An Inconvenient Truth - DPChallenge Forums

12/20/2006 05:13:51 PM · #51

Guess what? The earth is just fine. She will continue to thrive with or without us :-)

Not taht anyone is truly concerned about the Earth, but our own existence on it.

krafty1

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/20/2006 05:15:05 PM · #52

Originally posted by rswank:
Al Gore may not be a scientist but 99.9% of the scientists agree 100% with the above three facts.

Over 17,000 noted scientists have signed a petition debunking the so-called global warming theory. It's headed up by a past president of the National Academy of Sciences. Click HERE

Except from a speech given on the Senate floor by Senator James Inhofe entitled "Hot & Cold Media Spin: A Challenge To Journalists Who Cover Global Warming." The entire text can be found HERE

"On July 24, 2006 The Los Angeles Times featured an op-ed by Naomi Oreskes, a social scientist at the University of California San Diego and the author of a 2004 Science Magazine study. Oreskes insisted that a review of 928 scientific papers showed there was 100% consensus that global warming was not caused by natural climate variations. This study was also featured in former Vice President Goreâ��s â��An Inconvenient Truth,â�� //epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=259323

However, the analysis in Science Magazine excluded nearly 11,000 studies or more than 90 percent of the papers dealing with global warming, according to a critique by British social scientist Benny Peiser.

Peiser also pointed out that less than two percent of the climate studies in the survey actually endorsed the so-called â��consensus viewâ�� that human activity is driving global warming and some of the studies actually opposed that view.

But despite this manufactured â��consensus,â�� the media continued to ignore any attempt to question the orthodoxy of climate alarmism."

Originally posted by owen:
There seems to be 4 kinds of people in this thread as there are in life.
People in denial
People who agree with the facts but think we can't do anything about it.
People who agree with the facts but don't want to give up anything.
and those that accept the the facts, know we we are the ones causing it and we are the ones who can do something about it, we only have to decide to.
The scientists do have an agenda, they don't want to be part of the generation that trashed the planet.

In my view your "facts" are erroneous, I hold those people who swallow the half-truth laden propaganda like "The Inconvenient Truth" to be in denial of the facts. The theory that humans are the cause of global warming is just that, a theory...not a fact. The media simply chooses to present this theory as fact and majority of viewers swallow this hook, line, and sinker without doing their own research into the subject.

BTW, the scientists agenda is to secure funding for research and this is the hot topic that everyone wants to throw funds at in the given moment.

Message edited by author 2006-12-20 19:30:04.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/20/2006 05:21:14 PM · #53

Ahem ...

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Note that this thread is in the Challenge Suggestions section of the forums.

Unless you all want it moved to the Rant section (an undeserved fate), I suggest you phrase your subsequent comments in such a way as to argue solely whether/how the theory of human-induced climate change (or perhaps ecology in general) would or would not make a good photographic challenge topic.

Whether that theory is valid or bunk is irrelevant to the discussion of photographic propriety, and arguments in favor or opposed to the theory itself are misplaced in this thread. You can continue/resume them in this existing thread on that topic if desired.

Thanks.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/20/2006 05:31:46 PM · #54

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Ahem ...
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Note that this thread is in the Challenge Suggestions section of the forums.

Unless you all want it moved to the Rant section (an undeserved fate), I suggest you phrase your subsequent comments in such a way as to argue solely whether/how the theory of human-induced climate change (or perhaps ecology in general) would or would not make a good photographic challenge topic.

Whether that theory is valid or bunk is irrelevant to the discussion of photographic propriety, and arguments in favor or opposed to the theory itself are misplaced in this thread. You can continue/resume them in this existing thread on that topic if desired.

Thanks.

LOL. Ok so back to Shecoya's challenge suggestion... Hmm, I wonder if a coal dropped in some water would do well in this challenge. :P

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/20/2006 05:33:05 PM · #55

Originally posted by yanko:

LOL. Ok so back to Shecoya's challenge suggestion... Hmm, I wonder if a coal dropped in some water would do well in this challenge. :P

I think oiling down a duck would meet the challenge :-)

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/20/2006 05:35:38 PM · #56

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by yanko:

LOL. Ok so back to Shecoya's challenge suggestion... Hmm, I wonder if a coal dropped in some water would do well in this challenge. :P

I think oiling down a duck would meet the challenge :-)

Then you drop the duck in some water? Splashes score well hence the thought. :P

12/20/2006 05:42:40 PM · #57

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Originally posted by yanko:

LOL. Ok so back to Shecoya's challenge suggestion... Hmm, I wonder if a coal dropped in some water would do well in this challenge. :P

I think oiling down a duck would meet the challenge :-)

Then you drop the duck in some water? Splashes score well hence the thought. :P

Or drop the duck in some oil :-) Anyone ever tried a splash shot with water fowl and petroleum?

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

12/20/2006 05:46:34 PM · #58

Cows Farting - a sure winner.

Shecoya

Nikon D70s

12/20/2006 05:53:53 PM · #59

a challenge based on ways we already are or can improve our environment / for the planet might be a great way to start off the new year...

;) and yeah... cows farting.. BEAUUUUtifulllllllllll

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/20/2006 05:55:32 PM · #60

I think Cows Farting should be a challenge in itself... such lovely images come to mind :-)

swankFoto

Fujifilm X-E1

12/20/2006 07:46:37 PM · #61

Bad challenge idea.

krafty1

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/20/2006 07:53:27 PM · #62

How about a "Pollution/Conservation" challenge

Take a picture of pollution or "green" related activities/items.

Smokestacks/cars or composter/recycling items

This would allow for creativity and the titles would surely be interesting. And cow flatulance would surely fit in this category :P

Shecoya

Nikon D70s

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

12/20/2006 07:58:20 PM · #63

Originally posted by rswank:

Bad challenge idea.

