If you have a correction, please first check that it is not already in the 'corrections' section of the video description. Errors always get corrected as soon as they are pointed out and verified, unlike Durkin's film and the RUclipsrs promoting it. My video description has not only corrections but also sources. This is nothing to boast about, this is standard practice, and social media would be greatly improved if everyone followed this practice.
The problem is that your video hosting platform, supports you and not the truth.EDIT: I have to keep doing edits, because YT will not broadcast the truth:)
“I got censored by the mainstream science community for my opinions” translation: “I was proven wrong countless times via the typical process everyone else is subjected to but I kept making the same claims and it was so obvious that I was actually the problem. When it was brought to light that I was being paid by fossil fuel companies, people started to stop taking me seriously”.
People need to realise that almost all of the time a minority of people making contrary claims to mainstream scientific opinion are not actually the correct ones being oppressed by vested interests. I’m sure that’s a fallacy. That these people were simply treated to the same vigorous process any other scientist is subjected to (or there is some context that explains why they had consistent negative responses. They need to be introduced to the ‘if everyone reacts the same negative way towards you, maybe it’s because you’re the problem’ life lesson). They were making claims and it all came out wanting. And they likely call others snowflakes who don’t like any opinion that disagrees with them.
@@ottz2506 As Carl Sagan stated: “But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
@@ottz2506 Wahhhhh!!! it's not fair that i should face any kind of consequences for chasing my share of the money being milked out of conspiracy nuts, i shouldn't be treated like a lap dancer of science if i choose to sell my integrity to the highest bidder!!
@@atheistsfightclub6684 HOW DARE MY CLAIMS COME UNDER THE SLIGHTEST BIT OF SCRUNITY?? DON'T PEOPLE KNOW THAT MY CLAIMS SHOULD BE ASSUMED TO BE CORRECT BECAUSE [INSERT HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC FIGURE]??
That one political comic of a guy at a climate summit saying “what if it’s all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?” summarizes why I’ll never take a climate change denier seriously.
They don't agree that it will be a 'better world', though. The current world, where they can do whatever they want, pollute however they want, is the best possible world to them. You're taking that away from them, as they see it.
An email excerpt from the IPCC own scientists Wanner/NCCR: In my [IPCC-TAR] review […] I crit[i]cized […] the Mann hockey[s]tick […] My review was classified “unsignificant” even I inquired several times. Now the internationally well known newspaper SPIEGEL got the information about these early statements because I expressed my opinion in several talks, mainly in Germany, in 2002 and 2003. I just refused to give an exclusive interview to SPIEGEL because I will not cause damage for climate science.
I appreciate those who have pointed out two errors in the video. They were corrected within 48 hours of the video being posted. So please check the 'corrections' section of the video first before posting, and only post if the error has not already been corrected. Thanks.
And THIS is what distinguishes science and empiricism from dogma and speculation. You aren't committed to a conclusion/ideology/narrative. You're committed only to follow the data. I entered that realm, leaving dogma for data after decades as an ordained Christian minister raised by missionaries. Side note: All of the putative "signs of the End" in Christianity are events which have occurred throughout recorded history: earthquakes, wars, pestilence, famine, etc. Yet the current existential threat to our species--global warming--is never mentioned. Guess God is a denier. 😅 Thanks so much for your efforts. This stuff is complex and you do a great job of breaking it down.
Do you notice that if you post comments to RUclips that contain formatted citations to papers, the comments are soon automatically removed by RUclips? Very frustrating.
@@dieselphiend Martin Durkin is The Establishment, though. Literally. Co-founded the UK Communist Party. Funded by House of Lords members from the GWPF.
@@dieselphiend Ironic since if anyone is engaged in servitude it is those denying well established science for the profits of corporate special interests at the expense of their own community. But then again I remember the same propaganda being repeated by those who denied the health effects of tobacco use or lead.
"I'm not worried about 400ppm of polonium in my tea, it's just a trace element!" "I'm not worried about an extra 0.0075 reactivity in my nuclear reactor, it's such a small amount above criticality!"
Still dealing with this nonsense in 2024 when all observable fact has laid the question to bed. These people need to feel consequences. Economic or penal... The time for this shit is so over.
@@dieselphiend Is it totalitarianism when Fox is forced to pay 700 million for lying about the election? Is it totalitarianism when Alex Jones is forced to pay billions to the families he lied about? No... And this is much worse and has much more disastrous consequences than any of the other lies. Grow up.
@DonSalvatore1982 You are so right. It is plain to see. Anybody should be able to see by now that the sea levels are not rising, the ice caps are not melting. The predictions are wrong every time, but still, the lies continue
@DonS Prosecution for fraud, felony murder, depraved heart murder, treason, ICC crimes against humanity & the Earth, & other crimes, & upon conviction, offer of a truth & reconciliation process in which they renounce all profits & savings from their time of criminality, are prohibited from all positions of responsibility, & above all, turn over all information about their deception. In exchange, suspended sentences.
That assumes they know shame in the first place. It's easier to grift since you don't have to actually back anything up. Just say whatever you want, make up "evidence", quote mine and you've got a movie or book to sell to idiots. I get tempted to write a book like that sometimes and hide insults in it.
The next time politicians in your country push for massive cuts to education invite them to view the "skeptic" comments on any potholer54 video. The stupidity is staggering, bewildering, and sobering
@@p2va73xc6j3 Exactly. Ironically very few Christians are aware that their Bible presents a flat earth. More irony: Christian apologists (I was once one) deny this and use their sophistry and creative exegesis to argue otherwise....while conspiracy theorists try to convince us that it's really flat. This IS the 21st century, correct? Sigh...
In fact while you're at it please also vote down the equally misleading The Great Global warming Swindle (2007). It currently has a ridiculously high score of 6.6 from 2000 votes.
It's worth a try, but I doubt that the people who fall for this nonsense would care about that. I bet they would say the figures were being doctored. 🙄🤷🏻♂️
Potholer54 is among the most important youtubers of our time. What frustrates me is that we have known about this for decades and still ignored everything until it became impossible not to notice. Yet there are still people and institutions that deny the facts. It makes me sad 😢
I had dark thoughts about this in the early sixties, concluding that I really had a lot to learn, when everyone else apparently _knew_ burning carbon was sustainable and that I must have missed something. (Engineering apprentices are naive like that.) My present thoughts are much darker. Fermi was right, and we are about to fail his test.
and only the historians and economists that deny AGW, there are enough that accept AGW, but dont listen to them either... AGW denial is a cult, all this conspiracy theory stuff on the web is a gigantic religion like movement.
and that we should listen to actual scientists but only those whose specific fields often have nothing to do with climate change over people who are actual climatologists.
And don't forget that agw denial was heavily pushed by the fossil fuel industry for at least 80 years now. Are there any denial apologists who aren't in the pocket of big oil or some other industries that feel threatened by environmental protections and renewable energy?
It's no different to the chiropractors, ivermectin salesman, and lawyers denying the science of the molecular biologists and vaccinologists about COVID, or the religious pastors denying the geology of floods. Same tactics, same fallacies, and same cult followers who have never read a science paper in their lives.
I still can barely believe the new talking point of the fossil fuel industry is "All this CO2 we've been pumping into your air is.... good for you, actually! In fact, we're saving you from the dangerously low CO2 you had before, you're welcome!". I almost envy the shamelessness.
I suppose it's somewhat comforting that in 17 years since the original film they haven't managed to come up with a single new argument, bit of evidence or data. It's just the exact same lies and data manipulation with the exact same talking heads.
Maybe not that comforting because almost all of us wish that anthropogenic climate change wasn't happening. We would welcome some evidence that it wasn't happening. Unfortunately, when evidence that it isn't happening is provided it never stands up to scrutiny. And instead evidence that it is happening continues to strengthen from multiple observations.
The same science deniers that didn't believe the jab was safe and effective. Refuse to believe how many lives were saved by masks. Now they deny the sky is fall... I mean climate crisis. These dang science deniers. They believe what they see with their own eyes instead of whatever they are told.
@@drunkenhobo8020 the great global warming swindle was better, and funnier. The climate does not change due to human existence. We have no idea whether our emissions have an impact on the global climate. But I hope so. Climate change is cool…
@17:59 OMG! Is there any part of the movie that doesn't contradict itself??? The guy says at this time code that when the CO2 is high, ice ages begin, and when the CO2 is low, ice ages end. _That would still be a correlation,_ just a "negative" correlation between CO2 and temperature. So even if true, it would contradict their claim of a lack of correlation. Goddamn, they'll accept literally any claim except the difficult truth they're trying to deny.
