Quote:
This ambitious documentary/drama/animation hybrid stars Pete Postlethwaite as an archivist in the devastated world of the future, asking the question: "Why didn't we stop climate change when we still had the chance?" He looks back on footage of real people around the world in the years leading up to 2015 before runaway climate change took place. Written by
Thursday • February 11 2010
Book/Media Reviews
Movie: "The Age of Stupid" 2009
Ache
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dTyTTFgluk
ohanian
Ache wrote:
Pete Postlethwaite as an archivist in the devastated world of the future, asking the question: "Why didn't we stop climate change when we still had the chance?"
Because the future is highly uncertain.
It rude for historians of the future to ask these questions because they have the hindsight of history while people living today does not and could not know what will happen tomorrow much less that will happen 30 years from now. You can guess all you wan but it is still uncertain.
TWilliam
ohanian wrote:
Because the future is highly uncertain.It rude for historians of the future to ask these questions because they have the hindsight of history while people living today does not and could not know what will happen tomorrow much less that will happen 30 years from now. You can guess all you wan but it is still uncertain.
Which of course is a perfectly legitimate excuse for ignoring the most probable outcomes rather than taking steps to reduce their probability...
...NOT
jacksonp
HI
I still think it's debatable, but that is only my opinion. I really do think that cleaning up are environment and are dependency on fossil fuels would only be beneficial to us. You believe in global warming, lets start by doing that. Every one can a agree that are mass consumption is detrimental to are environment. Base the opinion that every 1 agrees, and you'll have a common goal for every one to live by. At the same time none believers and believers can set the precedence for change.
I still think it's debatable, but that is only my opinion. I really do think that cleaning up are environment and are dependency on fossil fuels would only be beneficial to us. You believe in global warming, lets start by doing that. Every one can a agree that are mass consumption is detrimental to are environment. Base the opinion that every 1 agrees, and you'll have a common goal for every one to live by. At the same time none believers and believers can set the precedence for change.
careinke
Jacksonp,
Your speech recognition software is typing "are" when you say "our." It is also typing the number "1" when it should be spelling "one."
You may want to consider proofing your stuff, prior to posting.
Your speech recognition software is typing "are" when you say "our." It is also typing the number "1" when it should be spelling "one."
You may want to consider proofing your stuff, prior to posting.
pablonite
TWilliam wrote:
Which of course is a perfectly legitimate excuse for ignoring the most probable outcomes rather than taking steps to reduce their probability...
Hello sir! And on what science are you basing these "probable" outcomes on and when did you decide probability trumps science?
Oh...wait, lemme guess, the "science" spewing out of the back orifice of a purely political organization known as the IPCC, a underling of the UN, the worlds war party!
The movie has an ironic title. Tried watching it but it comes off like an insulting opinion piece.
jacksonp wrote:
You believe in global warming, lets start by doing that. Every one can a agree that are mass consumption is detrimental to are environment. Base the opinion that every 1 agrees, and you'll have a common goal for every one to live by. At the same time none believers and believers can set the precedence for change.
OK, you go ahead and "believe" that, whatever makes you feel more "green". I think Earth worship is going to be right up your alley and I hope your new priests don't physically molest you by rationing your carbon. Good luck!
TWilliam
pablonite wrote:
Hello sir! And on what science are you basing these "probable" outcomes on and when did you decide probability trumps science?
Ummm... last time I checked, probability and its associated mathematics is one of the tools of science, not something that 'trumps' science.
Quote:
Oh...wait, lemme guess, the "science" spewing out of the back orifice of a purely political organization known as the IPCC, a underling of the UN, the worlds war party!
Mmmm... no, actually. I don't pay much attention to the opinions of 'panels' of 'experts'. I read about research, make my own observations, apply my own critical thinking skills (which are substantial) and formulate my own opinions thank you.
Quote:
The movie has an ironic title. Tried watching it but it comes off like an insulting opinion piece.
Yes, I suppose it would to those who are enamored of the cultural zeitgeist to which it refers...
Bas
How odd, this movie was on public television here (Holland) in December, caught the second half of it and thought it was pretty good! Ofcourse the future is uncertain but the guy is mostly looking back at things that have already happened now, with the wisdom of his (future) hindsight.
And it's not only about climate change, if I remember correctly, overpopulation, peak oil and lots of other contemporary developments are also featured. I'd recommend it!
And it's not only about climate change, if I remember correctly, overpopulation, peak oil and lots of other contemporary developments are also featured. I'd recommend it!