Stream of Conscience: Not Evil Just Wrong to Stream Live, for Free, Over Internet This Sunday. Here’s the trailer video:
In this movie, you’ll see Dr. James Hansen refuse to say Steve McIntyre’s name, among other things.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Fewer than 50 hours from the 8 pm EDT Sunday launch of Not Evil Just Wrong — set to be the world’s largest simultaneous film premiere party in history — the documentary’s co-creators today announced options for people across the globe to watch it FREE over the internet. Live links follow.
In addition to the thousands of individual DVD/theatrical premiere parties being hosted across the nation (map available here), the documentary will also be streamed live over the Internet — accessed for free by anyone who visits the site. Not Evil Just Wrong will also be available on several Internet domains to ensure bandwidth sufficient to handle the expected massive interest in the documentary.
The popular website Big Hollywood (http://bighollywood.breitbart.com) has announced its intention to live-stream the documentary over its site, as has the American Family Association (http://action.afa.net). Other options are expected to follow.
“Technology has always been anathematic to those who dominate the modern environmental movement,” said Ann McElhinney, co-director of Not Evil Just Wrong. “And after this Sunday, perhaps we’ll have a clearer idea why. Three years ago, immediately following the release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, we simply wouldn’t have had the capability to reach this many people short of equipping each and every one of them with his own DVD. Today, we have that technology, and thanks to Andrew Breitbart and the folks at AFA, millions of additional people will have the chance to see this film, consider its message, and be inspired to act as a result.”
Visitors to the live-streaming sites will also be able to watch (and, through social networking sites, even participate in) the panel discussion scheduled for immediately after the film, featuring experts such as world-renowned new media pioneer and ACORN buster Andrew Breitbart and the inestimable John Fund of the Wall Street Journal — among several others who will be on hand to moderate the panel and answer questions submitted by the worldwide audience.
Relevant links and information are included below.
What: World premiere of Not Evil Just Wrong
When: Sunday, 8:00 PM EDT; panel discussion with Andrew Breitbart, John Fund, Prof. Richard Lindzen, and Prof. Don Roberts Emeritus to immediately follow.
Where: One of hundreds of premiere sites across the country (and thousands around the world)
Live Streams:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/not-evil-just-wrong
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com
To Participate:
— Twitter: http://twitter.com/Not_Evil
— Facebook: http://facebook.com/noteviljustwrong/
— YouTube (just send us a message with your attached video):
http://youtube.com/noteviljustwrong
James Hastings-Trew (21:02:12) :
“I was a bit disappointed in the film. It was very light on the science, and pretty heavy on Al Gore. I’m more interested in the science than the politics.”
I agree with your sentiments.
“While I understand the appeal of the “salt of the earth” people pleading the case that their lifestyle is already fairly low-energy, and that they would be hard done by if the energy they rely on to live their lives were to become expensive or scarce, I think that is also entirely beside the point. If the AGW crowd is right, and these things must be done to avoid a putative disaster, then the sacrifice required registers a big “so what” with them – necessary to avert an even larger doomsday. Its not an argument that will change any minds.”
I agree again. OK my original B minus….now goes to a C minus (if that) for this film.
Should have trusted my gut instincts from the start.
Too much dragging emphasis on DDT and too little emphasis on exposing the REAL villain in all this: James Hansen. (yes….even more than Al Gore).
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Chris
rbateman “Most miners I have met are smart people and very observant. They have to be. Thier lives depend on paying attention.”
Agreed. No margin for error in this field, thats for damn sure.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Jeremy: “What I got was a form of propagandizing that should only sting those politically attached to this monster, not make them tremble in their boots.”
Well said….and agreed.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
In regard to “Not Evil, Just Wrong I would like to state that I really appreciate any initiative to promote the truth about our climate.
However, it could have done better in terms of dynamics of presentation and some of the interviewed were difficult to understand, not ideal to make a convincing statement.
I think Lord Moncton’s speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0
combined with his slides, which unfortunately are absent from his filmed speech, would also make a very convincing Anti Gore Movie.