I've been subscribed to this channel since the "pioneer days" of RUclips, and might I say it's an absolute pleasure to see that you're still tackling misinformation with the same fervour, humility and, perhaps most importantly, factual data - all the while without injecting endorsements and merchandising as so many on this platform now do. May you continue to inspire the pursuit of knowledge for many years to come sir.
29:44 "To speak out against climate change (...) is essentially career suicide." Terrence Howard also fights against established mathematics by claiming 1 x 1 = 2. And that will never mean he is right.
Saying climate change is no big deal because it's been warmer before is like saying a oceanfront property won't flood from rising sea levels because sea levels have been higher in the past.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd people are bad at assessing risk. people buy houses in flood and hurricane prone areas in florida, that doesn't mean hurricanes don't exist. it just means people are dumb. there's also rich people who don't care if their property floods in a few decades, because they can afford to lose it (or get the government to pay for levees and beech renourishments).
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd - Yes, if a rich person wants to buy ocean front property, it's going to be ... At the ocean. Rich people can afford expensive insurance against damage that regular people can't afford. You are all throughout these comments, full of fallacies everywhere.
@@jaykanta4326 How is it that you follow me around, provide no evidence for your "Climate Crisis" claim.... yet accuse me of providing no evidence..... when the evidence for the scam is right in front of your face :) 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@jaykanta4326 I can't get enough of this ..... where do these "not so smart people",..... think that dressing in red and marching.... means anything????? No one cares, there is no "Climate Crisis"
It's beyond belief that People still dismiss CO2 as greenhouse gas. I have one way that explains the significance of 420PPM that my buddies can relate to. Here in Manitoba you can have you license pulled and car towed if your blood contains .05% which happens to be 500PPM. No one agues with me when they make the connection that something invisible that accumulates during a night out drinking can cost you your job , ability to drive and of course your Wallet. Thanks Peter, please keep these videos coming!
Wow, I can't believe Durkin is still kicking. I remember the Swindle being a big thing when I was in high school. I think it was a big part in developing my interest in rhetoric because I really dissected the arguments made in the film, finding them very poorly substantiated and constantly appealing to emotion. In the end, I found it quite funny because Durkin seemed to have an aim of convincing everyone by trying to sketch an improbable and confusing conspiracy where climate change was a scheme cooked up by the Soviets, Thatcher, fascists, environmentalists and the shadowy 'they' running global finance. I don't think it convinced anyone here in Australia who wasn't already a climate sceptic, because the ABC showed it with a follow-up program discussing all the debunked arguments featuring actual scientists, which I thought was a good service. Although for the sake of 'balance' that was followed up by a fairly deranged roundtable, where, of course, radio presenter Michael Duffy was given equal weight as atmospheric sciences Professor David Karoly. Anyway, I don't have anything to add to the science. I'm a layman. Just wanted to thank you for the video.
Hopefully the heartland institute will one day be regarded as terrorists and they have spelt out themselves clearly all the evidence against them so should be a pretty short court case .
Interesting that they were set up by tobacco companies to deny the impact of secondhand smoke. Funny how nobody seems to mention that any more. Is it because they happened to be catastrophically wrong?
@@speedingatheist "freedom of speech includes stupid and ignorant speech. Instead of turning authoritarian like you more debunking like this video is needed". Nothing about the principles of freedom of speech shelters you from the consequences of the speech you've made.
Isn't Patrick Moore the guy who during an interview said you could drink Roundup, but then didn't because there actually happened to be bottle of roundup on set? If you write that man a cheque, he'll lie about whatever the subject. It won't win him a Nobel Prize, but i guess it covers the bills.
@@drunkenhobo8020 True. But much more important & relevant, Spencer & Christy have manipulated & lied about their UAH satellite data to try to deny climate catastrophe.
Why do conservatives, christians, and other people who just love believing in misinformation, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, etc also tend to love strawmen and whataboutism fallacies so much?
It's a comforting world view. God has it all under control. No need to worry about the planet. We're here to exploit it, like the fable in Genesis portrays. (Gen. 1:28) Jesus is coming any day to take them all to heaven! People who believe absurd ancient mythology will certainly believe wacky conspiracy theories. They're conditioned for it. Reality, data, research....that's boring. And God knows better than any lousy scientist.
Scientists who go against the consensus with EVIDENCE to back them up don't get fired. They get Nobel prizes. Talk about laying it on thick with the stupidest persecution complexes they have NOT experienced. 😂
@jitteryjet7525 Too bad that ideologues brainwash themselves to NEVER accept that axiom. This planet needs a nice KT-Sized asteroid impact where SOME creatures may survive BEFORE our disgusting failure of a species guarantees that NEVER happens. 😢
The question is how empty and pathetic the lives of Heller, Drukin, Lindzen, Spencer and the rest of the ilk are that they have to make their positions central to their lives and stick to their feelings in the face of decades of contrary evidence.
the issue isnt the people falling for it, the issue is main political parties using conspiratorial rhetoric, anti scientific rhetoric, racist anti immigration rhetoric whilst packacing it in the most emotionally manipulative way to get people to vote for them out of fear. its anti democratic parties funded by russia.
@@satkinson5505 1)Trolling a bit? 2)False messiah? 3)Letting someone else think for me? I’d say you fit all 3. Have a pleasnt day, Jesus will love you anyway.
I constantly see climate "skeptics" asserting "there's absolutely no evidence for ______". Whenever I see that, I alway ask, "what would be sufficient evidence for [poster] to accept _____?" Interestingly, I never seen to get a straight answer, or really any answer at all to that. I wonder why that might be?
Right, we definitely haven't seen a large decrease in glacier cover, or artic ice sheet coverage, or loss lakes and rivers, or record setting summer heat year over year, or record setting storms year over year. Give me a break.
As a 19 year old with family in Africa, sometimes I want to cry. These misinformers really won. I know people personally who think climate change isn’t real. Every day I go to work and realize there’s way too much momentum behind the ideas that are screwing us. I feel like my family low-key has no future. Already there are reports of farmers in West Africa abandoning their efforts because of unusual rainfall activity screwing up agriculture. It was my dream to go back there and start a farm. Can’t forget that politician who said “climate change is only bad if you’re in africa!” wow
I have often said that if we could eliminate greed the world would be a much better place. Misinformation pieces like this "movie", funded by the fossil fuel industry, provide ample evidence that my belief is correct. If the fossil fuel companies spent less time and money killing technologies that compete with fossil fuels and instead integrated them as a part of their businesses, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Damn. My mood always lighten when I spot a new Potholer video, but this is a frustrating watch. It is one thing showing people who gets things wrong by mistake and such, but this seem far more deliberate. Thank you for persevering Potholer, this must have been hard to work on. (I'm only half way trough, I need some breaks)
Addendum. Yeah, reached the end. No wonder it seem deliberate. I wish that Big-Windmill-Solar power and uhm, Big (emotional-leftist) government would start sponsoring you (in untraceable bit-coins of course) so that you could buy those gold-plated seat belt buckles you always wanted. (Since it is the internet, I'm not entirely serious in my previous sentence)
It was sued in 2019 by the State of New York, on the grounds that the company had misled shareholders, but the state lost. Exxon is currently suing two shareholders who tried to get the company to be more environmentally conscious. Arghh.
@@moxy4926 It's almost like that's where they got it from... (Get it? Because they literally did? From Heartland Institute policy creators? Hahahaha! It's funny!)
I doubt that anyone is required to make public private research. It should cost them consumer confidence/boycott - but it won't. You (we) will fill up your gas tank where-ever it is cheapest or most convenient.
Hoax. Massive companies like Exxon get thousands of reports every day. Back then the news and predictions for the future from serious to Sci-Fi were full of new ice age doom. The Earth was in a 35 year long cooling trend. The famous "Exxon knew" report said something different to everyone else and to what was actually happening outside. They mostly ignored it for those reasons.
I moved to Alaska last year, and although I already knew that climate change was happening seeing the effects of permafrost thaw up there makes the idea that climate change isn't happening just laughable. Those people need to go to indigenous villages in the Arctic and try to tell them that climate change isn't happening
If the people doing the denying are farmers (or a similar profession), after they’ve done all that, ask them if they’ve been having issues in their profession regarding profits and yield etc over the last ten years. Nine times out of ten, they’ll say yes, bemoan this happening and further complain about how it seems to get worse every year.
I visited Alaska five years ago and agree. There are roads that they used to repair every four years now they have to repair every year. The sled postal service used to run September to April but now runs October to March because the snow just isn't deep enough.
@@warpdrive116 _"How is he a hero exactly?"_ He's a hero just like anyone else that tries to teach or educate. You don't find value in teaching people how to avoid misinformation when it comes to the science? Or perhaps you don't care what peer reviewed papers actually say?
