Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
More discoveries. NEW: Zeiss Victory SF 32

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Planet of the Humans

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Tuesday 12th May 2020, 23:47   #1
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Planet of the Humans

Although Michael Moore's new documentary Planet of the Humans** came out in late 2019, and is now readily available on YouTube, I can't find any BF discussion about it.

So far, all of the criticisms I've seen on-line skirt around what he's pointing out from a Conservation perspective: i.e., a massive sacrifice of the natural environment for questionable ends. The rejoinder that "...technology is improving" is just kicking the garbage can down the road.

Your thoughts?

Ed

** pls scroll back the video to the beginning.
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 05:58   #2
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Okay, Planet of the Humans was censored by U-Tube.

Let's try this website HERE.

No one has anything to say so far? Remarkable.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Wednesday 27th May 2020 at 06:12.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 11:52   #3
gerald762
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Vejer de la Frontera
Posts: 296
I haven't watched the video so I can't comment about the content. The fact that some people want it taken down suggests that there must be some truth in the criticism of the renewable energy systems.
The really sad bit is that some people want to stop something that they disagree with, instead of allowing freedom of speech etc. The comments against the film that I have seen are very non-specific, such as "the film uses outdated information". I haven't seen a point by point rebuttal in a measured manner. But I might have missed it!
gerald762 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 13:59   #4
Mysticete
Registered User
 
Mysticete's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerald762 View Post
I haven't watched the video so I can't comment about the content. The fact that some people want it taken down suggests that there must be some truth in the criticism of the renewable energy systems.
The really sad bit is that some people want to stop something that they disagree with, instead of allowing freedom of speech etc. The comments against the film that I have seen are very non-specific, such as "the film uses outdated information". I haven't seen a point by point rebuttal in a measured manner. But I might have missed it!
I haven't seen it yet either, but please do note the reason that youtube took it down was copyright, not content.

I don't think you can call it censorship when the people who own the rights to the film they produced ask for it to be removed, presumably because folks who didn't own the rights posted the contents illegally.
__________________
World: 1195, ABA: 628
Last Lifer: Connecticut Warbler
Last ABA: Connecticut Warbler
Mammal: 233 Herp: 174
Mysticete is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 14:43   #5
poledark
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Canterbury Kent UK
Posts: 419
Mysticete, please don't obscure the topic with facts

Den
poledark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 16:54   #6
gerald762
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Vejer de la Frontera
Posts: 296
There were efforts to have the film withdrawn before the issue of copyright.
gerald762 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 18:41   #7
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
I posted a link to the full movie on #2. Can everyone access it? (Also, make sure to scroll down to FILMMAKER'S RESPONSES.)

Having seen the movie on U-Tube I wasn't a bit surprised that some means would be found to take it down. It's blatant censorship covered with a fig leaf. See HERE. The funny thing to me is that the movie doesn't address global warming per se, but the climate scientists are going ape shit nonetheless. Moore himself remains a fervent AGW believer. The movie addresses his concerns about green energy policy and its environmental effects.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Wednesday 27th May 2020 at 19:07.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 21:38   #8
Mysticete
Registered User
 
Mysticete's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
I posted a link to the full movie on #2. Can everyone access it? (Also, make sure to scroll down to FILMMAKER'S RESPONSES.)

Having seen the movie on U-Tube I wasn't a bit surprised that some means would be found to take it down. It's blatant censorship covered with a fig leaf. See HERE. The funny thing to me is that the movie doesn't address global warming per se, but the climate scientists are going ape shit nonetheless. Moore himself remains a fervent AGW believer. The movie addresses his concerns about green energy policy and its environmental effects.

