As hinted at above, but now being more explicit - if it’s meant to be a joke, what is the fucking joke? That’s what I don’t get. I don’t mind sick or disgusting humor. Mr Creosote made me laugh so hard the first time I saw it, I thought I was going to have an aneurism. But the joke there was that a wafer-thin mint catalyzed an unexpected and shocking outcome to his gluttony. 10:10 said “Many people found the… film extremely funny” (who?), and “we wanted to find a way to bring this critical issue back into the headlines whilst making people laugh” How? Why? What is the joke with people who say that participation in the initiative is voluntary, killing the apathetic? Wish fulfilment? Is that funny? Why? Regardless of intent or message, I simply don’t get it in terms of humor. Unless, as someone posted on their site:
The organizers say “it was an imaginative attempt to challenge public apathy over climate change”. This reminds me of a time I worked for MegaCorp and went to a ghastly corporate presentation where some speaker tried to use NLP during his presentation. It was simply weird and got overwhelmingly dissed in the post-event survey that about 500 people completed. His response was “we’ve had mixed feedback, but we’re glad that this presentation made you think”. Well yes, it certainly did make me think: unfortunately the only thing it made me think is that you’re a dickhead.
Even though the film explcitly presents “We’ll kill you if you disagree with us,” I think the implied message which you think they were trying to present (“You’ll die if we don’t do something about this problem.”) is even more problematic.
I thought the whole point of environmental politics in general is to awaken the general populace to the shared social costs of current policies and practices vis-a-vis the individual benefits. What I find perplexing about your implication is that, if global environmental disaster really does strike, everyone is well and truly fucked, no matter your prior environmental stance.
I think the video would have been far more effective if, failing to reach a unanimous consensus in each instance, when the respective buttons were pushed, ALL members of the groups were destroyed, including the button-pushers.
This was so idiotic, that it made me safe tons of carbon straight away…
… coming to think about it, they should have blown up the Vulcano in Iceland, that blew more carbon last summer into the air, then the human race in the past 10 years
…and by quoting my dumbass statement you used even more carbon, so should be push the button on you?..or me for replying to your reply?.. or those google searches you made to give us that link?..or those idiots making that stupid retarded clip used up some of the carbon?..so, let’s push that button on them as well.
Why not push the damn button on every human, that does not want to live in the stone ages anymore.
Given, that I do not need a 8 miles to the gallon car to do the shopping or pick up the kids from school, but that does not take from the fact, that this video was a complete fuck up and waste of recourses.
LOL … I’m the one who came up with that particular plot twist! I wrote the story for the original videogame which Tom then used as a basis for his novel. (And then I got to rewrite the story for the game to match the novel … since it takes less time to write a novel than make a game.) But the whole “crazy environmentalists plan to kill off most of the population of the world” bit … that was my idea.
A better way to deal with global warming deniers is to ship them off to another planet and let them coal mine themselves into oblivion and get them out of the way so that we on Earth can progress with environmentally-friendly technology.
Let them acidify their oceans and turn their world into Venus. Let them purge themselves.
Of course they’re not; I’d have been perfectly happy with an add that had people old and young saying things like “global warming? Who cares?” into the camera - and then spontaneously bursting into flames. And then maybe a shot of the flames from them spreading and sweeping to consume the earth, followed by the solemn and slightly wry voiceover: “Apathy - what harm could it do, really?” over a panning shot over a room of charred skeletons of kids at desks.
Okay, it might not be great art - but I think it would have at least got the correct point across.
And global warming does affect kids. The kids of the world will pay for all the environmental destruction our generation is causing. I’m just squeamish about showing kids dying on TV. It pisses people off, like showing pictures of aborted fetuses.
But the big picture is, nothing will convince the global warming deniers.
These are the same people who used to argue that burning coal doesn’t cause acid rain. They’re the same ones who believe in the “clean burning coal” myth. Nothing’s going to move them…
However that shows that I did not find that link by just googling, as it should be clear, you are incapable of finding good sources for your sorry opinion.
Incidentally, try the **intermediate **tab, as there is no advanced there like in many of the more than a 100 debunked denier points.
Like Morbo could say, Carbon footprints do not that way! goodnight you ignoramus!
The bolded part is to point out that there is more references and not just a basic bit of info, the maker of the site was so successful that even scientists are contributing articles and cleaning up his points.
