McCann-Erickson has produced a beautifully animated but disturbing PSA for the Portuguese organization Quercus {wiki} about global warming. Let the comments begin. http://www.fubiz.net/blog/index.php?2008/09/18/2229-global-warming-quercus -Thanks, Mat!
McCann-Erickson has produced a beautifully animated but disturbing PSA for the Portuguese organization Quercus {wiki} about global warming. Let the comments begin. http://www.fubiz.net/blog/index.php?2008/09/18/2229-global-warming-quercus -Thanks, Mat!
Of course I have a natural knee-jerk reaction against people who try to convince me using only my emotions and without a SINGLE ACTUAL FACT. If you want me to change my behavior, you need to tell me WHY to do it, not show me monkeys killing themselves with tears in their eyes.
The message here is vastly exaggerated to a ridiculous degree. No, the world isn't going to turn into a post-apocalyptic wasteland.
But I suppose by being a person who thinks climate change is real, but also thinks most environmentalists are exaggerating the threat by orders of magnitude, I guess that makes me a denier, right? Because there sure can't be any middle-ground!
To me, the point of this wasn't to convince people of GW's existence, but to motivate people to do something about it.
Strange video, nonetheless.
Why? Because the biggest threat to global warming isn't in Europe or the US, it's in China and India. If you look at a graph of pollution vs GNP, the US actually looks pretty good on average-- sure we are the biggest polluters, but we also have the largest GNP.
Once you get China to stop dumping old electronics directly into their rivers, then maybe I'll think about acting on it. For the time-being, it seems pointless for me to make any sacrifices.
I'm a little annoyed at the arrogance of man to think they can destroy the world completely.
The whole anthropomorphizing bit, and the gratuitous suicides, trivialize and cheapen the message.
This sort of well-financed tripe makes me wonder exactly how bloated Quercus' budget is.
Humans raise animals, then we cook and eat them. There are more cows alive today, because of man, then there was 1000 years ago. The environment doesn't factor into it.
If you think eating meat is evil, then fine, just say that. But don't make it sound like we are killing all the poor cows in the world and soon they will be extinct.... and this will lead to an environmental disaster.
By the way, I am going to go enjoy a T-Bone now. Take care :-)
// I will become a vegetarian when you teach a carrot to say "moo"
The ozone layer is gone, we will all die.
A new ice age is starting, we will all die.
The country is running our of coal, we will freeze to death
We are running out of gas, may not kill us but hey!
Every few years a new plaque hits the news.
These are just a few of the warnings I have seen in my short lifetime. I looked online, for a history or list of this sort of thing, I did not find anything, too bad. I am certain they go back to the end of time.
The roman news network probably ran a story on how more and more people were eating salt, and there would not be enough to use for money, and everyone would die!
I suppose eventually one of the dire predictions will come true. But I see no reason to panic, again.
I can make one prediction, that I wish was not true.
We will all die! Its just a matter of time!
PS. one excellent thing that come from all this exaggerated fear making advertising. Humanity as a whole is much more environmentally friendly. Study a bit of history! Even 30-50 years ago, our society was an ecological disaster! Things are actually getting better!
The point is that there's no point in me, or the US for that matter, cutting pollution as long as "third-world" countries, like China and India, are allowed to do whatever the hell they want. Including dumping electronics into rivers, and expelling massive quantities of unfiltered smog from coal plants.
This, BTW, is one of the reasons the US never signed the Kyoto Protocol. It gave developing countries, the place where the problem *really* exists, a complete pass on reducing carbon emissions. It's pointless for the US, already more efficient than China, should bend over backwards to be even more efficient while China does nothing.
I think she was talking more about the emmissions that come from cows, and the destruction of the land we raise animals on, than the extinction of cows.
I am sure cows would lead happier lives if they were extinct, anyway.
Yes, you enjoy gnawing away on a hunk of dead carcass.
We get it.
What has changed in the last few months/years to prove Global Warming is all man made? What has made it tougher to find a leg to stand on? Polar Bears as a species are thriving, and are still growing in population. For every Iceberg/shelf that is seen melting, there is another one that is growing. There is a scary coincidence that the spots that occur on the sun align with the temperature change.
In fact, I feel that the Global warming advocates are having fewer and fewer legs to stand on. Hence why this is no longer being largely advocated as 'Global Warming' but now its 'Climate Change'.
I for one proudly proclaim that I do not feel this so called climate change is man made. In fact I feel that blaming man for this change, instead of looking for other scientific explanations, is nothing more than false divine arrogance.
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 18% of greenhouse gases are produced by livestock production, so you are most certainly affecting the environment by eating meat.
-Dave
If everyone on the world was a vegetarian, then let prices of vegetables, beans, and grains would sky rocket, and it would cause much more destruction then just letting the people eat the cows.
And many cow farmers (herders?) are piling all the cows poo in a pile and running homes, etc. on the methane gas.
Come on, Bring it ON!
It takes almost 8 times the amount of plant protein to produce 1 pound of animal protein. That means if everyone stopped eating meat we could feed 8 times as many people with the same amount of production we have now.
I'm not saying you have to stop eating meat (although you should), but I think you should do some research before you try and bring it on.
Look guys, the reality is that global warming has been politicized by the Left and won't allow any discussion to the contrary. You don't have to accept the party line on this one. Think for yourselves!
It's best to be higher up on the evolutionary food chain.
Next time - evolve FASTER so you can adapt to (or change) the climate you require.
Realistically, human impact on warming, shift, even cooling is minimal. That does not give us the right to disregard the issues. We should still recycle, get away from fossil fuels, stop polluting, etc.... but this is basically global housekeeping and it isn't preventing the planet from doing what it's going to do.
A while back the temperature stations they were using for their "models" were located in the hottest places they could be, such as airports and on top of buildings. Gee, I wonder why those temperatures were hotter??? Now, they may have been changed since, but that was only 6-12 months ago.
Count me amongst the so-called 'Middle Grounders'. Fact; the climate changes. Fact; anthropogenic activity contributes. Fact; the better of the models we have demonstrate the contribution is significant enough to cause slight increases in global temperatures. Beyond that, we run out of facts, and run into speculation. The truth is that our models, while constantly improving, are still too vague.
What won't happen is 'the planet will die', 'all animals will die (or want to die)', 'the end of the world'. The exaggerations, oversimplifications and the ridiculous idea that turning off a few light switches or not driving your car to work will help on iota does nothing but obfiscate the issue and create a sense of doing something.
What I want to know is what will we do when changes do happen? We spend so much time and money telling the average Joe to ride a bike, while in places like Australia we're still scratching our heads over what to do about water. Let's face it - climate change happens. Let's deal with it.
Athon
So why do denialists who make ridiculous statements think they are more informed on climate studies than the many who do it for a living?
Athon
Screw polar bears. They'd eat us if they could. Kangaroos? There's too many of them already. And chimpanzees just freak me out. They're too much like us (only they're dumb, so therefore expendable).
[Yes, I'm being sarcastic. It's sad when you actually have to say so, though.]
It's easy to make things black and white that-- paint everyone that doesn't take the fear mongering that the media feeds us at 100% face value as wasteful idiots that have no regard for anyone or anything but themselves. It is possible to care about what happens to the environment and still not buy the global warming dogma.
The problem with what you said above is that either you don't know the meaning of the word "console" or you don't understand what it means to not believe something (or both). From Webster's Online: "to alleviate the grief, sense of loss, or trouble of : comfort ". Disbelievers are just that-- they don't believe, so they don't feel guilt and need no consolation. Do athiests find ways to console themselves about not believeing in God? No. They don't think they are turning their back on anything real. Same with those that don't believe in global warming. Now, that doesn't excuse the extreme and wasteful behaviors of some, but to lump all of those that are not in the global warming bandwagon is not fair or accurate. But, hey, if painting all of them as absolutely brainless idiots is the way you console yourself after finding out that those who disagree with you are intelligent people, then be my guest.
I heard it from a realiable source, but it was an old source.
@ Gellner
That, my friend, is the funniest/truest thing Ive heard today!
Now, dont get me wrong, I love the polar bears! But as far as I know, they dont have any real natural enemies, do they?
Their enemy is the climate?
hmm... Think about it.
And before you attack me! I have not done my research,
This is my opinion!
I always felt that a lot of PSAs are too gimmicky or annoying to take seriously. Just look at those stupid singing angels in the Truth ads.
I agree with your comment. People often contribute naught but sarcastic generalizations and try to pass it off as wit. Just because one is on the "Right Team" (be it liberal or conservative, believer or non-believer), does not mean that one is not a mere sheep.
By the way, I love polar bears too. They taste like pork.
I agree with your comment about the finger-sniffing monkey.
I hated this video. It's not disturbing, it's just pedantic, glossy, and unnecessary propaganda. Maybe I'll watch it again with "That Was Just Your Life" playing to make it more entertaining or something.
Now if only we could get the rednecks living in trailer parks to do the same thing instead of popping out 10 kids and sucking up resources on welfare.
Fake animals dying: LOL
no kids for me.
and if later, some point, i reallyyy want one, which i can't see happening
i'll adopt.
what is wrong with adopting?
i just don't get it.
If we don't change the way we live, it will just keep getting worse. Yes? Yes.
Should we change the we live, and start taking active steps to ensure the environment stays healthy, or should we continue to destroy it, and pollute our home? I guess this question is a matter of opinion.
Stew - got any data to back that up? 'cause the NOAA begs to differ
Sunspots work in 11-year cycles, but temperatures have been trending upward for a century (as far as we can tell). Now, I'm not saying this couldn't be part of another natural cycle. This site has some nice graphs indicating temperature fluctuations over decades, centuries, and millenia.
James Schend - China and India aspire to join the "first world". If the US doesn't make a commitment to lower emissions, why should they?
Oh yeah, the video. What a terrible waste of great animation.
remember folks - cpu models do not equal scientific evidence! dur ... I could make a cpu model which "proves", given enough time, that a monkey will fly out of every polar bears butt! now that would be something!
I WANT TO BELIEVE.
I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE.
Jesus... this post brought out the idiots.
On one hand, you have the "geniuses" that don't think it's a problem no matter what you show them.
The other hand you have the delusional religious who think that their religions trumped up make believe god is going to fix everything and make their pathetic existences "special" again.
It seems that some of you need to step up and take responsibility, and if you can't/won't at least educate yourselves a little before commenting.
Glad to see the skeptics coming out. I thought for sure this comment box was going to be a one sided argument.
Period.
But the longer we cling to our "civilized" lifestyle, the less likely we are to leave behind a livable planet when (not if) civilization finally crashes.
The human virus must be exterminated.