Ed
As someone who spends far far far too much time on youtube, there is nothing nefarious about this. Youtube is incredibly copyright shy...I can't tell you how often I have seen various folks from different channels (especially movie related channels) get videos pulled and demonetized thanks to 30 seconds of music from somewhere else, or a brief clip from a TV show, or whatever. It's random and annoying, and the site is generally speaking so litigation shy that they tend to remove first and ask questions later. Even if the video is being used for fair use purposes or was actually posted by the copyright owners!
__________________
World: 1195, ABA: 628
Last Lifer: Connecticut Warbler
Last ABA: Connecticut Warbler
Mammal: 233 Herp: 174
Mysticete is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 22:46   #9
RafaelMatias
Registered User
 
RafaelMatias's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 3,372
This is the version I've heard about it: https://www.theguardian.com/film/202...d-from-youtube
Of course, this copyright incident might have been welcomed by youtube as an alibi that allows them to do what they actually wanted to do from the beginning.
RafaelMatias is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 22:55   #10
Mono
Hi!
BF Supporter 2020
 
Mono's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake District,UK
Posts: 2,076
One of the problems with the film is its inaccuracy: a lot of the nitty-gritty data is just plain out of date. For example it states that the pay back period of PV solar is 25 years, in 2020 it is about 18 months.

A bigger problem with it is the "my enemies enemy is my friend" fallacy. The thesis of the film is that "green" technology and alternative energy in particular are not the solution to climate change, the solution is to reduce economic demand and to reduce the human population that causes that demand. An arguable point that has more in common with the Extinction Rebellion side of the green camp than it does with the mainstream ecoists.

However rather than lead with the "less consumption is better that alternative consumption" line the filmmakers have lead with the "alternative consumption is just as bad, if not worse than, traditional consumption" position. And in order to push that argument they have got into bed with the other purveyor of the alternative energy bad argument, namely the IC vehicle lobby, the oil companies and even the climate change deniers. The filmmakers have then uncritically taken partisan "evidence" from these lobbies and seemingly gone to zero effort to challenge the veracity of these arguments.

The conclusion of all this is a rather sorry state of affairs where the filmmakers intended agenda of anti-consumption and anti-capitalism has produced a film that is being promoted by anti-green conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers.

{The copyright claim is for a few seconds use of a still photograph, it will either get dismissed as de minimis or they will just edit it out.}
Mono is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 27th May 2020, 23:44   #11
dantheman
Bah humbug
 
dantheman's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 13,222
Blog Entries: 2
Well, the idea of 'greenwash' has been around for a while ... be interesting to see the video when it reappears ...
__________________
stithiansreservoirbirding.blogspot.co.uk/ - last update 10/11/15 - really rather remarkable still!!!
dantheman is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 02:04   #12
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman View Post
Well, the idea of 'greenwash' has been around for a while ... be interesting to see the video when it reappears ...
A link to the non U-Tube version can be found on post #2.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 08:55   #13
opisska
Jan Ebr
 
opisska's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Warszawa
Posts: 1,892
Calling anything produced by Moore a "documentary" is an ugly insult to all people who make actual documentaries. He doesn't care about facts in the slightest, he chooses an agenda that resonates with people that find reality boring or inconvenient and then makes money off the "controversy".

Implying that YouTube "wanted" it down is equally outrageous, it's a server that hosts literally millions of conspiracy videos and all they care about is views generating money. Copyright takedowns occur on an unimaginably large scale every day, this one just happened to hit something conspiracy nuts care about.
__________________
Final life lists:
Birds: world 2168, WP 563, gWP 600, bird photos
Mammals: 257, mammal photos
opisska is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 10:24   #14
DMW
Registered User
 
DMW's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Jersey
Posts: 2,041
Quote:
Originally Posted by opisska View Post
Implying that YouTube "wanted" it down is equally outrageous, it's a server that hosts literally millions of conspiracy videos and all they care about is views generating money. Copyright takedowns occur on an unimaginably large scale every day, this one just happened to hit something conspiracy nuts care about.
That is demonstrably untrue. YouTube is notoriously censorious and has removed or buried a great deal of material from popular content creators following politically-motivated complaints that have nothing to do with copyright. YouTube also shadow-bans videos and rigs the algorithms to favour certain political views or commercial interests over others, and routinely demonetises videos from certain creators that have "problematic" political views. This is literally the number one concern of most of the bigger YouTube content creators right now, and the reason most are diversifying onto alternative platforms.

