I agree that they never should’ve called this movie The Day The Earth Stood Still because it has nothing to do with the original. But, that’s Hollywood for ya.

[...] Better Video: Screenrant [...]

The government is the biggest polluter of all. Hell even the Military openly pollutes world wide.
Changing a few lightbulbs won’t do it.
More laws only effect the ppl not the companies that own the Governments.
You can’t change the image on the screen by yelling at it. You have to get to the projector.
All the ppl are doing is yelling at the screen. (No pun intended Vic).

Yes you have to go back to 2005 to find arguments against the hockey stick theory. In 2006 the scientist who originally proposed that the climate was heating up faster than at any time in the previous 1000 years came back with more evidence and the scientific community is in broad agreement now that this phenomenon is largely man made .. the government also concludes the same despite resisting it (for ecomonic reasons) for a long time. Once they realized this was real and that not doing anything would cost much more in the long run, that is.

The evidence that was presented and broadly accepted in 2006 (and ever since) is discussed here:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1540773/scientists_back_up_climate_hockey_stick_graph/index.html

Having said that I know that you can never convince some people once their mind is made up .. so I’ll just agree to disagree. However, pressure on politicians is needed as is a non partisan effort to reduce pollution to an extent that the atmosphere has a chance of correcting itself over a few generations.

Recycling and informed individuals deciding to buy hybrid cars will not be enough, this will need an international and government led effort to agree on and hit targets to reduce harmful emissions.

Anyway I won’t go back and forth on this any more. It reminds me how people fought tooth and nail once upon a time to decry any evidence that smoking, or even passive smoking was bad for you. All they do is slow down measures to fix the problem, and that’s what is happening again.

Anyway, back to the original point. I think that substituting nuclear anihilation for environmental disaster is appropriate and timely for the movie.

Did you know that even the original Robert Wise movie deviated from the short story it was based on .. it that short story Gort was revealed to be the master of Klaatu .. something the movie makers decided wasn’t palatable for US audiences of the time.

Well I’m going off to watch X-files now .. I just bought seasons 5, 6 and 7

This global warming is due to the Sun.
(That big nuclear reaction in the sky) Scientists have discussed it, it is becoming accepted,,, slowly…

However there’s still a lot of “groups” that are making “LOTS OF MONEY” by pushing the adgenda that its caused by mankind.

At the end of the day, its all about the money…

This is incredibly OT but,

That site you linked and any graphs/studies showing exponential increase in recent temperature fluctuations were proven wrong.

My professor for my masters thesis actually was one of the ones who discovered the flaws in the methodology and there were hearings made to try and force the original creator to reveal his data and method which he tried to keep hidden.

Look up the “hockey stick debate”

No more climate change talk from me

Great post there, bro, despite the fact I disagree with a lot of it.

We are not “just animals” just because we’re made of the same stuff. Animals don’t ponder their self-existance or appreciate art and beauty.

Heck the fact that you sat there, gathered your thoughts and added them to this discussion shows that your more than just an animal.

Best,

Vic

Anyway Vic I’m sure you are right and the entire global Scientific community is wrong. Phew! I mean, what do they know? Do they have a lively blog? No they don’t. They only have this boring site from 2004 claiming empirical evidence

http://www.mng.org.uk/gh/threat/threat6.htm

Group hug.

The first “gut reaction” I had to this trailer is that it appears a Darwinian approach is being used, placing humans on equal footing as other animals on the globe. When viewed from the context that we’re nothing more than animals with clothes on, I can see the possible perspective the writer and director used for this film. If you aren’t the fittest, survival isn’t likely.

Generally, people don’t like being told that they are animals too. Somehow, many find it difficult to accept that possibility when they have a half-million mortgage, 2.3 kids, and two expensive cars parked out front of their garage because their garage is full of stuff. It’s not a point people like to hear, but if an obviously dominant species were to descend upon the planet and see no merit or value in the human race above that of other species, it’s clear to me that an approach like this may be used to correct an imbalance.

That said, does the film merit the recycling of a historic title? Apparently not from what has been said. Perhaps they simply couldn’t come up with a better name. Is this film too sci-fi as has been proposed above? Only time will tell. I personally take all the sci-fi I can get and choose not to judge while using a healthy dose of suspension of disbelief (as I used in Sunshine).

There are many people out there with ideas of wiping people off the globe for the sake of the planet. Tom Clancey wrote “Rainbow Six” about a group of people plotting just such a thing. There’s a group of people on the planet that’d like to see the human race dramatically reduced, or even eliminated. Perhaps the writer is of that mind, or has influential friends that are.

It seems to me that parents would take offense to a movie suggesting that the planet would be better off without their kids treading upon it, after all the work they’ve put into making that happen. I don’t have children so I can’t see that perspective as easily, though I understand it. I think this film stands to be a film that will challenge people to think about possibilities that are uncomfortable to them. I’m just saying that when we have official contact with an alien species all over the globe simultaneously, my gut tells me that we’re not going to be facing E.T. asking to phone home.

Reguardless of who “wins” we loose.
Its a 2 party dictatorship…
Been that way since 63… When the CIA killed Kennedy.

I totally agree Vic. Why the Dems can’t see this is beyond me. I’m torn though; I believe one candidate is better for the country than the other but I also like my mother’s sweet potato pie and if I don’t vote for a certain “57 state” guy, I may not get anymore of that special sweet potato pie.

@Bruce

I hear ya, bro, about the judging a movie just by the trailer. I do plan on seeing this movie but like Vic said, it’s just an opinion brought on by the trailer. I have been fooled by trailers before (Battlefield Earth, Avengers, etc…) so we will have to see.

I don’t want to get into a debate in which neither side will convince the other, but…

I find it very amusing how the catchphrase was changed from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change.” Back in the 1970’s scientists were predicting another Ice Age, and now it’s the opposite.

I find the term “Climate Change” hysterically funny, myself – because that’s what the climate DOES… it changes over time.

Maybe someone can explain how we managed to warm up enough after the last Ice Age without the benefit of SUVs, factories and methane from millions of cows?

On the other hand of course I think we shouldn’t pollute if it can be avoided. I just hate seeing an alarmist view on this (thank you SO much Al Gore) that will end up having dire economic consequences for the entire planet.

People propose “solutions” without thinking through to the consequences. Corn for fuel? Awesome! Oh, wait, now corn is displacing other food crops, causing other countries to starve and our food prices to skyrocket? Didn’t think of that…

And as to oil, do you know how many products are oil based? It’s not just for running our cars folks: Plastics, medicine, cosmetics, clothing, shoes, etc., etc.

Of COURSE we need to drill. There are no alternatives in the forseeable future for creating this products, even if we run our cars on whatever alternative. So we need to extricate ourselves from depending on governments that hate us.

I also want to see us develop wind, solar, etc. power, but those things are NOT magic bullets that will wean us off oil in 10 years. Anyone who believes that is being naive and does not have a real-world grasp of the situation.

/Rant

Vic