Gore's team caught attempting to buy fake evidence of global warming

Originally posted by steve1709
nice try at manipulation but try to put things into perspective. Your apparent "terrible law" actually stops people from putting high prices on goods or services then blaming the carbon tax for the increase. a good example is the blatent lie spouted by the opposition that the electricity bills were up to 70% higher because of the carbon tax. But when this was examined, ONLY less than 10% was connected to the carbon tax and that the general public were actually compensated for this. In fact, they were given compensation that was MORE than the effect.

imo your example is nothing more than a good display of chinese whispers. The more it is propagated, the further from the truth it gets.

I stand corrected! (at least in this particular instance.)

Honestly, I'm happy the law is being used this way, instead of what I've been imagining. I hope that is the true purpose of the law.

My point really isn't the laws put in place for enforcement, but that the system has already been put in place that require these laws to remove any opposition... and that it's a new game to separate you (us) from our money, our comforts, and more of what's left of our own freedoms.

And to the poster above; my head's really not in the sand, that's your opinion and interpretation of the facts you see available. I see it differently, and feel that I ought not to guess at where your head may be. (couldn't resist!)

That footage being used to illustrate global warming is not confirmed in the first email.

One thing I must say of the believers of the Church of Global Warming is they certainly have "faith" in their leader.

Splitting hairs as to what Al Gore is going to use a dramatic piece of weather footage for .... because it wasn't "spelled out" in the email?

Seriously? What the h--- to you think he is going to use it for? Quick...search for an excuse.

What is his business? What is his goal? Give your heads a shake.

Maybe Al Gore has taken up a new hobby as Smokey the Bear 2.0...

"Now look at this footage kiddies, this proves beyond a shadow of a doubt why you must not play with matches."

reply to post by smurfy


Thanks smurfy for the links. Just going through them now. The plant stoma article is interesting. But some of the comments are equally interesting. Did you read them too or just the article? But, since I still have more research to do I will hold my thoughts for a while if that's ok.


And on the sites, I found something interesting for you schuyler.

"To claim global warming stopped in 1998 overlooks one simple physical reality - the land and atmosphere are just a small fraction of the Earth's climate (albeit the part we inhabit). The entire planet is accumulating heat due to an energy imbalance. The atmosphere is warming. Oceans are accumulating energy. Land absorbs energy and ice absorbs heat to melt. To get the full picture on global warming, you need to view the Earth's entire heat content."
This came from sceptical science website. Guess your idea of no warming for the past 16 years falls flat. I think you suggested to someone to read. hmmmm ok back at ya (like the rest of the article above)

GLOBAL WARMiNG - CLIMATE CHANGE
decrypting.......
decrypting.......
decrypting.......
= GLOBAL GOVERNANCE

Good on the filmaker for calling it out for what it was and not allowing its use for propaganda!!!!!!!!!!!

Global Warmers = Global Taxation = Global Government

Of course they had name change to Global Climate Changers so that any and all situations could apply their globalist ambitions.

Besides data I have confidence in shows cooling not warming

Originally posted by SpearMint
That footage being used to illustrate global warming is not confirmed in the first email.

Spearmint, the reason that I posted this is in the disinformation forum is quite clear. In my mind, the Al Gore team intended to use the footage as propaganda.

In film studies there is an editing technique called Soviet Intellectual montage. This technique was used in the epic "An inconvenient truth".

In intellectual montage, the images have no meaning until they are juxtaposed. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that the viewer would assume that the firestorm was a result of global warming, not a naturally occurring event. Do you see the problem with this?

Originally posted by sealing
Whether man made or not the climate is wacky.
And if there are those that don't think oil companies
aren't cooking the books for their evidence as well,
they are being fooled too.

Here we go...and your claim debunks exactly how the fact that Al Gore and his team were caught trying to use false information to further his AGW BUSINESS deals?...

Oh wait, nvm, your AGW scientists like Mann, Jones, Tremberth, Hansen, et al have all also been caught publishing false data, and lies, not to mention erasing raw temperature data like CRU did so no one could check the temps, and what PuterMan found about the temperature data for 1880s and subsequent years being changed CONSTANTLY to make it look like the present is warmer...