The next movie has to be with Moncton.
jorgekafkazar (15:08:22) :
4 billion (04:31:56) :“Ice is the enemy of life”..not to the billion or so people who rely on Glacier fed water supply.”
Reference, please. IPCC publications are not acceptable.
Glaciers of the Himalaya Mountain Range are an enormous reservoir of fresh water and their meltwater is an important resource for much of India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, China and Burma. A team of Indian scientists lead by Anil V. Kulkarni of the Indian Space Research Organization, studied surface area coverage for nearly 500 glaciers in the Chenab, Parabati, and Baspa basins using satellite data collected between 1962 and 2001.
They documented that most of these glaciers have retreated significantly. In 1962 a total of 2077 square kilometers was covered by glaciers and in 2001 that area was reduced to 1628 square kilometers. This represents a deglaciation of over twenty percent over a forty year period.
http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/jan102007/69.pdf
Max (18:20:30) :
4 billion (04:31:56) :
“Ice is the enemy of life”..not to the billion or so people who rely on Glacier fed water supply.
You can’t drink ice.
Ron House (18:41:17) :
4 billion (04:31:56) :
“Ice is the enemy of life”..not to the billion or so people who rely on Glacier fed water supply.
To get a glacier-fed water supply, the glacier has to be melting.
Glaciers regulate the feed of water to a large number of rivers throughout Asia and South America, without Glaciers these rivers would become even more raging torrents during melt season and mere trickles during the dry season.
James
Australia SA
4 Billion: “They documented that most of these glaciers have retreated significantly. In 1962 a total of 2077 square kilometers was covered by glaciers and in 2001 that area was reduced to 1628 square kilometers. This represents a deglaciation of over twenty percent over a forty year period.”
Retreating? Really, mate….are you that hard up for an argument???
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/05/himalayas-glaciers.html
And I QUOTE:
But in the rugged western corner of the plateau, the story is different, according to a new study. Among legendary peaks of Mt. Everest like K2 and Nanga Parbat, glaciers with a penthouse view of the world are growing, and have been for almost three decades.
“These are the biggest mid-latitude glaciers in the world,” John Shroder of the University of Nebraska-Omaha said. “And all of them are either holding still, or advancing.”
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Seems glacier advance and retreat in the Himalayas is big news:
http://www.ecofactory.com/news/himalayan-glaciers-both-growing-and-shrinking
GOT BIG NEWS FOR YA….
More related to PRECIP than TEMPS, allright??
When that Monsoon and the MJO start to play gam in this part of the world, strange things happen.
But PUT TO REST….the idea of shrinking glaciers as related to planetary warming (or lack thereof).
It is more likely related to PRECIP!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
CORRECTION of: When that Monsoon and the MJO start to “play gam” in this part of the world, strange things happen.
SHOULD SAY: “play games”
Mr. Lynn — “I was disappointed to see the interminable middle section on DDT. It should be cut. ”
QFT. I tuned in, lost patience early on, and switched off. The trailer had already given me a bad feeling this movie was going to be a stinker, and it turned out far worse than I would have ever imagined. It’s as if they’re trying to out-Gore Gore with all the violin-playing. It’s an embarrassment to the skeptical cause.
By contrast, I highly commend and recommend “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, “The Cloud Mystery” and “Global Warming Doomsday Called Off” — all produced outside the U.S.A.
Erik Anderson (22:27:49) :
QFT. I tuned in, lost patience early on, and switched off. The trailer had already given me a bad feeling this movie was going to be a stinker, and it turned out far worse than I would have ever imagined. It’s as if they’re trying to out-Gore Gore with all the violin-playing. It’s an embarrassment to the skeptical cause.
By contrast, I highly commend and recommend “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, “The Cloud Mystery” and “Global Warming Doomsday Called Off” — all produced outside the U.S.A.
Call me Consensus Chris….but DAMMIT I agree.
I hated the film….truth be told.
I agree with the cause, but not with the technique.
My c minus has now gone to a D Plus.
Agreed on other documentaries out there that are far better, including Doomsday Called Off.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
rbateman (19:10:25) :
And what the locusts didn’t eat, the caterpillars finished off.
Sounds like something Biblical.
savethesharks (22:04:37) :
Retreating? Really, mate….are you that hard up for an argument???
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/05/05/himalayas-glaciers.html
Not that hard up for an argument, you’re link provides enough evidence of Glacier retreat 🙂
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/24/tibet-glaciers-warming.html
As for the link of Glacier retreat to warming, it says this
“As more heat is trapped in the atmosphere, he said, it holds more water vapor. And when the water vapor rises to high altitudes it condenses, releasing the heat into the upper atmosphere, where high mountain landscapes feel the brunt of warming. At the highest elevations, we’re seeing something like an average of 0.3 degrees Centigrade warming per decade,”
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/11/24/tibet-glaciers-warming-02.html
So, peculiarly it seems higher altitude Glaciers in the region are receding, while midlatitude Glaciers in the region are growing.
Link also states that warming is working it’s way up the mountain side.
“As temperatures continue increasing, they will overtake additional mass provided by snow,” Fountain said. “The freezing level will keep rising, and glaciers will melt.”
Seems Glaciers are getting heat from both ends.
James
Australia, SA
Yeah all of those assumptions are based upon “As temperatures keep increasing…”
Seems like that is not happening, mate.
Not at all.
Furthermore:
http://www.iceagenow.com/Indian_Scientists_Debunk_UN_Glacier_Retreat_Claim.htm
I would ask the question, 4 Billion, what exactly are you trying to prove or disprove??
What is your motivation?
And it is really late here…almost 3 AM…so I am off to bed.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
savethesharks (22:13:44) :
GOT BIG NEWS FOR YA….
More related to PRECIP than TEMPS, allright??
=================================================
But your link does connect growth of these Glaciers to warming. 🙂
“Indeed, the unexpected advance of the glaciers has been blamed on climate change, but the explanation does seem valid—extra moisture carried from the warming Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea eastward seems to be dumping more snow on the Western Himalayas.”
and the Discovery link…
“It looks like it’s the Westerlies,” Shroder said, referring to strong jets of wind that pour from west to east in a belt around the planet. Though he can’t say for certain, the winds appear to be carrying more moisture from the warming Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea eastward.”
James
Australia, SA
Furthermore, James….you can believe whatever you want to believe in regards to climate science.
You will be no different than hundreds of millions of others of our species who have been duped by bad information, science, data, or a combination of the three….down through the ages.
It just so happens you and I are caught in one of the biggest scientific fraud schemes since the middle ages.
The peril is yours for the taking.
What say ye? Show forth the evidence of ANTHROPOGENIC global warming.
Let’s see it. You can’t produce it.
You might be able to show a warming uptick in the past half century.
BIG ****** DEAL. The Earth….and her cycles are 4.6 BILLION years old.
Think you can improve upon that??????
Extremely doubtful……rahter….yea…..impossible.
Give up, mate. Your battle is lost.
The science may not be settled (skeptics we are and proud of it!), but “the science” is not limited to the unsettledness of the scientific community.
Rather….it is related to OBSERVED FACTS.
Glaciers are not dramatically retreating as you claim. In reality…many of them are growing.
Anyways….and NEVERTHELESS….glacier growth/decline is mostly related to PRECIP…and not temps.
Time for you to drop it, all right?
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
CHRIS
Norfolk, VA, USA
“But your link does connect growth of these Glaciers to warming. :-)”
Bro…you are out to lunch…as we say in the states.
You continue to straw man your way through this conversation by manipulating what wasn’t said.
I am talking about real time observations dude.
NO ONE sees as short a time frame as you on this subject. Cherry pick if you want.
I am not saying, nor have I ever, that no warming has occurred.
It has. But it is no different from the previous cycles AT ALL…except that no cycle is the same.
We are in a recovery from the LIA, a very strong modern solar maximum, and perhaps other factors.
But to take 40 years of himalayan glacier data and extrapolate it over the rest of history is retarded….pure and simple.