@@hg2. _"For starters please watch this, all 42 minutes of it: Tom Shula: A Novel Perspective on the Greenhouse Effect. Tom Nelson channel"_ Spamming this at random I see.
Whatever it's true or not, if we live like it was true the end result will be cleaner air, better environment, better health and an industrial push towards new and modern technology. If we assume it is false and keep going on as now the result will be the same polluted air, worse environment, just slight improvement of old technology and a stagnation in industrial innovation and modernization. Så please dear climate skeptics, be sceptical and deny it if you want, but give us a reason why, for even if it turned out to be "political" or "industrial" that is just good, that is what we need anyhow. So climate scepticism is just dumb from any angle, it is a bit like argument shit is old and natural and that we therefore don't invest in a system that transports the crap away and then clean the water.
I know trying to push the Stupid Meter back into the green is like holding the ocean back with a broom, but thanks once again Peter for the great work. If we had more people like you we'd need less people like you. Much lover brother.
Next on your debunk list, Potholer: Fox News and Sky News, run by Rupert Murdoch, who also co-owns a fossil fuel company, Genie Energy, and sits on their board.
that is the problem with arguing with denialists, you can't apply Harlon's razor and assume they are arguing in good faith, check every claim, verify every data. never assume they are just misunderstanding the information, most of the time their claims will be straight up false.
They arent arguing in faith, there is no winning against these sad sad people. The only satisfaction is that history wont be pleasant about these money grabbing humanity traitors
It's funny when people say that a minor change in a minor gas shouldn't make a difference. The smaller something is, the bigger the effect when it changes. E.g. If you are a billionaire, and someone gives you £1m, you'd say thanks, i'm sure, but it won't have much impact. If you give someone with nothing £10k it will make a massive difference to them. The last time I checked £10k was smaller than £1m, but the impact is massive dependant on the starting point.
@judychurley6623 I totally agree, but sometimes, people need to be told things in a way that makes the issue more salient to them. People tend to regard money as more important than the prevalence of CO2 in air.
I cannot overstate how excited I am for your more thorough examination of the tenuous relationship that arises when research departments benefit from the petrol dollars climate skeptic researchers bring with them. Climate skeptics, and other controversial researchers, are often protected by the extra funding their publicity brings in. It is antithetical to good science.
Potholer. Even by the standards of the excellent videos on your channel, this is your finest video to date. Please remind us of the charity you ask donations to be directed to in lieu of financial support for your channel. I wish to make a long overdue donation.
Speaking as someone with a masters in communications, I feel compelled to highlight how this climate change denial film has attempted to replicate the style of a David Attenborough documentary. They clearly recognise the credibility of that style and want it for themselves.
Excellent comment, I never noticed. So like the CBC Radio Free Vestibule or Irrelevant Show program about blokes trying to attract ladies in Bars for Mating narrated by purportedly David Attenborough ("He gingerly approaches while regarding the dangers around") or Mandy Fairfax and thousands of other unemployed Wildebeeste.
I remember seeing the Swindle thing back in 2007 - think it was Channel 4, but it's a long time ago. What shocks me more than anything is the total immorality of these people. They're deeply manipulative with the vigour of a dodgy second hand car salesman. The key difference is you can always get a taxi when your dodgy car breaks down, not quite the same when you've messed up your planet.
Thank you for your work. While I point deniers to your channel I am doubtful any really want to hear evidence that contradicts their mainstream opinions. But your work is insanely valuable.
@dinnerwithfranklin2451 *"your work is insanely valuable"* 1000% agree. *"While I point deniers to your channel I am doubtful any really want to hear evidence"* Also 1000% agree. ph54 has an excellent post in another thread that I want to copy and save for later. From memory his point was these videos help arm the rest of us to have conversations. Pointing deniers here probably isn't a 100% solution, I agree. And in all fairness when someone tells me "Tony Heller is real science, go to his channel", I decline, usually with an expletive or sarcastic remark.
Getting a kick out of all the climate change deniers (the dumbest thing a human being could be twenty years ago let alone now) melting down about reality in the comments.
Thank you for putting this together, I couldn't get through Climate: The Movie myself. Its so disheartening seeing so many denialist comments all over youtube.
When you watch films like this one that are a constant stream of falsehoods and lies, do you ever get upset as you watch? How do you deal with these emotions and stay calm?
I sensed a slight bit of rare annoyance from ph54 on this one, though maybe I imagined it. He rarely goes into the opinion room, and he mentioned that he didn't have time to cover all of the bullsh*t in this "documentary", so that gives me reason to think this time it may have been a little upsetting.
I recently encountered another denier still pulling out the "Michael Man's debunked Hockey Stick!". They haven't bothered to update their arguments for 20 years...
@@Vulcano7965 They were still repeating "There's been no global warming for ten years!" right up until it got replaced by "There's been global cooling over the last 18 years!" and both of those were obviously false the day they were first pushed out.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeand like antivax still repeating autism claims. Or 5g scaremongerers rehashing WiFi scare. Pseudoscience follows the same repetitive faulty reasoning whatever it's subject.
I'm always amused when it is claimed that CO2 is a trace gas and hence cannot effect mean global temperature. That's like claiming that a few drops of Arsenic cannot kill a human of normal weight. Also it is often overlooked that global mean is the net global mean relevant to the whole planet with the resulting Climate change causing localised cooling. It's a bit like when an inch of rain doesn't sound much but an inch of rain across the whole planet would be disastrous.
I argue the exact same thing when I see people parrot the "0,04%" or whatever else to claim that "it's small therefore it can't have an effect". Just 2 comments above yours someone also makes a great point where they found that a standard cup of coffee is 0,04% caffeine.
You'll find that those same people will happily claim this 0.04% is crucial for life, as it is plant food, and that the increase has caused massive greening of our planet. "It's a trace gas that can't do anything, but look here how it did a lot!"
I'm always using Botox as an example of how really, _really_ small amounts can do a lot of harm. 1 g of botulinumtoxin can, in theory if distributed equally, wipe out a major city.
It really is. Durkin and Heller regularly accuse others of cherry picking when they've done it all the time. And Patrick Moore accuse others of ignoring the Sun when he repeatedly points out that CO2 was higher in the past. Total hypocrites. 🤦🏻♂️
13:55 Ah that old 'it's just a trace gas'-stupidity. Thing is, 3°C warming is also just a 'trace warming' on an absolute scale. 3°C over 100 years is 0.03°C per year or about 0.0000000001°C per second. A tiny effect... that adds up over time.
I found out recently that the amount of caffeine in a "standard" cup of coffee is about 0.04% also. Just try to tell anyone they don't need that cup in the morning for that tiny trace compound in that hot watery fluid, and the difference it makes.
How much caffeine do you need to get the heart pumping then? I have always drunk coffee all day and night and not noticed it. But i have friends that won't drink it after 2PM because they say they can't sleep. I thought i was weird, perhaps i'm just experiencing reality. Oh i see, just got to the bit. I should have known really, i am weird.
That's a great analogy! Of course, I had to check it. The average cup of coffee weighs about 240g and has around 95mg of caffeine. Indeed, that is almost exactly 0.04%. The percentage is even less compared to the weight of a human body, Therefore it cannot possibly have any effect. One could go further, and say that nicotine, heroin, cocaine, marijuana and other substances ingested at 0.04% of human body weight can't possibly have any effect, so we should legalise them. Thanks for that :)
@@LSD04 - It's clear from the phrasing, "8 of the 10 hottest days", that OP is referring to 'on record'. It's a common enough way of phrasing that you, as a terminally online "skeptic" troll, have come across before. Go pretend to be dumber than you really are elsewhere
@potholer54 your contributions to this dilemma are highly appreciated. The fact that your channel is not monetized is affirming. I'd be interested to know how long it takes to create one of your videos. Thank you.
@@_yonas These are people who reject any and all experts unless they say what they want to hear, and thus William Happer knows better than all the climatologists, because he's a professor in physics, you know! Far better than those climatologists!
About the "trace gas" CO2, accounting for only 0,04% : If I were to add a dose of LSD equalling 0.04% to my body, I would have taken around 200,000 times the effective dose, and I would completely loose my mind for AT LEAST several days if not forever. According to Dunkin, this can't possibly happen.