Not to mention the lies about "the concensus" when there is none, the scientists who have quit from the IPCC and other government jobs around the world because they would not jump into the AGW SCAM bandwagon, and the hundreds, and hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific research that debunks the AGW SCAM...

Yeah, let's forget the truth and accept the lie that is the AGW RELIGION...

Anyway, good work for the Australian film maker.

Who needs a video of fire. Sheesh.

More people trying to derail Global Warming. One question where have the ice caps gone? How were they able to melt at a rate significantly higher then expected?

reply to post by NoJoker13


Thank you for your interest in this thread however, this thread is not directly about AGW. It's about an Australian filmmaker clearly stating he did not want to sell his footage as it had nothing to do with AGW.

The title of this thread as has already been pointed out is very misleading and seems like a blatant attempt to draw attention to a complete non-issue.

What do you think they would do? Create an entire 2 hour documentary on how climate change will suddenly flood Australia with fire tornados? Most likely it would have been used in some montage on how GW will increase forest fires across the globe, which is completely true.

How the hell would Gore's team be aware of the local weather conditions on that particular day in the area where the footage was taken? Some peoples need to create a conspiracy out of everything would be almost laughable if it were not to further the dangerous but thankfully ridiculous agenda of climate change denialists.

TPTB have far more to lose by changing over from an oil based to a green economy, which is why they are not doing anything except commit to tokenry bs such as carbon credits instead of taking real action.

Wow good on the film maker, I takes a lot of integrity to turn down what would likely be a sizable amount of money like that. I honestly don't know if I could/ or would if put in that situation.

I wont argue whether or not global warming is real or not, because global warming is real... That's not to say that MAN has had any influence on it or not, just that global warming is happening as a result to the earth recovering from the last ice age. Now the problem I have with the whole man made global warming theory (i.e. that man is the cause or at least the primary cause) is that we have only been keeping "reliable" temperature measurements for what the last 100 - 150 years? So how are they getting the idea that the world temperature is above normal? or that Humans have had a significant impact on said temperatures? We really don't know if we are the cause or if we have had any effect on the global temperatures. The only thing we know for sure, is that over the last 100 - 150 years there has been some fluctuation in the global mean temperature. Nothing overly severe (+/- 1 degree) but fluctuation none the less. It's also known that in the last 20 -/+ the global mean temperature has either stayed the same or even decreased to some extent. Now someone is going to be "nice" enough to point out the use of tree rings to show historic temperatures, and the rises in temperatures since then and while this is nice in theory there is a couple small problems with it.

First off trees are about as localized a way of measuring as you can get. For those who don't know, trees from all over the world aren't all interconnected like some sort of network (like they are in the movie AVATAR), so sampling one set of trees from one specific location isn't going to show you world wide temperatures or world wide temperature fluctuations, rather it will show the climate/water fluctuations for that particular location only. Besides that how do you actually measure the temperature from a tree ring? I mean I can understand them saying that some years the tree grew better than other years, more likely from a wetter or dryer year depending on the ring in question. I mean it's not like it's stamped inside the tree what the average temperature was when it grew that year, nor is there records to show the mean temp from that area for that year. So how are they figuring out the temps? Simple it's guess work, with some colourful graphs and pictures to dress it up and pass it off as facts.

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
The title of this thread as has already been pointed out is very misleading and seems like a blatant attempt to draw attention to a complete non-issue.

What do you think they would do? Create an entire 2 hour documentary on how climate change will suddenly flood Australia with fire tornados? Most likely it would have been used in some montage on how GW will increase forest fires across the globe, which is completely true.

How the hell would Gore's team be aware of the local weather conditions on that particular day in the area where the footage was taken? Some peoples need to create a conspiracy out of everything would be almost laughable if it were not to further the dangerous but thankfully ridiculous agenda of climate change denialists.