You have no idea about which you were talking…but even if you did….I ask you again, James: What is your motivation??
What are you trying to prove??
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
Sweet dreams, don’t let the CO2 bugs bight.
Thought you were going to bed.
No way am I any where near lunch….
Chris, the very Scientist whose observation you rely upon to say that some Glaciers are growing says that the likely reason for their growth is more precipitation due to warming Atlantic and Mediterranean seas releasing more moisture into the Westerly air stream that travels to the Western Himalayas.
Where do I manipulate what is said? I quote directly.
As for no one seeing in the time frame I do, the Scientist you quote does.
As warming is causing the retreat of the higher Glaciers (as described in Discovery link), then surely it is fair to expect more retreat if there is more warming, and at some point, no more high alttitude Glaciers, less water for the Rivers down below.
As for my motivation I am interested in exploring the issue of Climate change, as for what I am trying to prove, I am trying to prove if Climate change is a big deal or not.
James
Adelaide, Australia
4 billion (00:40:19) :
Climate change is a big deal, but it’s natural. We evolved to adapt to it.
Both kinds.
When the glaciers grow, there’s less melting for the rivers below due to the river being frozen.
We didn’t come this far to have an elite group of fear-mongers drive the whole of civilization over a cliff to feed thier thirst for world domination.
If you really want to understand the 2 crazes (the coming Ice Age and AGW that span 4 decades of hysteria), try cosmology.
The Greeks argued for a steady state universe, and for 400 years (10x longer than climate hysteria) the astronomers and astrophysicists have been debating over the state of the Cosmos. Expanding, near critical, Contracting, Omega values, etc.
Whatever changes are coming down the extended climate pipe, we either adapt or hit the panic button.
It might interest you to know that in a disaster, those who panic have thier survival rates plummet. They also become a very real danger to those around them, not just to themselves.
Well, that was a political movie if I’ve ever seen one 🙂
And James-Hastings Trew … the science is not right. It is politically corrupted.
I saw the movie last night in Newport Beach. It was great.
I saw the movie last night. As a movie about global warming, despite Steve McIntyre’s key contribution, it was weak. It might be that I, like many who follow this site, Climate Audit and even Real Climate, was very familiar with most of the substantive points. The presentation of substantive facts had far less impact than Gore’s use of Polar Bears. Most of the small college audience (UNH) had no obvious understanding of the science at all. So much of the “hockey stick” information just left them with the primary takeaway – the hockey stick is wrong. As a piece of counter-propaganda to those like Gore who are preaching catastrophic environmental collapse it was OK. It certainly left one with the feeling that Gore and others do not understand the impact their ideas have on ordinary people either in Indiana or Uganda.
Steve McIntyre was very self-effacing but very clear and low key with his description of both the early phase of the Hockey Stick controversy and the 2000 NASA temeprature glitch. Ross looked like a leading man while Steve looked like a slimmed down Sebastian Cabot. James Hansen – well he came off quite badly. The WSJ speaker was pretty good – I missed his name – as was Patrick Moore and Lindzen. Beside Gore, the American environmentalist opposed to the use of DDT in Uganda came off the worst – out of touch with the science of DDT not to mention the rest of reality. A well meaning “do gooder” who is contributing to the delay in the use of DDT to reduce malaria. Not evil, just wrong!
It would have been better, given what it was intended to be, if the movie was tightened up from 90 to 50 minutes. As it stands, I do not think it will gain much traction and will have a short half life as currently put together. The producers better be ready for the counter-attacks.
I ordered the DVD. I’ll wait till I seen the whole show before I make any judgment on its quality. If its as good as I think it is then it needs to be forced on the schools to countered the other movie, but then maybe that’s not the right thing to do with the youtube generation. 🙂
The title of the movie is entirely wrong of course.
It should have been titled “Just Evil And Wrong”.
rbateman (03:26:56) :
Well said, as always, Robert. Definitely the “god perspective”.
I especially liked this part:
“It might interest you to know that in a disaster, those who panic have thier survival rates plummet. They also become a very real danger to those around them, not just to themselves.”
Yah!
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA