Certain discrepancies between what is shown and what is known are established. Data picked to present a certain perspective are pointed out in painful detail. However, to me this does not come as a surprise. In fact, I almost expected it to be the case.
When a camera films, it seems to have a ability to leave out parts of the puzzle that the director does not want to be seen. We saw it previously when websites and blogs were set up in response to fraudulent statements made my Al Gore in “An Inconvenient Truth.” Most of these claims, however, were proven to be right. It was startling to me as to how this medium was so capable of being very one-sided. Media, for me, has lost much of it’s depth.
On an optimistic note, I feel as though it is healthy to have scientific dialogue. In fact, I still think that the video about “global warming swindle” was amazing. Although it has some data that was skewed, no mention is made about the data that startled me the first time I saw the documentary. For example, hurricanes have increased in number, but have significantly decreased in intensity. When accounting for intensity of the hurricanes no increase is seen. Global warming means higher temperature in the oceans as well as the air. This is perfect, according to current theories, for larger (more frequent) storms. It is these discrepancies between theories and up to date scientific data that we should be looking at. In stead, it seems as though most of the attention is drawn to the fact that one side presented something that they knew is wrong.
Certain discrepancies between what is shown and what is known are established. Data picked to present a certain perspective are pointed out in painful detail. However, to me this does not come as a surprise. In fact, I almost expected it to be the case.
When a camera films, it seems to have a ability to leave out parts of the puzzle that the director does not want to be seen. We saw it previously when websites and blogs were set up in response to fraudulent statements made my Al Gore in “An Inconvenient Truth.” Most of these claims, however, were proven to be right. It was startling to me as to how this medium was so capable of being very one-sided. Media, for me, has lost much of it’s depth.
On an optimistic note, I feel as though it is healthy to have scientific dialogue. In fact, I still think that the video about “global warming swindle” was amazing. Although it has some data that was skewed, no mention is made about the data that startled me the first time I saw the documentary. For example, hurricanes have increased in number, but have significantly decreased in intensity. When accounting for intensity of the hurricanes no increase is seen. Global warming means higher temperature in the oceans as well as the air. This is perfect, according to current theories, for larger (more frequent) storms. It is these discrepancies between theories and up to date scientific data that we should be looking at. In stead, it seems as though most of the attention is drawn to the fact that one side presented something that they knew is wrong.