Tomorrowland : Blatant climate change propaganda
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
It's obviously leftist environmental propaganda. Why else would George Clooney have been in this film?
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
Good point, I only recently understood that he's a filthy liberal of the worst kind. He was absolutely sure Donald Trump would not be elected president. Shows how much he knows about other things he's sure about.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
yeah, well we'll know eventually. or someone else will know. While I tend to be persuaded by the bare mountainside at Glacier Nat'l park and the receding Mendenahall Glacier near Juneau, I too thought, "Oh, Dear, did they really have to bring that in?" If this movie were better, it would be quaint the way old 50s flicks like Them and all the other giant insect movies refer to nuclear fallout. Soylent Green is funny for lots of reasons. No one talks about over population but I am big believer that it deserves more attention.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
You don't have to be a climate scientist to understand the inherent logic in erring on the side of caution.
What I think you really wanted to say is that this movie had a liberal agenda... in which case many liberals thought that it had an objectivist tone. Probably why it did so poorly; people LOVE finding reasons to hate something. "Too many white people in this movie" I hear the left say. "Not enough white people in this movie" I hear the right say. Because a sense of self-importance that pontificating on internet forums gives them is the real escapism they desire.
Much like the corpses in a cemetery, if you're not digging for agendas in films, you aren't going to see them. Then you're free to enjoy things for being simply entertaining.
What I think you really wanted to say is that this movie had a liberal agenda... in which case many liberals thought that it had an objectivist tone. Probably why it did so poorly; people LOVE finding reasons to hate something. "Too many white people in this movie" I hear the left say. "Not enough white people in this movie" I hear the right say. Because a sense of self-importance that pontificating on internet forums gives them is the real escapism they desire.
Much like the corpses in a cemetery, if you're not digging for agendas in films, you aren't going to see them. Then you're free to enjoy things for being simply entertaining.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
I think that the only thing you wanted to produce was attract attention to your post through a simple and politically incorrect comment from a world event that started decades ago, it's been studied for years and it has been corroborated for many scientific papers. The climate change is a reality that it's impossible to deny, or you prefer to be part of the people that gobbled it up this like a chocolate eclair??
The good thing for you is that the bait you threw was bitten by several, and you should be proud for that, I suppose
The good thing for you is that the bait you threw was bitten by several, and you should be proud for that, I suppose
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
The climate may be changing, as it is what the climate does, but we humans have nothing to do with it.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
If you think that, then I have nothing more to say that I hope you enjoy your chocolate eclair.
Post deleted
This message has been deleted.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
I'm not saying your wrong, but one of the major problems is the hysteria and hatred spewed by the leftist Hollywood gang and politicians who make millions of $ doing more damage to the environment than the average person would do in a dozen life times.
Al Gore works people into a frenzy, lives in a energy wasteful mansion, flies around the world in private jets and is escorted with his wife (only) in a limo built for a dozen. He swears the polar ice-caps are going to melt and flood all beach areas - then drops $8 million on a beach-front house in Malibu.
Other celebrities get paid millions to make a movie where they blow up a few houses, wreck a bunch of cars, have bunches of explosions which not only wasted fuel but pollute the air and then push for regulations on manufacturing which cost middle-class people their jobs.
Had the environmentalists not gone the "Reefer Madness" route and practiced what they preached, then more people would have been willing to believe what they were selling.
There would still be skeptics. And, there would be people like me who acknowledge what man has caused but also recognize that we not only have a small understanding what has happened over time but also that we can't control what nature has wrought.
Either way, more people would be open to what is being said if it weren't for the horrible messengers associated with the environment.
Al Gore works people into a frenzy, lives in a energy wasteful mansion, flies around the world in private jets and is escorted with his wife (only) in a limo built for a dozen. He swears the polar ice-caps are going to melt and flood all beach areas - then drops $8 million on a beach-front house in Malibu.
Other celebrities get paid millions to make a movie where they blow up a few houses, wreck a bunch of cars, have bunches of explosions which not only wasted fuel but pollute the air and then push for regulations on manufacturing which cost middle-class people their jobs.
Had the environmentalists not gone the "Reefer Madness" route and practiced what they preached, then more people would have been willing to believe what they were selling.
There would still be skeptics. And, there would be people like me who acknowledge what man has caused but also recognize that we not only have a small understanding what has happened over time but also that we can't control what nature has wrought.
Either way, more people would be open to what is being said if it weren't for the horrible messengers associated with the environment.
Post deleted
This message has been deleted.
Post deleted
This message has been deleted.
Re: Blatant climate change propaganda
Chain of events:
kjk22956-545-667740 posted (Sat Jun 11 2016 15:29:03)
As a reply to a post i made. This is sarcasm, note of the comment following it and the idomatic structure. That exact phrase is idiomatic and commonplace for sarcastic remarks/statements - ex: And the ... insert any normatively weird/false statement as; the sun orbits the earth.
On which I reply
*The last part being in cursive.
To which you replied:
elpresidente-4 posted (Mon Jun 13 2016 10:28:39)
Onto which I replied:
@elpresidente:
Both messages have the same content about the moonlanding, both states it took place. Why would anyone (if you were to claim the chain of events is different...) rule OP as a pinhead if they share the same sentiment..?
Please explain that.
[EDIT] Sorry for the doublepost (admin/mod), I thought it was easier to seperate the two replies to keep it clear for both me and those two I reply to. Feel free to join them if you think otherwise.
Ignorance is only a bliss if you haven't reached awareness.
My imdb posts are getting altered.