Chasing Ice, changing lives

350 or bust

Here’s a video that’s going viral. When I first watched it on Tuesday, it had just over 3,000 views. Late on Tuesday it was posted on , and when I saw it there yesterday it was up to 18,000. This morning it’s up to 44,571. So if you’re interested in what a diehard Bill O’Reilly fan has to say after watching the documentary Chasing Ice, check out this video and then share it yourself:


Here’s the trailer for Chasing Ice. It is now showing in major cities across North America – go to their website, for details. For those of us who don’t live in any of those cities, I guess we’ll have to wait for the DVD. The film synopsis is:

Chasing Ice is the story of one man’s mission to change the tide of history by gathering undeniable evidence of climate change. Using time-lapse cameras…

View original post 22 more words


About pendantry

Phlyarologist (part-time) and pendant. Campaigner for action against anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and injustice in all its forms. Humanist, atheist, notoftenpist. Wannabe poet, writer and astronaut.
This entry was posted in Environment, News and politics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Chasing Ice, changing lives

  1. witsendnj says:

    Uh, well, don’t miss this gem about Master O’Reilly:


    • pendantry says:

      To be honest I really don’t know who this O’Reilly character is (your link suggests he may be a bit of a crank?). I didn’t realise there would be the potential for knee-jerkism in Christine’s headline (or I would have changed it). Whether he’s an oracle or a nutcase isn’t really the point of this post, as I see it, which for me is about the release of a powerful new film that may help to turn the tide of opinion against the slippery slope of inaction.


      • witsendnj says:

        Here’s the trailer to the movie: and the lovely sad closing credits:

        Bill O’Reilly is a television idiot on Fox News who has an unfortunately rapt audience that actually believe his lies. I never watch him and if he didn’t exist, no doubt somebody else would take his place; but he is important/dangerous in the way of any demagogue that sways large numbers of people without the ability to think critically.

        I have to say it really frustrates me that these movies that will supposedly “help turn the tide of opinion” are so freaking hard to see! If you don’t happen to live in a major city and make it to the one theater where it’s showing you have to wait an awfully long time, and Chasing Ice and Dirty Lying Bastards aren’t the only ones. Why is that? Can’t they just have you pay to watch it streaming online? You’d think they would want as many people as possible to see. I guess it’s the movie game to win prizes at film festivals first, or something.


        • pendantry says:

          “Why is that?”

          My guess is The Powers That Be don’t want to spark off the inevitable panic any sooner than they absolutely must. (And they probably figure they’re being noble, too.)

          Thanks for the links 🙂

          I agree: those closing credits are lovely, and sad.


  2. judyinalaska says:

    That’s pretty powerful! Can’t wait to see the movie.


  3. [bunches of waffle snipped]

    Or if you refuse to undertake such elemental devil’s advocate due diligence, you’ll have to ask yourself what possible harm could happen from doing that. As I see it, there are only two kinds of people on the planet, those who are skeptical of man-caused global warming, and those who’d lean in that direction when they actually read detailed assessments from skeptic scientists along with analysis of IPCC methodology, and compare the entire lot to the IPCC side.


    • pendantry says:

      I see absolutely no point in trying to discuss anything with you. You redefine reality at a whim, and twist and turn like a twisty turny thing. Have a nice life.


      • I’m not surprised. The inability to participate in the arena of ideas is the hallmark of those who promote man-caused global warming. You may say anything you please, of course, it is a free country and this is your blog. But when you repeatedly fail to demonstrate how I’ve redefined the reality about the woman’s claim about being an O’Reilly daily watcher, you’ve lost the ball there, haven’t you, particularly when you have to start deleting portions of my comments? You loyal readers will begin to wonder what it was that I said which necessitated that move. The one more bit of evidence about O’Reilly NOT being a skeptic was the straw that broke the proverbial camel’s back? Or was it the suggestion that you run from debate?

        Have a nice life as well. I’ve enjoyed the challenge of talking with you.


        • pendantry says:

          Yes, well… you’re keen on hallmarks. “It’s a free country,” you say: the hallmark of those whose minds are small. In case you hadn’t noticed, we live on a planet, not one country. I’m so glad you’ve ‘enjoyed the challenge’ of talking with me. It must be quite a challenge thinking up your nonsensical irrelevancies. Have fun in your crusade to prove that some bloke I’ve barely heard of is so vastly, hugely mind-bogglingly important that he deserves so much of your time defending him. Peace, out.


        • Russell Cook (@questionAGW) says:

          [p: Because I believe in the concept of ‘freedom of speech’, I have decided not to, as you would say, ‘deep six’ this post of yours. However, this is the last time I shall refrain, for the reasons stated below. Please do not waste your time in a response.]

          Uh, oh. Folks will interpret – correctly or not – that your first remark means big minds do not want a free country.

          [p: I believe that my meaning was perfectly plain: those whose remarks suggest parochial thinking are unlikely to consider the bigger picture. No doubt some will mistake my meaning: this is always possible. You, it seems to me, are intent on choosing any interpretation of my words that affords the greatest likelihood of provoking a rebuttal response — as, indeed, is the case here.]

          I most certainly am aware we live on a planet, the embarrassment might be for you how I might be able to drink you under the table when it comes to save-the-planet efforts on extreme recycling, minimal energy use, minimal car travel when a bicycle will suffice, tree sapling planting, litter pick-up, etc, etc. It may be that I outdistance you on those points by miles and years, so much so that you’d never catch up.

          [p: As you can have no idea whether your allegation is correct, I shall treat this attempt to gain the moral high ground with the contempt it deserves.]

          On talking with you, as I noted in the comments which you chose to delete, there’s no challenge to this at all, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. In fact, I find it downright spooky, it shouldn’t be this easy.

          Regarding O’Reilly, you hand me yet another gem on a silver platter – re-read your own words at the very top. You’ve placed all your eggs in one basket for the entire premise of your blog on the lady being “a diehard Bill O’Reilly fan”. Your knowledge of O’Reilly is completely irrelevant – shell game maneuver #1 on your part in your reply here – and your #2 maneuver is to say I’m defending O’Reilly, which any astute reader of this entire dialog will tell you I am not. If anything, one of the central bits in my own JunkScience article points to O’Reilly’s own ignorance on who the head of the IPCC is.

          [p: My guess is that you refer to these words: ‘Chasing Ice: Fox News Fan Discovers Bill O’Reilly Lies About Climate Change’. And this is, I believe, the crux of the matter here. What you fail to realise is that these are not my words at all. In the interests of fair play I shall labour at an explanation: 1) WordPress recently implemented the ability to ‘reblog’ another’s post. 2) Seeing a post on 350 or bust which featured a video that I believed to be worthy of sharing, I made use of this ‘reblog’ facility. 3) As it turns out, ‘reblog’, as implemented by WordPress, does not afford the ‘reblogger’ the ability to alter the headline text. (and I thank you for having so clearly highlighted the dangers of this flaw). To reiterate a point you are unwilling to accept: I do not know, nor care, who this O’Reilly bloke is. My intent was to help, in my small way, to promote the video featuring a climate change sceptic who was clearly moved by watching the film Chasing Ice. 4) Believing that you had an ironclad rebuttal to what you read as the main message behind this blog post, and, further, mistakenly believing that this was the main message that I was trying to champion, you embarked upon a campaign to ‘prove me wrong’, totally oblivious to the fact that you proceeded from a false assumption.]

          One day, the manner in which you toss out such unsupportable assertions will smack you in the head like a 2×4, where somebody else or you yourself will ask, “Why do you do that?”, and upon realizing you have no valid answer, you will thank me for the realization. I will say “you’re welcome” in advance and in the meantime also offer “Peace out” since you are the one putting out the arguably non-peaceful resistance to straight-up questions.

          [p: pot, meet kettle.]

          Me, all I’ve done here is point to an irreconcilable problem and say “what’s up with that?” But you and Christine over at 350orbust literally have no answer, nor do you lift a finger to dispute my evidence from Media Matters & 60 Minutes, a pair of places you should have no trouble endorsing. That’s a bug that never goes away, does it? Don’t think of it as a deadly virus, but instead a liberating ray of hope. There’s not a thing wrong with asking your own devil’s advocate questions to be sure what you hold to be true actually stands up to courtroom-style evidence presentation. You’ll be fine if it does. It it does not, then what?

          Just askin’.

          [p: just answerin’]


I'd love to hear what your views are!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.