CO2 is green advert

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:49 am

This was send around at work as a joke ... but well - apparently it is a real advert:
YouTube - CO2 Is Green Contact Your Senator Today
Seriously ..... is this for real?

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:54 am

Xandax wrote:This was send around at work as a joke ... but well - apparently it is a real advert:
YouTube - CO2 Is Green Contact Your Senator Today
Seriously ..... is this for real?

If you check out the sponsor results on the CO2 website I think it becomes apparent that the ad is a tease.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:59 am

Well, I'm not sure. I hope one thing, but my stereotype-bias is trying to convince me of otherwise.

Found this news bit about it as well.
CO2 is green: Leo Hickman on the TV advert making viewers choke | Environment | guardian.co.uk

If it is for real and anybody in an educated country believes that advert - I seriously doubt the human race as worthy of existing anyway. :mischief:

galraen · Post by **galraen** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:18 am

Something smells funny here, and it aint the CO2.

Love 'em or hate 'em, oil barons are usually pretty smart, and I would have thought smart enough to hide their direct involvement in something like this. It's the sort of godsend that environmentalists are desperate for in the wake of 'climategate', I find it difficult to believe that the oil industry would be dumb enough to fund this directly rather than hiding their trail through a series of surrogates.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 6:59 am

Oh - I truly hope so. But .... well, I'm not convinced

jklinders · Post by **jklinders** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:54 am

Not terribly surprised. The best lies frequently come packaged with a small whiff of the truth. ie CO2 is not bad evil thing, it is needed for life on Earth. Then they toss the lie in, more CO2 means better crop yields and more nutritious food. Buuuzzzz!! I'm sorry that is not correct. Studies involving growing plants in an artificially high CO2 environment showed that while plants grew better their nutritional value was in fact lowered.

It is speculated this was the reason critters were so darn big in the millions of years before man came about. Lower quality food meant herbivores needed a larger stomach to digest all they needed to eat, and with that a larger body to move said stomach around. Higher CO2 is not a good thing as our crops will get crappier from it.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:56 am

Looks to be a joke ad, just so thin that it really doesn't come across.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:08 pm

I don't think it's a joke. [url="http://www.dhmo.org/"]Here is an example of a joke[/url]. Note the disclaimer at the very bottom of the webpage. In small print, yes...but there to satisfy legal requirements. The co2 is green bit isn't a joke at all. Just another Big Oil ploy.

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:38 pm

Chanak wrote:I don't think it's a joke. [url="http://www.dhmo.org/"]Here is an example of a joke[/url]. Note the disclaimer at the very bottom of the webpage. In small print, yes...but there to satisfy legal requirements. The co2 is green bit isn't a joke at all. Just another Big Oil ploy.

You may be right. Here's what I find suspicious and off-kilter about this ad, if it is to be taken seriously:

1) It offers none of the fake statistics Big Oil, etc, like to throw out to look official.

2) It comes with no testimonies from the scientists who have pawned their souls for large grants to Big Oil, Big Coal, etc.

3) It parrots a silly observation made by two of the dumbest members of the US Congress, representative Michelle Bachmann and Senator Jim Inhofe, that has been roundly and severely mocked all over the place.

4) It looks like it was done on the cheap, with easily acquired software. No heavy studio production, no actors looking "normal" and concerned, etc.

I just can't help thinking that anybody who really wanted to make this a serious point would have pushed the point more specifically and with a lot more glamour.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:45 pm

fable wrote:I just can't help thinking that anybody who really wanted to make this a serious point would have pushed the point more specifically and with a lot more glamour.

This is a good point. It's enough of a point to give me a pause.

It parrots a silly observation made by two of the dumbest members of the US Congress, representative Michelle Bachmann and Senator Jim Inhofe, that has been roundly and severely mocked all over the place.

Think about it. Dubya served two terms in office. No, wait...he was actually elected in the first place. That says a great deal.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:26 pm

Chanak wrote:Think about it. Dubya served two terms in office. No, wait...he was actually elected in the first place. That says a great deal.

Actually, he wasn't. Gore got the popular vote, and might have had the electoral one, since the vote in Florida was heavily flawed by damaged voting machines that all seemed to end up in black districts.

But the conservative Supreme Court stopped the Florida vote recount, and declared Bush the winner.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:10 pm

fable wrote:Actually, he wasn't. Gore got the popular vote, and might have had the electoral one, since the vote in Florida was heavily flawed by damaged voting machines that all seemed to end up in black districts. But the conservative Supreme Court stopped the Florida vote recount, and declared Bush the winner.

Indeed. President by judicial decree. How could I ever forget that travesty.

EDIT: Off-topic, I know...however, interesting how this event is not given much attention here in our own country? It should have set off klaxons everywhere. Instead, there is nothing but an eerie silence. Hell, it had slipped my own mind until you mentioned it above.