TPTB have far more to lose by changing over from an oil based to a green economy, which is why they are not doing anything except commit to tokenry bs such as carbon credits instead of taking real action.

Ok I'll admit to not being an expert but I'll take a stab at your questions. First off how would Gores team know of the weather conditions on the day of the event in question? The same way the OP did, research!! If they researched it they would know that it had nothing to do with global warming but a localized event (as stated by the film maker).

What would they do with the film? Use it to push their theory on whats happening, certainly. Would they use it to colour the opinions of people without providing context for the images/film, more likely than not. Al Gore is Global Warming, he has staked what little credibility and fame he has left on pushing this theory and it seems to be the only thing we ever hear connected to him. So I can certainly understand the film makers assumption and hesitation on giving over material that could be used out of context to illustrate something that the film itself has nothing to do with.

Also TPTB have a lot to gain from "going green", they can control and regulate the green economy the same as they have with the oil based economy that we currently have. They just need time to figure out how to ensure that they will have complete control over the technologies involved before they make their push for it. That way they can ensure they have a say in who gets what, when and for how much, just like they do now. They just need time, time which we the people of the world are giving them in spades by our refusal to move forward into a sustainable future.

This thread and the linked article are under the flase premise that climate change isn't verifiable or currently visible.

Note to non believers. It is. Look at graphs, look at the poles.......hell, look outside.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by spinalremain


Yep, your right.

The weather has remained a constant over how many billions of years.


It is all static and never changes.

Sure sure

reply to post by looneylupinsrevenge

Originally posted by looneylupinsrevenge
Ok I'll admit to not being an expert but I'll take a stab at your questions. First off how would Gores team know of the weather conditions on the day of the event in question? The same way the OP did, research!! If they researched it they would know that it had nothing to do with global warming but a localized event (as stated by the film maker).

Look, if they were as I mentioned above going to make a full 2 hour doco on firestorms in Australia a little research would certainly be warranted, however I highly doubt this is what they’re were going to do. It would more than likely be a montage of hundreds of images designed to drive home the point that climate change will increase the rate of bushfires in Australia. If they were to research every image they wanted to borrow the doco would probably take the better part of a decade to complete. Besides, why bother doing any research at all prior to contacting the film maker anyway?

And the OP did not research the weather conditions. It’s stated right there in the film maker’s email. Note also that after the filmmakers reply Gores team did not push the issue any further.

What would they do with the film? Use it to push their theory on whats happening, certainly. Would they use it to colour the opinions of people without providing context for the images/film, more likely than not. Al Gore is Global Warming, he has staked what little credibility and fame he has left on pushing this theory and it seems to be the only thing we ever hear connected to him. So I can certainly understand the film makers assumption and hesitation on giving over material that could be used out of context to illustrate something that the film itself has nothing to do with.

Agreed (mostly)

Also TPTB have a lot to gain from "going green", they can control and regulate the green economy the same as they have with the oil based economy that we currently have. They just need time to figure out how to ensure that they will have complete control over the technologies involved before they make their push for it. That way they can ensure they have a say in who gets what, when and for how much, just like they do now. They just need time, time which we the people of the world are giving them in spades by our refusal to move forward into a sustainable future.

edit on 29-11-2012 by looneylupinsrevenge because: (no reason given)

They have far more to gain by staying oil based and this you cannot deny. Yes people are always going to cash if they can and Gore is certainly no exception but I fail to see how TPTB will benefit in any way by me generating my own electricity from solar panels on my roof or creating near free energy through wind/tidal power.

reply to post by deessell


So an OP that talks about someone faking global warming evidence, has nothing to do with global warming it self? Hmm.

Originally posted by Atzil321
The email sent by gore's assistant does not say they will use the footage of the firestorm as evidence for AGW... They just wanted to use the images as part of a presentation for what a warmer world, with more extreme weather events will look like. The reaction of this guy is a bit puzzling realy...

Just thought I'd quote your piece since I drew the same conclusions from reading the article. But you know 90% of the people replying just heard Al Gore didn't read a thing and posted about how 'crazy' he is. Gotta love ATS and it's trolls.