The Day After Tomorrow

[I, Brian]

I like the look of this film...

Melting polar ice causes a sudden disruption in the North Atlantic Current, resullting in a cataclysmic storm hitting the Eastern Seaboard USA.

Great looking effects - and a powerful environmental message that may just help rouse some of North America from it's political inertia regarding Global Warming issues. Hopefully, anyway - so long as it hits the psyche of the general movie-going public. Maybe Hollywood still has some light left in it?

Oh - the trailer:

http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/da...er/medium.html

[littlemissattitude]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Great looking effects - and a powerful environmental message that may just help rouse some of North America from it's political inertia regarding Global Warming issues. Hopefully, anyway - so long as it hits the psyche of the general movie-going public. Maybe Hollywood still has some light left in it?

One would hope. However, the problem with Global Warming as an issue here in the
States is that it has been framed not as an environmental issue, but as a political one. That has meant that the response to it is generally political, that is to say torn down political lines, and so has become a matter of "belief". Generally the conservatives (read Bush administration and its friends) don't "believe" in the whole concept of Global Warming; it is a matter of priniciple to them that it doesn't exist. Therefore, they will not address it except in terms that consider it a "liberal" plot to control big business. Or anyhow, that's how I read their reaction to it.

Now, as we've discussed here before I think, I am personally of the opinion that while warming is going on, it is not completely a man-made phenomenon but is at least partly a natural fluctuation in the Earth's climate. But that doesn't mean that I don't think it's an issue that needs to be addressed, and addressed quickly. I mean, I live in a valley that will be one of the first places to flood when the polar caps really decide to start melting. It was an inland sea before, and it could easily become one again.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

One would hope. However, the problem with Global Warming as an issue here in the
States is that it has been framed not as an environmental issue, but as a political one. That has meant that the response to it is generally political, that is to say torn down political lines, and so has become a matter of "belief". Generally the conservatives (read Bush administration and its friends) don't "believe" in the whole concept of Global Warming; it is a matter of priniciple to them that it doesn't exist. Therefore, they will not address it except in terms that consider it a "liberal" plot to control big business. Or anyhow, that's how I read their reaction to it.

Exactly my point - so long as the "people" are scared into seeing it as an issue, then politicians eventually have to listen.

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

Now, as we've discussed here before I think, I am personally of the opinion that while warming is going on, it is not completely a man-made phenomenon but is at least partly a natural fluctuation in the Earth's climate.

Heh, funnily enough, the "natural fluctuation" theory seems especially well fed to the North American public. Here in Europe it is a complete non-issue.

Of course, that means that far-right US conservatives claim that Europe is in the pocket of green activists, whereas Europe makes it plain that the US is in the pocket of the Oil and Military Industry complex. Now which of the two arguments does anyone find most convincing?

Even if there is a natural cycle and variation - and that's not under dispute - the fact remains that the environment of the earth has been very significantly changed by human activity since the industrialisation of Europe - and this process continues to this day.

Heck - if depletion of the Ozone layer was blamed on US industrial activity, you can be certain that in the US would arise a "perfectly respectable" theory that the Ozone hole was the result of "natural variations". I guess we're simply lucky that the CFC industry was never as fundamentally huge or strapped for viable economic alternative as the Oil industry of America.

[dwndrgn]

From what I see and hear from the people around me, as many people believe in Global Warming as don't. The problem is that it is hard to demonstrate to those who need to 'see to believe'. If people could see an example of what could happen, on a real model instead of in a fictionalized story, it would be easier to understand. As strange as it may seem, many nonbelievers are scientists themselves, those that should know better. I mean, if you went out to the BioDome and polluted it's air to the same extent that ours is, you'd see how the plants and such either adapted or didn't. I'm surprised that they aren't doing this type of experiment on a large scale. When normal fruits and vegetables are so easily contaminated by genetically engineered ones (I just read an article that did testing on 'natural' crops and their yields and found that almost all of them have some traces on them of the genetically altered crops grown on other farms), it's hard to not believe that everything is interconnected and dependent upon the other elements. Once you understand that you can see how a significant change in the atmosphere could create significant changes on the surface.

Am I blathering on? Sorry. The environment is one of my pet subjects. I say 'pet' because I've never formally studied other than the basic college courses, but I like to read about it. And blather on apparently . Stephen Jay Gould is one of my heros