Skip to comments.Climate Change - Global Warming Scam [Global Warming Video Made for School]
Posted on 02/08/2012 3:23:27 PM PST by collinmbell
Hi my name is Collin Bell. I am currently a Sophomore at Andover High School and I recently made a video about climate change for my World Geography class. Tell me what you think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WG7fpta8zI
Hi Colin -
Nice video. Fun graphics -
Suggested improvements -
For me - I like an outline or at least an “abstract” or summary up front. Tell the viewer what you are going to tell them. Then present the data - in the graphs etc that you have - then - Conclusion.
The way they used to say this is “Tell them what you are going to tell them, tell them, then tell them what you just told them” -
Also - some of your graphs up front - might be mroe fun as pie charts - so you can show a tiny tiny tiny sliver - that 0.28% - that man controls (got 6that word in again)
Also - you left out that the leftist models require CO2 to function as a forcing factor for water vapor - that is how they drive the big numbers. That is the “fudge factor” - when the forcing function is played with - it plays with taht big number - the water vapor driver.
re water vapor driver - this was revcently debunked with some NASA study that somehow eluded the polticos.
Anyway - best to you - great start for a kid. I’m from Melrose and North Reading - if you are Andover MA.
Other then that you did great.
This is what I wrote:
Very well done Thank you Socialism is a scam to take money from the working class and poor to give too the rich.
Global warming is analogous to the flat earth. If we look out at the horizon the earth is flat.
If you only look at one short period of time the earth is warm. Yet we live in the coldest part of the quaternary Ice Age near the end of an interglacial period with CO2 levels at near record lowest levels in Earths history. 100 ppm drop would mean our death with ~2000 is earth's norm
I hate youtube for many reasons one being I cannot explain myself with so few words.
Plants stop growing at CO2 levels less then 220 ppm.
Socialism is a very simple system of taxing the working class to redistribute it to big business that is on the government dole. But it will never be stated that way.
That format is great if you are not talking with brainwashed individuals.
If you are talking with brainwashed individuals you need to present your information as though you are their brother in arms. Other wise you are just scum of he earth and there is no need to listen.
It looks like he’s multitalented, too!
Re-watching the video I have to agree with jmacusa. you might want to cut the video at 2:45 the left likes to add opinions but we shouldn’t.
correction: I have to agree with naturalman1975 not jmacusa
ping to watch later
So, you’re a member of the flat Earth society,eh? And what exactly is it with me that you don’t agree with, particularly, ‘’global warming’’ or the greatness of the men I mentioned?
And while I’m at it, why don’t you global warming Chicken Littles make up your freakin’ minds. Christ sake, thirty odd years ago we were told by this point in the future the Earth would be one big freakin’ Sno-Cone and now we’re being told it’s melting. Get a life.
I think you’ve misunderstood - he was agreeing with my ‘teachers analysis’ of the video back at comment 11, and initially he misread that comment as coming from you. His “I agree with naturalman1975 not jmacusa” was just correcting the error of attribution. I am pretty sure Steve Van Doorn agrees that climate change is a scam giving his comments elsewhere in the discussion.
Thank you naturalman1975. jmacusa sorry about the confusion.
I am one to nit pick, but I hope to do so constructively.
On the part where you were explaining about the heat driving CO2 (via ocean abortion and emission) rather than the other way around, I think it would have been best to first show the strong correlation from the longer term charts...but then zoom in and show the lag to illustrate that the direction of cause and effect must be heat to CO2 rather than the other way.
Also, the second part where you are linking the science to a political agenda, although correct in your conclusions, you were trying to go too far too quickly for the purposes of rhetoric, and may have undercut your case to the casual observer who has not really followed any of this stuff. People are naturally resistant to changing their own opinions, so persuasion is a more gradual process...i.e. you can't take someone from uniformed all the way to harsh reality in just a few minutes.
LOL...drat the spell checker!