Robert Redford's Sundance Channel Broadcasts Climate Denier Propaganda

Tue, 2009-11-17 13:26Mitchell Anderson
Mitchell Anderson's picture

Robert Redford's Sundance Channel Broadcasts Climate Denier Propaganda

Much-loved actor and director Robert Redford launched the Sundance Channel fourteen years ago to broadcast independent and progressive films from around the world.

It is therefore surprising that the network chose to broadcast the notoriously inaccurate “Great Global Warming Swindle” this week.

When this pseudo-scientific “documentary” was first broadcast on British television to an audience of 2.5 million in 2007, real scientists were appalled. The British Antarctic Survey released a statement that “any scientist found to have falsified data in the manner of the [film] would be guilty of serious professional misconduct.”

The film was so loopy that several of the individual scientists featured in the “documentary” released their own statements to show how their interviews were used out of context to support the flat-Earth view that climate change was not real.

Dr. Carl Wunsch, a professor of Oceanography at MIT released a statement that read in part:

I believe that climate change is real, a major threat, and almost surely has a major human-induced component… Many of us [in the scientific community] feel an obligation to talk to the media—it’s part of our role as scientists, citizens, and educators… Channel 4 now says they were making a film in a series of “polemics”. There is nothing in the communication we had …that suggested they were making a film that was one-sided, anti-educational, and misleading. I took them at face value—clearly a great error.”


Apparently unfazed by this bracing dose of truth, the production company behind the GGWS responded by threatening to sue Wunsch unless he recanted his statements.

He did not. He instead successfully complained to the British media watchdog (along with 264 other people), which agreed on several points that the filmmakers mistreated him, several other scientists and breached the British broadcasting code for impartiality.

Another scientist featured in the film was Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen of Danish National Space center. He and his colleague Nathan Rive released a statement after the film was broadcast which read in part:

We have concerns regarding the use of a graph featured in the documentary titled ‘Temp & Solar Activity 400 Years’. Firstly, we have reason to believe that parts of the graph were made up of fabricated data that were presented as genuine. The inclusion of the artificial data is both misleading and pointless. Secondly, although the narrator commentary during the presentation of the graph is consistent with the conclusions of the paper from which the figure originates, it incorrectly rules out a contribution by anthropogenic greenhouse gases to 20th century global warming.”

Thirty-six scientists also co-signed a open letter of protest of the film. Another group of researchers submitted a 176-page complaint to the broadcasting watchdog.

The list goes on. In spite of the tsunami evidence that the Great Global Warming Swindle is both laughably wrong and criminally irresponsible, this polemic aired this week to a nation-wide audience on a network renown for its lefty credentials.

Robert Redford, what happened to you?

Comments

I wonder if they are going to play it with a banner across the bottom pointing out the inaccuracies. A panel discussion with experts afterwards could actually be useful.

FM

There was so many inaccuracies in this piece of junk it should be scrapped and replaced with some Doogie Howser re-runs.

Although I agree totally that this is an outrage it might be a bit premature to hang criticism on Redford for this.

If it does come out that he agrees with this bunk my opinion of the man would certainly suffer a huge blow but for now I would give him the benefit of the doubt.

Just a thought…..

Robert Redford has flipped and is now a denier! Someone should set up a generator in his backyard to emit extra C02 so he gets sunburnt first!

Is it really a surprise that Robert Redford has chosen to side with freedom of expression and free speech?
Does the global warming religion axiomatically have to come alongside restrictions on basic Human rights? Or is it kind of like Islam where you can have some sects that are more vehement to their belief in an inconvinient truth than others?

Lol, I love these articles.

Well there is one obvious parallel in that anyone remotely in opposition is an “infidel” or in the case of AGW, a “denier”. These labels feel roughly the same to me.

These film makers apparently made errors and/or were misleading. Lessons learned from Michael Moore and Al Gore perhaps.

False equivalence. Al Gore doesn’t distort what real scientists say; Michael Moore doesn’t pretend to be about science. Both respect their audiences.

Denialists are liars who show their contempt for the truth, for the scientists and for the audience.

If you can’t tell the difference you have a problem.

Of course the militant Islamist would like the terminology comparison even less and would say even nastier things about infidels. Look away though. It’s all too much to contemplate.

Side point - on Conan’s show, Gore just said the earth’s core was “millions” of degrees - HA!

that would make us a star or something. Okay I’ll consider giving him the benefit of the doubt that it was some kind of joke… if he says so.

but it doesn’t change my perception that the man is ready, willing and able to exaggerate.

Your perception is not based on the facts.

The last resort of those who have no science to support their belief.

What bothers me the most is that this horrible piece of nonsense will acquire a thin veneer of credence as a result of being shown on the Sundance Channel. It was, however, actually shown last night (or very very early this morning) so the stampede of the stupid may have missed it.

[x]

There are enough articles on the “myth of peak oil” floating around the Internet to fill a book; and there are enough books on the subject to fill a small library.  One of the common threads throughout these publications is their lack of credible sources, because not only is peak oil real, but we’re rapidly approaching that threshold. 

An example that is smacking the United...

read more