Customer Rating:  
Summary: An inaccurate film
Comment: This film is extremely misleading. If you wikipedia the title or visit climateofdenial.net you'll see what I mean. Please do not think that this film is a documentary. It is not as it does not present FACT!
Customer Rating:
Summary: Rubbish
Comment: This is the most biased and hypocritical programme/DVD I have ever watched and it underlines the lengths that the oil and car companies will extend to to maintain this epic public mis information campaign. The people interviewed are paid lobbying representatives or receive funding from the oil companies so it is hardly surprising when the say that global warming is a fraud. Do not believe this "carrying on polluting" political film, global warming is not a swindle and the intergovernmental panel on climat change are not idiots, they can see climate change happening is just few people a listening.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Opinions that should be listened to
Comment: A deliberate attempt to be contraversial, this film does add to the debate and brings to the fore opinions that deserve to be listened to.
Regardless of Global Warming, it is still true that every living Ecosystem in our world is in decline and has been for over 20 years.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Expected bias
Comment: Having watched this on Channel 4 I discovered very quickly who was funding the production. It was good television, but then so is Homer Simpson. For me this did not make up for the poor science, and the way he obviously looks at things through oil coloured glasses. I wondered who was doing the swindling
Customer Rating:
Summary: Shocked and horrified
Comment: I watched this film with increasing, wide-mouthed horror. To anyone who doesn't know any climate science, it might have seemed a well-crafted expose, backed up by facts, figures and quotes. But to anyone with even the slightest knowledge, it is clear that the 'facts' were cherry-picked, often from discredited data sets. The graphs and figures were drawn in a selective, deliberately misleading way and the 'experts' were either not good climate scientists or were quoted out of context.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour of putting the minority view, but not without any attempt at getting the facts right or pointing out that most scientists strongly disagree. This is worse than bad; it is criminal and Ofcom should have said so. (Also, to correct one reviewer, it was not shown by the BBC who would, I hope, check their facts, but by Channel 4.)
|
