[bd476]

Again, if you haven't watched the documentary, it would be good for any discussion, pro or con.

An hour and 15 minutes is a small investment of time considering that you're getting factual information.

[editor-surveyor]

He's not interested in facts; Gaia demands worship.

[elfman2]

I watched it, and said before, it was very persuasive, but desperately needed to be cut in half, especially near the end. But if it only presented one side of the argument rather than just emphasizes one side, it's propaganda rather than just biased. It should have addressed some to the criticism it's receiving from that blog. Now I have to dig into the science to tell whether it's propaganda or not.

[BIGLOOK]

Hello BD,
Elfman is incorrigible so let it go. This reminds me of a discussion long ago between students and their professor in a casual setting.......Friday night at a watering hole. The talk was rousing and rigorous until one student offered inane challenges to Einstein's Theory of Relativity but at the same time declared admiration for the man. The noise level rose considerably until the prof cut to the chase; he asked the pretender if he had read Einsteins theory in its entirty, the answer was no. The prof said, "How can you admire or challenge Einstein when you haven't even bothered to read his book."

In the case of the Elfman quandary, he's admitted to not being up on the scientific data presented (he'll look into it, reluctantly), he's critical of the climatologist, scientists and others who belong to the community interested in the subject while never having enough interest to follow up by reading their findings. Arguing with Elfman is futile in this case since his arguments ignore the case.

Jack