Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Michel Moore's new movie is an Inconvenient Truth

  1. Top | #1
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,079
    Archived
    3,672
    Total Posts
    5,751
    Rep Power
    62

    Michel Moore's new movie is an Inconvenient Truth

    I happen to stumble upon Moore's latest documentary "Planet of the Humans" on YouTube here:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE

    The content of this film was a big surprise for me. Moore actually was agreeing with many of the same points the right has been saying all along about renewables. Namely that they won't be practical and that green energy is a scam.

    So it is actually the liberals who are critical of Moore and this film. Yet Moore is about as far left of the political scale as you can go!
    While I do not consider myself either far left or right, IMO Moore is mistaken when it comes to solar collector and wind technologies that I beleive can someday be practical. But that is only my opinion and something fair and open minded people could debate.

    What blows me away most of all is how little impact this (extremely controversial) film has made in the main stream media. No mention anywhere and as though the film never was produced. It is obvious the people who really run things want this film cancelled and not discussed or debated!

  2. Top | #2
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    West Hollywood
    Posts
    5,640
    Rep Power
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by RVonse View Post
    {snip}IMO Moore is mistaken when it comes to solar collector and wind technologies that I beleive can someday be practical.{snip}
    The current "Flex Alert" and inevitable rolling blackouts in California says otherwise.

  3. Top | #3
    Contributor repoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    8,060
    Archived
    2,280
    Total Posts
    10,340
    Rep Power
    83
    The director of the movie is about 10-20 years out of date for the technology, but in general he is correct.

  4. Top | #4
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    11,025
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    28,766
    Rep Power
    81
    I read a summary on Wikipedia.

    It seems like the main point is that corporations (and capitalists) have subverted mainstream environmentalism to their benefit and continue to pose environmental risks (though perhaps different) to the world. It kind of makes sense from a far left perspective that centrists try to use business to expand on a left-leaning political idea like environmentalism but then get corrupted and subverted in the process. BUT, is the evidence anecdotal or is it statistical, does the centrist path leads to an overall better outcome than the alternative, and do Moore and Gibbs give us as a society a practical alternative or just criticize everyone? I'd like to see a list from the thread or op author, like this: society should do A, B, and C because of X, Y, and Z.

  5. Top | #5
    Squadron Leader
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Land of Smiles
    Posts
    1,743
    Rep Power
    17
    I watched this film; there was an annoying and bad tendency that rendered many arguments useless.

    He kept repeating something like "Harvesting renewable energy XXX requires CO2 emissions and other resource costs."

    Fine. But doesn't quantity matter? Is the wind power using up 5% as much carbon, per kilowatt-hour, as coal-fired plants? Or 110%? Moore and the other producer are silent about such numbers, seeming to consider them unimportant!

  6. Top | #6
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,555
    Rep Power
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Swammerdami View Post
    I watched this film; there was an annoying and bad tendency that rendered many arguments useless.

    He kept repeating something like "Harvesting renewable energy XXX requires CO2 emissions and other resource costs."

    Fine. But doesn't quantity matter? Is the wind power using up 5% as much carbon, per kilowatt-hour, as coal-fired plants? Or 110%? Moore and the other producer are silent about such numbers, seeming to consider them unimportant! :confused: INCONVENIENT
    FIFY

  7. Top | #7
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    11,025
    Archived
    17,741
    Total Posts
    28,766
    Rep Power
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Swammerdami View Post
    I watched this film; there was an annoying and bad tendency that rendered many arguments useless.

    He kept repeating something like "Harvesting renewable energy XXX requires CO2 emissions and other resource costs."

    Fine. But doesn't quantity matter? Is the wind power using up 5% as much carbon, per kilowatt-hour, as coal-fired plants? Or 110%? Moore and the other producer are silent about such numbers, seeming to consider them unimportant!
    Sure. I'll go one step further. Offhand, it appears to make sense to look at the entire lifecycle of the alternative product. So, starting from its manufacturing process, then including its usage (as you suggest), finally to its end and what to do with it....as compared to the traditional resource/product over that same lifecycle. What are the numbers...and what do we need the numbers to be...and are they improving...

  8. Top | #8
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,079
    Archived
    3,672
    Total Posts
    5,751
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    do Moore and Gibbs give us as a society a practical alternative or just criticize everyone? .
    No solutions given except that population and consumption are more the problem then c02. But they never talk about how that would happen. Forced birth control or something even worse?

  9. Top | #9
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA, California
    Posts
    4,042
    Archived
    5,710
    Total Posts
    9,752
    Rep Power
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by RVonse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    do Moore and Gibbs give us as a society a practical alternative or just criticize everyone? .
    No solutions given except that population and consumption are more the problem then c02. But they never talk about how that would happen. Forced birth control or something even worse?
    The solution was nuclear two decades ago. Now, well, we've made our bed.

  10. Top | #10
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    8,623
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    8,995
    Rep Power
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by J842P View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RVonse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Don2 (Don1 Revised) View Post
    do Moore and Gibbs give us as a society a practical alternative or just criticize everyone? .
    No solutions given except that population and consumption are more the problem then c02. But they never talk about how that would happen. Forced birth control or something even worse?
    The solution was nuclear two decades ago. Now, well, we've made our bed.
    If we did that, then there'd be no basis for the panic porn, demand for more taxes, and greater government control over our lives.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •