still say it "if it just ain't so".


The trailer:
www.climatecrisis.net...
The image is at about the 90% mark; it's one of the final images in the video.

Note the smoketrails, a classic sign of a nuclear bomb test.

Here's blasts that looks similar to Gore's:
Operation Upshot-Knothole

And:
atangledweb.typepad.com...

Relevant Threads:
An Inconvenient Truth: Al Gore engaged in direct disinformation
An Inconvenient Truth ON Al Gore: The Google AI Conspiracy
Dubya and Al Gore's unknown unholy alliance.

"By far the most terrifying film you will ever see.":


Found this by chance while analyzing the terror factor of his trailers. Now I have to keep the lookout for similar tactics in the feature film...


[edit on 28-6-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]


Hahah!! This is TOO funny!! You're comparing Gore with Bush??? This is the the same Bush who has now completely eroded your freedoms and those of most people living on this planet as we speak??? With a video by Al Gore?? heheh...too much...you ought to get into stand-up...

Jimbo999



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes
What is the duration of the nuclear clip? Lori-k,


It's Iori.

And I don't know, since I don't remember even seeing a nuclear detonation
in the movie at all.




if its subliminal, you wouldnt 'see' it or remember seeing it, due to the shortness of the visual, if it was short in duration, but the brain 'sees' it and our subconscience sees it as well.



Subliminal messaging is illegal in America and most of the rest of the world,
and considering how scrutinized the movie was, I'd think someone would have caught it
early on and make a big legal hubub about it.

[edit on 6/30/2007 by iori_komei]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   
The segment before the nuke begins:

"nothing is scarier"

and shows (in this order):

* a lightning strike
* a storm threatening docked boats
* a tornado
* a factory spewing smoke
* a forest fire
* waves slamming against a bridge
* a car submerged in water
* a nuclear blast
* dead trees
* more smoke stacks
* more waves slamming against a bridge

I don't think it's subliminal if you can consciously see it. And despite the big deal people make of subliminals, I have read many opinions from psychologists and others stating that subliminal messages simply don't have the persuasive power once attributed to them. No doubt the marketers of subliminal recordings will disagree with that assessment.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Subliminal advertising isn't illegal. It's used all the time. And you can generally spot it.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
And I don't know, since I don't remember even seeing a nuclear detonation
in the movie at all.

sry iori for mistaking your name to be lori...

This I believe isnt in the movie, but in the trailer? The question was meant for the OP...and again you wouldnt remember anything about seeing it if it is a subliminal.


Originally posted by iori_komei
Subliminal messaging is illegal in America and most of the rest of the world,
and considering how scrutinized the movie was, I'd think someone would have caught it early on and make a big legal hubub about it.

If it is illegal in USA (don't think so though), this hasn't stopped corporations in the past, some incorporate sublim ads then if caught, say sorry, technical glitch. There have been many examples in commercials, print ads etc. Sublimnal advertising can also be in plain sight as well.

One example is the latest "The Food Network" displayed a Macdonalds ad in red.

I was watching the end of today's Iron Chef and noticed the screen quickly blink red. A few seconds later I start thinking, "Was that the McDonalds logo...?" Thanks to the magic of my Dish Network DVR, I rewind, and put it in to slow motion. Sure enough, Food Network is running subliminal advertisements for Micky D's!!!

www.thatsfit.com...

They said "sorry, technical issue, won't happen again". Would the technical glitch have continued to run on that episode and possibly on other Food network shows in the future if not found? I say yes

Here it is all of its non-glory:


[edit on 6/30/2007 by greatlakes]



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Subliminal messaging has been disallowed by the FCC since the 60's since it was deemed
not in the publics best interest.
It was banned originally in the UK and Australia in the 50's after a hoax (which was'nt
admitted to being so for a decade) and has'nt been taken of the books to my knowledge.

In America the various companies and the National Broadcasters Association banned
it after the hoax but the government did'nt get involved at the time.

It was'nt until the 60's that, even though it was shown to not be as subversive as the
hoax had said, the FCC decided that it would be banned as it was not in the public interest to allow it.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 09:47 PM
link   
No, it's not banned. You're thinking of when they'll put an image in one or more frames that you can barely see. Subliminal stuff used now is things like faces or abnormalities that you don't really see unless you're looking for them.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Everything I listed I saw watching at normal speed.


Merriam-Webster Online

subliminal


Main Entry: sub·lim·i·nal
Pronunciation: \(ˌ)sə-ˈbli-mə-nəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: sub- + Latin limin-, limen threshold
Date: 1886

1 : inadequate to produce a sensation or a perception 2 : existing or functioning below the threshold of consciousness



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by yuefo
I don't think it's subliminal if you can consciously see it. And despite the big deal people make of subliminals, I have read many opinions from psychologists and others stating that subliminal messages simply don't have the persuasive power once attributed to them. No doubt the marketers of subliminal recordings will disagree with that assessment.


Subliminal can be more persuasive, since they are perceived strictly subconsciously, without the obstruction of conscious thought. However, the persuasiveness has more to do with the brain/mental state of the person, then the method the message is delivered. So it's true, the quick flash subliminal method was definitely overexaggerated.

[edit on 1-7-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
No, it's not banned. You're thinking of when they'll put an image in one or more frames that you can barely see. Subliminal stuff used now is things like faces or abnormalities that you don't really see unless you're looking for them.


I think that's correct.

It's very interpretive. There is a fine line between the 'illegal' version of subliminal messaging to what is currently allowed.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The easiest place to look is in alcohol ads. Normally unpleasant faces and stuff, looks kinda like monsters. Usually in the ice cubes.



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnmike
The easiest place to look is in alcohol ads. Normally unpleasant faces and stuff, looks kinda like monsters. Usually in the ice cubes.


Why would alcohol companies put unpleasant imagery in their ads? Wouldn't they want pleasant images to make their product more appealing?



posted on Jul, 1 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I'm not sure, but I can guess. I suppose the first reason would be to make something feel a little "different". The reason it's subliminal is that you don't really notice it unless you're looking, but your brain starts firing off signal that something isn't right in that picture. Things like that can make you remember the ad better. Additionally, and I'm not sure about this one, unpleasant things like monstrous faces and whatnot might relate to death. This could appeal to alcoholics, at least, who (generalization) drink to numb emotions. So is the relation killing emotions, or with the emotions they want to kill? It could even go beyond alcoholics and relate to anxiety.

I don't know. I know for sure that something being "off" will make it easier to remember, but I don't know about the rest. That's just speculation.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Subliminal messaging has been disallowed by the FCC since the 60's since it was deemed


Subliminal advertising isn't illegal, it's just assumed that none would do it for fear of getting caught.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join