For example, YouTube routinely takes down videos covering anything to do with Covid-19 if it challenges the orthodoxy, including videos made by hospital doctors treating Covid patients.
DMW is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 19:59   #15
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by opisska View Post
Calling anything produced by Moore a "documentary" is an ugly insult to all people who make actual documentaries. He doesn't care about facts in the slightest, he chooses an agenda that resonates with people that find reality boring or inconvenient and then makes money off the "controversy".
...
From the Internet concerning a documentary:
Quote:
Its purpose is to make you aware and actively participate in a society that can make [or] shape the future of this world. Other purposes of a documentary film are to inform, attack a perspective, to persuade, educate, entertain, defend a perspective, to critique, and to observe real life.
Within this framework the film is unquestionably spot on. So, rather than attacking the man, why not address the contents of the film?

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Thursday 28th May 2020 at 20:09.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 20:13   #16
opisska
Jan Ebr
 
opisska's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Warszawa
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
From the Internet concerning a documentary:


In all these regards the film is unquestionably spot on. So, rather than attacking the man, why not address the contents of the film?

Ed
That would require me to watch it. Why would I give Moore such a deep benefit of a doubt after his previous work? Also, your quote backed by the authoritative source of "the internet" uses a definition that is by no means typical. Compare with wikipedia

"... document reality, primarily for the purposes of instruction, education, or maintaining a historical record".

Which is a stark difference. And that's the problem - I want my documentaries to reflect reality, not to push a viewpoint. That later thing is what I call propaganda.

Anyway, this is getting really weird. Why is this forum, which is spawned by the common interest in something as innocent as birds, becoming such a hub of people with, to put it mildly, "alternative" thinking?

I don't know, maybe youtube is actually actively suppressing conspiracy theories. I can imagine that it could be before otherwise every normal person would stop visiting the site, because that's roughly my feeling from BF in the last few weeks. It is just plainly unpleasant to be present in an environment where lunacy is the norm.
__________________
Final life lists:
Birds: world 2168, WP 563, gWP 600, bird photos
Mammals: 257, mammal photos
opisska is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th May 2020, 21:04   #17
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mono View Post
One of the problems with the film is its inaccuracy: a lot of the nitty-gritty data is just plain out of date. For example it states that the pay back period of PV solar is 25 years, in 2020 it is about 18 months.

A bigger problem with it is the "my enemies enemy is my friend" fallacy. The thesis of the film is that "green" technology and alternative energy in particular are not the solution to climate change, the solution is to reduce economic demand and to reduce the human population that causes that demand. An arguable point that has more in common with the Extinction Rebellion side of the green camp than it does with the mainstream ecoists.

However rather than lead with the "less consumption is better that alternative consumption" line the filmmakers have lead with the "alternative consumption is just as bad, if not worse than, traditional consumption" position. And in order to push that argument they have got into bed with the other purveyor of the alternative energy bad argument, namely the IC vehicle lobby, the oil companies and even the climate change deniers. The filmmakers have then uncritically taken partisan "evidence" from these lobbies and seemingly gone to zero effort to challenge the veracity of these arguments.

The conclusion of all this is a rather sorry state of affairs where the filmmakers intended agenda of anti-consumption and anti-capitalism has produced a film that is being promoted by anti-green conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers.

{The copyright claim is for a few seconds use of a still photograph, it will either get dismissed as de minimis or they will just edit it out.}
Mono,

Would you mind expanding on the first paragraph, in particular "... the pay back period of PV solar ... in 2020 ... is about 18 months." Having recently installed two home PV solar systems I can assure you that the payback period is nowhere near 18 months, it's more like 7-8 years. Also, could you point out where that statement is made in the film? It's a long film.

