What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
225 Comments
- TheUniphobiac, on 10/12/2007, -99/+243He probably thinks he invented BitTorrent.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+119It's already on Bit Torrent.
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/hashtorrent/3574668.torrent/An_Inconvenient_Truth_-_En_Obekv_m_Sanning.3574668.TPB.torrent - aahpandasrun, on 10/12/2007, -14/+84Last I heard, most scientists have judged this movie to be accurate. I'd rather trust the consensus of the scientific community over you.
- Zique, on 10/12/2007, -8/+57Last I checked there were almost 10000 seeders and 15000 leeches... um, or so I've heard.
- OBDriftwood, on 10/12/2007, -9/+54It will be on BitTorrent, but the title will be changed to "Asian teen loses virginity".
- schadenfreude56, on 10/12/2007, -9/+53And even if the facts are hyped up a bit, is it such a bad thing to try to reduce our carbon footprint? I'm pretty sure that cutting back on foreign oil and switching to cleaner, alternative fuels won't be a bad thing.
- Brian48216, on 10/12/2007, -12/+46people like you ruin the internet.
- Ajajadude, on 10/12/2007, -5/+38Congratulations, the Bush Administration would like to hire you as a climate expert.
- Jdban, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29Piratebay is BitTorrent...
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25"Do you think all these producers just want to give away their investment?"
Just FYI, the film's producers, Participant Productions, did agree to donate all of their share of the revenue to help combat global warming. - heuer007, on 11/04/2007, -8/+32Dear Al Gore,
If you put your movie on PirateBay or Mininova, I will watch it.
Signed,
We Pirates - treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29It's one of those documentaries which the majority of people would like to see, but wouldn't want to pay to see it. So Bittorrent and streaming is the best solution.
- Splitter402, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I'm failing to see how something DOESNT end up on bittorrent.
- thefirstenemy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Pretty sure the first poster was joking, but for everyone who is an idiot....
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
Al Gore doesn't claim he invented the internet. - jakefloyd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Because right now it's an illegal version of it on Piratebay. If the studio itself releases it for bittorrent sharing, you could have a legal version.
- Stonedonkey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22Last time this story came up, it got disappeared when it hit the front page.
- Scruffydan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20@bowiestyle "Who are these scientist that say its accurate. Climatologists, the people that have the most expertise on this field, say its an embarrassment."
Climatologists or other scientists can say anything they want, BUT if it is not in a peer reviewed journal it doesn't mean much.
I am under the impression that there is very little debate in the scientific journals on this issue, and that is the only debate that really matters.
As for Tim Ball the 'climatologist' in the link you provided I think you need to learn more about him...
http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-the-first-canadian-phd-in-climatology
lets just say he isn't the expert he makes himself out to be. - Shaymus22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18No, that would be too convenient!
- UrbenLegend, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16It's a great documentary and the its message could reach a lot more people if it was put on BitTorrent.
- MercedRocks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16Yah...think all the crazy right-wingers voted to bury it......
How can u not say theres global warming when a huge chunk of ancient ice just broke off of Canada?
http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/cp_n122847A.xml.html
THXs to "erikpemberton" for resubmitting :) - vhold, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16"yeah, his purpose isn't to make money its to inform people, he would do better to the enviorment if he just put it on the internet instead of traveling around."
Making money and informing people aren't necessarily mutually exclusive goals. Don't forget he is also promoting himself.
Also, it's probably not just his decision. It's not like he made the movie without anybody's help.
Do you think all these producers just want to give away their investment?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/fullcredits - slicedoranges, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Driving a car doesn't make him a hypocrite... you're pretty shallow minded if you think that.
- sufferingant, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13MercedRocks you are a good man. Even though you submitted the story first, you didn't have to whine or shout out "DUPE!"
- scratched, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I wouldn't call PETA a "great" charity. It's the only charity I would ever avoid associating myself with.
PETA has such unethical tactics that it makes me sick. - jmann, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11If he wants to save the world, why not?
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11"Should Al Gore put "An Inconvenient Truth" up on BitTorrent?"
Sure; thats about the only way anyone who doesn't believe in global warming already will watch it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15@bowiestyle
try quoting an article from a reputable website. - Stonedonkey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11^^^ How do you know they haven't already? :p
- roguenine2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10100% of the money from An Inconvenient Truth goes to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a non-profit run by the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors. (http://www.allianceforclimateprotection.org/)
- erikpemberton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I'd like to address some of the comments here in general.
(1) This isn't about getting a movie for free. Although I've had access to all kinds of pirated material over the years - i.e. Kevin's "dark tips" about the piracy scene were never new to me - I am still a consumer, more than anything else. Hell, I even bought the DVD of An Inconvenient Truth already myself. But I hate the way corporations treat consumers like criminals. I pay AT&T good money every month for DSL service that is continually throttled or disconnected for using BitTorrent, regardless of its many legal uses. The more stuff like this makes news and justifies the existence of the technology itself, the more seriously it will be taken as a platform. BitTorrent is a wonderful content delivery system that deserves all the positive press it can get, rather than the crap the MPAA and RIAA continually feed the media about it. Perhaps you'd prefer everything to have DRM and be distributed in a closed, top-down architecture that prefers profit over smart distribution models. I don't.
