Home 2009 Documentary

[Oceanic]

I'm a huge sucker for any kind of documentary especially the space and nature ones.

Home

it was released simultaneously on June 5 in cinemas in 87 countries, on DVD, TV and on YouTube (only till 14.6.2009). i had the chance and time to watch it today, and have to admit that my english skills are not enough to describe the beauty of this movie. the main focus is the impact you, the Homo sapiens - the "wise man" (quote from the video) had on the planet earth.

official site

wikipedia

youtube

at first i was reluctant to watch it because i thought it might be a bit green propaganda like, but in my opinion it showed the facts nothing more nothing less. and it did that in a indescribable beauty. the soft narration of Glenn Close was a charm on the ears.

if you get a chance to watch it, i would really like to hear your opinion.

 

[ar81]

I also recommend you to watch "Are we changing planet Earth?" by the awarded BBC director Nicolas Brown.

I had a chance to talk to him and he said that at the beginning the idea was to make a documentary about the life of David Attenborough, and he thought humans were too small to change the planet. After the findings he had during the film, he realized that things were different than he thought.

 

[Jarvitä]

Ugh. Not green propaganda? This is going to be the next inconvenient truth. Is this some kind of progression in the green religion, tying in the perils of the third world with the church of Al Gore of the World Climate Change?


Overall, great footage. Maybe I'll download it later and rip out the voice-over.

 

[Moonwalker]

The movie includes some nice shots, but it actually does not present much reality. Most of the footage is machined by computer to let it look lovelier, or even worse where needed (special music does the rest). As usual, it also tends to exaggerate partly, and it includes the famous lobbyists future bad climate prophecy as well. It is green propaganda like indeed in my point of view.

 

[Urwumpe]

That gravity keeps the planets in place was also once considered propaganda. And propaganda works best if you are ignorant. It does not matter if you are ignorant in favor of the propaganda or ignorant against it. Both ensures the propaganda has the right effect.

 

[Moonwalker]

It is not basically ignorance which makes propaganda works best, although ignorance takes a significant part though.

When Alain Robert hang up his poster during his climbs, stating that each week more humans die because of global warming rather than on 09/11, of course certain people believed and still believe it without questioning, without thinking theirselves. The same if Al Gore or Rajendra Pachauri start to state their wisdoms, or what they believe is wisdoms, and spectacular soothsayings. Home is just another new part of that favour.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, the question is: Can you prove them wrong? 9/11 was, historically speaking, peanuts. Almost nobody died because of it. A good El Nino year kills 100 times more people.

Of course, they also can't prove that they are right - deaths because of climate are hard to estimate. But you can be sure: People die of it. The Dust bowl years in the USA alone possibly killed 10 times more people than 9/11, but we only know for sure that they displaced 2.5 million people in less than ten years. Hard to imagine today, but the Dust Bowl is a classic example of man-made climate.

 

[Moonwalker]

El Ninos are older than humans. Although predictable, they are not quite understood like many aspects of what we call climate.

The Dust bowl years in the USA resulted people to move, but many alleged deaths is an usual exaggeration. Based on deliverances, natural dry periods have probably wiped out thousands of lifes in short periods of times when there wasn't any industry and any electricity.

 

[Urwumpe]

Based on deliverances, natural dry periods have probably wiped out thousands of lifes in short periods of times when there wasn't any industry and any electricity.

Yes, so you agree that such events CAN kill humans? Because if these events happen more often, they will not kill less humans. They will displace more people and displacing people inevitably causes more deaths (At least, there was never a death free forced displacement of people).

Nothing else is the problem. It does not matter that droughts existed already before. Wars also happened before WW2. But no war in history killed more people in such a short time.

 

[Moonwalker]

Dry periods don't kill much people anymore like some centuries before Christ (like the Old Kingdom likely, just as one example). The last dramatical dry period, the Dust Bowl, solely caused people to move, not to cease. Humankind has become mobile. We are able to move faster and further like never before. Especially today. We've got certain technologies, knowledge and possibilities, which people did not have in the past. But we always had and will have to move or to adapt. No matter if we define the climate to be good or bad. And I don't know any current dramatic dry period comparable to past ones. And I do not see it increasing as well.

As for WWII: man made climate change, war and technological progress always was, is, and will be used to dramatize our future. WWII has killed about 0,05% of all humans that have probably ever lived, if those numbers are roughly predictable. At that time, about 2,5 billion humans already existed. Soon, about 3 times as much humans are going to exist, almost regardless of WWII. Without WWII, it would be "just" about 50 millions more, or in other words: as half as much humans more that are born each year.

No past event has wiped us out yet, nor did it stop us to grow, nor is anything going to stop us yet. Home, like almost any other green propaganda, does not prove the opposite.

 

[Urwumpe]

Why should it?