Why's that?

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/20/2006 08:26:03 PM · #64

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

I think Cows Farting should be a challenge in itself... such lovely images come to mind :-)

Leroy, I thought your were a Horse lover? :)

How about a challenge showing how dirty the natural environment really is? I mean when when it rains around here and I go walking on the nature trails, my feet get totally muddy. And I look around and see the rotting leaves, moss growing everywhere, duck crap in the lakes - I just shake my head.

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

12/20/2006 08:31:26 PM · #65

how about just an al gore challenge. Take a photo that reminds you of al gore! (note: cows farting still works)

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/20/2006 08:34:02 PM · #66

Originally posted by LoudDog:

how about just an al gore challenge. Take a photo that reminds you of al gore! (note: cows farting still works)

ONO! 150 photos of hanging chads!

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/20/2006 08:48:05 PM · #67

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
how about just an al gore challenge. Take a photo that reminds you of al gore! (note: cows farting still works)

ONO! 150 photos of hanging chads!

Actually you could also shoot pregnant chads, swinging chads, tri-chads, dimpled chads just to name a few. :P

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

12/20/2006 09:00:27 PM · #68

Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
how about just an al gore challenge. Take a photo that reminds you of al gore! (note: cows farting still works)

ONO! 150 photos of hanging chads!

Actually you could also shoot pregnant chads, swinging chads, tri-chads, dimpled chads just to name a few. :P

The challenge would probably be hampered by dq requests and numerous re-counts. I think just to make it simple, people in florida can't vote on this challenge.

AZSnapper

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

12/20/2006 09:09:39 PM · #69

There are no, repeat, no 'well accepted facts' regarding this gloabal warming. This is what the left wing wackos agenda is pushing. There are, however, more legitimate, real scientists that argue that man has little effect on the global climate.

Of course, we should push companies to be as responsible as they can, but that lame Koyoto treaty was designed to punish american corporations, and noting else.

Al Gore is an enviromentalist. Fine. He and his fellow liberals care about the enviroment. Fine. Ask yourself then, why Al Gore and all the left wing wackos have no problem whatsoever having tens of thousands of illegal mexicans crossing into the USA every year, dumping thousands of pounds of garbage, human waste, urine, and you know what else, on enviromently sensitive land. Where is the protest by the left wing planet protectors? No where? Why? Because what the lefties want is to destroy American corporations, not protect the enviroment, as they claim. In addition, the lefties are doing everything they can to get the millions of illegal mexicans in the USA to vote - why? because they will all vote liberal.

In short, the 'global warming' is nothing short of a political agenda, used in a way that makes rational people feel guilty that they 'don't care' about our planet.

Like I said, pure B.S.

Originally posted by rswank:

Originally posted by AZSnapper:
I haven't seen it, nor will I likely ever. These global warming scare mongers are plain crazy, and Al Gore is the head of the class. It is pure BS, plain and simple!!

Excuse me, but I seem to remember from history books that the south pole was once tropical. The earth has gone through several ice ages.

If scientists can prove (and no, contrary to popular opinion, Al Gore is not one) that the earth temperature has never varied for millions of years until man came along, I might then buy it. Until then, Al Gore and all his global warming do gooders can continue driving around in their fleet of gas guzzling SUV's preaching to all the anti-corporation, anti-American crowds!

Wow, that is one ignorant attitude.
If you read the earlier points I made about well accepted facts you will readily see that what you are rallying against is so far from what anything has been said from the point of view that mankind has had, and is making, an impact on our global climate.
"Pure BS plain and simple", what other facts do you conveniently disagree with that you have been told go against your political ideals?

Fact: Unprecedented levels and rate of CO2 increases.
Fact: Correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature.
Fact: Exponential CO2 level growth coinciding with industrial revolution.

This is accepted science.
Not a political agenda, not a statement that we are doomed, just data that should be a cause for concern.
Al Gore may not be a scientist but 99.9% of the scientists agree 100% with the above three facts.

Message edited by author 2006-12-20 21:10:53.

12/20/2006 09:10:38 PM · #70

Originally posted by LoudDog:

The challenge would probably be hampered by dq requests and numerous re-counts. I think just to make it simple, people in florida can't vote on this challenge.

Good idea. They could participate in the alternate "Butterfly" challenge. ;-)

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/20/2006 09:14:11 PM · #71

Originally posted by AZSnapper:

Ok - - but that's a little long for a Challenge Title. Shorten it up a bit.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

12/20/2006 09:19:58 PM · #72

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by AZSnapper:
Like I said, pure B.S.

Ok - - but that's a little long for a Challenge Title. Shorten it up a bit.

Pure B.S. is short enough for me ... I wonder how many submissions will be "polished" ...? : )

sfalice

Canon PowerShot SX60 HS

12/20/2006 09:40:43 PM · #73

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by LoudDog:
The challenge would probably be hampered by dq requests and numerous re-counts. I think just to make it simple, people in florida can't vote on this challenge.

Good idea. They could participate in the alternate "Butterfly" challenge. ;-)

Or maybe the "Hanging by a _____" Challenge.

BTW,
*Art ponders the irony of this thread. ...and tries to calculate the amount of CO2 expended in it - but alas, Art sucks at math*

Art Roflmao should not, repeat, not, exhale. Suck - okay; exhale - not okay. releases CO2. Bad, bad.

12/20/2006 09:49:38 PM · #74

Originally posted by sfalice:

Art Roflmao should not, repeat, not, exhale. Suck - okay; exhale - not okay. releases CO2. Bad, bad.

In actuality, I typically exhale radioactive fire, so no worries about the environment. :)

AZSnapper