Thanks,
Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 29th May 2020, 12:58   #18
Mysticete
Registered User
 
Mysticete's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMW View Post
That is demonstrably untrue. YouTube is notoriously censorious and has removed or buried a great deal of material from popular content creators following politically-motivated complaints that have nothing to do with copyright. YouTube also shadow-bans videos and rigs the algorithms to favour certain political views or commercial interests over others, and routinely demonetises videos from certain creators that have "problematic" political views. This is literally the number one concern of most of the bigger YouTube content creators right now, and the reason most are diversifying onto alternative platforms.

For example, YouTube routinely takes down videos covering anything to do with Covid-19 if it challenges the orthodoxy, including videos made by hospital doctors treating Covid patients.
Moderation is performed by low level functionaries, it's not carried out by the folks higher up, other than the occasional high profile story that gets media attention (see Alex Jones). I am always skeptical about claims about people complaining about censorship of social media for political aims. Often a bit of digging is all it needs to show that whatever led to the ban was often justified for various reasons. Just because you think what you said was appropriate, logical, or accurate, doesn't mean it actually is.
__________________
World: 1195, ABA: 628
Last Lifer: Connecticut Warbler
Last ABA: Connecticut Warbler
Mammal: 233 Herp: 174
Mysticete is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th June 2020, 13:05   #19
Melanie
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Kassel, Germany
Posts: 2,985
The film is back:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CBE_4xGnYgf/

There is also a Spanish and a German translation online.
Melanie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th June 2020, 20:22   #20
jmepler
It's just a flesh wound.
 
jmepler's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,289
I just watched it, and I thought it was pretty well done.

It was removed from YouTube due to a copyright strike on four seconds of footage by someone opposed to the message of the film. Al Gore perhaps? When Richard Branson was asked if he considered Gore a prophet, he responded "uh, how do you spell prophet/profit?". See the exchange here.

I think it's a good thing to look at the actions of these environmentalist groups and individuals with a critical eye. Unless you prefer to be lied to, so that you can feel good about green energy.
__________________
Latest lifer: #375 Barrow's Goldeneye
Latest Pennsylvania lifer: #343 Harlequin Duck
Latest Lancaster County lifer: #304 Varied Thrush
Use eBird to record your bird sightings.
jmepler is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 6th June 2020, 23:40   #21
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Northern California
Posts: 4,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmepler View Post
I just watched it, and I thought it was pretty well done.

It was removed from YouTube due to a copyright strike on four seconds of footage by someone opposed to the message of the film. Al Gore perhaps? When Richard Branson was asked if he considered Gore a prophet, he responded "uh, how do you spell prophet/profit?". See the exchange here.

I think it's a good thing to look at the actions of these environmentalist groups and individuals with a critical eye. Unless you prefer to be lied to, so that you can feel good about green energy.
Since Michael Moore is an outspoken believer in anthropogenic global warming (AGW), it's refreshing to know that he, at least, is aware of the damaging environmental impacts of 'renewable' and 'green' energy projects. He is questioning the efficacy of the process, not its objectives.

Personally, I have no inherent objection to changing the world's reliance on "fossil fuels," if there were provably effective ways to do so taking into consideration undesirable environmental consequences. Not paying attention to undesirable consequences, however, is possibly worse than the original problem itself.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
Nullius in verba
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool. Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Sunday 7th June 2020 at 23:12.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Early humans andyadcock Mammals 4 Friday 23rd November 2018 14:31
Are humans really that smart? andyadcock Conservation 9 Thursday 21st June 2018 11:57
Irresponsible humans nudgee Conservation 0 Saturday 7th July 2012 17:14
Any other non-humans out there? Andrew Rowlands Cameras And Photography 1 Monday 21st August 2006 00:24

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.38481212 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31.