Correlation does not imply causation. This is a logical fallacy that everyday people… from Joe Blow, to scientists studying global warming, to politcal figures like Al Gore seems to have forgotten. Modern science has come this far because scientists and statisticians rely on this phrase when making conclusions, yet when it comes to global warming, it goes right out the window. Extreme views of a subject as well as presenting information in a way to confuse viewers, much like how the movie Fahrenheit 9/11 portrays the Bush Administration, is how I would sum up this movie. Of course, there’s going to be a lot of people that believe everything they see… such as celebs and agenda driven politicians, which is how this movie won the Oscar for best documentary.
Before I get flamed here, let me bring up one of the correlations that is easily proven today, and was presented in the movie in a decietful way. Al Gore brings up the CAFE mpg averages throughout the world, with Japan having much more average fuel ecomony than US, yet they (Toyota, Honda) are a much more successful than US counterparts (Ford, GM). For the general public, this correlation shows better fuel economy equates to more purchases by consumers, thus resulting in more successful car companies. As a car enthuiasts who knows the world of auto manufacturers very well, and one who follows auto news almost religiously, I know for a fact that GM and Ford’s troubles are due mainly to pension and health care costs (thank the unions for that), and poorer quality of product compared to the Japanese, and not CAFE averages.
Ian Murray did a lot of the homework for me, explaining 25 fallacies from this documentary, some of which I knew from as early as elementary school. Some of them require a bit of research to fully understand… and some, such as CO2’s effect on temperature (#1) and increase in tornadoes (#9) are fairly easy to grasp. #8, Hurricanes, is an interesting one as well. The GFDL released a statement based on their research of hurricanes vs climate change which contradicts what Al Gore stated in the movie. Again, the easiest one to comprehend is #3, which explains Gore’s insurance claims graph.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe global warming IS happening. I just don’t feel that CO2 emissions, and the drastic cutbacks that the global warming movement and Kyoto Accord is the right solution, or the direct cause of the current climate change “crisis”. Remember that when looking at the total amount of CO2 emissions worldwide, only 3% is generated by human activity, with the remaining is generated by mother nature… decomposition being a primary contributor. CO2 is an integral source of our food cycle, and disrupting it to a large degree would cause food shortages as well, with a very minimal effect on global temperatures. Don’t believe me? Do some basic research on your own… that’s the message I’m trying convey. Don’t believe everything that you read, including what I have to say, since everyone has an agenda.
Overall, a good movie, which opens some eyes for folks that want to investigate the issue on their own, but like Fahrenheit 9/11, it’s a bit irresponsible in that it creates mass hysteria based on misinformation, and with nanny law trends on the rise, it could be devestating to our economy and way of life for achieving something that does nothing to counteract global warming.