@jochannan7379 Yebbut the actual science point for this is that the radiation up from Earth's surface is 1.65x times what Earth gets from the Sun and that is made entirely by surface molecules that are a minuscule one 23,000th of the H2O gas molecules and a minuscule one 2,300th of the CO2 gas molecules as I've posted a dozen times against this video alone, with not even a single person being interested in that STUNNING and TOTALLY RELEVANT Primary Fact of what's warmning Earth. Over each square metre of Earth radiation is sent up matching 1.65x times the solar SWR arriving and it's made by 10 grammes of molecules (an eye dropper of water) but the air above (N2, O2, Ag) weighs 10,300,000 grammes so 0.000059 ppmw (0.0059%) of molecules makes LWR radiation in the surface matching the entire solar SWR that heats Earth as I've correctly pointed out several dozen times against a dozen relevant videos. That's just measured fact of the physics. So the "0.04%" is to be compared with 0.0059% making the same LWR radiation as the entire solar SWR that heats Earth. And THAT'S the point about "0.04%" as i've pointed out correctly for 6 years.
Thank you for creating another great critical analysis. My guess is that a large portion of our population doesn't crave learning that some of their deeply held beliefs are bogus.
All that's missing from the last clip is the looney tunes outro. Also, the amount of mental gymnastics needed to say that with a straight face must be at least at an Olympic gold level.
There are SO many holes in this ""movie"" that I am not surprised it took you so long to get around releasing your video on it. Must have been hard doing it while constantly facepalming when listening to Durkin's material.
Atmospheric Chemist here. Let's remember that there are many types of clouds and cloud lifetimes - not all of them block out radiation effectively or last long enough to have an effect. For example, mixed-phase ice clouds (or cirrus clouds) are awful at reflecting solar light and these clouds are produced from a variety of things in our atmosphere - like pollutants, dust, bacteria. Radiative forcing is important because it tries to take into account all the possible ways that the atmosphere cools or warms the climate. When all of them are taken into account we still have a net warming affect.
Thank you for that piece of information! I’d love to pick your brain on this stuff. Atmospheric science is one of those fascinating and elusive studies that lay folks like myself find intriguing.
Thank you for your continued work in debunking nonsense pseudo-science. I have been following your channel for many years and genuinely believe that your channel should get more attention than it does. I can only assume that it gets less attention because most people don't want to look at graphs and the data and so on, and instead would like more digestible information. But that's the nature of debunking such things in an accurate way, and I appreciate your work at the very least. On multiple occasions over the years I have also been inspired to read scientific papers myself on issues you have brought up to better educate myself, and I wish more people were willing to do that kind of thing (or were able to read them effectively).
Both imply that scientists just KNOW that there are real problems with evolution/climate but scientists keep quiet for fear of losing their careers, grant money etc.
If you have a correction, please first check that it is not already in the 'corrections' section of the video description. Errors always get corrected as soon as they are pointed out and verified, unlike Durkin's film and the RUclipsrs promoting it.
My video description has not only corrections but also sources. This is nothing to boast about, this is standard practice, and social media would be greatly improved if everyone followed this practice.
You are not a propagandist
I repeat, you are NOT a propagandist
Dis is great news
@@laurier3348 agreed
@@laurier3348 Yes, he is a propagandist:)
@@BillyTheKidCENTURION In clownworld we gotta say the opposit of what we mean.
Please follow the rules.
The problem is that your video hosting platform, supports you and not the truth.EDIT: I have to keep doing edits, because YT will not broadcast the truth:)
“I got censored by the mainstream science community for my opinions”
translation: “I was proven wrong countless times via the typical process everyone else is subjected to but I kept making the same claims and it was so obvious that I was actually the problem. When it was brought to light that I was being paid by fossil fuel companies, people started to stop taking me seriously”.
People need to realise that almost all of the time a minority of people making contrary claims to mainstream scientific opinion are not actually the correct ones being oppressed by vested interests. I’m sure that’s a fallacy. That these people were simply treated to the same vigorous process any other scientist is subjected to (or there is some context that explains why they had consistent negative responses. They need to be introduced to the ‘if everyone reacts the same negative way towards you, maybe it’s because you’re the problem’ life lesson). They were making claims and it all came out wanting. And they likely call others snowflakes who don’t like any opinion that disagrees with them.
@@ottz2506 As Carl Sagan stated: “But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”
@@Marco-it2mr "WE'RE LITERALLY LIKE GALILEO!"
@@ottz2506 Wahhhhh!!! it's not fair that i should face any kind of consequences for chasing my share of the money being milked out of conspiracy nuts, i shouldn't be treated like a lap dancer of science if i choose to sell my integrity to the highest bidder!!
@@atheistsfightclub6684 HOW DARE MY CLAIMS COME UNDER THE SLIGHTEST BIT OF SCRUNITY?? DON'T PEOPLE KNOW THAT MY CLAIMS SHOULD BE ASSUMED TO BE CORRECT BECAUSE [INSERT HISTORICAL SCIENTIFIC FIGURE]??
That one political comic of a guy at a climate summit saying “what if it’s all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?” summarizes why I’ll never take a climate change denier seriously.
Unfortunately many of them believe that we're actually ruining the world trying to control the climate.
They also think it’s a plan to destroy America. Meanwhile in reality, China is the only major country taking the climate at all seriously.
@@DiThi
That assumes we weren't before, which hasn't actually been the case
They don't agree that it will be a 'better world', though. The current world, where they can do whatever they want, pollute however they want, is the best possible world to them. You're taking that away from them, as they see it.
@@Xenephos at the cost of who… the poor? Oh, no big deal then.
“They’re silencing me,” says the conservative pundit, into a microphone, in front of an audience of millions.
An email excerpt from the IPCC own scientists
Wanner/NCCR:
In my [IPCC-TAR] review […] I crit[i]cized […] the Mann hockey[s]tick […]
My review was classified “unsignificant” even I inquired several times. Now the
internationally well known newspaper SPIEGEL got the information about these
early statements because I expressed my opinion in several talks, mainly in
Germany, in 2002 and 2003. I just refused to give an exclusive interview to
SPIEGEL because I will not cause damage for climate science.
I appreciate those who have pointed out two errors in the video. They were corrected within 48 hours of the video being posted. So please check the 'corrections' section of the video first before posting, and only post if the error has not already been corrected. Thanks.
Another great work. Never stop doing this. We need you.
@potholer54 I would suggest pinning the comment tho...
Not that it will _completely_ stop the repeat comments, but it could help
And THIS is what distinguishes science and empiricism from dogma and speculation.
You aren't committed to a conclusion/ideology/narrative.
You're committed only to follow the data.
I entered that realm, leaving dogma for data after decades as an ordained Christian minister raised by missionaries.
Side note: All of the putative "signs of the End" in Christianity are events which have occurred throughout recorded history: earthquakes, wars, pestilence, famine, etc. Yet the current existential threat to our species--global warming--is never mentioned.
Guess God is a denier. 😅
Thanks so much for your efforts. This stuff is complex and you do a great job of breaking it down.
Do you notice that if you post comments to RUclips that contain formatted citations to papers, the comments are soon automatically removed by RUclips? Very frustrating.
@@Diamonddavej yep. Everything is heavily curated. They are calling these bubbles information ghettos.
TLDR; deniers haven't come up with anything new in 17 years.
Your beliefs only manifest themselves as inhibitions, and expectations. Good luck with that, and your servitude to The Establishment.
@@dieselphiend Martin Durkin is The Establishment, though. Literally. Co-founded the UK Communist Party. Funded by House of Lords members from the GWPF.
@@dieselphiend Ironic since if anyone is engaged in servitude it is those denying well established science for the profits of corporate special interests at the expense of their own community. But then again I remember the same propaganda being repeated by those who denied the health effects of tobacco use or lead.
@@George89999 I suppose you believe gender is a social construct?
@@George89999 "Ironic".
"I'm not worried about 400ppm of polonium in my tea, it's just a trace element!"
"I'm not worried about an extra 0.0075 reactivity in my nuclear reactor, it's such a small amount above criticality!"
"I'm not worried about the bullet that has just hit me, as even with it the volumetric lead concentration in my body is merely 0.01%!"
I smoke more polonium than that in my cigarrettes......daily
@@MadMackz They must be really tiny cigarettes! The LD50 for polonium is approximately 1 microgram for an adult.
@@al4nmcintyre I was just kidding, it was nice to see someone speaking of such things
@@al4nmcintyre have you heard of the false equivalence fallacy?
Apples and oranges are both fruit so obviously they taste the same.
0.04 of a percentage isn’t dangerous?
0.004 of a percent of arsenic will kill a 150lbs human.
CO2 isn't arsenic. Nice try.
@@yasi4877 Well spotted. Sadly, pointing that fact out just made you look silly.
@@yasi4877 Captain obvious thinks he's clever🤣
@@yasi4877 fyt mate
@@joejoe-vx4xs It looks like Potholer is having a bad day?