(2) I don't give a damn where you stand on global warming. Personally, this movie (and The Corporation) terrifies me. Not because of our future generations. I'm never having kids. Not because I am left-leaning in my political views. I could give a crap about politics. What really disturbs me is the complete apathy that people approach this subject with. Rather than err on the side of caution and not gamble with the planet - our only source of life - people continually use the same arguments of "it's not my problem" and "it doesn't effect me" and "it's too much responsibility" or "it's too expensive." I see nothing but fleets of giant gas-guzzling cars and lines at gas stations when I go out. People so engrossed in their excess, their consumption, that they can't step back a second and realize that they are complicit in their lives, that they are responsible for this planet as much as anyone else. I used to work for a guy who lived up in the hills, drove a giant Dodge Ram truck up and down the hill every day, except when he drove his Lotus or BMW - all of which got 14mpg or less. When I was invited up to his house for a company party, every possible appliance was on, regardless of whether it was being used, and I got the distinct impression it wasn't just for the party. This one person's consumption could potentially reduce the lifespan of another person by a few days, weeks, months, simply so he can live in excess and declare "it's not my problem." It's passing the buck, and it's not OK.
You can hijack the comments and say whatever you want, make the issue positive or negative, left or right, but at the end of the day, I don't think there's a single person on Digg who would like to see BitTorrent continue getting beat up in the press or see the planet die off and take us all with it. Whether you are "right" or "wrong" - it doesn't matter. At least there's some form of conversation about these issues, and that part is what's most important. - mdigirol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I think Al Gore would be receptive to this idea. He donates all of his time now to this cause, and what better way to get it to people than to spread it on the 'net. Plus that would probably help save the environment, since plastic DVD cases won't have to be made to house copies of the movie (he already has a copy on the DVD in a recycled paper holder instead of the conventional plastic box....I got one of those for Christmas!)
- vhold, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10"Just FYI, the film's producers, Participant Productions, did agree to donate all of their share of the revenue to help combat global warming."
Ah, I didn't know that.. Of course, that means that to give away the movie for free would be kind of like taking potential money away from those charities. - AmishRefugee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@bowiestyle: I find it hard not to laugh when a website is claiming An Inconvenient Truth is alarmist when they have an ad for instant terror attack alert service
https://www.alertsusa.com/images/aff_banners/300x250-ausa1.jpg
who do you think is being alarmist? - jboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8a legal paramount movie on bittorrent, for free?
This planet is going down :/ - omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9If he truly cares about his message, then yes, it should be available for free online.
- dgh1973, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If he honestly cares about the message, then this shouldn't even be a question.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It is not Gore's "causation" argument, it is the scientific consensus of reputable experts, in the thousands, studying the issue over many years, based on numerous data points.
You can review some of those data points yourself, for free, online. You can review 800,000 years of ice core samples correlating CO2 levels and avg. global temperatures, and see for yourself that your statement is incorrect - this is *not* just another periodic fluctuation, it is way out of the range or normal variability, at least over the past nearly one million years.
You can review the details analysis of the past 1,000 years, and see more closely how recent levels of CO2, and corresponding avg. global temperatures, are spiking dramatically.
You can read scientific research - all of it, again, freely available, from the sources, much of it published on official US government sites (as is the source data) - explaining how the conclusions were reached, how the climate models constructed, how their predictive power was tested, and what the forecast is for the next few decades.
Oh, and, by the way, you could, if you cared, easily read on the actual effect of the sun's output variability and how it does not account for the current ahistoric global climate change.
But, frankly, after viewing the actual source data, you won't need to be an expert, or read one, in order to see what is happening and understand the trend and its logical conclusion.
NONE of which depend on Gore in any way, shape or form. He is merely the messenger, and, sadly you would rather attack him (or, more accurately, mindlessly parrot attacks on him) than review the data for yourself and think for yourself. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Not so much: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Perhaps 'cause the world is going to hell in a hand basket.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Al Gore has been working tirelessly to raise awareness on this issue for more than 20 years. He presented his lecture literally thousands of times - on his own personal dime, incidentally - before he was ever approached by the director and producer to make this movie. Unless you think that, among his other talents, he is clairvoyant and knew that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would be running for president decades before they knew themselves, your comment is utterly uninformed *****.
- nunia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I happen to be one of those scientists, and what Gore states in his film is pretty damned correct.
It amazes me how much people with little to no education in science have such high threshholds for proof where science is concerned, but such low threshholds for the stuff they want so desperately to believe.
Go out and buy a global systems textbook (rigorously peer-reviewed), read it, and decide for yourselves. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Go ahead digg me down I don't know what I did wrong this time but I always get dugg down. "
That sentance right there is probably the reason. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5For those you who haven't seen it, you'll find it informative and enlightening. :)
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Irrelevant. The facts presented are the facts. Check them out for yourself. Attacking the messenger is a logical fallacy - ad hominem.
As I noted, he has been talking about this issue since long before it was fashionable - or politically advantageous for him to do so. You ascribe to him motives not based on fact, but based on an a priori rejection of the facts regarding climate change. Because repeated attempts to assail the facts, discredit the scientists, and bury the info have failed, denialists now pin their hopes on attacking Gore.
The facts about climate change exist completely independent of Gore's presentation of them. They are all publicly available - you can review 800,000 years of ice core sample data directly from the source - on a US government site, no less. You can review the past 1,000 years of detailed analysis, direct form the sources - also available on US gov't sites, among other sources around the world.
Gore happens to be right. I know that, because you oppose the man, you oppose the facts, but that only makes you an ideological idiot.
And, by the way, this is not an "environmentalist" issue. It is not some kind of fringe concern that only affects those who care about some obscure fauna or flora. This is the real thing, and will change our lives and our children's lives beyond recognition. To remain ignorant, and to ignore inconvenient information merely because it comes packaged in the "wrong" partisan box for your taste, is just plain stupid. - MSTK, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11witte: To the contrary. I've downloaded it as a torrent, with a multitude of seeders and leechers at hand.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Actually, the classic response of the propagandist is to accuse rational thinkers and reporters of factual data of propaganda.
I suppose you would deny the Holocaust, too, just because you can link to some denialists who recently spoke at an "international conference" in Iran.
The reason anthropogenic climate change is no longer being seriously challenged as real has nothing to do with media reporting, since scientists base their conclusions on data, not the press. The media is merely a Johny-come-lately to an issue that has been extensively peer reviewed and debated in the scientific community for many years - long before the deniers cranked up their oil-company-funded propaganda machines.
In fact, of course, the media is fanning the controversy, not the other way around. Controversy makes for headlines and sells newspapers. But there is no real controversy among climatologists about the basic issue of anthropogenic climate change, just about the details, just as there is no real controversy among evolutionary biologists about the basic mechanism of natural selection, just debate about the details, just as their is no real controversy among cosmologists about the Big Bang, just debate about the details.
That is how science works. Science begins with the evidence, and lets analysis and conclusions lead where they may. Science is incompatible with dogma, which starts with a conclusions and then cherry-picks and/or falsifies evidence to suit, rejecting any facts that are inconvenient.
Anthropogenic climate change is a noncontroversial reality. Scientists who study it as their life's work have reached a nearly universal consensus on its causes and mechanism and, most importantly for us laypeople, its devastating effects.
It is real, even if it is inconvenient for you politically or ideologically. Deal with it. Denial is for ignorant fools and Iranian presidents. - Eyeooga, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11@bowiestyle:
Tom Harris wrote this article??? Tom Harris of "The Natural Resources Stewardship Project is a Canadian non-profit organization presenting itself as undertaking "A proactive grassroots campaign to counter the Kyoto Protocol and other greenhouse gas reduction schemes while promoting sensible climate change policy." It is headed by global warming skeptics Tom Harris, formerly Ottawa director of High Park Group, and Tim Ball, formerly Professor of Geography at the University of Winnipeg."??
An industry whore, no doubt. - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Al Gore does not personally make a cent off the film, the lectures, the book, or the DVD. Just FYI.
Paramount Pictures made about $25 million from the film to date, and Gore got them to pledge 5% to charity. The production company, Participant Productions, agreed to donate 100% of their revenue from the film. - Toast1185, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I took a global warming class. My professor said that an Inconvenient Truth was mostly accurate, but more so it was sensationalized. He isn't so much so trying to push the truth as he is an agenda. It works out though because the other side is doing much of the same and Al Gore's version is closer to what is really happening.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Actually, if you look further down the page you'll see some of the actual source data linked to. Of course, one need not research all the data on the Internet - but it is interesting that you make that criticism, yet have no compunction about jumping to a (wrong) conclusion based on no data at all.
The data shows that you are factually incorrect, that the current levels are completely anomalous when compared to the past million years of evidence. "Most of the warming" is a meaningless phrase, because the world has gone through natural cycles of warming and cooling. In fact, most of what is anomalous today is the spiking of CO2 levels literally into uncharted territory. Predictive models, which have been compared against actual data to test for their reliability, have shown to be quite accurate in noting the effect of CO2 atmospheric levels on average global temperatures.
Anyone with basic common sense looking at the charts comparing the two measures over the past 800,000 years will draw the logical conclusions.
Of course, evidence doesn't sway evolution deniers or Holocaust deniers, either, so I don't expect you to learn much out of this exchange. Hopefully, however, a few more open-minded if still uninformed individuals out there will read this exchange, scroll down and click no the links to actual credible data, think for themselves and draw the logical conclusions. -
Show 51 - 100 of 225 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 