Still dealing with this nonsense in 2024 when all observable fact has laid the question to bed. These people need to feel consequences. Economic or penal... The time for this shit is so over.
Ah, so totalitarianism.. is the answer?
You are nothing more than a prisoner in Plato's Cave of subjectivity, and subjecthood.
@@dieselphiend Is it totalitarianism when Fox is forced to pay 700 million for lying about the election? Is it totalitarianism when Alex Jones is forced to pay billions to the families he lied about?
No... And this is much worse and has much more disastrous consequences than any of the other lies.
Grow up.
@DonSalvatore1982 You are so right. It is plain to see. Anybody should be able to see by now that the sea levels are not rising, the ice caps are not melting. The predictions are wrong every time, but still, the lies continue
@DonS Prosecution for fraud, felony murder, depraved heart murder, treason, ICC crimes against humanity & the Earth, & other crimes, & upon conviction, offer of a truth & reconciliation process in which they renounce all profits & savings from their time of criminality, are prohibited from all positions of responsibility, & above all, turn over all information about their deception. In exchange, suspended sentences.
Thank you so much Potholer.
Some, if not all, of the people in that film should be very ashamed - but of course they are too far gone for that.
That assumes they know shame in the first place. It's easier to grift since you don't have to actually back anything up. Just say whatever you want, make up "evidence", quote mine and you've got a movie or book to sell to idiots.
I get tempted to write a book like that sometimes and hide insults in it.
The next time politicians in your country push for massive cuts to education invite them to view the "skeptic" comments on any potholer54 video.
The stupidity is staggering, bewildering, and sobering
Except, those comments are made by voters. And in many cases, donors, aides, and advisors.
Many right wing politicians want most people to be poorly educated. Public education is something the far right in America want to get rid of.
They would all be selling flat earth if it got them a paycheck.
@@p2va73xc6j3 Exactly.
Ironically very few Christians are aware that their Bible presents a flat earth.
More irony: Christian apologists (I was once one) deny this and use their sophistry and creative exegesis to argue otherwise....while conspiracy theorists try to convince us that it's really flat.
This IS the 21st century, correct? Sigh...
"I'm being silenced, let me tell you about it in a documentary-style interview sitting in a comfy office"
At least it's a step down from all the people who go complain about being silenced on the news.
@@TitenSxull while still being employed by academic institutions.
This terrible propaganda film has a score of 7.1 on imdb after 727 votes. Let's change that.
Yes!
In fact while you're at it please also vote down the equally misleading The Great Global warming Swindle (2007). It currently has a ridiculously high score of 6.6 from 2000 votes.
It's worth a try, but I doubt that the people who fall for this nonsense would care about that. I bet they would say the figures were being doctored. 🙄🤷🏻♂️
Done and I added a written statement urging people to watch this video by Potholer54.
I've also submitted this video as a review.
It's thoroughly depressing that these films are still being made tbh...
Potholer54 is among the most important youtubers of our time.
What frustrates me is that we have known about this for decades and still ignored everything until it became impossible not to notice.
Yet there are still people and institutions that deny the facts.
It makes me sad 😢
One of the very best RUclips channels.
Too bad he doesn’t feature more cats.
I had dark thoughts about this in the early sixties, concluding that I really had a lot to learn, when everyone else apparently _knew_ burning carbon was sustainable and that I must have missed something. (Engineering apprentices are naive like that.)
My present thoughts are much darker. Fermi was right, and we are about to fail his test.
You can't be serious.... He is a "Climate Crisis" , pusher :)
@@BillyTheKidCENTURION Are you serious?
@@uriituw Wow.... i don't know...... are you?
What I find most entertaining about these stories is the idea that we should listen to historians, economists etc rather than climatologists.
and only the historians and economists that deny AGW, there are enough that accept AGW, but dont listen to them either...
AGW denial is a cult, all this conspiracy theory stuff on the web is a gigantic religion like movement.
and that we should listen to actual scientists but only those whose specific fields often have nothing to do with climate change over people who are actual climatologists.
And don't forget that agw denial was heavily pushed by the fossil fuel industry for at least 80 years now. Are there any denial apologists who aren't in the pocket of big oil or some other industries that feel threatened by environmental protections and renewable energy?
Historians always have a habit of thinking they know better than anyone else
It's no different to the chiropractors, ivermectin salesman, and lawyers denying the science of the molecular biologists and vaccinologists about COVID, or the religious pastors denying the geology of floods.
Same tactics, same fallacies, and same cult followers who have never read a science paper in their lives.
I still can barely believe the new talking point of the fossil fuel industry is "All this CO2 we've been pumping into your air is.... good for you, actually! In fact, we're saving you from the dangerously low CO2 you had before, you're welcome!".
I almost envy the shamelessness.
I suppose it's somewhat comforting that in 17 years since the original film they haven't managed to come up with a single new argument, bit of evidence or data. It's just the exact same lies and data manipulation with the exact same talking heads.
Maybe not that comforting because almost all of us wish that anthropogenic climate change wasn't happening. We would welcome some evidence that it wasn't happening. Unfortunately, when evidence that it isn't happening is provided it never stands up to scrutiny. And instead evidence that it is happening continues to strengthen from multiple observations.
The same science deniers that didn't believe the jab was safe and effective. Refuse to believe how many lives were saved by masks. Now they deny the sky is fall... I mean climate crisis. These dang science deniers. They believe what they see with their own eyes instead of whatever they are told.
i worry more that in the 19 years, what have we done? what have we improved? not enough :)
@@drunkenhobo8020 the great global warming swindle was better, and funnier. The climate does not change due to human existence. We have no idea whether our emissions have an impact on the global climate. But I hope so. Climate change is cool…
@@tommykindahl A lesson you should learn in your life - just because you have no idea about something, doesn't mean other people don't.
@17:59 OMG! Is there any part of the movie that doesn't contradict itself??? The guy says at this time code that when the CO2 is high, ice ages begin, and when the CO2 is low, ice ages end. _That would still be a correlation,_ just a "negative" correlation between CO2 and temperature. So even if true, it would contradict their claim of a lack of correlation. Goddamn, they'll accept literally any claim except the difficult truth they're trying to deny.
I've been subscribed to this channel since the "pioneer days" of RUclips, and might I say it's an absolute pleasure to see that you're still tackling misinformation with the same fervour, humility and, perhaps most importantly, factual data - all the while without injecting endorsements and merchandising as so many on this platform now do. May you continue to inspire the pursuit of knowledge for many years to come sir.
29:44 "To speak out against climate change (...) is essentially career suicide."
Terrence Howard also fights against established mathematics by claiming 1 x 1 = 2. And that will never mean he is right.
I tried really hard to follow Howard's logic for funsies. I couldn't.
Saying climate change is no big deal because it's been warmer before is like saying a oceanfront property won't flood from rising sea levels because sea levels have been higher in the past.
It's not a problem if my car crashes because it's been stopped before.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd people are bad at assessing risk. people buy houses in flood and hurricane prone areas in florida, that doesn't mean hurricanes don't exist. it just means people are dumb. there's also rich people who don't care if their property floods in a few decades, because they can afford to lose it (or get the government to pay for levees and beech renourishments).
Suggesting climate change is a big deal by employing logical fallacies is poor philosophy.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd - Yes, if a rich person wants to buy ocean front property, it's going to be ... At the ocean. Rich people can afford expensive insurance against damage that regular people can't afford.
You are all throughout these comments, full of fallacies everywhere.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4ydThis very channel did a debunking of that myth.
31:30 somehow I suspect being a paid shill for big oil is rather more lucrative than a researcher at an underfunded university 😅
No universities are underfunded when it comes to the "Climate Crisis" scam
@@BillyTheKidCENTURIONanother useless claim by Billy the clown
@@jaykanta4326 How is it that you follow me around, provide no evidence for your "Climate Crisis" claim.... yet accuse me of providing no evidence..... when the evidence for the scam is right in front of your face :) 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@jaykanta4326 I can't get enough of this ..... where do these "not so smart people",..... think that dressing in red and marching.... means anything????? No one cares, there is no "Climate Crisis"
@@jaykanta4326 One of my favorite climate bots chimes in again...... show your face :)
It's beyond belief that People still dismiss CO2 as greenhouse gas. I have one way that explains the significance of 420PPM that my buddies can relate to. Here in Manitoba you can have you license pulled and car towed if your blood contains .05% which happens to be 500PPM. No one agues with me when they make the connection that something invisible that accumulates during a night out drinking can cost you your job , ability to drive and of course your Wallet. Thanks Peter, please keep these videos coming!
That is an impressively good analogy. I will use it for sure. Thank you!
Wow, I can't believe Durkin is still kicking. I remember the Swindle being a big thing when I was in high school. I think it was a big part in developing my interest in rhetoric because I really dissected the arguments made in the film, finding them very poorly substantiated and constantly appealing to emotion. In the end, I found it quite funny because Durkin seemed to have an aim of convincing everyone by trying to sketch an improbable and confusing conspiracy where climate change was a scheme cooked up by the Soviets, Thatcher, fascists, environmentalists and the shadowy 'they' running global finance. I don't think it convinced anyone here in Australia who wasn't already a climate sceptic, because the ABC showed it with a follow-up program discussing all the debunked arguments featuring actual scientists, which I thought was a good service. Although for the sake of 'balance' that was followed up by a fairly deranged roundtable, where, of course, radio presenter Michael Duffy was given equal weight as atmospheric sciences Professor David Karoly.
Anyway, I don't have anything to add to the science. I'm a layman. Just wanted to thank you for the video.
"Swindle" is the operative word. When I first saw it I honestly thought it was a mockumentary it misrepresented global warming science so badly.
Hopefully the heartland institute will one day be regarded as terrorists and they have spelt out themselves clearly all the evidence against them so should be a pretty short court case .
Well, freedom of speech includes stupid and ignorant speech. Instead of turning authoritarian like you more debunking like this video is needed.
Interesting that they were set up by tobacco companies to deny the impact of secondhand smoke. Funny how nobody seems to mention that any more. Is it because they happened to be catastrophically wrong?
@@speedingatheistnah fuck em, shut them down. Freedom of speech morons just want to be able to lie with no consequences
@@deezboyeed6764Careful what you wish for.
@@speedingatheist "freedom of speech includes stupid and ignorant speech. Instead of turning authoritarian like you more debunking like this video is needed".
Nothing about the principles of freedom of speech shelters you from the consequences of the speech you've made.
A new Potholer - CLICK! Thank you once more for your persistence and hard work.
Isn't Patrick Moore the guy who during an interview said you could drink Roundup, but then didn't because there actually happened to be bottle of roundup on set? If you write that man a cheque, he'll lie about whatever the subject. It won't win him a Nobel Prize, but i guess it covers the bills.
True it is him.
And Roy Spencer is a creationist...
@@drunkenhobo8020 True. But much more important & relevant, Spencer & Christy have manipulated & lied about their UAH satellite data to try to deny climate catastrophe.
@@duskonanyavarld1786 Good video of it happening but hardly his worst act.
That was not Patrick Moore. It was the Monsanto rep.
Gotta love when a "documentary"'s arguments for its premise are mutually exclusive with each other.
Why do conservatives, christians, and other people who just love believing in misinformation, hoaxes, conspiracy theories, etc also tend to love strawmen and whataboutism fallacies so much?
It's a comforting world view. God has it all under control. No need to worry about the planet. We're here to exploit it, like the fable in Genesis portrays. (Gen. 1:28)
Jesus is coming any day to take them all to heaven!
People who believe absurd ancient mythology will certainly believe wacky conspiracy theories. They're conditioned for it. Reality, data, research....that's boring. And God knows better than any lousy scientist.
Scientists who go against the consensus with EVIDENCE to back them up don't get fired. They get Nobel prizes. Talk about laying it on thick with the stupidest persecution complexes they have NOT experienced. 😂
Playing the victim is in the Grifter's Playbook.
@jitteryjet7525 Too bad that ideologues brainwash themselves to NEVER accept that axiom. This planet needs a nice KT-Sized asteroid impact where SOME creatures may survive BEFORE our disgusting failure of a species guarantees that NEVER happens. 😢
That was back when scientists followed the scientific method, but that is discriminatory and racist now so they just follow their gut feeling now...
@@---...---...---...---... cool story
@@---...---...---...---... No worries grifter.
Climate "skeptics": Don't listen to the scientists.
Potholer: Okay.
Climate "skeptics": Wait, not like that!
The question is how empty and pathetic the lives of Heller, Drukin, Lindzen, Spencer and the rest of the ilk are that they have to make their positions central to their lives and stick to their feelings in the face of decades of contrary evidence.
tbf I think it's not about feelings, but rather the grift
It’s sad that those who fall for misinformation seem to outnumber those who are reasonably informed.
the issue isnt the people falling for it, the issue is main political parties using conspiratorial rhetoric, anti scientific rhetoric, racist anti immigration rhetoric whilst packacing it in the most emotionally manipulative way to get people to vote for them out of fear. its anti democratic parties funded by russia.
I learn something every time Potholer fixes the road to facts!
@@bauhnguefyische667 Yes,how lucky you are to have someone do your thinking for you. Too bad he is a false messiah
@@satkinson5505
1)Trolling a bit?
2)False messiah?
3)Letting someone else think for me?
I’d say you fit all 3.
Have a pleasnt day, Jesus will love you anyway.
Thank you Potholer❤
The sad part is that nobody is going to watch this video, while this "documentary" is going to get millions and millions of views.
I see new Potholer video, I click as fast as I can! Keep the debunking coming!
As big a problem as disinformation has become, it's a whole new level when "every accusation is a confession".
Patrick Moore is not someone to take seriously when it comes to climate change, plastic pollution, or weedkiller.
I find many of his statements hard to swallow.
I constantly see climate "skeptics" asserting "there's absolutely no evidence for ______".
Whenever I see that, I alway ask, "what would be sufficient evidence for [poster] to accept _____?"
Interestingly, I never seen to get a straight answer, or really any answer at all to that. I wonder why that might be?
In what way can your alarmist beliefs make your life better? I'll be waiting.
@@dieselphiend What "alarmist beliefs"? Who said they'd "make [my] life better"?
I'll be waiting.
@@Leafsdude Ahh, so you think you aren't selfish, is that it?
@@Leafsdude You've just proven that the entire argument is designed to make your life worse.
@@Leafsdude And it is.
I've heard climate denialists for decades and I haven't heard a new, original argument this side of the great big millennial party.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd Go take your roids microcock.
@@Toxicpoolofreekingmascul-lj4yd You don't seem very intelligent, little troll.
Right, we definitely haven't seen a large decrease in glacier cover, or artic ice sheet coverage, or loss lakes and rivers, or record setting summer heat year over year, or record setting storms year over year. Give me a break.
@@SLDimarco Dr Mann said Doomers and Adapters are the new Deniers. Lighten up or be thrust into the jungle
It never ends, does it? It's amazing to me at this point in time that these lying idiots have a leg to stand on.
As a 19 year old with family in Africa, sometimes I want to cry. These misinformers really won. I know people personally who think climate change isn’t real. Every day I go to work and realize there’s way too much momentum behind the ideas that are screwing us. I feel like my family low-key has no future. Already there are reports of farmers in West Africa abandoning their efforts because of unusual rainfall activity screwing up agriculture. It was my dream to go back there and start a farm.
Can’t forget that politician who said “climate change is only bad if you’re in africa!” wow
I have often said that if we could eliminate greed the world would be a much better place. Misinformation pieces like this "movie", funded by the fossil fuel industry, provide ample evidence that my belief is correct.
If the fossil fuel companies spent less time and money killing technologies that compete with fossil fuels and instead integrated them as a part of their businesses, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Damn. My mood always lighten when I spot a new Potholer video, but this is a frustrating watch. It is one thing showing people who gets things wrong by mistake and such, but this seem far more deliberate. Thank you for persevering Potholer, this must have been hard to work on. (I'm only half way trough, I need some breaks)
Addendum. Yeah, reached the end. No wonder it seem deliberate.
I wish that Big-Windmill-Solar power and uhm, Big (emotional-leftist) government would start sponsoring you (in untraceable bit-coins of course) so that you could buy those gold-plated seat belt buckles you always wanted. (Since it is the internet, I'm not entirely serious in my previous sentence)
The temperature projections made by Exxon at 26:30 in this video should absolutely set Exxon up for a lawsuit
It was sued in 2019 by the State of New York, on the grounds that the company had misled shareholders, but the state lost. Exxon is currently suing two shareholders who tried to get the company to be more environmentally conscious. Arghh.
@@maryanneslater9675 well thats terribly disappointing. It’s the same thing Phillip Morris did except even worse
@@moxy4926 It's almost like that's where they got it from...
(Get it? Because they literally did? From Heartland Institute policy creators? Hahahaha! It's funny!)
I doubt that anyone is required to make public private research. It should cost them consumer confidence/boycott - but it won't. You (we) will fill up your gas tank where-ever it is cheapest or most convenient.
Hoax. Massive companies like Exxon get thousands of reports every day. Back then the news and predictions for the future from serious to Sci-Fi were full of new ice age doom. The Earth was in a 35 year long cooling trend. The famous "Exxon knew" report said something different to everyone else and to what was actually happening outside. They mostly ignored it for those reasons.
I moved to Alaska last year, and although I already knew that climate change was happening seeing the effects of permafrost thaw up there makes the idea that climate change isn't happening just laughable.
Those people need to go to indigenous villages in the Arctic and try to tell them that climate change isn't happening
If the people doing the denying are farmers (or a similar profession), after they’ve done all that, ask them if they’ve been having issues in their profession regarding profits and yield etc over the last ten years. Nine times out of ten, they’ll say yes, bemoan this happening and further complain about how it seems to get worse every year.
I visited Alaska five years ago and agree. There are roads that they used to repair every four years now they have to repair every year. The sled postal service used to run September to April but now runs October to March because the snow just isn't deep enough.
2:00 "We are told" That's the conspiracy theory / science denial dog whistle. Every single time you hear that it's immediately followed by a lie.
Do you think we could get Durkin interested in Bigfoot? That would at least be a more harmless expenditure of money and energy.
@HebaruSan - If you can make it worth his time, sure. But if there is't much money in Bigfoot theory then prob not
You're an unsung hero for humanity! Seriously.
How is he a hero exactly?
@@warpdrive116 _"How is he a hero exactly?"_ He's a hero just like anyone else that tries to teach or educate. You don't find value in teaching people how to avoid misinformation when it comes to the science? Or perhaps you don't care what peer reviewed papers actually say?
@@warpdrive116 I mean unlike you he does not talk bullshit
@@hg2. _"For starters please watch this, all 42 minutes of it: Tom Shula: A Novel Perspective on the Greenhouse Effect. Tom Nelson channel"_ Spamming this at random I see.
Whatever it's true or not, if we live like it was true the end result will be cleaner air, better environment, better health and an industrial push towards new and modern technology. If we assume it is false and keep going on as now the result will be the same polluted air, worse environment, just slight improvement of old technology and a stagnation in industrial innovation and modernization.
Så please dear climate skeptics, be sceptical and deny it if you want, but give us a reason why, for even if it turned out to be "political" or "industrial" that is just good, that is what we need anyhow.
So climate scepticism is just dumb from any angle, it is a bit like argument shit is old and natural and that we therefore don't invest in a system that transports the crap away and then clean the water.
When the world needed him, he returned.
I know trying to push the Stupid Meter back into the green is like holding the ocean back with a broom, but thanks once again Peter for the great work. If we had more people like you we'd need less people like you. Much lover brother.
Potholer is still the best.
A lot of work has gone into this. Thanks.
It’s dark outside, so obviously the sun has been eaten by a crocodile. That’s the level some people are choosing to live at.
Oh, yeah, I met the crocodile! His name is Sobek, and he's disappointed we keep confusing him with that mean Egyptian guy.
@@josephbales7021 I, too, would be upset at being mistaken for the ancient Egyptian god of semen
Next on your debunk list, Potholer: Fox News and Sky News, run by Rupert Murdoch, who also co-owns a fossil fuel company, Genie Energy, and sits on their board.
that is the problem with arguing with denialists, you can't apply Harlon's razor and assume they are arguing in good faith, check every claim, verify every data. never assume they are just misunderstanding the information, most of the time their claims will be straight up false.
Never mind all the lies, damn lies and statistic...just look out of the window and try pointing to a crisis...
They arent arguing in faith, there is no winning against these sad sad people. The only satisfaction is that history wont be pleasant about these money grabbing humanity traitors
@@manoo422 moron
Clima: The Movie is full of misinformation by the fossil fuel lobbyists? Damn, I would not have expected that!
It's funny when people say that a minor change in a minor gas shouldn't make a difference. The smaller something is, the bigger the effect when it changes.
E.g. If you are a billionaire, and someone gives you £1m, you'd say thanks, i'm sure, but it won't have much impact.
If you give someone with nothing £10k it will make a massive difference to them.
The last time I checked £10k was smaller than £1m, but the impact is massive dependant on the starting point.
Why build spurious analogies that lay outside of chemistry or physics? The science itself debunks their claim
@judychurley6623 I totally agree, but sometimes, people need to be told things in a way that makes the issue more salient to them.
People tend to regard money as more important than the prevalence of CO2 in air.
I cannot overstate how excited I am for your more thorough examination of the tenuous relationship that arises when research departments benefit from the petrol dollars climate skeptic researchers bring with them. Climate skeptics, and other controversial researchers, are often protected by the extra funding their publicity brings in. It is antithetical to good science.
I was waiting for this one. Now I can share it with anyone who refers to that propaganda film
Potholer. Even by the standards of the excellent videos on your channel, this is your finest video to date.
Please remind us of the charity you ask donations to be directed to in lieu of financial support for your channel. I wish to make a long overdue donation.
It's in the video description, thanks for your contribution.
"Please remind us of the charity"
The link is in the description. :)
Always appreciate the tremendous amount of work you put into these videos. Thank you for your professionalism and high standards.
Speaking as someone with a masters in communications, I feel compelled to highlight how this climate change denial film has attempted to replicate the style of a David Attenborough documentary. They clearly recognise the credibility of that style and want it for themselves.
Excellent comment, I never noticed. So like the CBC Radio Free Vestibule or Irrelevant Show program about blokes trying to attract ladies in Bars for Mating narrated by purportedly David Attenborough ("He gingerly approaches while regarding the dangers around") or Mandy Fairfax and thousands of other unemployed Wildebeeste.
Another excellent expose of the people who have sold their souls to oil companies. Keep up the good work...PLEASE.
I remember seeing the Swindle thing back in 2007 - think it was Channel 4, but it's a long time ago. What shocks me more than anything is the total immorality of these people. They're deeply manipulative with the vigour of a dodgy second hand car salesman. The key difference is you can always get a taxi when your dodgy car breaks down, not quite the same when you've messed up your planet.
The thing that got me about that was how the movie's title was *way* too on the nose. The movie itself was actual great swindle about global warming.
I see the $Billions spent on propaganda worked very well on you...
Thank you for your work. While I point deniers to your channel I am doubtful any really want to hear evidence that contradicts their mainstream opinions. But your work is insanely valuable.
@dinnerwithfranklin2451
*"your work is insanely valuable"*
1000% agree.
*"While I point deniers to your channel I am doubtful any really want to hear evidence"*
Also 1000% agree. ph54 has an excellent post in another thread that I want to copy and save for later. From memory his point was these videos help arm the rest of us to have conversations. Pointing deniers here probably isn't a 100% solution, I agree.
And in all fairness when someone tells me "Tony Heller is real science, go to his channel", I decline, usually with an expletive or sarcastic remark.
Getting a kick out of all the climate change deniers (the dumbest thing a human being could be twenty years ago let alone now) melting down about reality in the comments.
Pot calling kettle black.
@@anthonymorris5084 That isn't what that means lol
@@ShawnKF It didn't take long for you to get an example that proved you were correct.
@@ShawnKF 'fraid it does so lol right back atcha.
@@anthonymorris5084 No it doesn't work that way. You're an idiot I'm not.
Thank you for putting this together, I couldn't get through Climate: The Movie myself. Its so disheartening seeing so many denialist comments all over youtube.
It’s always great to wake up to a new Potholer video. It’s just a shame we need them.
You make fantastic informative videos, this is a public service you are doing.❤
When you watch films like this one that are a constant stream of falsehoods and lies, do you ever get upset as you watch? How do you deal with these emotions and stay calm?
It helps me to think of it as trying to see someone else's viewpoint, but yeah, when it runs so counter to your perspective it can get rough.
I sensed a slight bit of rare annoyance from ph54 on this one, though maybe I imagined it. He rarely goes into the opinion room, and he mentioned that he didn't have time to cover all of the bullsh*t in this "documentary", so that gives me reason to think this time it may have been a little upsetting.
Excellent work as always. Nice to see they don't have any new arguments. Meanwhile temperatures continue to rise...
I recently encountered another denier still pulling out the "Michael Man's debunked Hockey Stick!". They haven't bothered to update their arguments for 20 years...
@@Vulcano7965 They were still repeating "There's been no global warming for ten years!" right up until it got replaced by "There's been global cooling over the last 18 years!" and both of those were obviously false the day they were first pushed out.
@@Vulcano7965They repeat false claims like the YEC groups.
@@NinjaMonkeyPrimeand like antivax still repeating autism claims. Or 5g scaremongerers rehashing WiFi scare. Pseudoscience follows the same repetitive faulty reasoning whatever it's subject.
I'm always amused when it is claimed that CO2 is a trace gas and hence cannot effect mean global temperature. That's like claiming that a few drops of Arsenic cannot kill a human of normal weight.
Also it is often overlooked that global mean is the net global mean relevant to the whole planet with the resulting Climate change causing localised cooling. It's a bit like when an inch of rain doesn't sound much but an inch of rain across the whole planet would be disastrous.
I argue the exact same thing when I see people parrot the "0,04%" or whatever else to claim that "it's small therefore it can't have an effect". Just 2 comments above yours someone also makes a great point where they found that a standard cup of coffee is 0,04% caffeine.
You'll find that those same people will happily claim this 0.04% is crucial for life, as it is plant food, and that the increase has caused massive greening of our planet. "It's a trace gas that can't do anything, but look here how it did a lot!"
I'm always using Botox as an example of how really, _really_ small amounts can do a lot of harm. 1 g of botulinumtoxin can, in theory if distributed equally, wipe out a major city.
@@johanneshass1614 Yeah that's one I've used before. I think around 60 g could basically wipe out humanity.
I do not like living in a polluted world.
The projection... it's insane.
It really is. Durkin and Heller regularly accuse others of cherry picking when they've done it all the time. And Patrick Moore accuse others of ignoring the Sun when he repeatedly points out that CO2 was higher in the past. Total hypocrites. 🤦🏻♂️
13:55 Ah that old 'it's just a trace gas'-stupidity.
Thing is, 3°C warming is also just a 'trace warming' on an absolute scale. 3°C over 100 years is 0.03°C per year or about 0.0000000001°C per second. A tiny effect... that adds up over time.
@Potholer54 bringing the smackdown yet again!
I made a debunk on this too on my channel. Thanks Peter for a comprehensive detailed and well sourced debunk!
Yes, it's good one. Your other videos are worth watching too.
Yes, it's good one. Your other videos are worth watching too.
@@merosgage196 thanks!
@@merosgage196 I concur.
I found out recently that the amount of caffeine in a "standard" cup of coffee is about 0.04% also. Just try to tell anyone they don't need that cup in the morning for that tiny trace compound in that hot watery fluid, and the difference it makes.
How much caffeine do you need to get the heart pumping then? I have always drunk coffee all day and night and not noticed it. But i have friends that won't drink it after 2PM because they say they can't sleep. I thought i was weird, perhaps i'm just experiencing reality. Oh i see, just got to the bit. I should have known really, i am weird.
Exactly. For some reason many ppl seems to have a hard time understanding that tiny tiny things can have huge effects.
@@CraftyF0Xlike how the population of the United States comprises only 5% of the population of humanity
That's a great analogy! Of course, I had to check it.
The average cup of coffee weighs about 240g and has around 95mg of caffeine. Indeed, that is almost exactly 0.04%.
The percentage is even less compared to the weight of a human body, Therefore it cannot possibly have any effect.
One could go further, and say that nicotine, heroin, cocaine, marijuana and other substances ingested at 0.04% of human body weight can't possibly have any effect, so we should legalise them.
Thanks for that :)
@potholer54 we should legalize those substances. Prohibition does not stop use, it only drives the cost up.
Meanwhile 8 of the 10 hottest days have occurred in the last 14 months.
In a 15 month timeframe?
@@LSD04 actually less. July 2023 to July 2024.
@@LSD04 - It's clear from the phrasing, "8 of the 10 hottest days", that OP is referring to 'on record'. It's a common enough way of phrasing that you, as a terminally online "skeptic" troll, have come across before.
Go pretend to be dumber than you really are elsewhere
@potholer54 your contributions to this dilemma are highly appreciated. The fact that your channel is not monetized is affirming. I'd be interested to know how long it takes to create one of your videos. Thank you.
the fact that no Climatologist was in the film should raise some eyebrows.
I don't think this is wholly true. Professor Lindzen made an appearance I believe. Doesn't give the film anymore credibility.
For these self-proclaimed "skeptics," you would think this would raise some flags...
@_yonas no, it fit into their world view so nothing seemed worth being skeptical about
@@_yonas These are people who reject any and all experts unless they say what they want to hear, and thus William Happer knows better than all the climatologists, because he's a professor in physics, you know! Far better than those climatologists!
@@gregoryjames165 Lindzen has made a career out of being wrong. Same with Roy Spencer.
The fact that this works…
We desperately need better education everywhere
That ending. Chef’s kiss.
About the "trace gas" CO2, accounting for only 0,04% : If I were to add a dose of LSD equalling 0.04% to my body, I would have taken around 200,000 times the effective dose, and I would completely loose my mind for AT LEAST several days if not forever. According to Dunkin, this can't possibly happen.
Lose, not loose.
@jochannan7379 Yebbut the actual science point for this is that the radiation up from Earth's surface is 1.65x times what Earth gets from the Sun and that is made entirely by surface molecules that are a minuscule one 23,000th of the H2O gas molecules and a minuscule one 2,300th of the CO2 gas molecules as I've posted a dozen times against this video alone, with not even a single person being interested in that STUNNING and TOTALLY RELEVANT Primary Fact of what's warmning Earth. Over each square metre of Earth radiation is sent up matching 1.65x times the solar SWR arriving and it's made by 10 grammes of molecules (an eye dropper of water) but the air above (N2, O2, Ag) weighs 10,300,000 grammes so 0.000059 ppmw (0.0059%) of molecules makes LWR radiation in the surface matching the entire solar SWR that heats Earth as I've correctly pointed out several dozen times against a dozen relevant videos. That's just measured fact of the physics. So the "0.04%" is to be compared with 0.0059% making the same LWR radiation as the entire solar SWR that heats Earth. And THAT'S the point about "0.04%" as i've pointed out correctly for 6 years.
Thank you for creating another great critical analysis. My guess is that a large portion of our population doesn't crave learning that some of their deeply held beliefs are bogus.
All that's missing from the last clip is the looney tunes outro. Also, the amount of mental gymnastics needed to say that with a straight face must be at least at an Olympic gold level.
There are SO many holes in this ""movie"" that I am not surprised it took you so long to get around releasing your video on it.
Must have been hard doing it while constantly facepalming when listening to Durkin's material.
Atmospheric Chemist here. Let's remember that there are many types of clouds and cloud lifetimes - not all of them block out radiation effectively or last long enough to have an effect. For example, mixed-phase ice clouds (or cirrus clouds) are awful at reflecting solar light and these clouds are produced from a variety of things in our atmosphere - like pollutants, dust, bacteria. Radiative forcing is important because it tries to take into account all the possible ways that the atmosphere cools or warms the climate. When all of them are taken into account we still have a net warming affect.
Thank you for that piece of information! I’d love to pick your brain on this stuff. Atmospheric science is one of those fascinating and elusive studies that lay folks like myself find intriguing.
@@udhehfhehcuw9169 What a lovely reply, thank you!! Atmospheric science is definitely really interesting :) and a little complicated lol
Thank you for your continued work in debunking nonsense pseudo-science. I have been following your channel for many years and genuinely believe that your channel should get more attention than it does. I can only assume that it gets less attention because most people don't want to look at graphs and the data and so on, and instead would like more digestible information.
But that's the nature of debunking such things in an accurate way, and I appreciate your work at the very least. On multiple occasions over the years I have also been inspired to read scientific papers myself on issues you have brought up to better educate myself, and I wish more people were willing to do that kind of thing (or were able to read them effectively).
I feel like I am in a fever dream or my brain is dying and I'm reliving the worst excesses of my 2009 internet obsessions
Don't worry. ClimateGate 3.0 will probably come out next month. 🤣🤣🤣
Hey, creationism is also making a comeback. And everything is Qanon. It's amazing, isn't it?
The mirror at the end was the chef's kiss. Thanks for another brilliant debunk.
Durkin's efforts are very reminiscent of the denials in _Don't Look Up._
They really are.
Thank you for your service, Potholer!
New potholer!! Made my Saturday night
Has anyone talked about the similarities in style between Climate the Movie, and the anti-evolution film Expelled?
Denialism is all similar.
You could also compare it to "Vaxxed - The Movie".
If someone was bored, it might be funny to cross reference the credits to see if there is any common company used for production or editing.
Both imply that scientists just KNOW that there are real problems with evolution/climate but scientists keep quiet for fear of losing their careers, grant money etc.
All these movies are the same. It's very funny. Expelled, Climate Swindle, Vaxxed, The Principle, etc are all the same.
Another great video. Thanks Potholer for another lesson in critical thinking.